Jump to content
Ripper

Global War Peace Terms - Discussion

Recommended Posts

BURN IT DOWN!!

**Head banging**

To Annihilation for TKR and TCW. Let them Rest In Pieces...

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Who Me said:

Because you don't like it? lolololol  Poor babies, teach your people to check their trades if you don't like them screwing them up.

 

If you are OK with the term, then apply it to all of your people that went into VM to dodge the war. Seems reasonable.

I think your lacking the basic ability to see ya'll are loosing, we can impose whatever we want tbch. In fact you should be happy the people making the terms are fair people. Dont like it fight us at a later time to reverse the terms. 

 

Lets not forget .....

<was going to be a ss of your alliance's great net damages but down for maintenance> 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Silly child, you can try and impose whatever you want.

Also, you have been in BK long enough to know what happens from this point forward in terms of net damage amounts.

Share this post


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

Silly child, you can try and impose whatever you want.

Also, you have been in BK long enough to know what happens from this point forward in terms of net damage amounts.

True but most of the net damage gains are due to fighting one specific alliance. Most of the coalition will remain similar to where they are now.

Edited by The Mad Titan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps this has already been pointed out, but it is worth referencing:  https://politicsandwar.com/account/vacation/

Quote

Vacation Mode
Vacation Mode is an option to preserve your nation during a temporary absence. This tool is intended for players who are going on vacation or are for some other reason going to be unable to access the site for an extended period of time (i.e. Military Service).

While in Vacation Mode, your nation will be unable to declare wars, fight existing wars, be declared war on, spy on other nations, be spied on, receive any sort of revenue, pay any bills, trade with other nations, or use alliance banks. There is no way to end Vacation Mode early. Vacation Mode is not intended as a tool to use to avoid wars, and it is not a "peace mode". Once you put your nation in Vacation Mode, administrators will not reverse it for you, and you must wait the length of time you chose before you will regain full access to your nation.

 

Specifically:  Vacation Mode is not intended as a tool to use to avoid wars, and it is not a "peace mode".

So while IQ/BK might not "Punish" for using it this way... perhaps Sheepy should consider whether many of those who went into Vacation Mode during the latest Alliance War were abusing the VM Mechanic and take appropriate action.

Edited by Esentia
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

Perhaps this has already been pointed out, but it is worth referencing:  https://politicsandwar.com/account/vacation/

Specifically:  Vacation Mode is not intended as a tool to use to avoid wars, and it is not a "peace mode".

So while IQ/BK might not "Punish" for using it this way... perhaps Sheepy should consider whether many of those who went into Vacation Mode during the latest Alliance War were abusing the VM Mechanic and take appropriate action.

Yep. That's been pointed out. Alex has stated he has no intention of policing that, so the point was made that at the very least he should probably change that misleading description, and apparently he has not. :P

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Esentia said:

Perhaps this has already been pointed out, but it is worth referencing:  https://politicsandwar.com/account/vacation/

Specifically:  Vacation Mode is not intended as a tool to use to avoid wars, and it is not a "peace mode".

So while IQ/BK might not "Punish" for using it this way... perhaps Sheepy should consider whether many of those who went into Vacation Mode during the latest Alliance War were abusing the VM Mechanic and take appropriate action.

Thrax hit it on the head with this one (ew). That means enforcement is on the player base rather than the admin, which is fine. If ensuring VM nations are held accountable, regardless of reason, that's a good precedent to set within the game.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You guys had 3 weeks to hit Endiness, I cant help that you took your time to get around to it.  And its fascinating how now that IQ isnt losing a war, that now is the time to push a bunch of terms at people.  But if you want to push terms that violate our sovereignty, then we can keep fighting till you change your minds.

 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Spaceman Thrax said:

Alex change

 

Hello! Welcome to Orbis, we've noticed you've used the words "Alex" and "change" in a sentence. Please note that this behavior is taxing to great lord emperor Alex, but if you would like to light a candle at the Altar of Please make this game less suck, please deposit 1 donation into the box. We'll even give you shiny credits with which to make your game less suck!

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Sweeeeet Ronny D said:

You guys had 3 weeks to hit Endiness, I cant help that you took your time to get around to it.  And its fascinating how now that IQ isnt losing a war, that now is the time to push a bunch of terms at people.  But if you want to push terms that violate our sovereignty, then we can keep fighting till you change your minds.

 

The VM term is a coalition term, notice how Ripper and Partisan have also defended it. 

"Hurr Durr Big Bad IQ"
-SRD, 2018

You can see exactly what IQ requested and its a fairly minor detail, so nice try.

As for the second part, well if people had to take bets on if TCW and GoB, the biggest offenders of pixel hugging, and if IQ/T$/Paperless last longer, I have the a feeling I know where most peoples money would go.

Edited by The Mad Titan
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Sweeeeet Ronny D said:

You guys had 3 weeks to hit Endiness, I cant help that you took your time to get around to it.  And its fascinating how now that IQ isnt losing a war, that now is the time to push a bunch of terms at people.  But if you want to push terms that violate our sovereignty, then we can keep fighting till you change your minds.

 

 

Ku_bFkdE-Q-t4wLkg7La2Mg-qtA=.gif

  • Like 3
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/1/2018 at 11:50 PM, 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.

 

I had personal displeasure to accept TKR's peace 3 times over in 6 months. No alliance made such moves as they did towards Arrgh. They hit us with 2 other alliances for hitting their ally's protectorate ffs! And after paper's please where we accepted general terms so our allys could get out of war (so tehnically I accepted their terms 4 times). And then 2 weeks after Arrgh changed to 1 ship raiding and we've been more or less at perma war with TKR. So yeah frick them and frick their initative. They get to respond, just like any other alliance does, while Arrgh gets to do it's own thing, like other alliances do. And, it would be retarded to ask of Arrgh to not raid TKR, if raiding TKR is profitable. Members would just make their own alliances and raid them anyway. I'd rather Arrgh be place of gathering for the disobent and free willed, than Arrgh being a shell of it's former self and those people scattered all over the place doing just as much, if not more, damage to farmers and the like.

22 hours ago, Prefontaine said:

Lets go through the terms in a condensed form

  • Article 1 and 2: Obvious end of the war. 
  • Article 3: cosmetic terms for various alliances. I can tell you the TEst ones come from the Mensa guys forcing people to write a Dio-based essay, so this is just a jab back. I fully expect something mocking Khorne. The GPA one is a result of our love for GPA, and the fact that it's what tCW effectively is in our opinion (and it's only a week). 
  • Article 4: Color names, if you care about this, you deserve more war.
  • Article 5: War dodging, the main problem apparently. Some people VM'd legitimately, some people did not. During papers please TKR and friends issued a "no nation above 700 average infra" clause in the wars peace terms. This is basically no different. The people who tried to hide from damage, legitimately or not, need to have a certain infra level.
  • Article 6: The answer to fake paperless alliances. 
  • Article 7: Arrgh was in perma-war with TKR for being pirates. Call it square and let them pirate, unless they pirate you, then defend against those pirating you.

There are no "harsh" terms anywhere in there if you look at the history of terms imposed by alliances in this game. 

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.

^ This. Terms like these were the norm for a while now, and if other side has done it before, why couldn't it be done to them as well?

20 hours ago, ℟Ø₣Ḹ Wⱥ₣₣Ḹᙦ said:

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.

It's more like getting off your bike, and then remembering you didn't put the lock on, after taking half a step, just to see an idiot speeding on your bike, that he stole a second ago and is already 100m away. Yeah. And stealing bike is still theft, regardels of if the victim was an idiot or not.

20 hours ago, Noctis said:

 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.)

These are proposed terms, aye. They don't need to accept and they can perma war. Or they can suck it up and accept it. I've accepted more than one bad term in my day, but overall, it's not always as bad as it initially seems. The only terms that were kind of harsh that my predecesors accepted was the one for Purple Spy War. Everything else was more or less a hit on a ego, and we all know TKR's side has enough ego to take it all.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I voiced my opinion on the current terms, Ripper has a point there.

(And to back my word on lengthy terms, we only pushed for TRF to move off Black after 2 rounds.  Nothing else.)

Edited by Buorhann
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Daily Reminder to disband your respective alliance and join BK

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you imagine this being the negotiations towards the end of world war II?  

Germany: We except a blanket peace, but we don't agree with the term that we have to say "Heil Stalin" everytime we a Russian troop.  That's just silly, grow up.  And what about the Nazis that are now hiding amongst civilians, we can't be held responsible!

Russia: Then we'll just keep destroying you?

Germany: Yep!

 

Alternative History better be making a video about this

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just want to make sure folks know this War has not been easy on those of us in BK (and I am guessing the rest of our side as well) either.  No one who is not suffering through it with us will ever truly appreciate how hard it is to find an Open Slot.  You need to be seriously On The Bounce to be able to get a spot.  The moment someone TKR, GOB, etc... comes out of Beige there are bunches of folks eager to take a bite.  So sad there is only room for three at a time.

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


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

Can you imagine this being the negotiations towards the end of world war II?  

Germany: We except a blanket peace, but we don't agree with the term that we have to say "Heil Stalin" everytime we a Russian troop.  That's just silly, grow up.  And what about the Nazis that are now hiding amongst civilians, we can't be held responsible!

Russia: Then we'll just keep destroying you?

Germany: Yep!

 

Alternative History better be making a video about this

Just want to point out that Germany is still paying reps for its crimes (determined by the winners) over 70 years later

 

I think the peace demands are fair and doable but not needed. Enjoy the rest of the war

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think a peace agreement should include peace for all, especially if both sides used vacation mode & not.everyone who used it are terrible people who don’t deserve to be the included in peace.

Edited by Noctis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Nizam Adrienne said:

Based on that viewpoint and despite our feelings regarding the opposition's actions with our war dodgers/deserters, a counter to the term was suggested, which outlined our plans for dealing with our actual war dodgers. It ultimately got rejected.

 

What was the counter offer made and the parameters for your description of war dodgers? 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Abbas Mehdi said:

What was the counter offer made and the parameters for your description of war dodgers? 

Abbas is sad nobody replied to his question

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.