Jump to content
Ripper

Global War Peace Terms - Discussion

Recommended Posts

39 minutes ago, Who Me said:

Everyone already knows who won and who lost, punitive terms won't change that nor will white peace.

Could you please pin-point the punitive terms?

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Fraggle said:

From The Desk of Uncle Traveling Matt

The Best Nation of Fraggle Rock

UncleTravelingMattFraggle.jpg.e84104cb3db546b2a99dc1099eba7462.jpg

Greetings again Friends!!  This was quick. On the authority of Ripper, I, Uncle Traveling Matt, am taking over this process.

First off...all of what Ripper wrote is out the window.

New Terms: Fraggle gets 85% of all reps.

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

 

6 minutes ago, Ripper said:

Could you pin-point punitive terms?

 

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Who Me said:

For anyone that plays/played CN you already know where terms like this are going to lead.

Welcome to CN 2.0.

Congratulations you morons.

 

Everyone already knows who won and who lost, punitive terms won't change that nor will white peace.

Maybe you shouldn't have started the trend then huh?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Ripper said:

Could you please pin-point the punitive terms?

Going after people that went into VM, for whatever reason they did so is punitive. If they need to be punished that should be up to their own alliances, not you.

 

31 minutes ago, Keegoz said:

Maybe you shouldn't have started the trend then huh?

Enlighten me please.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Micchan said:

I know it seems that it's a bot that does everything but it's actually Koso that accepts the trades, the bot just check all the new trades and gives him a broader view of the market, but he's there to check and manually accept the trade, he's the human bot online 24/7 :v

Complete automatic bots are banned btw

And if you want back your resources/money you just have to message him, he wants a piece of art in exchange but he's not demanding on quality :D

It isn't only Kosonome that uses it. He just made it and all of TKR uses it. Some may not be as willing to give stuff back. In the past people like Woot only would make the art thing available to allies. All in all the bot push notifying people about mistrades right away before the person can fix them isn't a good thing and people have made a lot of money off the mistrades while leveraging in-game power to avoid reproach. No one else could get away with doing it without political backlash.

  • Upvote 5
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Roquentin said:

It isn't only Kosonome that uses it. He just made it and all of TKR uses it. Some may not be as willing to give stuff back. In the past people like Woot only would make the art thing available to allies. All in all the bot push notifying people about mistrades right away before the person can fix them isn't a good thing and people have made a lot of money off the mistrades while leveraging in-game power to avoid reproach. No one else could get away with doing it without political backlash.

Or, if people dont want to be ripped of by their own mistake, they could just double check whenever posting trades. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think it's fair to take away someone's hard work, the person spent a lot of time on that bot I'm sure, and like Rebelman said: people can just double check their trade offers before posting them.

  • Upvote 4
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ℟Ø₣Ḹ Wⱥ₣₣Ḹᙦ said:

I don't think it's fair to take away someone's hard work, the person spent a lot of time on that bot I'm sure, and like Rebelman said: people can just double check their trade offers before posting them.

Someone spent time collecting those resources they were trying to sell as well, gone with the accidental click. 

  • Upvote 4
  • Downvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Prefontaine said:

Someone spent time collecting those resources they were trying to sell as well, gone with the accidental click. 

They didn't work hard enough, otherwise they would have double checked their trade offer before posting.

Edit: It's basically the same as not putting a lock on your bike before leaving it unattended, if you don't take the time to ensure it's security then oh well, sucks to suck.

Edited by ℟Ø₣Ḹ Wⱥ₣₣Ḹᙦ
  • Upvote 3
  • Downvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think terms can make sense if an alliance wants to try getting peace before they get rolled. Although if an alliance would rather just fight until given peace without terms despite being rolled hard, I think it should be a viable option.

Would be lame if this place ends up one where the greediest alliances bandwagon on the winning side in wars just so they can extort those getting rolled for reps when they’re already down. So winning alone doesn’t make one entitled to reps, depends why you were fighting in the first place & if they should be paying it regardless for something they did.

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


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

I think terms can make sense if an alliance wants to try getting peace before they get rolled. Although if an alliance would rather just fight until given peace without terms despite being rolled hard, I think it should be a viable option.

Would be lame if this place ends up one where the greediest alliances bandwagon on the winning side in wars just so they can extort those getting rolled for reps when they’re already down. So winning alone doesn’t make one entitled to reps, depends why you were fighting in the first place & if they should be paying it regardless for something they did.

Could you even be bothered to read the OP? There are no reparation demands.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ℟Ø₣Ḹ Wⱥ₣₣Ḹᙦ said:

They didn't work hard enough, otherwise they would have double checked their trade offer before posting.

Guess they can go to war to get the bot to be allowed again. Or stay in perma war to keep it going. The choice is theirs. 

 

2 minutes ago, Noctis said:

I think terms can make sense if an alliance wants to try getting peace before they get rolled. Although if an alliance would rather just fight until given peace without terms despite being rolled hard, I think it should be a viable option.

Would be lame if this place ends up one where the greediest alliances bandwagon on the winning side in wars just so they can extort those getting rolled for reps when they’re already down. So winning alone doesn’t make one entitled to reps, depends why you were fighting in the first place & if they should be paying it regardless for something they did.

There are no bandwagon terms, unless you count SK's term of requiring GOB to post something about cereal. Not that SK was really a bandwagon. Anyway, you'd think to really get any sort of reps an alliance would have to be a major part in the war. If UPN showed up demanding they get money, with how they performed they'd get laughed at. They probably would've gotten laughed at even if they performed well (pro-tip Under never performs). Now if an oppertunist alliance tries to jump on them as the war is wrapped up that's another matter, and they'd probably be effed shortly after the main forces pulled out (heh). 

 

And as Shiho said, no one's asking for money. 

  • Upvote 5
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


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

Could you even be bothered to read the OP? There are no reparation demands.

Someone posted an offer for peace if they pay after & that was newer. The issues with OP others have went over; I personally think it’s over complicating something which doesn’t need to be.

  • Downvote 3

Share this post


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

Someone posted an offer for peace if they pay after & that was newer. The issues with OP others have went over; I personally think it’s over complicating something which doesn’t need to be.

Fraggle is not a participant of this global war, and she posted that as a joke. Check the OP to see the actual participants.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Roquentin said:

 

A misclick is usually fixable on trading just simply deleting right after after it's posted.  With the bot, they don't have that option and it's constantly retrieving the information. Point of the matter is, we don't like it and we're rectifying it. You're free to continue posturing against IQ but I don't care. 

Your analogy is trash as leaving your bike unattended doesn't excuse the theft. Feel free to make the thieves into the good guys. It's totally not transparent.

Only if you take the analogy further than it needs to go.

Edit: I mean, one of the reasons this war started stems from the subject of accountability. The analogy was meant to get a point across that being naive is basically shooting yourself in the foot. If you don't want to take the extra maybe 5 seconds it takes to check and make sure your post is all good and dandy then don't be upset when someone takes the opportunity to make some cash. Also keep in mind this is a video game, thievery in a game is different than thievery in real life.

And to clarify, I'm only stating that I think the term is unfair however, I don't think that means the losing side can't be treated a little unfairly. But if the goal is to get this peace agreement finished as soon as possible, you shouldn't just expect TKR and allies to immediately adhere to those terms without push back.

Edited by ℟Ø₣Ḹ Wⱥ₣₣Ḹᙦ
  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No one expects them to merely submit without whining about it properly.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Shiho Nishizumi said:

Fraggle is not a participant of this global war, and she posted that as a joke. Check the OP to see the actual participants.

 I guess I’m just not aware of what they did to really deserve these terms. If the losing side wants peace & doesn’t think the terms are unfair; then nothing wrong with accepting. Although if they agree to the terms & think they’re unreasonable; they mostly just have themselves to blame for accepting an offer they’re unhappy with.

Would the alliance who needs to help another in their color politics rather do that or keep fighting? Then there are a bunch of other terms they need to make same decision on, although maybe progress can be made if they separate out which they’re willing to do.

Maybe the other side should pick one or two of them they’re willing to do & counter offer with that. (This was posted as a discussion, rather than a take it or leave it proposition.)

  • Downvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, ℟Ø₣Ḹ Wⱥ₣₣Ḹᙦ said:

Edit: I mean, one of the reasons this war started stems from the subject of accountability.

As effectively the person who first pushed this war, would you mind clarifying? Accountability for what?

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


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

As effectively the person who first pushed this war, would you mind clarifying? Accountability for what?

IQ specifically have been persistent about holding a few particular members of BC gov accountable for leaks against IQ.

Edit: The last bit wasn't necessary so I removed it.

Edited by ℟Ø₣Ḹ Wⱥ₣₣Ḹᙦ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ℟Ø₣Ḹ Wⱥ₣₣Ḹᙦ said:

IQ specifically have been persistent about holding a few particular members of BC gov accountable for leaks against IQ.

Edit: The last bit wasn't necessary so I removed it.

This thread has nothing to do with BC. 

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Prefontaine said:

And as Shiho said, no one's asking for money. 

Except you, and Shifty.

2 hours ago, Prefontaine said:

If any of these terms are too unacceptable, a coalition wide payment of 10B per term that needs to be removed could probably be arranged.

 

3 hours ago, Ripper said:

Could you please pin-point the punitive terms?

Article 5 is very clearly and directly punitive, as it is currently written. Everyone that went into VM on one side gets punished... and nobody on the other side that went into VM gets punished? Lest we forget, stacked infra is a prime target for nuclear and conventional missile strikes from the underdog side, and VM can and often is abused to protect pixelhuggers from said attrition warfare. So why is it that pixelhugging deserters on one side get the nail and the pixelhugging deserters on the other side get off scot-free? Honestly, asking for that is a bit of a pivot from CoS's position on the matter a couple months back when they did the Nothining to punish war dodgers "regardless of their alliance", and that makes the demand very tasteless in my view.

I really mean it when I say it should work both ways. Screw ALL the deserters! Let no pixelhugger escape!

Edited by Sir Scarfalot
  • Upvote 4
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Prefontaine said:

This thread has nothing to do with BC. 

IQ is included within the peace terms, so my point about the double standard still stands.

  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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