Jump to content
Ripper

Global War Peace Terms - Discussion

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, Ryan1 said:

Annnnd Knightfall is officially the longest war in Orbis history.

Not until we have our next war ;)

Edited by MinesomeMC
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, 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.

Not unfortunate. Just a correction to what should have been done a year ago. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, The Mad Titan said:

Not unfortunate. Just a correction to what should have been done a year ago. 

At this stage Knightfall did more to help kill monetary and resource inflation than Alex's Econ updates.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/23/2018 at 11:49 PM, Radoje said:


 

You do realize you proved leo's point with the paltry amount of TKR people you posted in that?

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t see how it matters, if close to half or just large portion doesn’t think they are acceptable; that is still a pretty big reason to reject them. The poll mostly just reflects how many won’t be angry with gov if the terms are accepted.

Just their leadership not thinking it’s reasonable is enough; they’re leading for a reason. If closer to 100% found them reasonable, poll results might be better argument toward surrender even if leaders didn’t find them reasonable.

So poll is pretty irrelevant when it’s only around half who think they’re acceptable.

  • Downvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Noctis said:

-snip-

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.

Edited by Epi
Pertaining to tkr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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)

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

24 minutes ago, Noctis 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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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 by Noctis
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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. :D 

  • Like 3
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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. :D 

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.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Radoje said:

-snip-

I just saw Leo's snapshot & this dudes comments. Wanna link the video xD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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 by Shadowthrone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

  • Downvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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 by Noctis
  • Downvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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 by Sphinx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 by Inst
  • Downvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

  • 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.