Jump to content

Cordiality: Days of Future Past


Recommended Posts

Surely we won't see any stupid Lobster Party references in this thread. Oh, what's that? $%&@ off? Ok then.

Congrats on a game-changing treaty between two alliances who have either given up on game-changing or don't know how to do it.

 

The days of game changing are over. It is no more the fault of either of the 2 alliances than it is of the over 200+ alliances. What this is, is practical, and more clearly spells out what the future holds (at least in regards to the next war, if the trend continues, it will all change again before the subsequent one, we may never see a sphere win 2 in a row while at the pinnacle again.)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 74
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

The days of game changing are over. It is no more the fault of either of the 2 alliances than it is of the over 200+ alliances. What this is, is practical, and more clearly spells out what the future holds (at least in regards to the next war, if the trend continues, it will all change again before the subsequent one, we may never see a sphere win 2 in a row while at the pinnacle again.)

I'm not sold on this being a big deal at all. I'm not sold on it being the smartest thing. In fact, I'm almost sure that the more treaties with IRON a sphere has, the more likely it is that IRON attacks that particular sphere.

OOC: I wasn't referencing the actual meta-game, but the fact that people are pretending this is a big deal.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel like you have to let the thread reach a dozen pages and have damage control done by bigger players before "a big deal" can be said to be being made of this.

'grats NPO, IRON.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

You say NAP but I smell oDoAP. 

 

Letum's right; it isn't exactly hidden. And the original Cordiality Accords had an optional military clause in them as well. They were just signed in early 2007 before the names of treaties were standardized. ;)

 

 

Either way,

o/ IRON

o/ Pacifica

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't wait for someone to test out the new and fully operational cordiality accords


The point is you surely felt the same way about the Forge Accords. Maintaining (as you are) or reestablishing (as NPO just did) ties with an alliance that crows about its stats which are a product of leaving allies out to dry reeks of desperation.
Link to post
Share on other sites

The point is you surely felt the same way about the Forge Accords. Maintaining (as you are) or reestablishing (as NPO just did) ties with an alliance that crows about its stats which are a product of leaving allies out to dry reeks of desperation.

There's also the fact that it wasn't even a year ago that IRON cut NPO because "their interests didn't align"

ie, NPO had to fight upper tier alliances with the edge.
Link to post
Share on other sites

There's also the fact that it wasn't even a year ago that IRON cut NPO because "their interests didn't align"

ie, NPO had to fight upper tier alliances with the edge.

give me whatever you're smoking please

Link to post
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...