Jump to content

Blackwater using unfair sanctions...


Striker DCS

Recommended Posts

Also...you think raiding a none is anyless a raid? Or that its ok because he has no friends to protect him? Your startint to sound more and more like a coward

This isn't complicated.

A raid is a raid, regardless of whether the target is aligned or non-aligned. However, the raison d'être of an alliance is to protect its members, while the non-aligned often choose to forgo such security for their independence. Hence, any right thinking person who wishes to tech raid will choose a non-aligned target because there is less chance of having it escalate. Attack an aligned target, and of course things are going to escalate.

This is also why any right thinking alliance will tell its members that if they choose to tech raid, they're on their own- regardless of whether the target is aligned or non-aligned - because when you have one alliance defending its members from tech raids, and another alliance defending its member's right to raid aligned targets... well... you end up exactly where we are today, don't you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 57
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

This isn't complicated.

A raid is a raid, regardless of whether the target is aligned or non-aligned. However, the raison d'être of an alliance is to protect its members, while the non-aligned often choose to forgo such security for their independence. Hence, any right thinking person who wishes to tech raid will choose a non-aligned target because there is less chance of having it escalate. Attack an aligned target, and of course things are going to escalate.

This is also why any right thinking alliance will tell its members that if they choose to tech raid, they're on their own- regardless of whether the target is aligned or non-aligned - because when you have one alliance defending its members from tech raids, and another alliance defending its member's right to raid aligned targets... well... you end up exactly where we are today, don't you?

We werent defending against the defenders of the tech raid. We attacked rouges that continued attacks after the peace orders were given.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This isn't complicated.

A raid is a raid, regardless of whether the target is aligned or non-aligned. However, the raison d'être of an alliance is to protect its members, while the non-aligned often choose to forgo such security for their independence. Hence, any right thinking person who wishes to tech raid will choose a non-aligned target because there is less chance of having it escalate. Attack an aligned target, and of course things are going to escalate.

This is also why any right thinking alliance will tell its members that if they choose to tech raid, they're on their own- regardless of whether the target is aligned or non-aligned - because when you have one alliance defending its members from tech raids, and another alliance defending its member's right to raid aligned targets... well... you end up exactly where we are today, don't you?

There are always 2 sides to the story.....Just as there is to a raid. Most of the none AA's are noobs or just playing the game for fun, not to win.

Thus not really needing an AA to join. Then they are pulled from every direction by AA's asking them to join, and possibably not wanting to be apart of an AA that raids

so they stay none thinking its neutral (i know this for a fact because of a convo with a none) Yet still find themself being hit!

One might also argue that hitting a none is unfair just for what you have stated...you know they have no chance of fighting back. Thus giving the apperance of the raider

being a bully.....Isn't this the very thing you say that your fighting in NAAW?

This is where the laws of raiding come in, and defending....As you said simple, You always raid with politeness and only GA's

Raid and an AA fights back with the same as it got = fair. A warning to never raid again, enough said! each goes their own way.

If the nation then has its buddies join in, its not considered protection from war, its an act of war as its a raid defended well with out excessive force and enough to get the point accross!

If the raiding nation is hit by all out attacks, this is considered war and then defendable by the raiding nations AA and or buddies.

Just my thoughts, but i feel its fair. after all everybody knows the difference between a war and a raid.

BG.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, well, I thought everyone knew the difference between an aligned and a non-aligned nation. Hasn't it already been established that not raiding an alliance is one of those "laws of raiding" you mentioned? :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, well, I thought everyone knew the difference between an aligned and a non-aligned nation. Hasn't it already been established that not raiding an alliance is one of those "laws of raiding" you mentioned? :rolleyes:

LOL, i have to say you lost me there....I really don't understand this one. :blink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Erm... I was referring to us - Blackwater. I realize we may seem pretty small to you, but we are an alliance. We have forums, and a flag, and everything! And you know we're an alliance if we have a flag! :awesome:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Erm... I was referring to us - Blackwater. I realize we may seem pretty small to you, but we are an alliance. We have forums, and a flag, and everything! And you know we're an alliance if we have a flag! :awesome:

Well hell we don't have a flag, or at least one thats not seperate from CN-SE, for that matter last round we didn't have fourms or even a nice place to take a crap,lol!

This round we have moved up and we have a fourms place, but hell i'm the leader and i don't even think i'm allowed in! lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


×
×
  • Create New...