Jump to content

Imperial Announcement from the New Pacific Order


Brehon

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 269
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

[quote name='Roquentin' timestamp='1334389804' post='2952958']
Another issue here: how does a PIAT dictate one's path when it's an ODoAP partner to begin with. Currently TLR is an MDoAP partner of the New Pacific Order, does that mean NPO wants to follow TLR's path (MK/GOONS/Non Grata)?
[/quote]
I think this is more a case of when NPO was on most alliance's !@#$ list with a rolling coming their way, they figured signing with Invicta would bring more NS strength on their side. Although for the same reason Invicta was willing to sign with them when everyone wanted to roll NPO, which was due to them not caring what all the other alliances thought is now the reason NPO wants to distance themselves from Invicta. They don't want any ties with alliances unpopular with the MK crowd, who they want to get more comfy with.

Edited by Methrage
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Methrage' timestamp='1334390140' post='2952968']
I think this is more a case of when NPO was on most alliance's !@#$ list with a rolling coming their way, they figured signing with Invicta would bring more NS strength on their side. Although for the same reason Invicta was willing to sign with them when everyone wanted to roll NPO, which was due to them not caring what all the other alliances thought is now the reason NPO wants to distance themselves from Invicta. They don't want any ties with alliance unpopular with the MK crowd, who they want to get more comfy with.
[/quote]


I don't really agree with that assessment for a reason, which is why I am confused. NPO turned down MK's ODP offer. NPO is allied to alliances that have interests that clash with MK's. It would be too easy to arrive at that conclusion, but there is contradictory evidence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Roquentin' timestamp='1334390232' post='2952971']
I don't really agree with that assessment for a reason, which is why I am confused. NPO turned down MK's ODP offer. NPO is allied to alliances that have interests that clash with MK's. It would be too easy to arrive at that conclusion, but there is contradictory evidence.
[/quote]
Invicta is probably not very popular with CnG either would be my guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Methrage' timestamp='1334390341' post='2952972']
Invicta is probably not very popular with CnG either would be my guess.
[/quote]

C&G's interests = MK's interests. it's a point I've consistently made, so I can't accept that conclusion either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='NoMercy' timestamp='1334389976' post='2952963']
Hey Pansy,

I am cool, since it isn't my business. And that they are dictating is what I am getting from Invicta's posts. Maybe the CSN treaty was only the very last of many reasons, but only very little doubt, it seems to be one of the reasons.
[/quote]
Hey No Mercy, good to see you again, yeah, there is more at work here, and as usual, one set of people will cherry pick the reasons, and try to gain sympathy from the OWF.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Gandroff' timestamp='1334389794' post='2952957']
1. So we're back to the brainwashed BR days then? I miss those. They were entertaining.



2. How are we dictating anything? We don't agree with the path they want to take so we have split ways. Dictating would be threatening them in some way to do something we wanted.
[/quote]

1. Well traditionally the BR has very little say in the business. I am not sure if the information policy in NPO has changed, I doubt it. So yes, there is the danger they have never stopped giving you one-sided information. You guys all know that better than me, you are invited to correct me. However the posts I quoted strongly suggest that I am right.

2. The threatening includes threatening to cancel the treaty. I assume it was very important for Invicta (judging their reactions). You are free to disagree with them, but my point stands. After what they have done for Pacifica, it needs more than a few disagreements to justify a cancellation.

If the will to cancel was mutual, you could have made a joint statement. If your disagreements were unfixable, I am sure Invicta would have agreed to that. The way this announcement was posted simply doesn't reflect that you guys are actually deep in their guilt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Simple facts:

The NPO Invicta relationship has been suffering for some time. There are many things that have happened, many discussions, arguments. It was not recovering, we were not getting along. The only time we did is when we simply stopped talking.

NPO and Invicta enjoyed benefits from this treaty and now we are both moving on. We enjoyed peace together, we enjoyed war together. Regardless of personality conflicts which have easily shown on this thread already, the fact is we wish Invicta the best. We have a history both public and private those that claim to know it that aren't NPO gov or Invicta gov simply don't know all the details.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry to see such a longstanding relationship finally come to an end. Good luck to Invicta, and particularly to our allies in NPO.

[quote name='Methrage' timestamp='1334390140' post='2952968']They don't want any ties with alliances unpopular with the MK crowd, who they want to get more comfy with.
[/quote]
Welp, that's a bit difficult given it accounts for most of their allies :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Brehon' timestamp='1334390534' post='2952977']
Simple facts:

The NPO Invicta relationship has been suffering for some time. There are many things that have happened, many discussions, arguments. It was not recovering, we were not getting along. The only time we did is when we simply stopped talking.

NPO and Invicta enjoyed benefits from this treaty and now we are both moving on. We enjoyed peace together, we enjoyed war together. Regardless of personality conflicts which have easily shown on this thread already, the fact is we wish Invicta the best. We have a history both public and private those that claim to know it that aren't NPO gov or Invicta gov simply don't know all the details.
[/quote]


Okay, fair enough. Like I'm not trying to call you out here at all, just I admittedly couldn't figure it out.



[quote name='Sir Humphrey' timestamp='1334390559' post='2952980']
Sorry to see such a longstanding relationship finally come to an end. Good luck to Invicta, and particularly to our allies in NPO.


Welp, that's a bit difficult given it accounts for most of their allies :P
[/quote]

edit; Similar to what I said on that. Lots of them aren't popular there.

Edited by Roquentin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Roquentin' timestamp='1334390392' post='2952974']
C&G's interests = MK's interests. it's a point I've consistently made, so I can't accept that conclusion either.
[/quote]
Yet NPO is allied to CnG and not MK, but that tie with CnG could cause MK's interests to effect NPO if they want to continue being tied to CnG/MK. Maybe now NPO wants to cut back on their treaties with alliances who have interests who clash with MK. Either way speculating to much is pointless, Invicta is better off finding new allies if NPO was so eager to get rid of their ties with them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='The Pansy' timestamp='1334390713' post='2952983']
You people calling MK NPO's puppet masters are quite off base, it is well known Olympus pulls NPO's strings
[/quote]

Brehon even makes a point of saying it. :P

Edited by Roquentin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Roquentin' timestamp='1334390612' post='2952981']edit; Similar to what I said on that. Lots of them aren't popular there.
[/quote]
In my defence, I starting writing my response before you posted. The transition from thought to text just takes a bit longer <_<

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Methrage' timestamp='1334389247' post='2952944']
So how many wars have Invicta fought for you guys and how many have NPO fought for Invicta due to this treaty? Seems this treaty served NPO well in the past, but I suppose with the new allies you guys are going for its best to get rid of the old.
[/quote]

Pretty much, yes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How come you so brilliant people touting your agenda so quickly forget the good that was involved. The peace, growth and etc Invicta enjoyed prior to Karma. Oh wait because it doesn't fit YOUR agenda to comment on that.

Be a man (or woman) and say it all vs being snits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Brehon' timestamp='1334391015' post='2952988']
How come you so brilliant people touting your agenda so quickly forget the good that was involved. The peace, growth and etc Invicta enjoyed prior to Karma. Oh wait because it doesn't fit YOUR agenda to comment on that.

Be a man (or woman) and say it all vs being snits.
[/quote]

I don't really know definitively Brehon, but something people like Haflinger say is that NPO and Invicta weren't really close before Karma.

I could see you posting something like "noWedge wanted to roll other purple alliances and NPO prevented that," which would make sense. I do not know if that's what you are hinting at, however.

Principle of charity applies.

Edited by Roquentin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Brehon' timestamp='1334391015' post='2952988']
How come you so brilliant people touting your agenda so quickly forget the good that was involved. The peace, growth and etc Invicta enjoyed prior to Karma. Oh wait because it doesn't fit YOUR agenda to comment on that.

Be a man (or woman) and say it all vs being snits.
[/quote]
I remember how unpopular you guys made yourselves prior to the Karma War and how many alliances ditched you when you guys finally got curb stomped, yet Invicta stuck by you guys giving up on good growth to be a reliable ally for you guys many times as so many of your other former allies (even with eternal treaties) dropped you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Brehon' timestamp='1334391264' post='2952993']
Were or weren't does it change the safety or benefits of the treaty of that time?
[/quote]

No, but unless it's something specific like the potential argument I gave you, it would have to apply all NPO allies prior to Karma and not just Invicta. I am giving the benefit of the doubt that there was some specific intervention on Invicta's behalf.

Edited by Roquentin
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.


×
×
  • Create New...