A doctrine of war: what Karma should and shouldn't have done.

[Shodemofi-NPO]

[quote name='SoADarthCyfe6' timestamp='1296092491' post='2603838']
So what gives you the god forsaken right to remove our own rights as being 'moralists' as you so proclaim. Nothing does, this infact proves you are just as corrupt or in reality, evil as NPO was during the 'Hegemony' or 'Old Hegemony.' This 'right' that you proclaim to have is given to you by the power of the twisted treaty web, strong military and political competence and the final piece to it, this war. You used this war to become the 'New Hegemony' and with this power, you can do what you please.

EZI is no different the PZI, if you do PZI, your likely to EZI as well. With this power, you will NOT control how you use it, you can not decide that you will not EZI, but still pillage alliances of their tech for your own bidding or fight off the moralists and rule the game. No, that will not happen, power corrupts, you will soon find yourselves to be NPO, but even worse off. Your lust for power will not end here, no, certainly not. You will seek more, punish the 'infidels' and crush the opposition.

You are imposing your 'beliefs' upon us, and that good sir, will lead to your demise. You are nothing more then extremists with a hand full of power. The day that we start letting others dictate our own beliefs and values... is the day when Planet Bob shall self implode.

[i]However[/i]...

I for one refuse your [i]beliefs[/i], I for one refuse your [i]corruption[/i], I for one refuse your [i]evil[/i], I for one, refuse your [b][i]Hegemony[/i][/b]!!!!

I will not bend to your demands, I will not bend to your beliefs and I most certainly will [b][i]NOT[/i][/b] bend to your power! I will however, refuse you your rights to power and fight it whether it be on the political arena or the battlefield.

For freedom, for honor, for the true Karma. Down with the New Hegemony!!

I will [i]win[/i] and I shall be [i]free[/i].
[/quote]
Ok, now I'm a fairly anti-MK person, but this post was either a pretty good job of trolling or you're delusional. Regardless, you're undermining the credibility of people trying to argue against MK.

[GeoLauzier]

Filter "CB" to "Spy Incident".

Edited January 27, 2011 by GeoLauzier

[Hereno]

[quote author=OP]
No block has anything close to the comparative power that Q held.
[/quote]

Tetris would like a word with you.

Also, while nicely written, you're pretty much wrong. The fun part about wars isn't the actual warring after the first week or so - the fun part is the drama and the buildup to war and tension it creates, and watching who falls on which side. Extended periods of just constant war suck; go ask FAN if you don't believe me.

On that note, it's really boring just rolling the Orders all the time. I know that some of you have longstanding grudges against these alliances from before I even played, but I'm quite tired of just rolling them repeatedly. NEW had the right idea when they tried to start a war that would've actually been different, based on getting some revenge. But instead, you guys go and make sure that never develops, and then give us another Order curbstomp. It's straight tiring. Don't you ever want to fight somebody else? When your favorite football team plays against their rivals, it's awesome because all the other games are against other teams. If they just played each other every single week, after the 3rd game you'd be tired of seeing it and not care anymore. Give us some variety.

Edit: Clarity

Edited January 27, 2011 by Hereno

[Prime minister Johns]

[quote name='Ardus' timestamp='1296097182' post='2603979']
Games are, by their very nature, adversarial. For a game to exist, electronically or in reality, there must be some sort of challenge set before the player, based on a conflict between himself and some other force. This force can be any one or combination of the following (non-exhaustive): the forces of nature (time, gravity) , artificial opponents (bots, AI), other players, or the player himself (beating one's own records). In the absence of such conflict there can be, by definition, no game. There might be a space of play in which you attempt to make friends and socialize, as many in this game eagerly do, but that is not a game. Since this is intended to be a nation/political simulation game, the conflict that drives it best tends to be political intrigue and role-playing. You can certainly play the game by racing each other to statistical benchmarks, but that's not particularly entertaining.

This isn't to say that the only thing one can enjoy in this game is the conflict. There are numerous benefits that go hand in hand with participation, some of which I've already mentioned. Socializing is the biggest one. Many players build relationships with one another in this game that endure to other locales on the internet and even result in real-life events. Members of the Kingdom have held multiple meet-ups around the world. Opportunities for creative output is another reason many enjoy the game. Folks like D34TH or my friend Professor Chaos both take enormous pleasure in using CN to inspire "visual arts" (for lack of a better term), creating numerous sigs, flags, posters, and so forth. Many write lengthy treatises, manifestos, and other walls of text to hone their prose and debate skills. But, as enjoyable as these things are, there would be no reason for them to gather here in the absence of the game that exists on the basis of role-playing national conflict ([u]this is, after all, a nation simulator[/u]). Without the core the rest disperse and the entire house eventually rots away.
[/quote]

(underlined section of interest in quoted text)

It has been ages since an individual nation meant anything in an of itself in this game other than to be a disposable commodity for tech raiders. Cybernations is an alliance simulator and the politics of alliances drive this game forward, the alliances are in effect the nations of CN, what the system chooses to call nations are in actuality citizens of these nations. And a citizen without a nation is in essence powerles. CN is a nation simulator in name only.

[Ardus]

[quote name='Prime minister Johns' timestamp='1296100952' post='2604149']
(underlined section of interest in quoted text)

It has been ages since an individual nation meant anything in an of itself in this game other than to be a disposable commodity for tech raiders. Cybernations is an alliance simulator and the politics of alliances drive this game forward, the alliances are in effect the nations of CN, what the system chooses to call nations are in actuality citizens of these nations. And a citizen without a nation is in essence powerles. CN is a nation simulator in name only.
[/quote]
So because alliances better fit the role of sovereign nations this isn't a nation simulator?

[Farnsworth]

Clearly few want to embrace disadvantage, but MK could have brought about more opportunity for legitimate war, imo, by not treatying themselves into an unopposable position.

Yes, treatying and unopposable are words.

Edited January 27, 2011 by Farnsworth

[Prime minister Johns]

[quote name='Ardus' timestamp='1296103956' post='2604490']
So because alliances better fit the role of sovereign nations this isn't a nation simulator?
[/quote]
Yes, I am pointing out that as individuals we are not the nations, the alliances do indeed fit this description far better than an individual player, and that blocs have taken on the role alliances once held.

Sovereignty rests in the hands of alliance leaders and the only freedom an individual player has is the initial choice of which master to serve.

[D34th]

[quote name='Azaghul' timestamp='1296069832' post='2603057']
I'm posting this as an OOC essay because in many ways this is OOC, addressing what makes the game fun or boring.
[/quote]

Saying that doesn't hide the fact that you are making propaganda for your side,keep that in mind,so just be honest about what you are doing next time.

[Sigrun Vapneir]

[quote name='Prime minister Johns' timestamp='1296107616' post='2604828']
Yes, I am pointing out that as individuals we are not the nations, the alliances do indeed fit this description far better than an individual player, and that blocs have taken on the role alliances once held.

Sovereignty rests in the hands of alliance leaders and the only freedom an individual player has is the initial choice of which master to serve.
[/quote]

It doesnt have to be that way.

[Ardus]

[quote name='Prime minister Johns' timestamp='1296107616' post='2604828']
Yes, I am pointing out that as individuals we are not the nations, the alliances do indeed fit this description far better than an individual player, and that blocs have taken on the role alliances once held.

Sovereignty rests in the hands of alliance leaders and the only freedom an individual player has is the initial choice of which master to serve.
[/quote]
Or the player can grow some gumption and take command themselves. In most alliances you can rise through ranks pretty quickly simply by being active and contributing. Heck, in many you don't even have to be competent.

[Doug Falkner]

At the risk of bringing this thread back to its original topic, I wanted to comment on the OP. Particularly this section of the OP:

[quote]What was wrong with the world before Karma

There were several main problems with the war before Karma. NPO was a decent top alliance in some ways, in that it kept the game interesting. In other ways it imposed stagnation as a matter of policy, making the game boring. There were several different aspects to this.

EZI is one, and one of the most egregious. The purpose of it was to literally keep players who opposed NPO and friends from playing. The fact that it doesn't exist in any form and and the community wouldn't tolerate it today (when anyone "threatens" it today it is almost always as a joke) is a testament to one very clear and obvious improvement from that era.

Another one was the intentional unipolarity of that era. Q was a game breaker, it intentionally was a conglomerate of all the major blocks in the game. A way for NPO to have a solid power-structure over almost everyone in CN. This was corrected and is no longer true today. No block has anything close to the comparative power that Q held. Q was designed as a hegemonic instrument. No one has tried to set up a comparable block since then.

A third was starting wars based on flimsy CBs against much, much smaller opponents. This on occasion is fine, but we need major wars between substantial coalitions as well.

Fourth was the intentional suppression of freedom of speech, often coupled with EZI.

A fifth was harsh terms designed to destroy communities and forced disbandments. Terms are a lot lighter now. Even though major reps are nothing like the terms of the past, I personally hope to not see them this war because they create too much of a gap between wars.[/quote]

I have just returned to CN after a 2 year hiatus (I left shortly after the Karma war) so I can't comment on the conditions of the current era on Planet Bob. However, I do have some comments regarding the period when NPO and its allies were the dominant force. I think you're overblowing the effect of EZI, while I agree it was often an excessive response, it wasn't something that happened often and it wasn't something that tended to happen as the result of disagreements. Indeed, if I remember correctly - and I might not given that 2 years is a long time - EZIs tended to happen because folks would do things like constantly troll, hack or vandalize forums, or otherwise be excessively jerky. That said, there are better ways to address people who are !@#$% nozzles than to try to run them out of CN.

Further, I don't think that large coalitions are wholly avoidable. As long as any coalition can become dominant over time they will accrue more support from people who desire the protection and stability that comes with partnering with the folks who call the shots. If no group has a much power as Q did - I would assume that it's not for lack of trying just lack of any single group to be able to be sufficiently dominant to attract enough satellite alliances.

As for flimsy CBs and curb-stomps, I think they're again just unavoidable. It seems to me that most people are just unwilling to start a war unless conditions are favorable and when conditions become favorable they're inclined to get when the getting is good. I don't think there's anyway to change that. It would just be fool-hardy for alliance leaders to pick fights that might lead their alliances - who trust said leaders to help them promote their interests on Planet Bob - to ruin. Such an alliance leader would not be able to keep together an alliance for long.

As for your final point in the quoted section. I think that's correct. I do think the excessively punitive terms at the end of wars did hurt the game. That said, it seems to me that it was largely the long term grudges that came with those excessive terms that spurred following wars. So if you want more wars maybe you might want alliances to be jerkier when they win so that other people get angry at them.

[Cataduanes]

The question is whether this new hegemony (for want of a better word) of yours will be truly of benefit for CN at large, time will tell if that is a load of !@#$ or not. Forgive me if i choose to believe otherwise, The arrogant demeanour of this new hegemony leads me to think it will not be of benefit to all of us, and will essentially be a boon to a select band.

[shahenshah]

Depends.
If this war goes on for 3 months and !@#$ loads of reps, that'll just lead to another year of boredom, same product, different package. Lets see how those actions play about, because rhetoric is subject to U-turn from pretty much everyone.

If say, war goes for 6-8 rounds, ends with white peace all around or token reps that can be done with in 1-2 months..then, we have this planet back alive. Else, as far as boredom is concerned, its truly same old.

Edited January 27, 2011 by shahenshah

[wickedj]

[quote]How things should be

We need to keep some of the precedents set in Karma. No more EZI and deliberate attempts to drive opponents from the game[/quote]
Ahem, pre-emptive strikes to kill off an opponent who threatens your power arent helping

[quote]Game-smothering mega-blocks are gone,[/quote]
Except you left one mega-bloc and two more were spawned

[quote]We cancelled our treaties and only resigned with alliances selectively in order to help break up the treaty web, going in the opposite direction of a Q like block[/quote]
No. you resigned treaties to keep you well connected so you had power. also PB is to Doomhouse as Q was to 1v so the latter part of your statement is also false

sorry, not buying this one till i see some proof

[oOoMidooOo]

I totally agree with most of the OP , i just hope the winning side doesnt take the terms too seriously like MK did in karma

Good luck to everyone in this war, and for everyone who is not in it if you have a treaty partner just join the fun and stop being infra huggers..

[Banksy]

[quote name='oOoMidooOo' timestamp='1296124869' post='2605281']
i just hope the winning side doesnt take the terms too seriously like MK did in karma
[/quote]
MK never set the NPO's terms in Karma. They fought TPF and ML iirc.

[Mark Ashton]

I disagree with almost all points. However, I'll not take the time to answer on all of them, after all there is a war to fight, however I want to respond to a few:

1. Bloc Situation Pre/After Karma. Pre-Karma we had the Continuum that was one power bloc. Today we have several power blocs - that is correct as well. However that doesn't mean the game is more dynamic because the more important factor, that there still is only one [b]power force[/b] remained. So in the end, you have just hidden that by having several blocs working tight together. It would have changed if you signed less treaties and/or if you decided to be on one side of the "bloc-web" - however after your mass-cancellation you ended up being allied CnG, PB, SF and additionally TOP as a strong alliance. The conclusion is that there is no difference between you and NPO in this point.

2. EZI / PZI: That was [b]two[/b] years ago. On one hand side you make them look like criminals for committing these "crimes" on the other hand you claim this is a game and everything is allowed. That doesn't make sense. I'd assume since this is a game you should be able to forget. Last I checked NPO didn't use any illegal strategies hunting the EZI-targets. So the people receiving the punishment made sure that there identity was discovered. VOX just showed that people could anonymously live within the main Hegemony powers at that time without being discovered. What you are doing is searching points to make NPO look worse than it actually is, because you need someone to hate to keep the kindergarten you call alliance interested.

3. I don't think it was part of the thread but it's part of the topic. Umbrella also attacked GPA in the Woodstock Massacre. Now, Umbrella [b]never paid[/b] for their crimes, and never lost a war. Although being ex Genmay (thus actually on NpO's EZI list) they managed to get protection from TOP, were able to hit Polaris in the WoTC, hit NPO in Karma, and when their actual protector needed them, they made sure to be on the opposing side in order to win. Now they announce how evil NPO is, although they committed the same crimes and although they never "paid". That's pathetic.

4. Don't pretend you are better than NPO, and we both know that change is the only spirit keeping this game alive. With this war you have made sure the last person in this game not kissing your ass has understood that you are a threat for everyones security and that you are in fact not better. No matter how this war will end, this will make that people on the other side reconcile and one day you and all your ass kissing treaty-partners, and their ass kissing treaty partners will get a kick in the butt they won't survive. This will be the day, I can happily retire from this game because everything is achieved.

[Banksy]

[quote name='Mark Ashton' timestamp='1296127971' post='2605337']
1. Bloc Situation Pre/After Karma. Pre-Karma we had the Continuum that was one power bloc. Today we have several power blocs - that is correct as well. However that doesn't mean the game is more dynamic because the more important factor, that there still is only one [b]power force[/b] remained. So in the end, you have just hidden that by having several blocs working tight together. It would have changed if you signed less treaties and/or if you decided to be on one side of the "bloc-web" - however after your mass-cancellation you ended up being allied CnG, PB, SF and additionally TOP as a strong alliance. The conclusion is that there is no difference between you and NPO in this point.[/quote]
Firstly, SF/C&G/PB are not hugely interlinked, they all have their own egos and their own views of the world. Anyone who thinks otherwise needs to get more involved in game politics. Secondly, you are focusing on the present day situation. Immediately after Karma the world had Ex-hege (politically dead until bipolar), SF, C&G, FB and Citadel, all of whom were connected, none of whom held an upper hand.

[quote name='Mark Ashton' timestamp='1296127971' post='2605337']
2. EZI / PZI: That was [b]two[/b] years ago. On one hand side you make them look like criminals for committing these "crimes" on the other hand you claim this is a game and everything is allowed. That doesn't make sense. I'd assume since this is a game you should be able to forget. Last I checked NPO didn't use any illegal strategies hunting the EZI-targets. So the people receiving the punishment made sure that there identity was discovered. VOX just showed that people could anonymously live within the main Hegemony powers at that time without being discovered. What you are doing is searching points to make NPO look worse than it actually is, because you need someone to hate to keep the kindergarten you call alliance interested.[/quote]
It was two years ago, but it is still a change. This thread was brought up in response to the recent increase in posts talking about the events of two years ago, it's clearly still relevant to today. Also, his point is that anything is allowed within the game. EZI is outside of the game as it's preventing people from playing the game.

[quote name='Mark Ashton' timestamp='1296127971' post='2605337']
3. I don't think it was part of the thread but it's part of the topic. Umbrella also attacked GPA in the Woodstock Massacre. Now, Umbrella [b]never paid[/b] for their crimes, and never lost a war. Although being ex Genmay (thus actually on NpO's EZI list) they managed to get protection from TOP, were able to hit Polaris in the WoTC, hit NPO in Karma, and when their actual protector needed them, they made sure to be on the opposing side in order to win. Now they announce how evil NPO is, although they committed the same crimes and although they never "paid". That's pathetic.[/quote]
You just said the events of two years ago were irrelevant. These were 3 years ago, and the Umbrella triumvirate then don't even play now.

[quote name='Mark Ashton' timestamp='1296127971' post='2605337']
4. Don't pretend you are better than NPO, and we both know that change is the only spirit keeping this game alive. With this war you have made sure the last person in this game not kissing your ass has understood that you are a threat for everyones security and that you are in fact not better. No matter how this war will end, this will make that people on the other side reconcile and one day you and all your ass kissing treaty-partners, and their ass kissing treaty partners will get a kick in the butt they won't survive. This will be the day, I can happily retire from this game because everything is achieved.[/quote]
This makes no sense in the context of the rest of your post. I am glad we're getting you interested in destroying the mushroom kingdom. The entire point of Azaghul's post is that we need to make the game more interesting. Here you are, saying we've done this for you.

[Prime minister Johns]

[quote name='Ardus' timestamp='1296108637' post='2604910']
Or the player can grow some gumption and take command themselves. In most alliances you can rise through ranks pretty quickly simply by being active and contributing. Heck, in many you don't even have to be competent.
[/quote]
Been there, done that, and I discovered the glass ceiling. I was moderately good at military matters and although I had a reasonable war record (over I fought in every war the the NPO was in from woodstock to karma with a 80% win-loss ratio (karma screwed up my average), and eaten dozens of nukes) I never rose further than section leader. I learned the lesson that if you are not in the clique you will never be recognized or rewarded so I stopped seeking recognition and rewards. And besides, players who seek leadership positions are deemed threats to the existing leaders and eliminated.

[Mark Ashton]

[quote name='Banksy' timestamp='1296129221' post='2605366']
1. Firstly, SF/C&G/PB are not hugely interlinked, they all have their own egos and their own views of the world. Anyone who thinks otherwise needs to get more involved in game politics. Secondly, you are focusing on the present day situation. Immediately after Karma the world had Ex-hege (politically dead until bipolar), SF, C&G, FB and Citadel, all of whom were connected, none of whom held an upper hand.


2. It was two years ago, but it is still a change. This thread was brought up in response to the recent increase in posts talking about the events of two years ago, it's clearly still relevant to today. Also, his point is that anything is allowed within the game. EZI is outside of the game as it's preventing people from playing the game.


3. You just said the events of two years ago were irrelevant. These were 3 years ago, and the Umbrella triumvirate then don't even play now.


4. This makes no sense in the context of the rest of your post. I am glad we're getting you interested in destroying the mushroom kingdom. The entire point of Azaghul's post is that we need to make the game more interesting. Here you are, saying we've done this for you.
[/quote]
[i](I have inserted numbers to make the response clearer, hope you don't mind)

[/i]1. In fact it's not about blocs being tied to each other, it's about the top alliances of these blocs being allied to each other. In our current situation especially you and Viridia are important. Since Karma you have done exactly what NPO has done since GWI - allying yourself with the most different sides of the treaty web in order to create a Hegemony; and Hegemonies are what stagnate the game. I personally think that a war cannot revive the game because wars always drive people away from the game and only last for a few weeks. What really keeps the game interesting is a balanced foreign development.

2. I think my point was a little unclear. I have never doubted that EZIing people isn't a very "human" move, however I have doubted the efficiency, the actual enforceability and I have pointed out that NPO has paid for their crimes during and after Karma, and since then not committed anything worth mentioning. (Please I left shortly after Karma (goal achieved) and just returned, I might be wrong here, I have not found anything they'd have done that were worthy attacking them)

3. Yes, call me a hypocrite for that, but the differences are:
A. NPO has already paid for their "crimes".
B. I actually don't want that Umbrella pays now, three years later, for what they have done to NPO, but I think it's funny they hit NPO for something they have participated in (and supported) yet not paid for.

4. No actually I want to retire

[mrcalkin]

[quote name='Mark Ashton' timestamp='1296127971' post='2605337']
3. I don't think it was part of the thread but it's part of the topic. Umbrella also attacked GPA in the Woodstock Massacre. Now, Umbrella [b]never paid[/b] for their crimes, and never lost a war. Although being ex Genmay (thus actually on NpO's EZI list) they managed to get protection from TOP, were able to hit Polaris in the WoTC, hit NPO in Karma, and when their actual protector needed them, they made sure to be on the opposing side in order to win. Now they announce how evil NPO is, although they committed the same crimes and although they never "paid". That's pathetic.
[/quote]

Not commenting on your opinion related to the events, but the involvement in the GPA War was not only extremely controversial internally, but it was also extremely limited. I believe only three of our nations ever engaged in a token show of support after TOP asked if we would come in. Ochocinco made the decision almost entirely on his own (and hasn't been in Umbrella or [ooc]the game[/ooc] since Karma), with the rest of the alliance and government really only learning after all was said and done. If you look at our track record since the GPA War, you can see that overall we have been pushing away from these sorts of actions. After the WoTC, we were initially opposed to taking reps but were told they would just be reallocated elsewhere, and I believe a good amount of our members paid for any tech they ended up procuring. Once people like Roquentin, myself and Xavi got into government, we pushed hard for no reparations with Valhalla at the end of Karma, much to the chagrin of some of our allies and allies' allies. We also asked and received no reparations for the many alliances we fought in Bipolar. So while it is correct to say we took part in the GPA War, I think its important to note that 1. the involvement was very minimal compared to the major players involved and was not something that probably would have been supported by the alliance as a whole (which at that time was less important in Umbrella than today) and 2. that the actions undertook there and during the WotC have shaped our decisions about reparations and fighting the wrong kinds of wars since as evidenced by both Karma and Bipolar. We have tried to make some amends and not perpetuate bad decisions.

[Monster]

Again, people try to conflate ochocinco's Umbrella with my Umbrella. I already explained why you can't throw that at me. I was not appointed by him and we were practically enemies at the end of his time here. Difference with NPO is they don't repudiate their past actions because of pride. I don't understand the psychology behind it, but the issue is they just don't like apologizing for things they've done in the past and only do so in the most vague manners possible in the few instances they do and still walk around with the same pomp they did before. In general, owning up to mistakes isn't common enough here. We can find many instances of them explaining their lack of public actions in general with Francoist justifications: "The material conditions have changed."

[mhawk]

[quote name='Antoine Roquentin' timestamp='1296136518' post='2605495']
Again, people try to conflate ochocinco's Umbrella with my Umbrella. I already explained why you can't throw that at me. I was not appointed by him and we were practically enemies at the end of his time here. Difference with NPO is they don't repudiate their past actions because of pride. I don't understand the psychology behind it, but the issue is they just don't like apologizing for things they've done in the past and only do so in the most vague manners possible in the few instances they do and still walk around with the same pomp they did before. In general, owning up to mistakes isn't common enough here. We can find many instances of them explaining their lack of public actions in general with Francoist justifications: "The material conditions have changed."
[/quote]

So what is your opinion of how TPF "needed to pay" for crimes when myself and my gov were not in the alliance during any of so mentioned crimes? Despite constant recognition of mistakes and policy reversals up to and including defending a founding member or Nordreich from pzi. Banning ezi/pzi publicly (along with NPO) and including apologies for such actions -note the guy from tdsm8 that I can't remember.

Are actions not the very best way of "owning up" to mistakes? In two years they didn't even participate in a war, they didn't pzi anything (which doesn't mean much as they banned the practice pre karma). What of the nearly year long terms and massive reps they paid, do those mean nothing? If you do not need to apologize or pay for Umrella's actions once, surely NPO does not need to apologize and pay twice.

[Dochartaigh]

[quote name='shahenshah' timestamp='1296112718' post='2605054']
Depends.
If this war goes on for 3 months and !@#$ loads of reps, that'll just lead to another year of boredom, same product, different package. Lets see how those actions play about, because rhetoric is subject to U-turn from pretty much everyone.

If say, war goes for 6-8 rounds, ends with white peace all around or token reps that can be done with in 1-2 months..then, we have this planet back alive. Else, as far as boredom is concerned, its truly same old.
[/quote]

please, white peace will be presented to half maybe 2/3rds of the alliances opposing PB/Doomhouse. the rest will pay a !@#$load in reps and be under terms ranging from 1 month to a year. most likely Polaris and Pacifica will pay out the highest reps to ensure that they are not a threat for a while. This will basically lead to stagnation once again and when PB/DH grow bored again, they will either manufacture another CB or just straight up attack with no CB. they have shown they are capable of doing both.

i would honestly love to be proven wrong and have this war last maybe a month or 2, with white peace or token reps but i honestly doubt that would happen. PB?DH=New Q.

@Antoine- gee, that sux for you. truly i cry. you get the same treatment that Polaris gets, that Pacifica gets, that many of the Remnants get unless they kiss the ass and feet of PB/DH. poor you....

[Monster]

[quote name='mhawk' timestamp='1296144754' post='2605668']
So what is your opinion of how TPF "needed to pay" for crimes when myself and my gov were not in the alliance during any of so mentioned crimes? Despite constant recognition of mistakes and policy reversals up to and including defending a founding member or Nordreich from pzi. Banning ezi/pzi publicly (along with NPO) and including apologies for such actions -note the guy from tdsm8 that I can't remember.

Are actions not the very best way of "owning up" to mistakes? In two years they didn't even participate in a war, they didn't pzi anything (which doesn't mean much as they banned the practice pre karma). What of the nearly year long terms and massive reps they paid, do those mean nothing? If you do not need to apologize or pay for Umrella's actions once, surely NPO does not need to apologize and pay twice.
[/quote]

Not sure what I said about TPF before? Did you not keep a good portion of the old guard around anyway? Did Slayer not invite you to take the reigns?

How could they do anything? As I said "the material conditions have changed", their line not mine. They don't mean anything if NPO goes back to acting like it did before except for not being able to do anything due to its political position. How could you participate in a war if you're under terms and have no money? I know your jailbreaking of NPO fantasy never panned out(which if it happened would subvert your argument here, also brilliant to alienate anti-NPO elements within a coalition defending you). Their rhetoric has always been always been transparent on these forums since Karma, and even moreso especially once this war kicked off, which they saw as their big chance.


[quote name='Dochartaigh' timestamp='1296146032' post='2605710']

@Antoine- gee, that sux for you. truly i cry. you get the same treatment that Polaris gets, that Pacifica gets, that many of the Remnants get unless they kiss the ass and feet of PB/DH. poor you....
[/quote]

I don't even know what you're getting at here. It's dochartaigh after all, though.

Edited January 27, 2011 by Antoine Roquentin