Jump to content

[Peace] In our time


Asierith
 Share

Recommended Posts

19 minutes ago, Epi said:

Write Nerd Word Wall

Screenshot-2711.png

Post Chad Meme about the Forum Meta

i737b442ccd11.jpg

If downvotes count then you could say Noctis got his share of recognition too ?

  • Like 1
  • Haha 3
  • Upvote 1

Look up to the sky above~

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Kevanovia said:

It’s not even wanting the surrender that’s the issue, it’s the fact that you continue to hide your terms because you want the war to go on. In order to present your terms, you want us first to surrender. How ridiculous is that?

Scenario:

Side 1: wE WiLl oNLy tElL yOu TeRmS iF yOu SuRrEnDeR

Side 2: Okay, in order to stop the war since it’s dragging on for so long - we surrender.

Side 1: VICTORY!! YOU OWE US 300 BILLION IN REPS! Also, change your names to ‘Side 1’s !@#$’ .

Side 2: No. We’re not doing that. 

Side 1: Pfft. You have already lost, you said so yourself. ‘Hey OWF, they surrendered! They lost! They said so themselves! Next round we can impose even harsher terms hurrdurr.’

You know full well that we (Coalition A) are in a much better place then what you (Coalition B ) are presenting, and this war is much closer than the current projection that’s put out. This is in all likelihood why you are threatening alliances in your coalition in order to keep them there. 

Agreeing to surrender before terms negotiation is bog standard, it doesn't mean you are beholden to an unconditional agreement.

As to your 'place', well a picture tells a thousand words.

Screenshot_20190930-161920_Chrome.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Kevanovia said:

You know full well that we (Coalition A) are in a much better place then what you (Coalition B ) are presenting, and this war is much closer than the current projection that’s put out. This is in all likelihood why you are threatening alliances in your coalition in order to keep them there. 

Lol id like to add on to frawleys reply

 

Lets take soup first, current member count is at 38 with 5 in vm, pre war numbers you had 68 (sadly i dont have vm numbers from that far ago... anyways Soup alone has dropped 30 (44%) members (305 cities). Your also sitting at about 7% military level and 6 of your members have not logged on in over 7 days (18%). So that isnt doing well 

 

Lets not do TGH, pre war they had 51 members, they now have 29 with 3 in vm, so TGH has dropped 22 (43%) members, they are sitting at about 5% activity and 3 of their members have not logged on in more than a week. Also not good 

 

----------------------

 

Now our side has had some losses but no major alliance has lost anywhere close to the sheer number of players as your side has,

0b3897cd640f95254329f7a2d45d8c77b1c120e.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, George (James T Kirk) said:

Lets take soup first, current member count is at 38 with 5 in vm, pre war numbers you had 68 (sadly i dont have vm numbers from that far ago... anyways Soup alone has dropped 30 (44%) members (305 cities). Your also sitting at about 7% military level and 6 of your members have not logged on in over 7 days (18%). So that isnt doing well 

 

----------------------

 

Now our side has had some losses but no major alliance has lost anywhere close to the sheer number of players as your side has,

You’re not comparing Apples to Apples. Soup Kitchen (founded April 1) has been in 3 separate wars since its creation. We have only gotten to utilize a few weeks of peace. We’re doing pretty damn well with all things considered.

6 hours ago, Frawley said:

Agreeing to surrender before terms negotiation is bog standard, it doesn't mean you are beholden to an unconditional agreement.

Unless things have drastically changed from Bob to Orbis, this isn’t exactly true. There is a negotiation. Terms are given so that they can be accepted/rejected/discussed.

  • Upvote 5

image.gif.d80770bf646703bba00c14ad52088af9.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Kevanovia said:

Unless things have drastically changed from Bob to Orbis, this isn’t exactly true. There is a negotiation. Terms are given so that they can be accepted/rejected/discussed.

You have to sue for peace (aka agree to Surrender) before you can get to the table, its works like that in RL, it worked like that on Bob, and it works like that here.  The only major difference is that we are only allowing you to sue for peace at set times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Frawley said:

You have to sue for peace (aka agree to Surrender) before you can get to the table, its works like that in RL, it worked like that on Bob, and it works like that here.  The only major difference is that we are only allowing you to sue for peace at set times.

Why does it matter?

 

You guys keep moving the goalpost for KETOG, this is why everyone keeps dropping out. You wanted a surrender, they've said they're willing to surrender, so take them to the table and hash out terms. You literally keep making something new up to keep the war going. What is it that you want? I bet if they agree to surrender then discuss terms you'd change it again. Just agree to something. damn.

IMG_2989.png?ex=65e9efa9&is=65d77aa9&hm=

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Kastor said:

Why does it matter?

 

You guys keep moving the goalpost for KETOG, this is why everyone keeps dropping out. You wanted a surrender, they've said they're willing to surrender, so take them to the table and hash out terms. You literally keep making something new up to keep the war going. What is it that you want? I bet if they agree to surrender then discuss terms you'd change it again. Just agree to something. damn.

We’ve agreed that it If they admit they lost and will surrender we can discuss terms. It’s really not that hard. 

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Aragorn, son of Arathorn said:

We’ve agreed that it If they admit they lost and will surrender we can discuss terms. It’s really not that hard. 

Okay, but if they reject your offer, then they'd be admitting they lost and your stance would be bolstered.

I understand the game you're playing, but they're not going to play it, and you're not operating in good faith. Now before you say they aren't, your coalition has lied to theirs the entire time since this war has started, and thus have no reason to act in good faith. 

 

Sit down, discuss terms, and then you'd probably get what you want, the prolonged act of stalling is causing you(BK) to lose allies/alliances fighting with you. And once a few leave, they'll all leave, and I think you'd have trouble holding on after all your satellites left.

IMG_2989.png?ex=65e9efa9&is=65d77aa9&hm=

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Kastor said:

Okay, but if they reject your offer, then they'd be admitting they lost and your stance would be bolstered.

I understand the game you're playing, but they're not going to play it, and you're not operating in good faith. Now before you say they aren't, your coalition has lied to theirs the entire time since this war has started, and thus have no reason to act in good faith. 

 

Sit down, discuss terms, and then you'd probably get what you want, the prolonged act of stalling is causing you(BK) to lose allies/alliances fighting with you. And once a few leave, they'll all leave, and I think you'd have trouble holding on after all your satellites left.

We'll See.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Frawley said:

You have to sue for peace (aka agree to Surrender) before you can get to the table, its works like that in RL, it worked like that on Bob, and it works like that here.  The only major difference is that we are only allowing you to sue for peace at set times.

This isn’t RL or Bob....

  • Upvote 2

image.jpg1_zpszukhjtut.jpg

 

The Redneck Caliphate of Forrest's Critters

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly what Pre and Critters said. I genuinely don't know where people are getting this idea that wars in P&W have commonly ended how Coalition B is proposing.

I don't know how people negotiated peace in CN and I really don't care. Drawing parallels between RL history and P&W is also rarely practical.

Edited by Kurdanak
xzhPlEh.png?1

Link to comment
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...
 Share

  • 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.