Fistandantilus

It doesn't acknowledge that though, and you guys signed something that says "For the purpose of this agreement there is no distinction between an attack that is a defined as a raid or one that is part of a broader war" "defined as a raid or one that is part of a broader war". Both parties agreed that raids and wars are different by definition and to count them as the same, then signed it. You guys very well may see raiding/war as the same, but that's not what Steve posted and what you guys signed, and I found it funny. I didn't think this would be such a big deal or need me to explain it in such detail XD

On another thread, said by Steve: What you said about Arrgh using the definition of raiding to be diferent then war. The OP: "For the purpose of this agreement there is no distinction between an attack that is a defined as a raid or one that is part of a broader war" That inherently means that there is a difference, which is inconsistent to what you said about Arrgh I would also like to point out how you cut out the "For the purpose of this agreement" to change the meaning to just "there is no distinction between an attack that is a defined as a raid or one that is part of a broader war" in your recent reply. The line segment "For the purpose of this agreement" when connected to the whole affirms that there is a difference between raiding and War in this document, posted by Steve. Interesting how you left that one out in your quote though

So now Steve says raids and wars are defined differently...When it involves his own AA, interesting XD

Ive always been one to enjoy Irony, and that made my night

There is a difference between implied threat and strong arming/Forcing/Threatening. There is a clear line. All actions have consequences, but extortion is more then that, per it's own definition. To apply your definition of extortion, the word would mean: A situation where a individual or party has negative consequences unless they appease the other person/party. That is not the definition, it is specifically forcing or threatening or using unfair means. You are changing the definition in your point, from extortion, to something similar but different to fit your views. If you attacked my alliance and I said give us 50m for reps, and you felt pressured to do so for peace and to save some infra, and accepted, that is not extortion. If in the same example, I asked for 50m and you didnt want to do it, and I said okay and the war continued. That is not extortion. If once again in the same example, I requested 50m, you declined, and I said I will rape your alliance for the next 2 months if you didn't accept. Or said that I would never end the war and keep destroying your AA until I got my 50m. *That* is attempted extortion. Lastly, it is ofc possible to be unbiased and accurately perceive reality or a situation, it requires some level of awareness though. My points all still stand, you are just misunderstanding what extortion means and changing it to something else. But alas, you dodged several of my points again(How it was extortion, how my example clearly shows how your are being biased here, and not me. How I have not spun anything, while you have exaggerated), and running around in circles is not what I'm here to do. Let's just agree to disagree as they like to say

You are incorrect on several points, let me break it down so it's easy to understand: 1) It is absurd to think that all peace agreements are extorted. White peace happens, and happens often. Both sides agreeing on reps in good faith happens as well. To say that because the looser never gives the terms = Every war in the history of ever has resulted in extortion is incorrect, and very silly. 2) My entire point of last post was that it was extortion. You said it wasn't, but it is. I said nothing about going into the fairness/justifications/commonality of it all, but as I said in #1, the term is meaningful as it is far from universal. I could go into a discussion about how I think is the correct way to do them, but that is offtopic. 3) My point here was that they didnt break them, and that is the fact.And certainly not "No, you are taking your biased opinions and attempting to dress them up in a veneer of "fact" to give legitimacy to your narrative about how big bad UPN and allies forced their hateful, crippling terms upon poor little Arrgh and are now getting their due" 4) But on the the topic of Bias, I can say with certainty that you are the one biased here. The only thing I said about me doing things differently(Insinuation that UPN could of done better) was this: " But as I said, I don't blame UPN or it's allies for doing what they did(Though personally, I think it may of not been the best way to go about it), it was just clearly forced(And this was not the first time here in PnW a party has done this. I don't intend for it to be sinister or accusatory, just factual. Especially given the situation you guys where in at, and before, that time with arrgh)." You then translate this as "No, you are taking your biased opinions and attempting to dress them up in a veneer of "fact" to give legitimacy to your narrative about how big bad UPN and allies forced their hateful, crippling terms upon poor little Arrgh and are now getting their due. It's disingenuous at best, so just drop the "factual" spin and post what you think without the narrative. The worst I can do, after all, is disagree." This is a clear cut case of bias on your end to anyone who is capable of seeing bias. If you want a reasonable discussion to continue, I need to you to acknowledge that your points where wrong. Acknowledged that your 1st point was incorrect, where you claimed it was not extortion(The dictionary disagreed with you). Acknowledge that White peace is not extortion every time(I could argue that it is not often in my experiences, but that's unnecessary), so your claim about every peace treaty being extortion is false. Acknowledge that it is in fact you* who are the biased one here and that you took that comment waayyyyy to far in an incorrect direction as I have proven(Via bias). Acknowledge that there is no spinning on my end, I have been accurate with everything so far. I have never been disingenuous here. I have not slandered UPN in any way as you have said, I just said I didn't blame you guys and it was a tough time, but I would of done it differently. If you disagree with any of these, feel free to argue, but do not change the subject and dodge again(Dont Steve me bro), let's get this settled in a rational way before we progress. I understand bias is blinding though, I hope my points are clear to you. It is also key to acknowledge mistakes, we're all human, their is no shame in that. Just have the awareness to see them so you can overcome them.

Did Arrgh raise serious objections about those terms but only agree to them because of how the war was going? If so, it is extortion technically. I dont blame you guys for doing what you did, people have every right to do everything in their power to protect themselves and their allies from threats. But when you force terms that are to hard, especially if the document isnt worked well to include "Military actions", it will just create a grudge I think. ex·tort ikˈstôrt/ verb verb: extort; 3rd person present: extorts; past tense: extorted; past participle: extorted; gerund or present participle: extorting obtain (something) by force, threats, or unfair means. Would UPN of gotten those terms, or any at all if they didn't have the force to make arrgh agree? Unlikely IMO. I don't think it was an agreement both parties agreed to willingly, I would assume it was one arrgh felt they where forced to do given the situation and UPN felt it had to leverage to do so. To say that they where free to reject does not mean it was not extortion. But as I said, I don't blame UPN or it's allies for doing what they did(Though personally, I think it may of not been the best way to go about it), it was just clearly forced(And this was not the first time here in PnW a party has done this. I don't intend for it to be sinister or accusatory, just factual. Especially given the situation you guys where in at, and before, that time with arrgh).

You don't know the difference between a raid and a war? Intent and a/or a DoW. A raid is a military action undertaken strictly for profit(Think Tech raids from (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways)) That does not have a DoW. A war is a more broad term for a different type of military action(usually politics, allies, infra damage, merc contract,ect). Profit tends to take a sideline, especially if accompanied by a DoW. If a DoW is given, regardless of actions, it is a war. Arrgh has given a DoW, so that makes it a war. It is undeniable that it is a war with a DoW. While they are inherently similar(Raids/Wars), there are succinct differences, you really didnt know? Saying Arrgh broke an agreement that they did not is a serious thing, and as such, the right thing to do would be to give them an apology.

Incorrect. The UPN deal only specified raiding, this is a War. Arrgh is legally in the clear and did not break the agreement. You could argue that they broke the spirit of the treaty but it's hard to do that when it was extorted.. Facts are an annoying thing, aren't they Steve?

This is great to see! Grats guys

You should have them stay like the military images =X Reseting, and then having to redo them all with stock images, sounds super terrible

I have just over 2.5k messages

That poor 3rd party..

I like the level system. Here’s a draft I just put togethe!r: Each colony gets a custom name and you get to select a type. Each level represents the size of the city and the size of the resource industry. Colony Cost’s: 1st colony: 25m 2nd colony: 50m 3rd Colony: 100m 4rth Colony: 200m 5th Colony: 400m 6th Colony: 800m 7th Colony: 1.6B Colony levels: Level 1: Free Level 2: 5m Level 3: 50m Level 4: 100m Colony Bonuses: Besides the resource bonuses, a Level 1 colony will give a 1% net income bonus due to trade/commerce. Each level of a colony will add an additional .25% except level 4, level 4 will be a .5%(So a net total of 2% with all upgrades). This help justifies the larger cost and gives reason to upgrade them without making resource production to high to justify the cost. Colony types: Iron Mining Colony, Coal Mining Colony, Bauxite mining Colony, Oil drilling Colony, Lead Mining Colony, Agriculture Colony. Resources: I just brainstormed these numbers, I can do the math and come up with numbers based on a reasonable Rate of Return for nations of different sizes and market prices if sheepy wants!

Angels are real obviously, I'm offended

I love this!

The Old Guard has made some excellent friends, grats!

Hah! You already have several legit members, I think you guys can go far! Congratulations gents

Welcome to Orbis guys!

That's no small feat, grats guys!

Well said* big brother @OP: A lot of it boils down to society to, the human brain is incredibly* malleable and is the product of it's environment largely(Conditioning to be specific). If you are concerned about selfishness, Hypocrisy, or violence(That's your definition of evil), those traits are not inherent of being human(As we can easily see), but also the conditioning the individual received throughout life that encouraged or created those traits.

^

Congratulations!

Pantheon needs it Official* flag on there to: https://politicsandwar.com/alliance/id=1896 Our old one sucked XD

I also think we really should have custom cities images