Jump to content

Kapleo

Members
  • Content Count

    32
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Kapleo

  • Rank
    Guardian King

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Previous Fields

  • Nation Name
    Kaplea
  • Alliance Name
    Sellswords / The Phoenix Federation
  • Resource 1
    Fish
  • Resource 2
    Uranium

Recent Profile Visitors

252 profile views
  1. I agree, but I also see White Chocolate's point for less hostile interactions. We have had incidents of friendly fire and we don't counter. No that we can't, but considering there's friendly relations we make an approach like "hey, this dude is a friend of us" and that helps more than going in with a flying kick. It's obvious there is no friendly relations between us, but arranging a punishment for the sake of avoiding escalations between both factions doesn't sound unreasonable **as long as long as the commitment is mutual**.
  2. I appreciate you letting us know how things look from your end. I can understand your skepticism and I admit we, for whatever reason, have been hostile towards you all for a long time now and maybe what you propose for a next time would be a step towards friendlier interactions (or at least not so hostile) as long as the commitment is mutual. To achieve this, I consider necessary that both sides to reopen direct communications. I don't think any improvement on this matter will be possible without us being able to talk outside of the OWF. I hope we find ourselves in agreement on this.
  3. CLAWS, (spoiler alert) the leaders of our alliances share a chat and I can give you my word that we are NOT trying to start a war. As GK said, if we wanted a war we would just go for it, just like we did last time, and I can tell you this time we are way better prepared for one, so we legit just don't want to fight over this, however; I do believe your guy IS in the wrong and deserves to have some sort of punishment just like our guy was punished by you all when our guy was in the wrong. You all did not ask us "permission" to counter Korlath, you just went ahead and did it and THEN negotiated his punishment and that's okay, you had EVERY right to do so. Back then you considered punishment fair when we were in your position and we allowed the punishment to take place, so it is only fair that as we took responsibility back then, you take responsibility for your member's actions now. Now I will go back to DEFCON 5 and advise my peers to do the same as I believe this will get solved fairly and without sacrificing nations that had nothing to do with Veracity's actions.
  4. Exactly, this shouldn't be so hard to settle. A protected nation was attacked and the offending nation now has to face consequences over it, especially after obviously doing it on purpose. Two rounds minimum (6 wars). If I remember well that was the punishment set by RFI against Korlath when he attacked your protects. And reopening the channels for coordination would be good too, for the sake of avoiding misunderstandings like the ones that lead to our previous conflict.
  5. No one likes NPO very much anyway, that part is not *that* surprising, but the other stuff, very bad. Veracity, Lex is probably not going to accept the peace due to inactivity, however; he's someone held in high regard among us and we are hoping he will come back at some point, so ceasing attacks on his nation would be nice so we can de-escalate this. Regarding Lyanna, I think she's the only one that can bring clarification on that matter. Also, if we are to solve these issues peacefully, silencing/kicking us from your servers and leaving ours will certainly not help. I've been advocating for better relations among our blocs and even loosened up restrictions to trade with CLAWS but I after everything that has happened so far it becomes harder every time to do so as there is no sign of those being the intentions on your end. On every issue we had we were able to work it out through diplomacy, I don't think closing the channels to dialog is the best option here unless CLAWS intention is to declare war on us, which of course you are welcome to do so if that's the case. -Regarding the new post about Lex's name not being there, that was an additional comment to the post, the original post was meant for all of Kashmir, and obviously the now former leader of it, was included in that protection.
×
×
  • Create New...