Jun 28th 2023, 23:20:19
Originally posted by Getafix:
I've looked into it too TC, and we went to war in part for the unfair FDP that was not really an FDP beacuse of the clause that meant you never had to back us up even if we got blindsided by a larger enemy. In fact, in our previous war before this one, LaF sent $6b to our enemy in "Reps" despite clause #2 that said you would never send FA to our enemy. Add to that huge penalties if we had a rogue suicider, like KBomb, who we recruited in good faith but who hit LaF and who we paid billions in reps for, discouraging us from recruiting anyone new. And then, bullfluff like this:
"-Standard reps formula is: ((75*number of week into the reset)*(lost acres*1.2)). Units are in tanks.
-200% Land:Land negates any lost production payable, as future production will be more. Special cases may still be discussed between representatives from both alliances."
so yes, we went to war for a new pact, in addition to you being assholes who cheat, bribe, corrupt and infiltrate with lying spies, on top of being crybabies who want special treatment and protection.
"-Standard reps formula is: ((75*number of week into the reset)*(lost acres*1.2)). Units are in tanks.
-200% Land:Land negates any lost production payable, as future production will be more. Special cases may still be discussed between representatives from both alliances."
so yes, we went to war for a new pact, in addition to you being assholes who cheat, bribe, corrupt and infiltrate with lying spies, on top of being crybabies who want special treatment and protection.
So you think that SOL should not bear the responsibility for their players and should not compensate for suisiders? Did LaF have different payment terms for damage under the pact or did both sides commit to the same thing? Compensation for damage, to make whole what was broken IS fair by definition. As you note in your own post, LaF is willing to live by it's pacts and send 6 billion in compensation for it's own damage. LaF generally doesn't consider it a hostile office to pay reps either, we accepted Evo was doing it two resets ago until they didn't stop and went beyond what they owed and to alliances they did not owe it to.
And it's not like you have to war to end a pact, you just drop it, and if you have another suisider everyone gets to decide in real time what they want to do rather than having it prenegotiated. Normally if you don't think a FDP is really a FDP, you just downgrade it to a uNAP. But to drop a FDP down to nothing indicates bad faith.
Sounds like ClanGDI would have helped you then by stopping KBomb from doing so much damage.
So I'm left with the same conclusion, that the only way to say that pacts were 'unfair' is to say that damage should not be compensated for. LaF clearly believes such things are fair and is willing to and does live by them.
I'm also curious who these spies are you are refering to. I certainly used spies, 15-20 years ago. But I have no idea about any current use. LaF as a strict rule doesn't do things in game that others could do against us and we wouldnt want done (like sending people to join tags and suiside).