Jump to content

Attack on WOLF by FOK?


Programming101

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 164
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I don't know how to put this nicely, but you are coming across as a complete !@#$% right here.

Why? People need to stop being so scared of wars in this game. being in a fight when you're small and there's no nukes involved for a round or even two isn't even very costly. There's no reason to have this irrational fear for war as if it was something that instantly crushed a nation. If nations have this irrational fear of war they should join a big neutral alliance. For the ones that doesn't want to do this, this is a game, war is a part of the game. You're going to risk getting into a war no matter what you do be it tech raiders or alliance wars.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey with an attitude like that you could be in One Vision.

I think I missed that chance. There is a saying: Better late than never but sometimes it's so late that late will be never.

To all the e-lawyers: Hi.

We allow techraids. Once again: Deal with it, or don't. We have rules for techraids and punish those that don't abide them. When a FOK nation is attacked: We deal with it diplomatically. Never has one attack on FOK of just one member turned the lion into a meat grinder. When a FOK nation attacks someone else we expect the same courtesy we extend: diplomacy. If attacks of one FOK nations immediately turn into an alliance declaring that nation ZI and simultaneous attacks... the lion will be woken up. Again, no one should wake up a lion since it never turns out good for anyone other than the lion.

Lions > You.

In short: We allow techraids. We handle things diplomatically. No alliance can simply declare a FOK nation ZI and expect the lion to remain asleep.

Edited by shakes
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If a techraider attacks a nation, there is a war between those persons. When alliance mates from the victim declare on the raider, do the alliancemates of the raider then also not have the obligation to help their alliancemate?

No, they don't. Unless your alliance likes to defend the right of people to launch unprovoked wars.

If you launch an unprovoked assault upon a nation with allies, it seems obvious that that nation's allies are honour-bound to defend that nation if they can. Any retaliation those nations launch against the attacker could have been easily prevented by the attacker choosing not to launch an unprovoked assault.

The short of it is, the war system is already heavily weighted towards those who launch unprovoked attacks. By bringing your alliancemates into it to defend your right to launch said attacks, you are just acting as a bully.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, they don't. Unless your alliance likes to defend the right of people to launch unprovoked wars.

If you launch an unprovoked assault upon a nation with allies, it seems obvious that that nation's allies are honour-bound to defend that nation if they can. Any retaliation those nations launch against the attacker could have been easily prevented by the attacker choosing not to launch an unprovoked assault.

The short of it is, the war system is already heavily weighted towards those who launch unprovoked attacks. By bringing your alliancemates into it to defend your right to launch said attacks, you are just acting as a bully.

We regard alliance buddies (other than the attacked) attacking a FOK nation as unprovoked. So we are honour bound to defend the FOK nation. Thank you for making that clear to everyone.

Edited by shakes
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We regard alliance buddies (other than the attacked) attacking a FOK nation as unprovoked. So we are honour bound to defend the FOK nation. Thank you for making that clear to everyone.

So you would stand by and allow your fellow brothers to get crushed by another nation and do nothing I take it?

That kind of defeats the purpose of being in a alliance does it not :huh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you would stand by and allow your fellow brothers to get crushed by another nation and do nothing I take it?

That kind of defeats the purpose of being in a alliance does it not :huh:

He means he would defend a FOK techraider should someone declare on that nation. If the person being techraided fights back, FOK will not help. That's the risk of techraiding.

I would like to make a larger, more in-depth reply but I have to go to work now. <_<

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He means he would defend a FOK techraider should someone declare on that nation. If the person being techraided fights back, FOK will not help. That's the risk of techraiding.

I would like to make a larger, more in-depth reply but I have to go to work now. <_<

If a nation raids a nation that is in an alliance he should expect the other nations in that alliance to defend and FOK shouldn't do a damn thing about it in my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey WOLF, I have an open slot if you wish to seek revenge. I'm totally friends with FOK, and totally agree with what they just did.

http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_d...ation_ID=317694

Go ahead, show the Cyberverse you mean business.

So if WOLF takes up your offer do you expect your alliance to help you out?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So if WOLF takes up your offer do you expect your alliance to help you out?

I don't mean to post here again, but I have to admit that would be hilarious if he were throwing out threats for his alliance and his alliance doesn't back him up. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

About the raiding, we see raiding as a part of the game, and we think its both fun and gives new nations some chance to learn to fight.

Its certainly not our goal to crush smaller alliances, or try to keep others out of the game.

When people talk with alliances, 95% of the time we stop the raids, and even better we give them advice and or good techdeals.

Agreed here, this game is built around diplomacy. The strongest bond in LSR is with the DT, and that relationship started with a tech raid, and they ended up our protectorate. Try private talks with FOK first, then if it does not work out, escalate it to a military response.

JB

Edited by Jim Bowie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

He means he would defend a FOK techraider should someone declare on that nation. If the person being techraided fights back, FOK will not help. That's the risk of techraiding.

I would like to make a larger, more in-depth reply but I have to go to work now. <_<

Sorry I didn't clarify what I meant.

Say nation A tech raids on nation B and nation B is a member of FOK, using his logic none of the members of FOK should be allowed to help nation B.

And because the current war system is so one sided towards the aggressor, and since most nations that aren't in war keep a relatively low military, the chances of getting put into anarchy is very high.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry I didn't clarify what I meant.

Say nation A tech raids on nation B and nation B is a member of FOK, using his logic none of the members of FOK should be allowed to help nation B.

And because the current war system is so one sided towards the aggressor, and since most nations that aren't in war keep a relatively low military, the chances of getting put into anarchy is very high.

If someone attacks a FOK nation we handle things diplomatically. If that doesn't go anywhere we wake up the lion. This alliance didn't do diplomacy. That's why your comparison is wrong.

Regarding anarchy. Anarchy != losing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If someone attacks a FOK nation we handle things diplomatically. If that doesn't go anywhere we wake up the lion. This alliance didn't do diplomacy. That's why your comparison is wrong.

How is my comparison wrong. I just wanted to make sure you guys held yourselves to the same rules you expect everybody else to live by as well.

And you answered my question I was raising, so that settles that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to clarify, this isn't a techraid. Techraiding at FOK is forbidden since the war started.

The FOK nation in question looks like a inactive nation, he is only 1500 nation strength while he is over 100 days old.

The nation has been contacted and we asked him to peace out the war with the WOLF nation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks like WOLF needed some MDPs.

I thought they had one with NPO. I seem to recall saying that if a KARMA member tech-raided them one more time they'd join the war on NPO's side. I wonder if they're writing their declaration right now...

As for the OP, it seems a little strange to whine about being tech-raided and then sentencing someone to ZI before seeking a diplomatic solution... I forsee WOLF not staying very long. Or becoming the new NPO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If someone attacks a FOK nation we handle things diplomatically. If that doesn't go anywhere we wake up the lion. This alliance didn't do diplomacy.

This is a fair statement. If FOK goes to war with WOLF because WOLF are too dumb to talk things through first, then more power to FOK. That's totally fine, dandy and honorable.

But on the other hand, if FOK has a general doctrine stating that other alliances are not permitted to protect their own nations from attack, which some of these statements seem to imply, then that is another story entirely. The whole point of alliances is to protect nations from attack. If FOK's standard here is that WOLF (or any alliance) doesn't have the right to launch alliance-sanctioned counter attacks against any nation that attacks that alliance's sovereignty, then FOK is in effect setting out a doctrine that alliance affiliation doesn't matter. I'm not sure the rest of the cyberverse should be OK with that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a fair statement. If FOK goes to war with WOLF because WOLF are too dumb to talk things through first, then more power to FOK. That's totally fine, dandy and honorable.

But on the other hand, if FOK has a general doctrine stating that other alliances are not permitted to protect their own nations from attack, which some of these statements seem to imply, then that is another story entirely. The whole point of alliances is to protect nations from attack. If FOK's standard here is that WOLF (or any alliance) doesn't have the right to launch alliance-sanctioned counter attacks against any nation that attacks that alliance's sovereignty, then FOK is in effect setting out a doctrine that alliance affiliation doesn't matter. I'm not sure the rest of the cyberverse should be OK with that.

WOLF is making threats towards a member of FOK. I believe that gives FOK a good enough reason to step in and defend the raider. Yeah, the raider made a mistake. WOLF also made a mistake by not seeking diplomatic solutions first. Instead they just jumped on him, which at the time, wasn't a bad thing... until they made the threat.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to clarify, this isn't a techraid. Techraiding at FOK is forbidden since the war started.

The FOK nation in question looks like a inactive nation, he is only 1500 nation strength while he is over 100 days old.

The nation has been contacted and we asked him to peace out the war with the WOLF nation.

Ahh.. There is always someone in the crowd who doesn't get the message. Good deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WOLF is making threats towards a member of FOK. I believe that gives FOK a good enough reason to step in and defend the raider. Yeah, the raider made a mistake. WOLF also made a mistake by not seeking diplomatic solutions first. Instead they just jumped on him, which at the time, wasn't a bad thing... until they made the threat.

The other side of this is that an alliance shouldn't need to seek diplomatic recourse to defend itself from a tech raider. They really should be able to jump the raider with everything they have and do with him what they please. I'm all for raiding, but I'm even more for the rights of alliances to destroy threats to their safety.

The demand of diplomacy is nice, but it shouldn't be required. Small alliances really ought to be able to smash tech raiders, if they can.

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...