Jump to content
Ripper

Global War Peace Terms - Discussion

Recommended Posts

I think it’s best peace agreements can be summed up in one sentence & not a fan of people trying to make it over complicated when damage done should satisfy if your alliance fought well.

  • Upvote 3
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Noctis said:

I think it’s best peace agreements can be summed up in one sentence & not a fan of people trying to make it over complicated when damage done should satisfy if your alliance fought well.

And fun don’t forget fun

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Mad Max said:

And fun don’t forget fun

I count that as part of damage deallt, but yeah. Things would be boring with no wars, but terms can take away fun for many. 

 

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Fraggle said:

Peace for all for the low price of 19 billion cash, 200k Gas, 200 Alum, 200k Uranium.

Those are a lot of nukes, do you plan to play for so long?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Fraggle said:

So our starting point is as follows: Peace for all for the low price of 19 billion cash, 200k Gas, 200 Alum, 200k Uranium.

Wire it all to me. The war is over.

 

Many Hugs

Uncle Traveling Matt

Is it that high in cash because your upkeep would slaughter it?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems like a lot of resources to me at least, but at least they’re simple & to the point without extra words. Guess it depends on if peace is worth the price.

Also since that is his starting price, I would try negotiating that down to something they think is reasonable if they want to buy peace.

Edited by Noctis
  • Downvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a nuke once...shot it into something called a "Vital defense system"..... Weirdest thing I ever saw....

 

 

 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Shiho Nishizumi said:

Sort of pointless for it to oblige side A to do so, since it's already on their best interest to cleanse their own deserters.

True, I'm just saying... frick deserters :P

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Buorhann said:

Way too wordy.

Waaay too many terms.

I sure as hell wouldn’t accept it till it was trimmed down to something more manageable.

EDIT:

Looking through these more closely, the only ones that I like are the AoD, Color Bloc, and War Dodgers.

The rest is just too much.  The Arrgh one seems odd.  It’s allowing Arrgh the initiative to raid TKR, and TKR can only reply once a hit happens.  Should just push for a blanket NAP there.

Fairness in Trading is a odd demand too.

Public Statements, while lulzy, that’s a lot there to pay attention too.

 

Better than a 6 month NAP

1 hour ago, Agent W said:

Truthfully, I’ve never been a fan of joke terms. I’d rather levy terms that have actual in-game meaning or consequences.

Personally I like them if they're more gritty, humiliating, and offensive/harsh to the surrendering party.

I liked the massive reps idea.

Get tKR sphere to surrender 3/4ths of it's bank.

  • Upvote 3
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, ☠ϟħ̧i̧₣ɫ̵γ͘ ̶™☠ said:

Better than a 6 month NAP

I disagree.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, ☠ϟħ̧i̧₣ɫ̵γ͘ ̶™☠ said:

Personally I like them if they're more gritty, humiliating, and offensive/harsh to the surrendering party.

Surrendering party? Are you giving up?

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my opinion, Articles 1,2,4,6,8 should be accepted easily.

 

Articles 3 and 5 are up for discussion. I see the point in hitting the war deserters, but I also believe that should be left up to the individual alliances.

 

As for Article 3, I think those are best left out.

1 hour ago, ☠ϟħ̧i̧₣ɫ̵γ͘ ̶™☠ said:

Better than a 6 month NAP

Personally I like them if they're more gritty, humiliating, and offensive/harsh to the surrendering party.

I liked the massive reps idea.

Get tKR sphere to surrender 3/4ths of it's bank.

1. Not better, lots of people will be upset AFTER this war ends.

2. Nah, light peace terms are the best.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, CitrusK said:

So, IQ wins eh? 

Something, somewhere has gone horribly wrong, yes.

3 hours ago, Buorhann said:

Fairness in Trading is a odd demand too.

How so? Three of the largest mass-recruitment alliances want a fourth mass-recruitment alliance to join them in making trading more accessible. Bots that immediately accept bad trades are most harmful to new or inexperienced players. And IQ would have to reciprocate by policing its own members in the same way it wants TKR to.

  • Upvote 3
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.