Micro-Peace

[BamaBuc]

[quote name='goldielax25' timestamp='1299094054' post='2649808']
We endorse that when our protectorate comes to an amicable agreement with another alliance on terms, that we will obviously support them in doing so. We, ourselves, did not care for reps from KoH, but on the same token we didn't care if MN wanted them from KoH. If our protectorate wants something and they negotiate themselves to get it, all power to them.
[/quote]
I understand that. I was simply refuting one of your members who said that VE had nothing to do with these reps.

-Bama

[Penguin]

[quote name='MrMuz' timestamp='1299101089' post='2649897']
But they kept trying to cause more long term damage, despite not being able to change the outcome of the war. They did not have the capacity to actually defend NpO after a few wars or even absorb much damage. That's the part that justifies reps.[/quote]
This really makes no sense to me. I think it's very rare that any individual alliance changes the outcome of a war. KoH was still pulling Misfit Nations off of us up to the very end, so however small a role they were playing they still had an impact. Do you believe this gives you justification to demand reparations from anyone who joins a war on the losing side and stays beyond when it is obvious that they are going to lose? And if they didn't have the "capacity to actually defend" us, how were they able to "cause more long term damage"?

Edited March 2, 2011 by Penguin

[Callebaut]

[quote name='Penguin' timestamp='1299095500' post='2649829']
I just think it's silly for you to set up a time line such that the reps have to be paid before your alliance is actually at peace. The terms amount to war aid not rebuilding aid, and Misfits accepting them and building infrastructure shouldn't be surprised if they become a more prominent target than other nations who have been wiped out completely and hold almost no infra at hard to reach NS ranges with no sign of assistance.
[/quote]

Allowing Hyrule to send us reparations before we are at peace with Polar would violate the non-involvement clause of the agreement. We will not be soliciting or accepting reparations while at war with Polar. Should the war continue to a point where it interferes with the schedule laid out in the agreement, it will be re-negotiated by both parties, as has been said before.

[Penguin]

[quote name='Callebaut' timestamp='1299102383' post='2649921']
Allowing Hyrule to send us reparations before we are at peace with Polar would violate the non-involvement clause of the agreement. We will not be soliciting or accepting reparations while at war with Polar. Should the war continue to a point where it interferes with the schedule laid out in the agreement, it will be re-negotiated by both parties, as has been said before.
[/quote]
Ah, I hadn't noticed that, thanks for the clarification. Why not just set the payment period as X months from the end of the war?

Edited March 2, 2011 by Penguin

[TypoNinja]

[quote name='erikz' timestamp='1299073864' post='2649546']
Did you hit a wall or something? When can you get around to the fact that people are pissed of because of the fact [i]reps are being demanded[/i]....???? The amount of reps is totally irrelevant, it's the fact people extort others and demand blood money.
[/quote]

If people have issues with recognizing reality that's their issue. Reps happen in wars. And these numbers are not high. People want to make themselves look silly with faux moral outrage every time anything happens no matter how minor, we could be blamed for causing papercuts and to hear the OWF tell it, it's the end of the world.

[quote name='JWConner' timestamp='1299077452' post='2649577']
Yeah, claiming everyone that's disgusted with your lack of class by saying they're hypocritical in the case of receiving reps is just as pathetic as the reps themselves. I've never accepted reps from war, even when offered to me. When I led VA, we were offered reps on 2 different occasions (from STA and someone else) and we declined them. I don't approve of receiving or sending of reps due to a war.

So that debunks your little theory of hypocrisy. Face it, you're in the wrong here and there's no reason to demand reps for peace, no matter the amount. As I said, it's pathetic.
[/quote]

Oh no! You personally never accepted reps! We have an anecdote folks! Everything is solved! congrats, you personally have never accepted reps, does that cover your alliances, and say oh Polar and Pacifica? I admit to ignorance about TPF, but somehow I doubt Neither of the Orders ever collected reps.

Which is entirely besides the point anyway, try answering the other part of my post instead of just deflecting.

[quote name='ChairmanHal' timestamp='1299080838' post='2649611']
Then why are they here in such numbers defending it?
[/quote]

Cause nobody has ever agreed with and defended one of their allies in public, shocking!

[quote]
I think I also saw one of your number talking about a good fight it was. Since you went the plastic participation trophy route, you don't get to compliment your former opponent for a good fight. Clearly you didn't enjoy it or you wouldn't be demanding the tech/cash for peace, you'd shake hands and walk away.
[/quote]

No the idea that this is how wars work is a rosy tinted myth perpetrated by the losing side now that the are not the ones in position to be the victors. If you attack me or my friends you are sending a message that you are attempting our destruction. There are negative consequences for that. You do not walk away with a handshake because trying that kind of material harm to me or my allies is a serious offense. Steps should be taken to limit anyone's ability to try for round two.

[quote name='BamaBuc' timestamp='1299086207' post='2649700']
I was responding to his comment that VE had nothing at all to do with the reps. By placing their name on an agreement, yes, they are endorsing that agreement. I'm surprised that there's any debate about that.
-Bama
[/quote]

That kind of logic is so full of holes. By the same logic I can declare that TOOL is in favor of government sanctioned spying since you declared on Polars side of the war.

[quote name='Sardonic' timestamp='1299086961' post='2649712']
The amount of whining in this thread over the reps is ridiculous. I look forward to seeing people's reactions when alliances start surrendering to us.
[/quote]

This is kind of been my point, they whine like its the end of the world over what amounts to chump change (chump change that KoH doesn't even have to pay themselves, people seem to keep missing the fact that outside aid was not forbidden.) They really should save the complaints for something worth complaining about or they'll never be taken seriously.

[quote name='Rebel Virginia' timestamp='1299089103' post='2649736']
[color="#0000FF"]You know how I feel about reps. I've said I would not be too vocal about non-excessive reps, since it'd be a pointless battle for me to fight, but in this case it is fairly unreasonable considering they have two nations capable of paying reps.

GOONS has always been something not too awful. From Ninjas, FnKa, and NATO you asked for something in the 100 mil to 200 mil, which isn't really excessive at all considering that each of those alliances had about ten or so nations in the rep paying range and a few months to pay. Most alliances who will be surrendering to you will have that and maybe a bit more.

The thing with KoH is that they have two nations, and most of their alliance is composed of newbies. Proportionally it is much more than GOONS has asked. Yes, you did ask for 90 mil from Dopp and the rebel, but they both had huge nations and neither had to support the rebuilding of an entire alliance.

As I said earlier, now that it seems KoH has a month and a half to rebuild before they have to send reps, it isn't as bad as it was. And the reps won't take too long to pay, but it is still a little steep for an alliance that small. I wouldn't have asked for such reps myself.[/color]
[/quote]

No I really isn't. Once again, They are not forbidden outside aid, somebody else could pay the entirety of their reps for them as long as it gets funneled through KoH nations. I really don't see Polar not having peace two months from now, and that that point they should be able to fart 75 mil out with out even noticing. Even if through some freaky twist of fate that they can't surely one of their allies or friends would do them a favor and cover their protectorate for them?

[quote name='erikz' timestamp='1299095379' post='2649827']
I have offered to pay half of the reps earlier.
[/quote]

You sir have put your money where your mouth is and have earned some respect for it.*

The rest of the whiners have not.

[size="1"]*Assuming you follow through, talk after all is not aid slots [/size]

[BamaBuc]

[quote name='TypoNinja' timestamp='1299103369' post='2649936']
That kind of logic is so full of holes. By the same logic I can declare that TOOL is in favor of government sanctioned spying since you declared on Polars side of the war.
[/quote]
First of all, we are not on Polar's side of anything. But this isn't the place for the one-war-or-two debate.

That's not the same logic at all. What I am saying is that [b]if you sign your name to an agreement, you are endorsing that agreement.[/b] It really isn't complicated.

-Bama

[TheEraser]

congrats on peace KoH you guys fought your asses off, even after MN had to have VE bail them out from all the damage you were doing.

kick back and relax for a bit guys, by the time we're through with them 75 million isn't even going to begin to rebuild MN

[Cornelius]

[quote name='Roi Loup' timestamp='1299093748' post='2649806']
declaration of warring your protectorates? (that has been annoying me when people say dowing, not just you)

your signature is hypocritical and mn not offering white peace the third time (i thought it was three times the charm?) is just bad. mostly i just find your signature hilarious though since most of the ve i fought either lost badly or didnt fight back lol
[/quote]
I know, it's a bad habit.

As for my sig, the Polar in question and I had a good laugh about it. It is called propaganda after all, and I've seen far worse examples on both sides. As for Misfits not offering white peace the third time, if it had been turned down you'd have criticized them for not offering it a fourth. The whole point of increasing terms as the war drags out further is to provide the incentive to end the war faster and reduce damage (and recovery time) to both sides. The "price" if you will for standing by your allies goes up as time goes on. We're certainly not going to make it easy for our opponents to do the right thing by keeping terms constant throughout the war. And if you don't like allies that surrender after a week or two, don't ally with them.

[King wilkinson]

People are free to their own opinion on these reps but it doesn't change facts, we have agreed to them and we have to pay them.

Thank you to everyone who has offered support to us in this thread, your kind words mean a lot to us.

o/ Hyrule
o/ Polaris

Edited March 2, 2011 by King wilkinson

[Penguin]

[quote name='Cornelius' timestamp='1299104722' post='2649950']The "price" if you will for standing by your allies goes up as time goes on. We're certainly not going to make it easy for our opponents to do the right thing by keeping terms constant throughout the war.
[/quote]
The price goes up already just by being in the war longer, taking more damage, using up more warchests, and postponing rebuilding periods. There's really no need to add insult to injury.

Edited March 2, 2011 by Penguin

[Sarmatian Empire]

chirp chirp reps chirp chirp chrip we dont like chirp chirp evil chirp chirp

Congrats on peace everyone, I'm surprised this conflicted lasted so long

[Roi Loup]

[quote name='Cornelius' timestamp='1299104722' post='2649950']
I know, it's a bad habit.

As for my sig, the Polar in question and I had a good laugh about it. It is called propaganda after all, and I've seen far worse examples on both sides. As for Misfits not offering white peace the third time, if it had been turned down you'd have criticized them for not offering it a fourth. The whole point of increasing terms as the war drags out further is to provide the incentive to end the war faster and reduce damage (and recovery time) to both sides. The "price" if you will for standing by your allies goes up as time goes on. We're certainly not going to make it easy for our opponents to do the right thing by keeping terms constant throughout the war. And if you don't like allies that surrender after a week or two, don't ally with them.
[/quote]

"you guys were an honorable alliance, therefore we must punish you for your honor. next time be dishonorable." i seem to be getting that from you guys.

[Enrage]

Grats on victory Misfits

[caleb ryals]

[quote name='ones' timestamp='1299042962' post='2649257']
congrats to all
KoH it was fun.
erik weren't you a POW from day.. three was it. hmmm
[/quote]

just an FYI, erik surrendered due to some RL problems that kept him from being active enough to fight.

[Xiphosis]

Pretty sure this front had the coolest line-up.

[Frodark]

[quote name='captain america' timestamp='1299104597' post='2649947']
congrats on peace KoH you guys fought your asses off, even after MN had to have VE bail them out from all the damage you were doing.

kick back and relax for a bit guys, by the time we're through with them 75 million isn't even going to begin to rebuild MN
[/quote]


To follow this line of logic, Polar needed a micro to bail them out of all the damage we were doing?

[Callebaut]

[quote name='Penguin' timestamp='1299102702' post='2649927']
Ah, I hadn't noticed that, thanks for the clarification. Why not just set the payment period as X months from the end of the war?
[/quote]

Several reasons I suppose.

On one hand, this protects Hyrule against situations in which our war with Polar ends sooner than expected, while terms X months from the end might have them on a more aggressive schedule than planned for. If we do have to renegotiate and extend the schedule, it will only benefit Hyrule, giving them more time.

On another hand, negotiating peace terms on the first of a month just presented too tidy a schedule to pass up, haha.

Other minor reasons too, but I'm not sure they're terribly interesting.

[Roi Loup]

[quote name='Frodark' timestamp='1299109167' post='2650035']
To follow this line of logic, Polar needed a micro to bail them out of all the damage we were doing?
[/quote]

if you mean all the alliances fighting us, then i suppose that could be correct. but we werent fighting a 1v1--nowhere close.

[Schattenmann]

KoH should hide used needles in the shipments muahahahahaha

[Kochers]

Wow. This is a major disappointment CB. Good luck to KoH during their rebuilding and while paying reps.

[foxfire99]

[quote name='Roi Loup' timestamp='1299111421' post='2650107']
if you mean all the alliances fighting us, then i suppose that could be correct. but we werent fighting a 1v1--nowhere close.
[/quote]

By that logic(ignoring all counters), Misfits were far more outnumbered by you than you were at the time.

[Frodark]

So you agree that depending on how you look at it pulling KoH to attack us helped your nations that were at war with ours...yet you then go on to say KoH v Misfits was 1v1 until VE was pulled in?

Im lost...
Polar + KoH = 2 alliances
Misfits = 1 alliance
Therefore Polar and KoH fighting Misfits is 2 alliance fighting 1 alliance. Where do people keep getting this 1v1 information?

[Roi Loup]

[quote name='foxfire99' timestamp='1299112162' post='2650127']
By that logic(ignoring all counters), Misfits were far more outnumbered by you than you were at the time.
[/quote]

mn declared war on us and koh declared war on them. what other wars was mn in during this conflict? (i know ive asked this before but got no response) keep in mind we were hardly targeting them before this.

[Roi Loup]

[quote name='Frodark' timestamp='1299112294' post='2650131']
So you agree that depending on how you look at it pulling KoH to attack us helped your nations that were at war with ours...yet you then go on to say KoH v Misfits was 1v1 until VE was pulled in?

Im lost...
Polar + KoH = 2 alliances
Misfits = 1 alliance
Therefore Polar and KoH fighting Misfits is 2 alliance fighting 1 alliance. Where do people keep getting this 1v1 information?
[/quote]

what. other. alliances. were. they. fighting. koh was pretty much the only alliance targeting them. we obviously have bigger priorities than some crapass little alliance who did very little damage. (where do people get this idea that polar actually cared enough to target mn, making it a 2v1?) in the end it was a 3v2 at the very least with mn having the advantage of two alliances not being overloaded with counterattacks and such

[Frodark]

[quote name='Roi Loup' timestamp='1299112315' post='2650132']
mn declared war on us and koh declared war on them. what other wars was mn in during this conflict? (i know ive asked this before but got no response) keep in mind we were hardly targeting them before this.
[/quote]

No one, we admit that. However its still 2v1(2 alliances vs 1 alliance) until VE came in...it is not our fault that when we fight with our Protectors they actually help us out and when KoH came in to fight with their protector Polar "hardly targets" the nations fighting their protectorate.
KoH being outnumbered with VE in the war was more due to Polar playing with the treaty web to leave VE pretty clear and Polar not helping take out more of their Protectorate targets, so please stop blaming Misfits for taking advantage of your lack of support directed to KoH.

Edited March 3, 2011 by Frodark