Noctis Anarch Caelum Posted December 30, 2018 Share Posted December 30, 2018 6 minutes ago, Epi said: Polls don't determine government policy, they confirm people are convinced of it. Re: TKRs vote was 50/50. So a loss on their part. Even in a democracy 50/50 wouldn’t be enough to change policy, so still not a meaningful number. If only half would approve of either decision, I don’t see how that reflects a loss. (Unless you consider it a loss no matter what they do) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Epi Posted December 30, 2018 Share Posted December 30, 2018 (edited) 859 Edited February 16, 2021 by Epi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noctis Anarch Caelum Posted December 30, 2018 Share Posted December 30, 2018 (edited) 21 minutes ago, Epi said: Tkr isn't as committed as it wants to be with 50/50. The poll was meant to prove they were and see how long it would last//extent of the damage. You’re assuming the poll was meant to prove something rather than see how the membership felt. If the poll was to see if they should change policy; 50/50 would mean leadership is better off going with what they think best. So it’s not a loss for those who want to stay the course if it was just meant for internal purposes. Those who’d leave over them not surrendering would be Yes votes, so if they lose more members the percentage against accepting could increase. Edited December 30, 2018 by Noctis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zei-Sakura Alsainn Posted December 30, 2018 Share Posted December 30, 2018 5 minutes ago, Noctis said: You’re assuming the poll was meant to prove something rather than see how the membership felt. If the poll was to see if they should change policy; 50/50 would mean leadership is better off going with what they think best. So it’s not a loss for those who want to stay the course if it was just meant for internal purposes. Those who’d leave over them not surrendering would be Yes votes, so if they lose more members the percentage against accepting could increase. If the poll is taken in seclusion, yes. If it is weighted against prior polls and against the the change in activity and attitudes of the members however, this is a clear sign to government that an end is better sooner not later. I can guarantee for the first 3-4 weeks, such a poll like this in TKR wouldn't have gone lower than 90% approval. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noctis Anarch Caelum Posted December 30, 2018 Share Posted December 30, 2018 10 minutes ago, Akuryo said: If the poll is taken in seclusion, yes. If it is weighted against prior polls and against the the change in activity and attitudes of the members however, this is a clear sign to government that an end is better sooner not later. I can guarantee for the first 3-4 weeks, such a poll like this in TKR wouldn't have gone lower than 90% approval. If not taken in seclusion, think this would probably be taken as a sign they should wait & take another poll after its continued longer if no flexibility is shown on terms. Them being in an uphill war this long would naturally lead to more open toward terms, however still a large portion who think terms are so unreasonable they’d still rather fight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buorhann Posted December 30, 2018 Share Posted December 30, 2018 Guess TFP is added to the terms. Quote Warrior of Dio https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfPCFQfOnLg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radoje Posted December 30, 2018 Share Posted December 30, 2018 4 hours ago, Epi said: Polls don't determine government policy, they confirm people are convinced of it. Re: TKRs vote was 50/50. So a loss on their part. TKR never had a vote. What you were looking at is a TCW poll that only 18 members participated in. The screenshots on the video I posted were all from the same date, and were all one after another. The song, sadly, only has a certain amount of run time, and than it ends lol. Adding another 20 screenshots just for the sake of making the point last longer would ruin the joke, you can hardly read them as it is unless you pause. 3 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sphinx Posted December 30, 2018 Share Posted December 30, 2018 1 hour ago, Radoje said: TKR never had a vote. What you were looking at is a TCW poll that only 18 members participated in. The screenshots on the video I posted were all from the same date, and were all one after another. The song, sadly, only has a certain amount of run time, and than it ends lol. Adding another 20 screenshots just for the sake of making the point last longer would ruin the joke, you can hardly read them as it is unless you pause. And adding to this the entire gov of tCW is happy to fight with our allies as long as possible. Peace will be reached when all alliances on our side agree to it, we aren't abandoning our allies. The poll was the idea of a member who wanted to hear what peoples thoughts were. 18/82 votes isn't a true snapshot of tCW, some elections are voided if a certain % of turnout isn't reached. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Epi Posted December 30, 2018 Share Posted December 30, 2018 (edited) 862 Edited February 16, 2021 by Epi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadowthrone Posted December 30, 2018 Share Posted December 30, 2018 (edited) 3 hours ago, Sphinx said: And adding to this the entire gov of tCW is happy to fight with our allies as long as possible. Peace will be reached when all alliances on our side agree to it, we aren't abandoning our allies. The poll was the idea of a member who wanted to hear what peoples thoughts were. 18/82 votes isn't a true snapshot of tCW, some elections are voided if a certain % of turnout isn't reached. 82 members in TCW? So you do consider your VM'ers as official members then? Edited December 30, 2018 by Shadowthrone Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noctis Anarch Caelum Posted December 30, 2018 Share Posted December 30, 2018 6 minutes ago, Shadowthrone said: 82 members in TCW? So you do consider your VM'ers as official members then? I would normally assume anyone kept inside the alliance is considered a full member, although whether a member who can’t vote is a full member could be debatable I guess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
丂ħ̧i̧₣ɫ̵γ͘ ̶™ Posted December 30, 2018 Share Posted December 30, 2018 18 members is the best TCW can muster It really is Pantheon 2.0 It's like former Panth gov are the horsemen of the apocalypse. If you see one appear in your alliance gov and then suddenly VM, you know the end is coming. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noctis Anarch Caelum Posted December 30, 2018 Share Posted December 30, 2018 1 minute ago, ?ϟħ̧i̧₣ɫ̵γ͘ ̶™? said: 18 members is the best TCW can muster It really is Pantheon 2.0 It's like former Panth gov are the horsemen of the apocalypse. If you see one appear in your alliance gov and then suddenly VM, you know the end is coming. Do they have that many in VM? I had assumed he meant only 18 bothered voting in an unofficial poll which wouldn’t effect anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
丂ħ̧i̧₣ɫ̵γ͘ ̶™ Posted December 30, 2018 Share Posted December 30, 2018 2 minutes ago, Noctis said: Do they have that many in VM? I had assumed he meant only 18 bothered voting in an unofficial poll which wouldn’t effect anything. Not VM, inactives and apathetic members. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noctis Anarch Caelum Posted December 30, 2018 Share Posted December 30, 2018 (edited) 4 minutes ago, ?ϟħ̧i̧₣ɫ̵γ͘ ̶™? said: Not VM, inactives and apathetic members. Pretty sure they’re in until the end regardless of any polls if their leadership can think ahead. So even if true, I wouldn’t take the 18 number to reflect those who care. Sure some didn’t vote since they didn’t think it was worth adding any credibility to the result or didn’t notice it. Edited December 30, 2018 by Noctis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sphinx Posted December 30, 2018 Share Posted December 30, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, Shadowthrone said: 82 members in TCW? So you do consider your VM'ers as official members then? A VM'er could've still voted in that poll so, once again its not indicative of what tCW's intentions are, and yes some VM people are still members at least until they may/may not get kicked. 1 hour ago, ?ϟħ̧i̧₣ɫ̵γ͘ ̶™? said: Not VM, inactives and apathetic members. I didn't vote in that poll cause its meaningless and the fact people are still talking about it is hilarious, we aren't going to have peace not until our allies all agree as a bloc. Until such time as that happens the war will continue. Edited December 30, 2018 by Sphinx Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadowthrone Posted December 30, 2018 Share Posted December 30, 2018 21 minutes ago, Sphinx said: A VM'er could've still voted in that poll so, once again its not indicative of what tCW's intentions are, and yes some VM people are still members at least until they may/may not get kicked. I see. So does TCW allow members to sit in VM, to help out the alliance through other means, and therefore continue receiving the benefits of membership? ( I believe you've mentioned so earlier in the thread, possibly? Just need a reconfirmation.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lu Xun Posted December 30, 2018 Share Posted December 30, 2018 (edited) VM isn't actually that bad a strategy. If you're using a prolonged war, it makes sense to rotate people in and out of fighting as they become fatigued. Rotating people "out" of fighting comes down to two options: you can either let them sit with no money and low infrastructure, waiting to waste enemy ammo and fuel on beiging them, or you can VM them. The latter has the problem of image, as well as not wasting enemy war slots. Of course, whether TKR-sphere is using rotation tactics is another story altogether. Edited December 30, 2018 by Inst 5 Quote . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noctis Anarch Caelum Posted December 30, 2018 Share Posted December 30, 2018 25 minutes ago, Inst said: VM isn't actually that bad a strategy. If you're using a prolonged war, it makes sense to rotate people in and out of fighting as they become fatigued. Rotating people "out" of fighting comes down to two options: you can either let them sit with no money and low infrastructure, waiting to waste enemy ammo and fuel on beiging them, or you can VM them. The latter has the problem of image, as well as not wasting enemy war slots. Of course, whether TKR-sphere is using rotation tactics is another story altogether. It would allow nations in VM nations still not wrecked to come out for another blitz if war lasts at least 2 weeks. What I would use any nations who who enter VM at start of a war & want to stay at least. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaiser Heide Posted December 30, 2018 Share Posted December 30, 2018 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sphinx Posted December 30, 2018 Share Posted December 30, 2018 (edited) 3 hours ago, Shadowthrone said: I see. So does TCW allow members to sit in VM, to help out the alliance through other means, and therefore continue receiving the benefits of membership? ( I believe you've mentioned so earlier in the thread, possibly? Just need a reconfirmation.) You're clearly fishing for information but if you are so interested we of course don't allow war dodging and those who did so will be booted. But for those who gave us legit reasons and who fought for a few weeks, then of course we understand why they would go into VM, and we aren't going to penalise people for IRL events, which clearly take precedence over a browser game. We course expect those people the moment they return from their VM period that they initially informed us about, to enter back into the war if it is still ongoing. If they extend it without any good reason then that's war dodging in my books and I'd have them punished. When members are in VM they don't contribute to fights, nor provide us with taxes, or anything so I don't know why you seem so obsessed with that. Edited December 30, 2018 by Sphinx 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joel James Posted January 2, 2019 Share Posted January 2, 2019 (edited) On 12/28/2018 at 8:09 PM, Parachotic said: I think the unfortunate part of it all being that only a tad above 450 billion dollars currently exists in pnw although, not counting resources I believe. It's at $944.8 billion in damages now. Also, you do say only $450 billion, but that is actually more than what existed before the war broke out. Fact of the matter is that there was probably more wealth locked up in resources than actual money (i.e. war chests, brokering), and the only thing that kept resource prices high on the market was market speculation. Furthermore, since IQ-sphere is more or less back up to some percentage of normal production, those resource stockpiles will keep going up. In other words, Orbis will never return to those days where wars would clean out everyone's resource stockpiles. A definite winner would be visible by the time a scratch is made of the pile, and by that point the amount of resources being consumed will probably be at most equal to the rate of resource generation. Hell, if the market is any indication, there are people picking up cheap resources with the intent of dumping it on the market after the war is over, or when resources prices go back up (assuming they will). Edited January 2, 2019 by Joel James Posted 4 times Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Scarfalot Posted January 6, 2019 Share Posted January 6, 2019 On 12/30/2018 at 4:24 AM, Inst said: VM isn't actually that bad a strategy. If you're using a prolonged war, it makes sense to rotate people in and out of fighting as they become fatigued. Rotating people "out" of fighting comes down to two options: you can either let them sit with no money and low infrastructure, waiting to waste enemy ammo and fuel on beiging them, or you can VM them. The latter has the problem of image, as well as not wasting enemy war slots. Of course, whether TKR-sphere is using rotation tactics is another story altogether. Using VM to avoid war is specifically against the rules, so that is not in fact a valid strategy in any way. The problem becomes proving who's doing it to avoid war and who's doing it because they actually need to due to IRL concerns, like work or school or family or whatnot. "Rotation tactics" like that are 100% on the wrong side of the rules there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lu Xun Posted January 6, 2019 Share Posted January 6, 2019 (edited) But we go back to the unverifiable, no? Rotation tactics without VM, on the other hand, are perfectly viable, just allow nations to sell infra and go to 0 res while on vacation. Also, in the interests of achieving peace in our time, I hereby propose the following peace terms that are mutually acceptable to both sides: Article I: Side I and Side II hereby endeavor not to renew hostilities for the next 6 months. Article II: Side I and Side II hereby endeavor to continue hostilities for the next 6 months. === Also, congrats to TKR for breaking 20mn net war stats. At the present pace, it should take between 10 and 20 days for TKR to pass Rose in damages. And then, 3 months of war comes on the 18/19th update. @Kaiser Heide "It's the war that never ends~ It goes on and on my friends` I started fighting without knowing what it was~ And now I'm still fighting it just because~ It's the war that never ends~..." Edited January 6, 2019 by Inst 1 4 Quote . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Scarfalot Posted January 6, 2019 Share Posted January 6, 2019 12 hours ago, Inst said: But we go back to the unverifiable, no? Rotation tactics without VM, on the other hand, are perfectly viable, just allow nations to sell infra and go to 0 res while on vacation. Well, sure, there's nothing against the rules about sitting on 100% tax, 0 infra, 0 military, 0 resources/cash, and hecking off. I'm not sure I'd qualify that as 'tactics' per se, but it's at least... legal? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.