Rose's Surrender

[Auctor]

I argued my point and now I'm arguing how stupid your point was.

[hadesflames]

Yeah, except the difference is you guys lost and now you're refusing to accept responsibility for your actions and end the war, so that's on you.

UPN was willing to pay, they even agreed to your ridiculous 800m demand and you all decided to tell them to !@#$ off. That's on you.

 

NPO agreed to pay reasonable reps, but BK was unwilling to compromise on your ridiculous demands. There's a difference between accepting responsibility and getting taken advantage of. That's also on you.

[Pangui]

Reps are perfectly acceptable when extracted from the aggressors.

 

Also, BK and friends have no responsibility to keep the game from getting "stale," especially when they're attacked for no reason. ParaCov knew the potential consequences of their attack, but they did it anyways. 

 

"You reap what you sow," I guess. 

ParaCov attacks Syndisphere for consolidating. "No reason at all".

 

Syndisphere attacks ParaCov for consolidating two months ago. "You guys where a threat, valid CB."

[Roquentin]

Yeah, I mean the issue wasn't really wanting to avoid the symbolism of paying reps. We were willing to pay a far smaller amount. The issue is you guys wanted the reps combined between alliances  to subsidize maybe like 30% of your infra rebuild and it wasn't acceptable to us.  UPN agreed when they felt they still had something to lose, but then you took that away. The negotiating tactic of holding them in more or less backfired.

[Guest Curufinwe]

I argued my point and now I'm arguing how stupid your point was.

 

Okay, but you should probably establish that your point is correct by substantiating it with facts before dismissing someone else's argument as stupid.  It makes for a more persuasive argument. Just a suggestion.

 

 

UPN was willing to pay, they even agreed to your ridiculous 800m demand and you all decided to tell them to !@#$ off. That's on you.

 

NPO agreed to pay reasonable reps, but BK was unwilling to compromise on your ridiculous demands. There's a difference between accepting responsibility and getting taken advantage of. That's also on you.

 

Well considering that VE paid 500mil in reps and Rose paid 1b, I don't think 200mil up front and 600mil over 30 days is ridiculous - considering the scale of the damage that BK took (around 4b worth of infra damage), it's actually a pretty reasonable sum to ask of the aggressors that pre-empted us.  As for NPO's 'reasonable' offer, their initial offer of 150mil, which was followed by an offer of 200mil which was quickly retracted, was considered too low considering their role as a prime mover in this war (which Roq himself admitted to me in query), which is why we pushed for more.  If VE paid 500mil, why should NPO get away with only 40 percent of that?

[War Hawk]

ParaCov attacks Syndisphere for consolidating. "No reason at all".

 

Syndisphere attacks ParaCov for consolidating two months ago. "You guys where a threat, valid CB."

 

You're putting words in my mouth. I was in Pantheon when Syndisphere attacked ParaCov; I don't know why Syndisphere attacked, and I don't really care.

[Pangui]

BK has never pre-empted UPN, either when we had a treaty or afterwards.  If you're referencing the fact that one of our allies pre-empted you last war, well, it can be argued that UPN pioneered that particular trend in Oktoberfest, so I'm not sure you really have the moral high ground there

You cherry picked a small piece of my point, and tried to spin argue about something on morality which was nowhere near close to my point all. 

 

You have proven you are willing to act against us when grow to become a "threat". That is the point. That is why we won't patiently grow and wait for you to hit us, because the "threat" label is very easy to throw around. 

Edited October 2, 2016 by Pangui

[hadesflames]

Well considering that VE paid 500mil in reps and Rose paid 1b, I don't think 200mil up front and 600mil over 30 days is ridiculous - considering the scale of the damage that BK took (around 4b worth of infra damage), it's actually a pretty reasonable sum to ask of the aggressors that pre-empted us.  As for NPO's 'reasonable' offer, their initial offer of 150mil, which was followed by an offer of 200mil which was quickly retracted, was considered too low considering their role as a prime mover in this war (which Roq himself admitted to me in query), which is why we pushed for more.  If VE paid 500mil, why should NPO get away with only 40 percent of that?

The fact that VE overpaid and Rose threw away their bank doesn't make your demands any less ridiculous, nor should it impact NPO or UPN's negotiations.

Edited October 2, 2016 by hadesflames

[Roquentin]

Okay, but you should probably establish that your point is correct by substantiating it with facts before dismissing someone else's argument as stupid.  It makes for a more persuasive argument. Just a suggestion.

 

 

 

Well considering that VE paid 500mil in reps and Rose paid 1b, I don't think 200mil up front and 600mil over 30 days is ridiculous - considering the scale of the damage that BK took (around 4b worth of infra damage), it's actually a pretty reasonable sum to ask of the aggressors that pre-empted us.  As for NPO's 'reasonable' offer, their initial offer of 150mil, which was followed by an offer of 200mil which was quickly retracted, was considered too low considering their role as a prime mover in this war (which Roq himself admitted to me in query), which is why we pushed for more.  If VE paid 500mil, why should NPO get away with only 40 percent of that?

 

It comes down to 800 mil from us being far more harmful than 500m from VE or even 1b to Rose(not that I agree with it). The decision to try to cripple who you see as the prime agents just will de-incentivize anyone else from taking risks. I didn't deny our role in it because it'd be false, but everyone committed of their own volition. If someone saw it worthwhile to tell you x and y were ringleaders, whatever. 

 

edit: what hades said too.

Edited October 2, 2016 by Roquentin

[Pangui]

You're putting words in my mouth. I was in Pantheon when Syndisphere attacked ParaCov; I don't know why Syndisphere attacked, and I don't really care.

Good to know you don't know what you are talking about. 

[WarriorSoul]

-So many words-

 

You were a part of that group that preempted us, got absolutely demolished, and were given white peace (for what reason is beyond me). If you feel so strongly about the state your coalition mates are in, come fight for them. Otherwise, shut the !@#$ up and enjoy your rebuild in peace.

[War Hawk]

Good to know you don't know what you are talking about. 

 

And you're arguing the semantics of a previous post. My original point was that reps are acceptable in this scenario. Hell, UPN was even willing to pay the $800m we asked for.

[Guest Curufinwe]

You cherry picked a small piece of my point, and tried to spin argue about something on morality which was nowhere near close to my point all. 

 

You have proven you are willing to act against us when grow to become a "threat". That is the point. That is why we won't patiently grow and wait for you to hit us, because the "threat" label is very easy to throw around. 

 

Apparently so - you used it about three weeks ago to justify an unprovoked attack on us.  But if by 'you' you mean 'BK,' then the point remains that we have never directly attacked UPN and claiming that our side hit you in a previous war and is therefore in the wrong is a bit rich considering your history in Oktoberfest and the 168 days war.

 

 

The fact that VE overpaid and Rose threw away their bank doesn't make your demands any less ridiculous, nor should it impact NPO or UPN's negotiations.

 

Sure it does - you guys didn't act in a vacuum.  You did so as part of a coalition that started (and lost) an aggressive war.  The reps paid by other parties involved in your attack provide a frame of reference that can be used to measure the reasonableness of our request and it's myopic to pretend that they bear no relation to the issue at hand.  Of course, if HBE feels they're so unjust you can always chip in to the reps fund - you got off rather easy when you surrendered as I recall.

 

 

It comes down to 800 mil from us being far more harmful than 500m from VE or even 1b to Rose(not that I agree with it). The decision to try to cripple who you see as the prime agents just will de-incentivize anyone else from taking risks. I didn't deny our role in it because it'd be false, but everyone committed of their own volition. If someone saw it worthwhile to tell you x and y were ringleaders, whatever. 

 

edit: what hades said too.

 

Well considering last time we checked your bank activity you had over a billion in cash and resources floating around in various beiged nations it's hard to buy the argument that 200mil upfront for peace (and three times that over another month) is beyond your means - you can obviously afford to make peace if you were so inclined.  As for de-incentivizing future aggression, you'll forgive me if I'm not upset that paying a significant bill for launching an unprovoked war on us may dissuade you from doing so again.  Finally, the fact that NPO and Rose were the driving forces behind this war was communicated to me by a number of people on your side - given Rose's abrupt change of leadership, everything I've been told about how the war actually went down and your own attitude publicly and privately I'm inclined to believe them.  With that in mind, its not unreasonable to expect you to pay a greater share of the costs associated with your aggression (as Rose did), not less.

[Sketchy]

Pls rename this thread from "Roses Surrender" to "Public NPO-BK Peace talks"

[Auctor]

Well considering last time we checked your bank activity you had over a billion in cash and resources floating around in various beiged nations it's hard to buy the argument that 200mil upfront for peace (and three times that over another month) is beyond your means - you can obviously afford to make peace if you were so inclined.  As for de-incentivizing future aggression, you'll forgive me if I'm not upset that paying a significant bill for launching an unprovoked war on us may dissuade you from doing so again.  Finally, the fact that NPO and Rose were the driving forces behind this war was communicated to me by a number of people on your side - given Rose's abrupt change of leadership, everything I've been told about how the war actually went down and your own attitude publicly and privately I'm inclined to believe them.  With that in mind, its not unreasonable to expect you to pay a greater share of the costs associated with your aggression (as Rose did), not less.

 

It doesn't really disincentivise anything if we don't pay them. But ok, after months of being called out publicly and also being rolled once, I'd be really curious as to what constitutes provocation. Did you have to throw your glove on the ground or something?

[Dr Rush]

Pls rename this thread from "Roses Surrender" to "Public NPO-BK Peace talks"

Splitting would be better. 

[Roquentin]

Apparently so - you used it about three weeks ago to justify an unprovoked attack on us.  But if by 'you' you mean 'BK,' then the point remains that we have never directly attacked UPN and claiming that our side hit you in a previous war and is therefore in the wrong is a bit rich considering your history in Oktoberfest and the 168 days war.

 

 

 

Sure it does - you guys didn't act in a vacuum.  You did so as part of a coalition that started (and lost) an aggressive war.  The reps paid by other parties involved in your attack provide a frame of reference that can be used to measure the reasonableness of our request and it's myopic to pretend that they bear no relation to the issue at hand.  Of course, if HBE feels they're so unjust you can always chip in to the reps fund - you got off rather easy when you surrendered as I recall.

 

 

 

Well considering last time we checked your bank activity you had over a billion in cash and resources floating around in various beiged nations it's hard to buy the argument that 200mil upfront for peace (and three times that over another month) is beyond your means - you can obviously afford to make peace if you were so inclined.  As for de-incentivizing future aggression, you'll forgive me if I'm not upset that paying a significant bill for launching an unprovoked war on us may dissuade you from doing so again.  Finally, the fact that NPO and Rose were the driving forces behind this war was communicated to me by a number of people on your side - given Rose's abrupt change of leadership, everything I've been told about how the war actually went down and your own attitude publicly and privately I'm inclined to believe them.  With that in mind, its not unreasonable to expect you to pay a greater share of the costs associated with your aggression (as Rose did), not less.

 

It's not about being able to afford it in absolute terms, it hurts us in terms of being able to rebuild. We would only want peace if we had some sort of real reason to rebuild and rebuilding while trying to pay the reps and just waiting for the next war doesn't appeal to us.  In relative terms, it's simply not a good deal for us to pay that cost of peace just for the same stuff. We don't really sympathize with your perspective given your own actions, so we're just going to be at an impasse. I was willing to offer something to help out UPN/DEIC/Polar and to show we weren't totally stonewalling things even though a lot of people would dislike paying you a red cent. Now those deals are off and we have even less incentive.  We've done this in circles.

 

Again, we don't care if you feel us and Rose being the "ringleaders" means you want more punitive terms on us. It doesn't matter to us, just like you don't care about any of our feelings.

 

It doesn't even de-incentivize us from doing anything because we no longer will have the ability. Our side is finished in terms of being a serious competitor and I made it clear that would be the case if we lost. It's more it generally de-incentivizes taking action against would-be aggressors even if the benefits are still there.

Edited October 2, 2016 by Roquentin

[Foltest]

Your treaty further consolidated your sphere. 

 

The only threat to Paragon or The Covenant+NPO is the Syndisphere. 

 

Syndisphere shows no sign of untethering, thus making the union of Paragon and The Covenant as logical.

I know this is two pages late, but you realize that Syndicate/Mensa/TKR/BK and our respective spheres were already consolidated?

 

It's ok to admit that ParaCov got together and collectively overreacted due to your own propaganda.

 

 

I also like that your post dispenses with the pretense that Paragon and NPO were ever really separated though.

[Roquentin]

I know this is two pages late, but you realize that Syndicate/Mensa/TKR/BK and our respective spheres were already consolidated?

 

It's ok to admit that ParaCov got together and collectively overreacted due to your own propaganda.

 

 

I also like that your post dispenses with the pretense that Paragon and NPO were ever really separated though.

 

We were though and I was pretty upset at Keegoz's highminded idealism thinking that breaking up our side would radically change the game. Pangui's just referring to the fact when Paragon saw they weren't getting the results they had wanted from it, they reunited temporarily with our sphere.

[Yosodog]

But if you guys never agree to peace then you'll never have a chance to improve your situation.

[Dr Rush]

It doesn't even de-incentivize us from doing anything because we no longer will have the ability. Our side is finished in terms of being a serious competitor and I made it clear that would be the case if we lost. It's more it generally de-incentivizes taking action against would-be aggressors even if the benefits are still there.

Then quit. If you have decided you have no hope, then you actually have none & are just wasting your time & ours. Quit, & let the non sucky people actually have time to break up & mythical T$-Mensa war to happen.

[Buorhann]

If only NPO didn't try to botch up the alliance's bank by sending it to a newly created player who had no desire to build~

 

Anyways BK, how does it feel to have your own personal rival alliance now?!

[Auctor]

But if you guys never agree to peace then you'll never have a chance to improve your situation.

 

The situation is as good as it's going to get. And there's nothing wrong with it.

 

Then quit. If you have decided you have no hope, then you actually have none & are just wasting your time & ours. Quit, & let the non sucky people actually have time to break up & mythical T$-Mensa war to happen.

 

AHAHAHAHA. please. As if you guys have the ambition to do anything but tie all your wangs together in a granny knot.

[Apeman]

Reps are perfectly acceptable when extracted from the aggressors.

 

Also, BK and friends have no responsibility to keep the game from getting "stale," especially when they're attacked for no reason. ParaCov knew the potential consequences of their attack, but they did it anyways.

 

"You reap what you sow," I guess.

The fact the losers, lose more than the winners regardless of initial aggression, is what makes reps silly. So now not only has rose lost more but also must set itself months behind while you get extra cash and months ahead on rebuild makes it so lop sided it hurts.

 

This game might as well become a state run off ransom. Pay me and we won't stomp you then make you pay anyways for losing.

 

I say the winner has already shown it's superior capabilities and did more damage. It just doesn't feel like the winners are being good ones. Grace and being humble goes a long way. It may even end this cycle of perpetual hate.

[Yosodog]

Anyways BK, how does it feel to have your own personal rival alliance now?!

 

Eh, if this was EU4 it would say that NPO isn't a valid rival because they're so much smaller.