Jump to content

Spartan Treaty Announcements


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 271
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

 

particularly since from what the Kings of Sparta have said in that they knew the treaty was under review and were considering cancelling on us prior to the war. 

 

 

I find this bit especially interesting, considering that, you know, we didn't start reviewing treaties until early December, after the war had already begun. Indeed, I specifically mentioned all treaties were currently under review by my Councils in the private channel.

Edited by DeathAdder
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

That's fair, I suppose. Though, at the same time, feelings between membership, or leadership of either Alliance had absolutely nothing to do with the cancellation. As you very well know, or at least a part of you does. It's fine that you feel the cancellation was rushed. Many do. Did I intentionally plan to cancel you directly after a war? No, but those things (Global Wars at inconvenient timing) happen, and waiting until way post-war, letting you/your membership believe everything was fine (Politically, I mean, not personally) would've been more wrong than cancelling now, in my book. -Shrugs.-

 

To an outside perspective of the dynamic relationship that existed between the XX membership, I'd imagine Yeru's claims do seem pretty baseless. But only because XX/Sparta doesn't make a habit of publicly airing our problems/dirty laundry. We kept it in-house 99.9% of the time, and that's fine by me.

 

And if I really bothered to care enough, Chim (which I do not), I'm relatively certain I could point out several instances where you've publicly over-reacted. My entire point wasn't to attack you, but more to point out glass houses + casting stones.

 

I believe we're done here.

 

 

 

I find this bit especially interesting, considering that, you know, we didn't start reviewing treaties until early December, after the war had already begun. Indeed, I specifically mentioned all treaties were currently under review by my Councils in the private channel.

 

My apologies. I read the above post where you stated that this war got in your way of canceling on us. That made it appear that you were in discussion previous to the war and waited until the war ended prior to actually canceling. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The first quote was in response to Chim going "I couldn't possibly care less that the treaty was cancelled; it was best for both our alliances but MI6 would never have done such a thing after going to bat for you this war."

 

Taken literally; it wasn't something I had planned for months on end to wait specifically for a war to cancel you.

 

can see how it could have been misread, though, so no worries.

Edited by DeathAdder
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is the required waiting time for canceling a treaty after a war in your opinion?

Its a serious question since both Sparta and MI6 are allies of ours I was just wondering what you felt the proper timeframe would be?

I generally think it's a bit hasty to cancel immediately after a war when said alliance just took heavy damage to defend you.

 

Had I been Sparta, I would have informed MI6/Polar/etc of my decision to review post-war, and had individual talks with each alliance to determine if FA and alliance goals were still in sync. After a losing war, it is also good to look in the mirror and figure out what went wrong, and why. I don't really have an issue with the cancellation itself, as I think MI6 needs to take a different path, but as Doch said, the manner in which it was done, and the manner in which Spartan leaders are representing themselves here. There is no reason Sparta should be so hostile towards MI6, and if there is one thing to make you stop and wonder if you should ally Sparta in the future, it should be that.

 

If you go to bat for me, expect loyalty in return. That is not the case here. Anyway, good luck to Sparta. I've always liked you guys. Just really unsure what path you guys are taking.

Edited by Starfox101
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, Adder's in full damage control mode...haven't seen Sparta do that since...the ODN cancellation?

All i can say is it is a bit fucked up to cancel on someone after they just fought a war for you (one in which they did not turtle to high hell)

I expected better from you guys, though with what I've seen in logs and discussions over the years, XX might be better off

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, Adder's in full damage control mode...haven't seen Sparta do that since...the ODN cancellation?

All i can say is it is a bit $%&@ed up to cancel on someone after they just fought a war for you (one in which they did not turtle to high hell)

I expected better from you guys, though with what I've seen in logs and discussions over the years, XX might be better off

Oh please, in wars like these no one fights them for people. The chains that bring people in on certain fronts are ones of coalition utility. Nothing else. You join coalitions for alliances or your own personal interests.

Edited by Centurius
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh please, in wars like these no one fights them for people. The chains that bring people in on certain fronts are ones of coalition utility. Nothing else. You join coalitions for alliances or your own personal interests.

Nice sentiment since, to an untrained eye, it appears that NpO fought on for TOP's interest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh please, in wars like these no one fights them for people. The chains that bring people in on certain fronts are ones of coalition utility. Nothing else. You join coalitions for alliances or your own personal interests.

 

Well, I mean, you really have to consider the sources of where the majority of whining comes from; people who have little to absolutely no idea how this war was fought on our end, or those who hardly ever tangibly contribute to Wars in general. 

Edited by DeathAdder
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice sentiment since, to an untrained eye, it appears that NpO fought on for TOP's interest.

If you'd learn to read properly you would have noticed the last part of that statement. You can join coalitions for alliances, the exact deployment however should always be the one where you are most effective for the coalition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure what cancelling on MI6 but keeping TOP and GOONS accomplishes. Unless we see more cancellations soon, it looks like you'll be fighting with the same people again, especially if TOP-Polar holds up. It'll be interesting to see the aftermath of this.

 

It's ok, it's not like Umbrella would never cancel a future treaty with them and actively plot against them or anything.

Cancel a future treaty? How does one even do that? I guess people can call off plans to sign an imminent treaty but this doesn't sound like that.

 

 

Look, I was going to leave it be until you went and attacked me here.  I couldn't possibly care less that the treaty was cancelled; it was best for both our alliances but MI6 would never have done such a thing after going to bat for you this war.  Politically untenable locally, shall we say; my membership thought the world of you guys until three days ago.  And it's posts like these that make me sorry to have defended you to them in the first place.

 

I thought Yeru's post was low and baseless against the rest of your ex-allies, so I interjected myself into the discussion.  Nothing personal whatsoever; I found the sentiment remarkably distasteful and unfitting to the quality I believe of Yeru as a leader, so I had something to say about it. 

That's never happened before. This must be a new thing. Oh well, first time for everything.

 

We have Sparta cancellations with Fark, Polar, MHa, and Mi6, and the logs we get is Atlas gov debating the merits of hitting UPN? These are not the logs we are looking for.

 

Also, Atlas hitting UPN would have been terribly dumb, as anyone looking at their wiki could tell you.

The wisdom here is blinding.

 

As for whether STA would have hit Atlas, I don't think ODN would have liked that too much.

 

Oh please, in wars like these no one fights them for people. The chains that bring people in on certain fronts are ones of coalition utility. Nothing else. You join coalitions for alliances or your own personal interests.

I distinctly remember fighting in this war for Kashmir and DS, Disorder for AI, and the Kas War for Kashmir again. Even exact deployment as you later specified gets iffy there because of who you're looking to hit. Coalition utility becomes horribly abstract in less cohesive coalitions, too, like how I'm sure you were bursting at the seams to do everything possible to maximize SNX's utility this war.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure what cancelling on MI6 but keeping TOP and GOONS accomplishes. Unless we see more cancellations soon, it looks like you'll be fighting with the same people again, especially if TOP-Polar holds up. It'll be interesting to see the aftermath of this.

 

Rush's post summed it up pretty nicely on what it would accomplish.

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...