Rafael Nadal

You were expecting something that couldn't be done. ODN played neutral in that war because two main combatants, you and ourselves, were both MDoAP'ed to them. There has been several precedents set for that decision. Saying that, we discussed and agreed, iirc, to cancel our treaty with ODN after that war for a) not seeing things our way and b ) not coming in against other purple when they entered (just a more specific facet of not seeing things our way I guess). However, ODN was secondary to our treaty with TOP, and TOP beating us to the cancellation took our focus off ODN, and we just never got back around to canceling the treaty. ODN sanctioning Universalis would have been a sticky situation because of OUT, in that Uni was orange and we're orange. It's very possible that ODN would have been retaliated against under the OUT ODP. Don't argue the morals of the ODP with me because I'm not a fan of it, personally. As a side note, had we not accepted peace the night we did, Rok, Echelon, and GGA we're prepared to come in the next update. We knew this, and yet we still agreed to pay reps because we wanted to avoid the messy situation it would put Echelon and Rok in, who, if you recall, were already involved in that other war at the time. So, to whomever said asking your ally to stay out of a conflict doesn't mean just that, then maybe you just need to work on your communication skills. Sometimes I wish we hadn't accepted the peace, just to see how messy the whole thing could have become, but hindsight is 20/20. Also, not making hard choices in FA any more? ODN used to not make any choices at all, which is why they got into such predicaments. Then, they had to make the hard choice (perhaps easy choice in the past, for those wanting the more troll style word choice) to honor or not honor certain treaties, or just go plain neutral in a conflict. ODN isn't ridding themselves of hard choices, they're just choosing better times to make them than right around war time.

Not any longer. Well, as of a few months ago.

I'm sure both parties are in tears over this.

To your first point, Vanguard has a treaty with ODN. Maybe others think they know better, but that's their loss. I don't know what kind of organization or help IRON provided ODN, if any at all, but IRON didn't save ODN's $@! from VE. Firstly, ODN was decently armed then, and secondly had others besides IRON behind them. Not to mention, the fact that it conflict would have made it pretty awkward for Rok and ourselves, being that VE is tied to Rok through Bastion, Rok is tied to us, and we're tied to ODN. Either the war would have escalated to a point much further beyond VE and ODN to where it's pointless to extrapolate now, it would have stayed between ODN, VE, and Int, or it wouldn't have happened at all due to the intervention of Rok and ourselves. To claim ODN was all alone in that situation shows a lack of knowledge of the full situation.

You're just jealous that I'm a better poster, and even people like Haf can recognize this. >_>

This statement means you believe that you're interpreting this correctly. It also assumes there is much to interpret from this, beyond the normal "we're just not going in the same direction any longer". As I am out of the loop, please shed some insight? Edit: Rev beat me. That'll teach me to open up the response box and then leave to do something else. >_>

Good luck to Legion and ODN without this old time treaty.

If the relationship isn't there, neither should the treaty be. I wish MXCA well in the future.

I hope this works out, but color me skeptical.

This is illegitimate. You only reached 1 mil NS by baiting NCC to leave. GIVE US BACK NCC! Congrats guys.

Good luck, have fun Solidus.

Hope you succeed in spite of us.

I'm sure Caffine will be fine as a member, and it's good to see that he went to such a good alliance; worked out about as well as it could.

This topic got exponentially more lulz overnight. Good on RV to bring the lulz.

I was going to post that this topic was not up to par with your past work, but then that reply made me laugh, so I guess it was worthwhile. Good luck on dealing with the spying problem. And member retainment problem.

I was unaware most alliances on the NPO front were former allies.

I'm pretty sure we've been openly honest about our stances on NPO. We want them to be thoroughly militarily defeated, throughout the alliance. Stomping 20k ns nations down to 1k doesn't change NPO's real military capability. Take their top nations down a few thousand infra, and make them spend some of that warchest to rebuild and then aid out, is much more desirable. I would much rather see NPO at 1 mil NS, thoroughly bombed out, than at 5 mil NS paying billions in reps. BTW, don't argue with me over these numbers, as I didn't put much thought into them. They're more to provide examples to my sentiment and feelings.

And as you've seen, many of us have qualms with that term.

I agree with the overall sentiment. I disagree about using Pacifica as a measuring stick. I feel Pacifica's terms as currently offered are fair, relative to their sins and actions of the past. I don't think Karma came about to create a doctrine of "light terms", but rather, deserved terms. Alliances embroiled in defensive wars shouldn't be receiving backbreaking reps and terms of membership expulsion, for example. Terms should scale with the crimes, and I consider our mission to be correcting the imbalance of where that scale had inflated to. This topic is not about NPO's terms, how we got to them, etc, so I will not delve into that.

That is so. However, I think offering to help pay the reps would be more productive than this topic.

You're not deserving of the protection around you.

I'm aware of that. That doesn't change anything, it's still a joke term.

You're plain wrong regarding white peace. I won't tell you that there was no strategy in handing out white peace, but there was definitely a major role for the moral side of it, saving real terms for alliances who deserved them more, rather than having every alliance in war pay reps just because.

That is a joke term. Somebody from Echelon gov't, Caffine I think, used it in some discussion involving one of the alliances on it's front, in the past.

If I had written the terms, these all would not be the outcome. I mainly have issues banning Caffine from gov't permanently, as I'm not a fan of permanent terms at all. However, I don't have much issue at all with the reps. These are the same terms that Echelon turned down a month (?) or so ago, and weren't quite as proportionally harsh as they seem now. The terms were on the table waiting for Echelon to accept, and now they have. No qualms about that. Overall, I'm glad to see Echelon finally at peace. Good luck with your rebuilding.