ktarthan Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Hyperion321' timestamp='1296596445' post='2615028'] Eh, personally I disagree with tacking on monetary reps just because they were too scared to use anything above 45k. The humiliation in accepting that they are too inferior to fight with anything but lowbies would be good enough for me. [/quote] I say that more due to my thought that a 100K nation that gets knocked down to 50K will need what's left of their money more than a 50K nation that sat in PM and did nothing. Reps in a nuclear war are never going to actually pay for damages, so I think it better to scale them to what the alliance is easily able to pay. You do have something though with the humiliation thing, I'll keep that in mind. edit: spelling Edited February 1, 2011 by ktarthan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hydro Posted February 1, 2011 Report Share Posted February 1, 2011 Ganking people is always fun the first few times. After that, it just gets lame. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ardus Posted February 2, 2011 Report Share Posted February 2, 2011 [quote name='Letum' timestamp='1296588913' post='2614887'] Despite popular belief, an Aggressor's demand is not automatically translated into an agreement. The other side has the ability to say no, a judgement based on the relative merits of getting peace with terms vs having war. Considering we were attacked for existing after completing our previous terms, we do not particularly take the view that further reps are going to improve our long-term situation compared to continued war, and would thus be very unlikely to accept anything of the sort. [/quote] The same logic applies and is recognized by the invading side. One of the purposes of reparations is to buy peace. If that peace is not assured in the absence of "valid" [i]casus belli[/i], then there is no point in agreeing into terms that consume one's ability to rebuild while benefiting the enemy. It is then more logical to stay at war. Non-monetary terms can still make sense, but the motivation to stay at war remains considerably elevated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlmightyGrub Posted February 2, 2011 Report Share Posted February 2, 2011 [quote name='Ardus' timestamp='1296609285' post='2615309'] The same logic applies and is recognized by the invading side. One of the purposes of reparations is to buy peace. If that peace is not assured in the absence of "valid" [i]casus belli[/i], then there is no point in agreeing into terms that consume one's ability to rebuild while benefiting the enemy. It is then more logical to stay at war. Non-monetary terms can still make sense, but the motivation to stay at war remains considerably elevated. [/quote] This post makes far too much sense at first reading. Careful consideration must always be made of the longer term effects of rolling over versus fighting on. Pride is always worth something. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sephiroth Posted February 2, 2011 Report Share Posted February 2, 2011 Even if I'm on the outnumbered side, I'm having a lot of fun this war and wouldn't have it any other way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hyperion321 Posted February 2, 2011 Author Report Share Posted February 2, 2011 [quote name='Ardus' timestamp='1296609285' post='2615309'] The same logic applies and is recognized by the invading side. One of the purposes of reparations is to buy peace. If that peace is not assured in the absence of "valid" [i]casus belli[/i], then there is no point in agreeing into terms that consume one's ability to rebuild while benefiting the enemy. It is then more logical to stay at war. Non-monetary terms can still make sense, but the motivation to stay at war remains considerably elevated. [/quote] The thing is though, buying peace is exactly what got us down to 20,000 players in the first place. People just aren't satisfied with victory anymore unless that victory lasts for the next year. Because of that, wars drag on FOREVER because people want to avoid terms because to them it is more logical to fight for 6 months than surrender and face 200,000 tech in reperations, or if you are Grub, you have too much pride to just give up and let your alliance rebuild. We spend a year waiting for a war and get bored, and then when something FINALLY happens it drags on so long that we all get burnt out and just don't want to play anymore. We need shorter periods of peace so the game doesn't stagnate (i.e., stop fighting for a half year at a time just to charge people reps and accept your victory you friggin' morons), as well as shorter wars so people don't get burnt out (stop scaring people with terms so they actually will surrender within six weeks, not six months). BTW, if Legion, TPF, and all the other Pacifican lackeys weren't so utterly terrified of people giving them terms right now they would actually be fighting and we would be having a lot more fun. Seriously, everyone....stop it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ardus Posted February 2, 2011 Report Share Posted February 2, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Hyperion321' timestamp='1296618973' post='2615555'] The thing is though, buying peace is exactly what got us down to 20,000 players in the first place. People just aren't satisfied with victory anymore unless that victory lasts for the next year. Because of that, wars drag on FOREVER because people want to avoid terms because to them it is more logical to fight for 6 months than surrender and face 200,000 tech in reperations, or if you are Grub, you have too much pride to just give up and let your alliance rebuild. We spend a year waiting for a war and get bored, and then when something FINALLY happens it drags on so long that we all get burnt out and just don't want to play anymore. We need shorter periods of peace so the game doesn't stagnate (i.e., stop fighting for a half year at a time just to charge people reps and accept your victory you friggin' morons), as well as shorter wars so people don't get burnt out (stop scaring people with terms so they actually will surrender within six weeks, not six months). BTW, if Legion, TPF, and all the other Pacifican lackeys weren't so utterly terrified of people giving them terms right now they would actually be fighting and we would be having a lot more fun. Seriously, everyone....stop it. [/quote] Well, you have to remember what evil preceded the one that plagues the game now: disbandment. At the end of the Great War Era, defeated powers opted to dissolve, offering an incredibly absolute conclusion to that set of conflicts. Since that time, major alliances have been far less willing to disband but still search for the same sure conclusion that such offers, only this time in the form of brutal reparations and indemnities. These terms, among countless other justifications reasonable and otherwise, are meant to remove a major player (or group of actors) from the scene so that new adjustments and political gambling can be pursued. The problem is that, unlike disbandment, which frees hundreds of players to continue active participation in different groups (usually), reparations lock these players in place, shackled by their loyalty and commitment to help repay their alliance's debt. Setting aside disbandment (nobody does it) and brutal reps (not feasible in current circumstance), this leaves a few immediately obvious options. The first is to extend the war yet longer to incur more actual damage, a course of action limited by the common tactic of escaping to peace mode. The second is sequential war reminiscent of the Second and Third Great Wars, wherein a war ends with a clear victor and loser, but presents an outcome insufficient for the victor's desires, leading to another war very, very soon after the conclusion of the first. Finally, one can just dispose of a conclusive victory and immediately try to reconcile with the defeated party, though given the historic disdain between the combatants on both main fronts of this war, such is (to understate) very unlikely to occur. There are more creative and complex options, but these are the most historically prevalent ones. tl;dr: This war will be really long or will be but the first in a series, thus why I've taken to calling it the "First Endwar". EDIT: has anyone ever really been so far as to look at even? Edited February 2, 2011 by Ardus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shoofly Posted February 2, 2011 Report Share Posted February 2, 2011 (edited) this war sucks. like in rl theres no real villian to personify. maybe mk needs more of a face, or umbrella, i dont know. i miss the age of moldavi and electron sponge, old mpol, joseph thorne - for me VL and Reformentia and Swampy hell, even noWedge. i guess there just isnt as many clear-cut personalities in this war. i cant put a face on it. its the faceless war. i did find however, comically, in the archives, an apology letter from GOONS to the Legion. i thought it strangely fitting: [i]Posted 10 September 2007 - 12:06 PM We stand before you tonight a humbled alliance. We stand as people proven wrong. We stand as people who have fought and bled for our friends only to see them evaporate. We stand as men and women who have waged the wars of others out of the spirit and letter of our agreements. But we also stand for the first time with our eyes open. And because of this we'd like to apologize. First and foremost to Viridia. We had our loves and our hates, but you did not deserve that. But when GGA asked us to fight, we fought. For our friendship, for our treaties, for the World Unity Treaty, we put ourselves on the line for the ambitions of a fellow. We contributed to an atrocity and for that we apologize. Most recently, we apologize to the Legion. It began with Dilber saying "We're going to kill Legion." Then Moo moved it to "Who wants to help us kill Legion." All of a sudden its GOONS, \m/, and TPF fighting for the casus belli NPO had conjured from Valhalla while NPO keeps its hands clean. But were friends. We were treaty partners. We fought the war that we had nothing to do with for those whose back we believed we'd always cover and be covered in return. And for that we apologize. And finally, we apologize to FAN. FAN who perhaps deserved what it got the most. We apologize because they tried to warn us - they tried to tell us that as soon as we were a threat to their power, Pacifica would throw us down the steps just the same. And we laughed. We laughed! The Drinking Buddies would be friends forever! Pacifica's honor is supreme! We rejected their words, we called them fools. But they were right. They were too right. For months people have told us this day would come. They tried to warn us and again and again we laughed them off, and we trusted. We stated again and again that it would never happen, that these people were good. We flamed and trolled those who only tried to open our eyes. And for that we apologize. But here we stand, and here we make a stand. Our vision is for the first time cleared. We pray that whatever god is floating above this 'verse will have mercy on our souls for the sins we commited in the name of a treaty, of a false friend. But more, we pray that that same deity will have mercy on the betrayers... because GOONS will not. Signed, The Goon Order of Neutral Shoving PS: I'd like to request that electron_sponge, Ivan Moldavi, and Doitzel stay out of this thread. I want it to stay open and those three aren't really conducive to that, you know? This post has been edited by Daemon banned member: 10 September 2007 - 12:11 PM [/i] Edited February 2, 2011 by Shoofly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emperor Whimsical Posted February 5, 2011 Report Share Posted February 5, 2011 That is one my personal favorite posts, ever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Do Not Fear Jazz Posted February 5, 2011 Report Share Posted February 5, 2011 [quote name='Emperor Whimsical' timestamp='1296894587' post='2620291'] That is one my personal favorite posts, ever. [/quote] One of the best. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.