Jump to content

Peace In Our Time


JT Jag
 Share

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, HeroofTime55 said:

"Our way is the most efficient system and also we need to demand 160 billion in 'reps' in order to even out growth" - Roquentin

Except I've never said we demanded reps or anything for ourselves as we are not an aggrieved party and the bond is a different story due to the liability. Now 160b would be crippling as opposed to the much lower sums included. We don't really have a reason however to just peace without the terms as it's a bad deal. It's not as if I controlled every alliance that was on our side in terms of whatever systems they had in place and not as if any of the extraneous circumstances that have nothing to do with their economic orientation somehow don't exist.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tiberius said:

Way to degrade our banter bromance, the divorce letter is in the post.

You know I'd sell you to Satan for a corn chips, my dear. Let alone a Value slam from Denny's. 

  • Haha 2

Bottom_Border Siggy.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Shadowthrone said:

RIP Uncle Tarr. By far one of the finest players to grace any of the worlds. 

Whales have always been an issue. Their city range has just constantly increased as the game has progressed. NPO's tiering being across the board while facing sustained threats from EMC, ensured the necessity of self-reliant Econ. One can't just switch over and do what Alpha did with Wampus, if it harms our WC and has no military effectiveness. It's such a silly assumption. 

Boosting one or two members at the cost of everyone else is surprisingly a stupid idea. There's no point having one member at 30 cities if we can't afford to maintain a war. Our military will always be dictated by economics. We're competing with alliances that have never lost a war till this one, who through the years has rolled multiple alliances, and grown a war chest that's not only crazy, but surpasses what most others on the losing side of a war ever could imagine. 100/100 doesn't magically induce huge wealth, especially when spread over 130 nations. Again seems like basic understanding of 100/100 or externally induced tiering does not seem to be your forte. 

 

I enjoy this tangent but that's simply untrue. TKR et all had unimpeded growth for years and were able to spend extra cash as they saw fit, while we simply did not have that luxury. Mind you, between ToT and (what 16 or 17 months?) did not really have much of an economically taxing war. We fought AC to a stand still and also had certain upper tier/ higher infra members get hit right after building that thanks to TJest, which threw a whole lot of money invested down the drain. The peace between AC and KF we were playing catch up, and within months after KF, here we are. Unlike a tonne of alliances on your side that had 10-15 months of peace to build, we've always been under the threat of war, and fighting wars/raids all of which costs way more than most of you have had to face in this game. So its really disingenuous of you to even try to claim otherwise. Maybe if y'all didn't keep focusing on damaging the NPO for years, this war would have taken a different turn. 

Also I'd prefer no one having an untouchable tier ever. I'd rather ensure all tiers are held down and take damages so that everyone is at the same starting point at the end of each global. To do that though,  we have to invert the present structures to ensure those who have had the economic capital so far are knocked down a peg or five, to ensure at the end of this war, we are at similar standing points. 

It's great some fancy Econ system you suggested has a great upper tier. Maybe if all the upper tiers weren't in one consolidated mass for years, it'd have been less effective. Here's to hoping more upper tier damage and attrition ;) 

I will just repeat a point I made earlier as a counter since I don't have the time right now for a wall of text. There are people who were at c8/10 during ToT who are now at c24/26 and that's without the benefit of 100/100. I say benefit because even though I oppose 100/100 for community reasons , I can acknowledge that if performed correctly and efficiently, 100/100 is superior for reasons of long term productivity. So if former TKR members who have taken a couple beat downs,  particularly in these ranges I might add, have achieved that level of growth mostly of their own volition and can during peacetime buy a city every 5/6 weeks (4/5 is possible with good loans). So if that is possible then surely NPO can do the same with an Econ system which has more wealth at its disposal and advance more than just a few members gradually over a period of a few months into the whale tier? 

Tldr: if you wanted a whale tier, you would grow one. There are whales who are 800ish days old after all.

Untitled.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Our enemies when they were beating us: "We won the war so you must pay us reps, that's how things work"
Our enemies now: "How dare you demand reps? You're only asking for reps because you're poor and broke"

We get it, you're hypocrites, spare us the waterworks and pay up already so we can all move on.

  • Upvote 1

Orbis Wars   |   CSI: UPN   |   B I G O O F   |   PW Expert Has Nerve To Tell You How To Run Your Own Goddamn Alliance | Occupy Wall Street | Sheepy Sings

TheNG - My favorite part is when Steve suggests DEIC might have done something remotely successful, then gets massively shit on for proposing such a stupid idea.

On 1/4/2016 at 6:37 PM, Sheepy said:
Sheepy said:

I'm retarded, you win

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Charles the Tyrant said:

I will just repeat a point I made earlier as a counter since I don't have the time right now for a wall of text. There are people who were at c8/10 during ToT who are now at c24/26 and that's without the benefit of 100/100. I say benefit because even though I oppose 100/100 for community reasons , I can acknowledge that if performed correctly and efficiently, 100/100 is superior for reasons of long term productivity. So if former TKR members who have taken a couple beat downs,  particularly in these ranges I might add, have achieved that level of growth mostly of their own volition and can during peacetime buy a city every 5/6 weeks (4/5 is possible with good loans). So if that is possible then surely NPO can do the same with an Econ system which has more wealth at its disposal and advance more than just a few members gradually over a period of a few months into the whale tier? 

Tldr: if you wanted a whale tier, you would grow one. There are whales who are 800ish days old after all.

How bout instead of these economic lessons AMD whinning the terms are to much there is this thing called negotiation and it does not involve using ur feet walking away from the table. Like this ...

 

 Coalition b ... we want 100b 

Coalition ..A ... hahahaha .. way to much .. how bout 50 .... 

A ... TOO LOW   90 

B  .. no way dumbass how 65 .. and we through in some

......   

 

See get it hint hint ...good luck wah wahs  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, brucemna said:

How bout instead of these economic lessons AMD whinning the terms are to much there is this thing called negotiation and it does not involve using ur feet walking away from the table. Like this ...

 

 Coalition b ... we want 100b 

Coalition ..A ... hahahaha .. way to much .. how bout 50 .... 

A ... TOO LOW   90 

B  .. no way dumbass how 65 .. and we through in some

......   

 

See get it hint hint ...good luck wah wahs  

 

No.

And just incase you missed it.

No.

Edited by Charles the Tyrant

Untitled.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Regiment and The Federation have both invoked Clause 5, and are hereby bound to the NAP. The OP has been updated.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 3

 

sigsize_od.gif
ONE WORLD OR NONE
CyberNations veteran, Co-Pilot Emeritus
Hambassidor (Head Ambassador (Minister of Foreign Affairs)), Head of the Ministry of Log Dumping, GOONS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Micchan said:

Your enemies are now your allies

73VkYjK.png

https://politicsandwar.fandom.com/wiki/Oktoberfest

"BoC will pay $50,000,000 each to SK and tS as reparations for the damage done"

"UPN agrees to pay a total of $300 million, 30k gasoline, and 30k munitions to Seven Kingdoms, The Syndicate, and Terminus Est, as reparation for damages done."


'DEIC agrees to pay a total of 25k steel, 25k gasoline as reparations for damages done. DEIC also agrees to pay a total of 350million (300mil as reparations for damages, and 50million as a fine to Mensa for DEIC being !@#$)"

 

It's not our problem that members of your coalition have decided that reps are bad now that you're on the losing side

 

  • Upvote 5

Orbis Wars   |   CSI: UPN   |   B I G O O F   |   PW Expert Has Nerve To Tell You How To Run Your Own Goddamn Alliance | Occupy Wall Street | Sheepy Sings

TheNG - My favorite part is when Steve suggests DEIC might have done something remotely successful, then gets massively shit on for proposing such a stupid idea.

On 1/4/2016 at 6:37 PM, Sheepy said:
Sheepy said:

I'm retarded, you win

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Coalition B: "Our side has less liquidity."

Charles: "Should have blown it on more cities in NPO.

Coalition B: "it's not for NPO".

Charles: "This is a referendum on NPO tiering."

Coalition B: "The other side has had the ability to keep individuals out of wars whereas isolated upper tier wouldn't be  getting big returns on 3000 infra+"

Charles: "Should have spent more."

Coalition B: Most alliances on our side do not tier like that or have 100/100 nor have they had as much time with income levels. The highest liquid alliances barely fight or hadn't fought losing wars before.

Charles: "This is an admission of incompetence."

 

Best of luck tFed/Reg.

 

Edited by Roquentin
  • Like 2
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Roquentin said:

Coalition B: "Our side has less liquidity."

Charles: "Should have blown it on more cities in NPO.

Coalition B: "it's not for NPO".

Charles: "This is a referendum on NPO tiering."

Coalition B: "The other side has had the ability to keep individuals out of wars whereas isolated upper tier wouldn't be  getting big returns on 3000 infra+"

Charles: "Should have spent more."

Coalition B: Most alliances on our side do not tier like that or have 100/100 nor have they had as much time with income levels. The highest liquid alliances barely fight or hadn't fought losing wars before.

Charles: "This is an admission of incompetence."

 

Best of luck tFed/Reg.

 

That's actually a pretty good summary. I'm impressed.

?

 

Untitled.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, and before I forget, since I'm sure this is a fact that is probably forgotten, DIEC's reps were their entire bank as """punishment""" for attempting to hide it and forcing them to take loans to pay off their reps. Unless we ask for all our enemies banks as compensation, any and all reps demanded are still effectively smaller than the precedent established in that war by TS-sphere. If anything, you should be grateful for our restraint and magnanimity in asking for relatively minor reps by comparison. However, I'm receptive to the idea of dusting off partisans rep hammer and using it on it's original wielder.

Edited by Malal
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1

Orbis Wars   |   CSI: UPN   |   B I G O O F   |   PW Expert Has Nerve To Tell You How To Run Your Own Goddamn Alliance | Occupy Wall Street | Sheepy Sings

TheNG - My favorite part is when Steve suggests DEIC might have done something remotely successful, then gets massively shit on for proposing such a stupid idea.

On 1/4/2016 at 6:37 PM, Sheepy said:
Sheepy said:

I'm retarded, you win

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Elijah Mikaelson

The truth is NPO 100/100 tax system is very good, I have personally used it a few times and its very effective at spamming city growth, the only down side is NPO are to scared to go above 2000 infra, was pointed out before that the reason being is NPO truly feels if it went to 2500 infra it would be targeted and it would be wasted money, so i get that to some point when you play the victim long enough you start to believe that people are really after you. 2500 infra is by far the best infra levels to maintain growth and a good WC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Bjorn Ironside said:

The truth is NPO 100/100 tax system is very good, I have personally used it a few times and its very effective at spamming city growth, the only down side is NPO are to scared to go above 2000 infra, was pointed out before that the reason being is NPO truly feels if it went to 2500 infra it would be targeted and it would be wasted money, so i get that to some point when you play the victim long enough you start to believe that people are really after you. 2500 infra is by far the best infra levels to maintain growth and a good WC.

Pretty much, I don't doubt that 100/100 is a great system economically. What I do disagree with is the reasoning NPO uses to justify prolonging this war because coal A has whales and they don't when it's a result of their own decisions regarding tiering and infra purchases made years ago which deliberately slows down their growth in favour of tier consolidation in tiers below the whale tier.

If NPO wants whales, grow them or start being nice and ally some whales.  Everyone else does that after all.

Edited by Charles the Tyrant

Untitled.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Bjorn Ironside said:

The truth is NPO 100/100 tax system is very good, I have personally used it a few times and its very effective at spamming city growth, the only down side is NPO are to scared to go above 2000 infra, was pointed out before that the reason being is NPO truly feels if it went to 2500 infra it would be targeted and it would be wasted money, so i get that to some point when you play the victim long enough you start to believe that people are really after you. 2500 infra is by far the best infra levels to maintain growth and a good WC.

Nope, it's all about the return on investment. Its difficult to predict when the next war is going to come about, though using historic data, it's possible to give a good estimate. We dont have 10-30 members to spread the investment into, we have over 100, so we need to make sure its worthwhile to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Return on investment is the main consideration however, it is not the only consideration to take note of. Lost potential productivity and revenue having an impact upon compound growth over the long term can have a significant impact. You are correct in stating that infra lost before the costs are recuperated is a loss, but then so is war in general for that matter and I don't see us stopping wars anytime soon. Infact, I wonder how many people actually stop to consider if their infra has been paid off before they go to war. I doubt many and if they did, I would laugh at them.

I tend to believe the only true currency in this game is time. Time it takes to rebuild, time it takes to amass a stockpile and time between city purchases. If you can significantly lessen these three by purchasing more infra and using that infra efficiently for the purpose of productivity, then the risk of infra not being fully paid off before it is destroyed is worth it as long as the purchasing of infra occurs immediately after a war. Particularly if it can lessen the time between city purchases since cities are eternal and over the course of their existance can recuperate the cost of infra which was lost before being fully paid off long after the infra itself was destroyed and then some. It's basic compound growth which takes the highs and the dips into account over the longer term and it applies a more fuller context to the notion that return of investment is the sole indicator of whether more infra is worth it.

Untitled.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest PhantomThiefB
On 1/19/2020 at 10:51 PM, HeroofTime55 said:

I'll be honest, I always forget that the lunar surface was a thing.  I couldn't remember a damn thing about that place, and I barely remember what alliance I was even in (I think it was FAN?)

I would be thrilled if your stay here was extended.  My expectations do not match my hopes.  Please surprise me.

Oooo I remember moon warz. I was in LUE over there and that's all I remember. Oh and Archon. I remember him ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Elijah Mikaelson
5 hours ago, Tiberius said:

Nope, it's all about the return on investment. Its difficult to predict when the next war is going to come about, though using historic data, it's possible to give a good estimate. We dont have 10-30 members to spread the investment into, we have over 100, so we need to make sure its worthwhile to do.

and you have a 100 paying 100/100 whats your point, 30 nations paying 100/100 or 100 nations paying 100/100 it takes the same amount of time 

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.