Jump to content

A Nominal Announcement


Nemhauser
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 188
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

[quote name='Vol Navy' timestamp='1313267795' post='2779857']
Well looks like the MK damage control department managed to rack up another victory.
[/quote]
Nordreich knows what they want and they know who can give it to them (it's not the nominal, introspective, defensive Mj). It doesn't really matter what MK does or doesn't do at this point; NoR will put up with it in exchange for the prize.

Edited by Schattenmann
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1313268034' post='2779865']
Nordreich knows what they want and they know who can give it to them (it's not Mj). It doesn't really matter what MK does or doesn't do at this point; NoR can handle it in exchange for the prize.
[/quote]

I don't think any one alliance is capable of giving anyone anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

See, normally in the planning channel I would look at this treaty and be like "alright, we'll just avoid NoR's defense clauses then :smug: ". But then I remembered that MK now has the option to directly defend anyone in MJ....so really it doesn't who is hit now (I guess I should have seen that coming considering XX has the exact same clause). Finding a counter solution to this will be most challenging. Well played.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1313268034' post='2779865']
Nordreich knows what they want and they know who can give it to them (it's not the nominal, introspective, defensive Mj). It doesn't really matter what MK does or doesn't do at this point; NoR will put up with it in exchange for the prize.
[/quote]

Well said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All I'm confused about is why you bothered signing that ODP. If your objective was to create a binding tie, then why not just go straight for this in the first place? I can't believe that anything significant has changed between the two treaties.

That said, you're both furthering your political agendas by signing this, and you know what you're signing up for, so congratulations on a successful piece of politics on both sides.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Bob Janova' timestamp='1313268545' post='2779877']
All I'm confused about is why you bothered signing that ODP. If your objective was to create a binding tie, then why not just go straight for this in the first place?
[/quote]

This is what I was thinking when I saw it.

Anyway, congrats on this I suppose.

Edited by LittleRena
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Hyperion321' timestamp='1313268186' post='2779869']
See, normally in the planning channel I would look at this treaty and be like "alright, we'll just avoid NoR's defense clauses then :smug: ". But then I remembered that MK now has the option to directly defend anyone in MJ....so really it doesn't who is hit now (I guess I should have seen that coming considering XX has the exact same clause). Finding a counter solution to this will be most challenging. Well played.
[/quote]
Look at me, I'm playing politics Mum! It's pretty funny to see you constantly and transparently trying to paint yourself as a brilliant political strategist and military tactician, equal to anything the other side can throw at you. Repetition is the key, right?

[quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1313268230' post='2779870']
Valhallans oughta know better than anyone that you're incorrect.
[/quote]
Haha, well played Schatt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1313268230' post='2779870']
Valhallans oughta know better than anyone that you're incorrect.
[/quote]

Perhaps historically you may be right, but looking at the way things stand now, power is spread all across the cats cradle we call the treaty web. Relying on just one Alliance and nothing else is quite silly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='James Dahl' timestamp='1313268640' post='2779878']
Well that didn't take long.
[/quote]

[quote name='James Dahl' timestamp='1313269052' post='2779889']
Well played, MK.

My condolences, Mjolnir
[/quote]

You liked the treaty so much, you posted twice? :huh:

Good to see this upgrade happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='WorldConqueror' timestamp='1313268683' post='2779882']
Look at me, I'm playing politics Mum! It's pretty funny to see you constantly and transparently trying to paint yourself as a brilliant political strategist and military tactician, equal to anything the other side can throw at you. Repetition is the key, right?
[/quote]

I imagine Sparta is putting in a ton of work right now trying to find someway to ditch Fark and R&R.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='James Dahl' timestamp='1313269052' post='2779889']
Well played, MK.

My condolences, Mjolnir
[/quote]
The fact that NoR played off the wording shows how concerned they are.

Ardus wants a world where his alliance is able to defend themselves against any possible threats, he is a bad person.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Neo Uruk' timestamp='1313269516' post='2779899']
The fact that NoR played off the wording shows how concerned they are.

Ardus wants a world where his alliance is able to defend themselves against any possible threats, he is a bad person.
[/quote]

Indeed, Pax Shroomica, I can't wait!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...