GOONS Posted April 17, 2009 Report Share Posted April 17, 2009 Good luck LoSS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erikz Posted April 17, 2009 Report Share Posted April 17, 2009 The ship is having some problems definitely..I am not directly related to any of the sides so I can't comment for sure. What I see here is disappointing behavior on LoSS's part, dumping numerous allies to join the other side. I don't see this as disappointing behaviour nor as jumping ship. If you have numerous allies, maybe allies at 'both sides' of said 'conflict', and you agree with one 'side' more then with the other 'side', and when ties with one 'side' are better maintained, more friendly (lets say just better overall), why not cancel on the other 'side'? Would you keep those treaties when you where not even going to honour them? Well, that Sir, would be dishonourable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sal Paradise Posted April 17, 2009 Report Share Posted April 17, 2009 SIDES TO WHAT? THE WORLD IS AT PEACE. SIDES TO THE TEA PARTY. MILK OR NO MILK? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paradigm Posted April 17, 2009 Report Share Posted April 17, 2009 SIDES TO WHAT? THE WORLD IS AT PEACE. Shhh Dont ruin it! The other side is getting all freaked out and defensive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starcraftmazter Posted April 17, 2009 Report Share Posted April 17, 2009 The ship is having some problems definitely..I am not directly related to any of the sides so I can't comment for sure. What I see here is disappointing behavior on LoSS's part, dumping numerous allies to join the other side. Clearly LoSS doesn't consider them allies. Given their past history - I can understand why. And if you knew LoSS history as well as I do, you would realise that you don't have the right to claim LoSS is an alliance that jumps ship when their side looks like it's going to lose. LoSS has never done that in the past - in fact the opposite, on more than one occasion. I don't know how you even dare to claim otherwise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
o ya baby Posted April 17, 2009 Report Share Posted April 17, 2009 How is running away from a fight ballsy? But Good Luck LoSS. They're not running from the fight. They're getting on the right side of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delta1212 Posted April 17, 2009 Report Share Posted April 17, 2009 Clearly LoSS doesn't consider them allies. Given their past history - I can understand why. And if you knew LoSS history as well as I do, you would realise that you don't have the right to claim LoSS is an alliance that jumps ship when their side looks like it's going to lose. LoSS has never done that in the past - in fact the opposite, on more than one occasion. I don't know how you even dare to claim otherwise. For the sake of all fairness, they did do it once. But if they say they regret and believe this to be the way to get back to their roots improve themselves, as they have stated previously in the thread, then the courteous thing to do is wish them luck and see what they do with themselves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gelinas23 Posted April 17, 2009 Report Share Posted April 17, 2009 Aw, some people are upset that Loss did this, and their feelings are hurt. Go see a counsellor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alfred von Tirpitz Posted April 17, 2009 Report Share Posted April 17, 2009 Jeeez!!! Thats some restructuring LOSS. And its not spring neither. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tromp Posted April 17, 2009 Report Share Posted April 17, 2009 Oh my, that many cancellations... Good luck to you LoSS! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kowalski Posted April 17, 2009 Report Share Posted April 17, 2009 All that kerfuffle about declaring neutrality in the last war and now 'suspending' all 5 of your military treaties (that are all with tC/1V) alliances. I guess it does take guts and publicly pick sides like this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingSuck Posted April 17, 2009 Report Share Posted April 17, 2009 lol. Good luck with this LoSS Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hizzy Posted April 17, 2009 Report Share Posted April 17, 2009 Jeeez!!! Thats some restructuring LOSS. And its not spring neither. It's the middle of April. How much more spring do you want? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penguin Posted April 17, 2009 Report Share Posted April 17, 2009 I'm a bit taken aback here. First you guys come querying me demanding to know as our MDP partner any situations going on. So I tell you we are in talks with PC about a protectorate issue. You ask for a dow time, I tell you the answer. You guys ask for more ally information, I tell you. Minutes later you tell me you're canceling, 5 mins later I see the owf post. [20:44]<jawayku> and that you're asking on behalf of LOSS <jawayku> in accordance with our current MDP are you DOWing PC tonight or tommorow You suspend all your treaties, due to restructuring.... then minutes later sign a treaty with nemesis? Honorable indeed. It is already slightly suspect that you would suddenly have a change of heart and want to cancel all of your treaties. Perhaps it is truly as you have said, an attempt to join the "side" which you say better matches your personality while you still have the chance; if it is, I can't really fault that. It is quite a bit worse, however, if you tried to sneak military intel with you on your way out of a treaty relationship. Everyone tends to get excited about defections in the confusion leading up to a battle, but these are the kind of things that will stick with you for a long time afterward. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and hope that you have a decent explanation as to why mhawk's post doesn't show a large breech of trust that ought to shake the confidence of your present and future allies. What exactly happened in that conversation? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rabonnobar Posted April 17, 2009 Report Share Posted April 17, 2009 (edited) LoSS: This is pathetic. Edited April 17, 2009 by rabonnobar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
godfather89 Posted April 17, 2009 Report Share Posted April 17, 2009 LoSS: This is pathetic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erikz Posted April 17, 2009 Report Share Posted April 17, 2009 To all people publicly ranting LoSS: is it so hard to see an alliance do what it thinks needs to be done? It's almost shocking to see right, doing what you believe in? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kowalski Posted April 17, 2009 Report Share Posted April 17, 2009 To all people publicly ranting LoSS: is it so hard to see an alliance do what it thinks needs to be done? It's almost shocking to see right, doing what you believe in? Of course not, I think the issue is more why sign the treaties in the first place when they are dropped at the first sign that they might have to be honoured. This may not be the case but the timing is awfully unfortunate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erikz Posted April 17, 2009 Report Share Posted April 17, 2009 Of course not, I think the issue is more why sign the treaties in the first place when they are dropped at the first sign that they might have to be honoured. This may not be the case but the timing is awfully unfortunate. Eg. the TORN - VE cancellation? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uaciaut Posted April 17, 2009 Report Share Posted April 17, 2009 To all people publicly ranting LoSS: is it so hard to see an alliance do what it thinks needs to be done? It's almost shocking to see right, doing what you believe in? This is a bad way to go about doing things, especially if what they think is right changed so suddenly affecting what 4-5 treaties at once. @penguin - i doubt this was an attempt to steal military info, it sounds more like "who and when are you gonna go to war (with) so we know if we stick with you or not" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arrnea Posted April 17, 2009 Report Share Posted April 17, 2009 Of course not, I think the issue is more why sign the treaties in the first place when they are dropped at the first sign that they might have to be honoured. This may not be the case but the timing is awfully unfortunate. More than likely when those treaties were signed, LoSS felt that it could honor those treaties. Now, it feels it cannot, should war erupt, and so to avoid having to dishonor a treaty in wartime, it has nipped them in the bud before war comes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
godfather89 Posted April 17, 2009 Report Share Posted April 17, 2009 More than likely when those treaties were signed, LoSS felt that it could honor those treaties. Now, it feels it cannot, should war erupt, and so to avoid having to dishonor a treaty in wartime, it has nipped them in the bud before war comes. A sudden change of heart so close to a war, i won't buy this theory. It would have been better if LoSS would have just come out and said "we think our allies have a lesser chance of winning this war and so we can't be allied to them anymore as we love our infra so much" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kowalski Posted April 17, 2009 Report Share Posted April 17, 2009 More than likely when those treaties were signed, LoSS felt that it could honor those treaties. Now, it feels it cannot, should war erupt, and so to avoid having to dishonor a treaty in wartime, it has nipped them in the bud before war comes. Well if that's the case then sure, but the difference of opinion here is whether LoSS can't or won't honour the treaties. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boscher Posted April 17, 2009 Report Share Posted April 17, 2009 Isn’t this the first thread where both sides don’t even pretend that there is nothing going on? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delta1212 Posted April 17, 2009 Report Share Posted April 17, 2009 Isn’t this the first thread where both sides don’t even pretend that there is nothing going on? No there've been a couple others. 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.