Leaderboard

Sounds exactly like something a loser would say.

Just a small suggestion, it would help immensely to see what embargoes are in place if you could filter out embargoes on Mountania for the objective bonus, since they clog up dozens of pages of the list.

And yet perfectly reasonable. A little humiliation, they get out of a protracted conflict that they know they cannot win nor have the ability to win and now they get to go on their merry way.

Well, it’s been quite a game, eh folks? This is one for the ages, going back and forth all nine innings. Home runs, strikeouts, fights, even some fan interference, but now it’s closing time and things are all wrapped up. While the home team cleans up the rest of the garbage littering the stadium, The Fighting Pacifists team departs, defeated but treated to a resounding round of ‘Sweet Caroline’ as they go. An honest game was played, and we wish them many a fine exhibition game going forward! IQ/Paperless and The Fighting Pacifists agree to the following terms: 1. The Fighting Pacifists will change their in-game alliance acronym to "Grumpy" and must use "Grumpy" in any and all situations an acronym or shorthand of "The Fighting Pacifists" would be used. This term will begin immediately, and will last for as long as the duration of Knightfall, with the countdown beginning when Knightfall ends. 2. Grumpy will fly the Mensa HQ flag. This term will begin immediately, and will last for as long as the duration of Knightfall, with the countdown beginning when Knightfall ends. 3. War-dodgers are considered: nations that used (or renewed) Vacation Mode during the war, nations that entered Vacation Mode a few hours before the initial blitz of the war and were seen to be active at some point during the war. Either (A) Grumpy will allow members of IQ/Paperless to attack war-dodgers (no counters will be launched by Grumpy) once they get out of Vacation Mode. Attacks will continue till the infrastructure at all cities of a war-dodger is decreased to the level of 1k infra per city. The members of IQ/Paperless are not to unnecessarily “torment” any war-dodgers; “torment” is defined as the purposeful prolonging of any attacks on war-dodgers to a greater extent than necessary, or continuing such wars once said nations infrastructure have decreased beneath the designated level. Or (B) war-dodgers of Grumpy will have to sell the infrastructure in all of their cities down to 1k infra level. Once a nation submits to this term and fulfills it, its alliance has to inform and wait for confirmation from IQ/Paperless before they are able to rebuild their infrastructure. Confirmation has to take place within 24 hours. Should any war-dodgers renew their Vacation Mode after this Article get accepted, Grumpy must kick these nations from their alliance. Should any war-dodgers get kicked or change alliances on their own, before Terms A or B are fulfilled, they will be attacked by members of IQ/Paperless, till their infrastructure depletes to the level of 1k infra per city. Term B of this Article will still apply. War-dodgers or their alliances cannot bribe their way out of Terms A or B of this Article. The nations affected by this term are the following: https://politicsandwar.com/nation/id=37327 https://politicsandwar.com/nation/id=56828 https://politicsandwar.com/nation/id=92398 https://politicsandwar.com/nation/id=95652 https://politicsandwar.com/nation/id=102843 https://politicsandwar.com/nation/id=124281 With this no new wars will be declared but existing ones will finish however the combatants wish. Signed: TC: Acadia United Purple Nations IQ: New Pacific Order Black Knights Paperless: Terminus Est Seven Kingdoms Arrgh Oblivion Grumpy: The Fighting Pacifists

You mean Knightfall? Hate to break it to you... again... but you guys claimed them as Knightfall on the forums... on the stats... on the wiki... and in the peace talks server, where you gleefully took the opportunity to flaunt that you were hitting TFP and ask if Quichwe gets a mask or if Guardian was going to represent them. They're Guardian's MDP ally and you declared on them for ghosting in this war, so of course they're part of our war and our coalition.

I mean, you all can’t even handle your own peace talks. Kinda feel bad for TFP if you’re forced to represent them.

Good Game. It's amazing what can happen when people agree to terms.

And that's the question we'd ask TFP. Afterall, they could croak at any second. Shifty bringing you the cause of death: Could Guardian be putting so much pressure on poor TFP during CPR that it accidently punched a hole through it's chest? Just how exactly does Guardian plan to keep TFP, who is already losing badly, in the war? Bribes? Who will be left when the dust settles in such a fragmented AA? Violence? Can you really beat a corpse to death? Coup? How do you replace a leadership that was never there? Looks like this mystery may never be solved, but we do know TFP wants to be put out of its misery. All you need is the Mensa flag gravestone.

The knights Templar are at it again with these heinous crimes. but this time we have video proof take a look judge for yourself. This is why we will be dropping another one of our treaties. Credit: @Ameyuri for the Images.

Looks like TKR could learn something from Grumpy for once instead of finding new excuses every couple days.

"Quichwe returns home." (2019, black and white.)

Good Game.

I'm actually curious as to why people are upset about it. For one, IQ/Syndi want this war to continue. So does TKR/Guardian. Second, who else plans on doing anything during this time anyways? If you want to do something, then do it. This isn't going to stop you, nor should it.

Nope, I'm just an angry jackass.

I wish for the ability to be able to sort the bounties list. Maybe have an option that only shows bounties within your War range? Only certain colours (no racism lul)? From highest to lowest award? Score? You get the point. I’m sure it would make bounties and bounty hunting a much more commonplace activity.

Been a damn rough ride, but good fight guys. Here's to peace.

Stupid terms. Thoughts.

Now I'm no diplomat, but if TFP want a separate peace isn't that kind of up to them and not you guys? Y'all certainly have a right to waggle your fingers at them, but they're an independent alliance with a right to their own foreign policy decisions aren't they?

Lmfao here we go again You might not have been the ones who came up with the terms, but you spent the better part of a month arguing for their merit as if they were yours. By the last few weeks of that war, TCW was barely fighting, like less than 10% of all wars were TCW, TRF was getting jumped and dicked repeatedly by us as their activity waned and we had flipped their stats into the negative. TKR was the one doing all the work. At any point you could have chosen simply to drop those terms because you had all of the bargaining power. The only reason those terms ever got dropped is because TCW and TRF lacked the stamina to maintain them and none of you lacked the ability to argue with me for their merit (probably because there was none, as we all saw thanks to that Alex/Queen M thread). Its simple really, when you are the primary negotiator or a large and integral part of a coalition, and therefore have a large amount of leverage, you don't get to hide behind your smaller and less important allies when they try and push terms you supposedly don't support. I do find it ironic that according to multiple members of TKR and TCW, TGH was majorly responsible for the 6 month NAP with IQ you guys all complained about, despite being a smaller alliance in a wider coalition, with no leverage (what we gonna say, "If you peace out with a 6 month NAP, we'll.....peace out?" lmfao). Yet TKR apparently bares no responsibility for the terms their allies tried to push (they only failed because your allies were shit), despite making up like 70% of the coalition size, doing all the legwork, not even being allied to one of them, and being in the dominant position in the war. Have you learned nothing?

Propoganda? Or news?

-Removed by Forum Moderation for Filter Evasion- I am back from The Upside Down which is an alternate dimension existing in parallel to the human world. What I saw I present you here... I checked every alliance from list above very carefully and here what I found out. -Removed by Forum Moderation for Filter Evasion- It's my special day :evil:

Not to worry, as we speak the pidgeon and I are working tirelessly to set up the destruction of IQ and restore the true hegemony to greatness. The Covenant will rise again!

I'm already confused reading the peace terms with that Grumpy name The good thing is that usually no one talks about The Fighting Pacifists Now that this is considered a different war and not part of Knightfall why are them still in the stats for Knightfall?

Would be a big insult to their sovereignty if they weren't permitted to seek their own peace. If they want to seek peace alongside your coalition and aren't being allowed by the opposition, that's also an issue. This does not seem to be the case, however.

Basically the terms are centered around the Mensa flag. Somehow Mensa is still relevant enough to become a term in a war.

Not by TFP’s own admission. And anyways it’s up to us whose fighting what wars not you, unless you are now saying guardian is in two wars. If that’s the case reach out and we can set a second group of terms!

But did you know @TheNG made Arrgh surrender?

Alex is having a game update come February. (basically 2 days) Is this the mandatory war update that will screw up the war a bit?

You have already announced the merger between the two alliances and their rebrand here: I see no reason for another announcement providing the same information, so I will be locking the thread.

I fundamentally disagree. Peace terms are an essential part of the bridge between politics and wars. Without delving into the fact that, yes, TKR has had a hand in imposing terms on numerous alliances in the past, your basic premise is wrong for two main reasons. 1) Wars establish or reinforce grudges and rivalries. The Mensa-Rose rivalry is probably the most famous so far, and it was built in part on peace terms. Rose signing a treaty with Mensa had more significance because of the $1 billion in reparations Rose paid Mensa when it surrendered in the Silent War. A lot of the Article III terms were added because alliances in TKR's coalition successfully imposed similar terms on alliances in our coalition in the past. The Article IV terms are about rivalries in naming color blocs. No one is going to go to war over the name of color, but that doesn't mean that Acadia, TCW, SK, and TKR aren't slightly annoyed that their preferred color names aren't always chosen. These aren't bad things. They make politics more interesting. I don't know if there's evidence to support your claim about driving players away, but there is evidence that public arguments like these are the most politically engaging parts of the game for most players. Consider this: the two topics with the most views and the most replies in Alliance Affairs are this one and Rose's Surrender from the Silent War, which is where NPO and BK had a 30-page argument about the reparations BK was trying to (and did) impose on NPO. 2) Peace terms are the most reliable way to establish and enforce informal rules. The precedent on reparations, for example, is that only aggressors should be forced to pay them. This was the case in the Great VE War and in the Silent War, and was cited as a justification for reparations in both. The terms surrounding Arrgh after UPN defeated them, after Syndisphere defeated UPN's coalition a few months later, and in Article VIII here are attempts to curtail or protect Arrgh's brand of piracy. Arrgh's success - and, by extension, the viability of full-time raiding - is partly built on Arrgh's ability to make major alliances willing to help Arrgh via peace terms. The terms in Articles V, VI, and VII are our coalition's attempt to set precedents regarding war dodging, trade bots, and secret treaties. Article V has a partial precedent in Rose's surrender in the Silent War - Belisarius and Oblige were subjected to additional wars because Rose's opponents felt they hadn't been damaged enough. Trade bots aren't illegal, but we dislike them; so, we're trying to get rid of TKR's bot. Exposing GOB's charade about being "paperless" is in keeping with both traditional and paperless alliances' conception of treaties: regardless of their formality, we feel all treaties should be made public. Part of the reason for the war was the power that TKR-sphere derived from bloat - massive warchests from bloated nations that hadn't fought a difficult war in years; power from maintaining treaties off the books with GOB, t$, or others despite public claims that they'd removed their FA bloat by "cancelling" most of their EMC treaties. If it's somehow unacceptable for our coalition to alter this status quo with peace terms, why was it acceptable for TKR-sphere to engage in these practices in the first place? The solution to displeasure with the current political dynamic is to change it, through force if necessary. The solution isn't to say that we should remove political consequences from wars, especially since wars are fought to address problems other than those posed by unchecked military power.

I don't really know how many times I have to say it OR show public examples of it OR write reports about it OR send messages to Alex about it, but MODERATION/MODERATORS are trash - every single one of them, even the ones I like outside of their mod role, cuz some are chill AF. Moderators are either horrible at their job or simply not here - so the best thing to do is to just say frick it and do what you want cuz either 1) nobody is gonna see it/care or 2) you'll get a warn point....and who gives a shit about that? People like Noctis are cancer - always have been cancer and this moderation/admin cater to cancer growth. Good luck with the petition - but it ain't the chemo you need.

You know i had a large reply made up for this pointing out the stupidity but to be honest I dont care enough to post it. The lack of moderation or ambition of the mods to read topics at all makes me laugh. " but we cannot patrol the entire forums on our own." as you stated is the best, since from where I can tell you seem to patrol none. (Hence my list of 6-7 topics to chris earlier that were in plain view with minimal work other than checking topic overviews once a while) I mean i personally dont find it to taxing to read topics, its not like 100 are posted a day in the main section, there is how many mods for you to split the work into

I would like to suggest the ability to add “Last Online” to the table of info in the applicants list. Currently we have Leader Name, Nation Name, Active Wars, and Score.

Remember, mostly inactive is still slightly active

Maybe we should self organize and self protect by replacing you lot with members of the community who care enough not to make excuses.

I'm a victim too. Just sayin'. But I still see 5 treaties left? Is this fake news?

Didn't see this until now. I sign this petition, wholeheartedly.

It's been a hundred days. This is the largest, most costly, longest war anyone has seen in PnW. Why has peace not been achieved yet? I'm not asking for six month peace treaty. I don't understand why this war is continuing. Have I missed an important detail? Is TKR just that stubborn and won't accept they've been blasted out of the water? Some of the proposed articles are a little rough, yet that can't be the only reason Knightfall continues. Let me farm my pixels without worrying about another nuke blowing me up. Here's a picture of my dog so no one can say mean things to me. What evil fiend talks crap when there's a dog?

(OOC) [forgot this in my last post] 1) This is a good point and a positive. But I think, from an OOC perspective, that it is vastly overshadowed by the negatives. 2) This is very marginal. The terms very rarely have a fraction of the impact that the war, or the war continuing, has. Things like the trade bot and war dodgers might have the impact of a couple of days income or losses from fighting on an alliance level. It's almost always mostly more symbolic than substantive. To be clear, I'm not making any of these points to make the case for anything about this war. Nor am I making an argument about the ethics of terms or whether or not it is "acceptable". This really is an OOC perspective based on my experience in many wars both in this world and in that other world many of us have experience in, this war is just the latest example. Now for the negatives. And keep in mind I'm talking about long wars generally, this isn't about this war specifically. 1) It becomes monotonous and tedious for most players on both sides. Yes, I know everyone has to put on a political show of not being bored with it or wanting it to be over. And of course, the most active people who would be on the forums may be more interested and more willing to fight a long war. Hell, I'm still having some fun, but I know I'm a minority and this isn't my normal experience or the experience of most players. 2) It exasperates tier separation. Very often, one side dominates in one tier and the other side in another tier. Or if not, the losing side can come to dominate the lower or middle tiers because of an influx into those tiers from higher tier nations. Some people end up fighting a lot, and others very little. Often the people fighting very little are a lot of the alliance leaders because they have older and thus bigger nations. Those big nations keep growing after 1-2 weeks of fighting, while the smaller nations keep grinding it out for months. The bloated nations you are talking about (of which I was one) in large part came about because the wars before this were longer. Short wars hit bigger nations harder because they have the most expensive infra to loose in the initial rounds. But once the nations that they fight are knocked down into lower tiers, they can generally take it easy and almost treat it like peace. While the smaller nations in EMC and their opponents were fighting it out for months, the larger nations in EMC were largely left alone and free to rebuild and restock after the first 2 rounds of war. This gets even worse when the winning side wants to do a certain amount of damage and can't hit certain nations due to tiers or peace/vacation mode, so those they can hit get hit extra hard to get the overall damage in that they want. 3) Both of the above two factors drive players from the game. This may be to the advantage of one side or the other, but it's bad for the game as a whole. And even for the winning side, the tedious experience of wars that last for months can make people tired of the game and give them a reason to quit later. 4) The wars themselves put a damper on new political developments. People rarely think about or sign new treaties while at war. It delays the point where people can really start preparing for the next war for most nations and alliances. People might smart in small ways (rebuying infra, etc.), but not at the level that they would in peace. So while the fight over terms can create drama, it is precluding other types of drama. 5) It makes rebuilding take a lot longer and forces people to build larger war chests, which makes the peace between wars a lot longer People generally don't go to war until they have war chests that they think will get them through the next war. If they expect the next war is likely to be very long, they feel like they need bigger warchests and wait later to go to war. Or to take actions that might lead to war. 6) These extended war cycles that can last 6 months to a year give new players less reason to stay around. Who wants to play a game where the next major action isn't likely to happen for many months? Who wants to sit around just collecting resources for months? The people active on this forum and/or in their alliance in other ways can amuse themselves with the politics and everything else. But that doesn't entirely make up for it and it doesn't necessarily matter to a lot of players Our experience (I'm in that camp) tends to be disconnected from the experience of more casual players, which I think can create a disconnection between the political/leadership class and the more casual players. We live in the age of the internet and smart phones, where games people play operate on very short time frames and people have short attention spans. From the perspective of the average person casually joining this game, it is extremely slow paced. Edited to bold and to say: My hope is that in future wars, we don't see the winning side ask for terms, regardless of who wins.

For the record, TKR's only term was for you to reveal which of our members was leaking information to you. The term you're referring to was TRF's, which they chose to drop.

May have been the tequila shots and a shitty mood. But the brownies certainly caused this.

Ofc, you could fix up like 8 cities with that money, point is, that is still a p big reduction in costs for the alliance. Going from say, 22m to 13-14m cost. I'm gonna say, I like this prolonged war. The only real benefit coming from it is that a lot of alliances involved aren't gaining much income, and therefore their WC is decreasing, even if it is by a small amount. Hopefully this leads to alliances being fully aware of the damages caused by this autism. The downsides of course, are a lot though. Market prices being horrible, players quitting, almost no alliances being able to have drama because the world is in a coalition. Every alliance should go paperless and this would fix the problem. Every alliance goes to war against one another, winner takes all. Losers have to delete their nations.

Ah yes, like the white peace/just admission of defeat TGH/KT got.

hmmm yes, please click "delete my nation" and go play farmville

hmm dont thik so, him being banned would be a game improvement, hence im in the right section

Awww... Well, I guess it has to happen, but that's still disappointing since we love the meme so much

Hmm... well, there's a few possible solutions I can think of. We might make it so that trade data doesn't show up on the API for a few seconds. Alternatively, you might try setting your taxes to 100% and be granted what you need to operate by your alliance. Failing that, you could perhaps declare war on TKR and force them to stop using their bot or at least refund your money.

Roqbot OP

Great peaches are a consequence of great legs