Pakkk Posted February 17, 2009 Author Report Share Posted February 17, 2009 Actually some of us raid for Um Casualties and mainly land.. So not really. Plus nuking an aligned nation isn't really a good idea, Might I add. then it would be wise not to raid in the first place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hizzy Posted February 17, 2009 Report Share Posted February 17, 2009 Raiding an aligned nation isn't a good idea. Don't raid them if you don't want to be nuked. Someone making the mistake of raiding an aligned nation is pretty common. Nuking someone in return is not a mistake, and it certainly won't be viewed well by that member's alliance, especially while you're asking for a $6 mil handout. You should probably brainstorm a few different scenarios that extend further than simply "*fire nuke* we demand money" and ask yourselves what you would do if the other alliance tells you to piss off. Cause it's gonna happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supa_Troop3r Posted February 17, 2009 Report Share Posted February 17, 2009 then it would be wise not to raid in the first place. Very true but people are just stubborn these days @ Infinite Narwhal too ( so I'm not rude) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B Tard Posted February 17, 2009 Report Share Posted February 17, 2009 (edited) because this will keep people from raiding you, or you could just rip em a new one in private and not take up our precious internets BTW: Triforce cant triforce   ▲ ▲ ▲ Edited February 17, 2009 by B Tard Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostlin Posted February 17, 2009 Report Share Posted February 17, 2009 then it would be wise not to raid in the first place. You see, let me educate you on the hypotheticals of what would happen if you did this to one of my nations. I have a no tech raiding policy in my alliance, so I would probably agree to have the nation pay you for damages out of their own pocket lest they become a rogue. This includes reasonable damages for what they did, and yes, being an alliance leader, I would ask for war reports and a full accounting. I would make a counter proposal of 100-150% of those damages, and log our conversation if my member is willing to peace out. Presuming the Triforce would not accept my...reasonable peace offer, I would then ask my protector to assist with the issue as a last resort right before letting the war declaration fly. If you nuked me in the middle of that, I would accept it as an act of war and nuke you back. I would then activate my treaties for the assault, post my cassus belli including logs and let the chips fall where they may. This is not a wise policy, this is reckless and insulting that we can't manage our own house and you find nuclear proliferation a necessary first tool to fight something that as a whole is something that can be negotiated within 24 hours. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Infinite Narwhal Posted February 17, 2009 Report Share Posted February 17, 2009 Someone making the mistake of raiding an aligned nation is pretty common.Nuking someone in return is not a mistake, and it certainly won't be viewed well by that member's alliance, especially while you're asking for a $6 mil handout. You should probably brainstorm a few different scenarios that extend further than simply "*fire nuke* we demand money" and ask yourselves what you would do if the other alliance tells you to piss off. Cause it's gonna happen. Small alliances are constantly troubled with raiders. It isn't always a "mistake". Those who are raided need this policy to deter people from making these "mistakes". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aeternalis Posted February 17, 2009 Report Share Posted February 17, 2009 yes i so can triforce. Policy shouldn't matter if you don't plan to raid aligned nations anyway. â–² â–² â–² Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rsoxbronco1 Posted February 17, 2009 Report Share Posted February 17, 2009 because this will keep people from raiding you, or you could just rip em a new one in private and not take up our precious internetsBTW: Triforce cant triforce   ▲ ▲ ▲ Safe to say the thread is over. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pakkk Posted February 17, 2009 Author Report Share Posted February 17, 2009 The policy has been modified after reading critics from this thread. The thing is Triforce dosent wish to be a big huge alliance. we will only have 20 nations and our goals is to have them all MP equipped. we dont have a desire to grow in alliance strength, we will have 20 fit nations locked and ready to go at all times. now we will be small and 20 in size, this means some alliances will raid us, and we dont wish to be a protectorate for ever. so this policy was needed for us to stay safe from raiders. I think the point is made across. So let us stay in peace. and best of luck to you. Now if you please Mods, please close this thread Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B Tard Posted February 17, 2009 Report Share Posted February 17, 2009 (edited) ah so a half hour later and your back at square 1, good luck to you i guess In b4 404 Edited February 17, 2009 by B Tard Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hizzy Posted February 17, 2009 Report Share Posted February 17, 2009 Small alliances are constantly troubled with raiders. It isn't always a "mistake". Those who are raided need this policy to deter people from making these "mistakes". Now we have 2 issues; either 1) it's an honest mistake (these do happen). or 2) It's not a mistake, and it's coming from an alliance that doesn't recognize groups your size (whatever it is, I don't know) as an "alliance" (personally I think that kind of policy is retarded too but that's not the issue here). Now assuming it's the first option.... you think you're ready to nuke someone over an honest mistake and escalate something that is relatively simple to handle into something that's definitely going to make you look like the idiot? Assuming it's the 2nd option; do you really think it would be wise to nuke a member of an alliance which doesn't even recognize you as an alliance in the first place? Where do you think this will lead? But whatever, I think I made my point. Have fun enforcing this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alicia Posted February 17, 2009 Report Share Posted February 17, 2009 Now if you please Mods, please close this thread (OOC) No authors rights anymore(/OOC) I think this policy will only be detrimental to your alliance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Infinite Narwhal Posted February 17, 2009 Report Share Posted February 17, 2009 (edited) Now we have 2 issues;either 1) it's an honest mistake (these do happen). or 2) It's not a mistake, and it's coming from an alliance that doesn't recognize groups your size (whatever it is, I don't know) as an "alliance" (personally I think that kind of policy is retarded too but that's not the issue here). Now assuming it's the first option.... you think you're ready to nuke someone over an honest mistake and escalate something that is relatively simple to handle into something that's definitely going to make you look like the idiot? Assuming it's the 2nd option; do you really think it would be wise to nuke a member of an alliance which doesn't even recognize you as an alliance in the first place? Where do you think this will lead? But whatever, I think I made my point. Have fun enforcing this Such a mistake is very unlikely. The raider would have to be very reckless. A nuke would be good motivation not to make such a mistake again. Tech-raiding should not be tolerated. Edited February 17, 2009 by Infinite Narwhal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Felix von Agnu Posted February 17, 2009 Report Share Posted February 17, 2009 As far as I understand, this announcement basically states that Trifroce will accept no more than 6 mil in reps. For those who think that Triforce is trying to extort nations who raid their members, it seems that they just have a ceiling on how much they accept. Then it goes on to say that if your demands are not met the aggressor would face the consequences. How is this whole thing actually different from most other alliances' policy is beyond me. Telling BAPS about your problem probably would have be as effective, if not more, as this announcement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.