Lennox Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 Just now this was realized? A fitting decision nonetheless. Good luck to to both. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
empirica Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 I'm sure this was a difficult choice. Good luck to both alliances in the future. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Electron Sponge Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 Well it's a good thing this difficult decision making process didn't end up with you making the decision to honor the treaty. Foregone conclusion for the win. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ejayrazz Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 Official Announcement from The Order of the Paradox Treaty Cancellation Of all TOP's mutual-defense treaties, the MDoAP we hold with the New Pacific Order is the oldest. We and Pacifica have been through much together, good and bad, in the two and a half years since the treaty was signed. Unfortunately, events have shaken our faith in the validity of the friendship between our two alliances; actions on the part of Pacifica have convinced us that they view us not as friends, but rather merely as a strategic asset, and we do not wish to continue such a relationship. The Order of the Paradox hereby cancels the MDoAP in existence between we and the New Pacific Order. This was not an easy decision; it was reached after weeks of discussion on the issue. Ultimately, we determined that cancellation of the treaty was the most fitting course of action in this situation. We wish Pacifica all the best, and we hope that the relationship between us will see repair in the future. Signed, Crymson, Grandmaster Dr. Dan, Grand Hospitaller SomeGuy, Grand Chancellor "but rather merely as a strategic asset, " NO WAY Good to see TOP, I love you guys. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivan V Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 Well, it seemed like a hard decision, but it was expected. Good luck to our friends in TOP. o/ Paradoxia Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Epik High Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 So it goes. A decision had to be made, one way or another, with negative consequences on both sides. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buller Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 Just now this was realized? A fitting decision nonetheless. Good luck to to both. heh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChairmanHal Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 There is no way you were that far out of the loop, I'm sorry. I know that TOP teetered between neutrality and joining the coalition and that the talks with them were rather extensive and at times frustrating. I was rather surprised that you landed them, actually. But then landing Citadel (or as much of it as possible) was key to the operation, wasn't it? At some point I look forward to some genuine war post recounting of how the whole thing came together--assuming people are finally willing to be honest. The details prior to my departure I'm confident in, at least those shared in #sfdelegation. The bit about getting MK on board later on I was not there for and it should be a good read. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monster Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 This was a hard decision to make but you did the right thing. I love TOP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bkphysics Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 I am out of the loop because I just assumed this was already done and buried during the initial flurry of announcements. Onward to better things! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Petrovich4 Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 GL to my friends in TOP and may TOP as an alliance forever move at TOP speed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avernite Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 A pity indeed, although effectively the treaty was never used as other treaties surpassed it (WUT, Möbius). It appears the non-treaty treaty is now truly not a treaty anymore. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janax Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 Much TOP on what was a hard decision. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chickenzilla Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 (edited) I know that TOP teetered between neutrality and joining the coalition and that the talks with them were rather extensive and at times frustrating. I was rather surprised that you landed them, actually. But then landing Citadel (or as much of it as possible) was key to the operation, wasn't it?At some point I look forward to some genuine war post recounting of how the whole thing came together--assuming people are finally willing to be honest. The details prior to my departure I'm confident in, at least those shared in #sfdelegation. The bit about getting MK on board later on I was not there for and it should be a good read. Nah, you give Karma too much credit. It was obviously the GGA that brought Karma together to free them from the NPO Edited May 21, 2009 by Chickenzilla Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khyber Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 (edited) Wouldn't a smart alliance such as TOP know when they're being played? Why'd it take you this long and why did you just cancel on the NPO when it seemed most convenient? Did you now just realize the NPO was using you as a "strategic" ally? Just curious since the NPO is your oldest ally and you did leave a door open to re-establish relations just in case NPO becomes no. 1 again.Heh, I don't know I just don't see it. Aut, good to see you here. As to your questions, I'm no goverment official but I'll give you my view. Wouldn't a smart alliance such as TOP know when they're being played? Yes, and we canceled. Why'd it take you this long and why did you just cancel on the NPO when it seemed most convenient? While there were events before this point that somewhat angered us, it was enough to discount the years of friendship we had. Our long history of wars that were hard fought and won. It takes more then one action to make friends part ways. The recent actions though proved to be the last act that I felt I could take from them. The timing is not as important, as the act itself. If they attacked any one of our allies, or their allies while we were trying to mediate a peaceful settlement, even if the odds were with them, we would have canceled it. Did you now just realize the NPO was using you as a "strategic" ally? As stated there were other events that hinted, but friendship allows you to overlook slights, but now was when it was made clear that they held no respect for us as allies, when we in the past have pulled back from situations far worse out of respect for them. And to be honest, I really believe it was respect. I know this is not a question: Just curious since the NPO is your oldest ally and you did leave a door open to re-establish relations just in case NPO becomes no. 1 again. But I wish to comment to it anyways. The treaty was done the second they fired their first shot, even if they got peace the followeing day. It was a matter of principle for us. While I hope that we can re establish things with some ex Heg alliances, one in particular for me in IRON, I have no wish to see a treaty with the NPO for a very long time, and only after they have shown that they have changed. This is not a war over the injusticies of the NPO for me, I find many alliance guilty of them too. This is about respect between allies and friends. I do with them luck though, and hope the old glory of the NPO can be restored, it made the game a lot of fun during the early days. Edited May 21, 2009 by Khyber Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The AUT Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 But I wish to comment to it anyways. The treaty was done the second they fired their first shot, even if they got peace the followeing day. It was a matter of principle for us. OV was linked to iFOK and therefor FOK our close allies. While I hope that we can re establish things with soem Heg, one in particular for me in IRON, I have no wish to see a treaty with the NPO for a very long time, and only after they have shown that they have changed. This is not a war over the injusticies of the NPO for me, I find many alliance guilty of them too. This is about respect between allies and friends. Yes but isn't that a bit petty? I mean we're all tied via the web. To use that OV who is linked to iFOK who is linked to FOK as an excuse be rather ambiguous? I mean, that's a bit weak in terms of justification in my opinion. As for IRON, I know you'd like to bring them over to your side of things, will be interesting to see how IRON reacts. (Sorry for going off topic). Thanks for adressing my other points though. I fully trust what you say is true Khyber so I'll just leave it at that and move on from here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archon Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 I know that TOP teetered between neutrality and joining the coalition and that the talks with them were rather extensive and at times frustrating. I was rather surprised that you landed them, actually. But then landing Citadel (or as much of it as possible) was key to the operation, wasn't it?At some point I look forward to some genuine war post recounting of how the whole thing came together--assuming people are finally willing to be honest. The details prior to my departure I'm confident in, at least those shared in #sfdelegation. The bit about getting MK on board later on I was not there for and it should be a good read. Just like how I one day have to share the story of the formation of Aegis. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Litler Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 I really didn't expect TOP to be so... fake. Just canceling would have been enough as no explanation for why is really owed nor would one really be needed. You didn't need to make up an excuse. And such a generic one, at that! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crymson Posted May 21, 2009 Author Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 (edited) But I wish to comment to it anyways. The treaty was done the second they fired their first shot, even if they got peace the followeing day. It was a matter of principle for us. OV was linked to iFOK and therefor FOK our close allies. While I hope that we can re establish things with soem Heg, one in particular for me in IRON, I have no wish to see a treaty with the NPO for a very long time, and only after they have shown that they have changed. This is not a war over the injusticies of the NPO for me, I find many alliance guilty of them too. This is about respect between allies and friends. While I dislike the need to contradict a fellow alliance member in public, I feel it necessary to note that the bolded portion above is incorrect. Edited May 21, 2009 by Crymson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KagetheSecond Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 This really isn't surprising. Good luck to all involved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The AUT Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 While I dislike the need to contradict a fellow alliance member in public, I feel it necessary to note that the bolded portion above is incorrect. Alright, that'd adress the only point I wanted answered. So I'll go ahead and say I had all my questions answered. Wow, this was productive. I'm not sure if I'm in the OWF or not! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Savage Man Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 I really didn't expect TOP to be so... fake.Just canceling would have been enough as no explanation for why is really owed nor would one really be needed. You didn't need to make up an excuse. And such a generic one, at that! Are you serious? This is the first honest treaty cancellation I've seen in a while. Most of them are like WELL LIKE WE ARE BFFS BUT LIKE WE HAVE GONE OUR SEPARATE WAYS LOL WE STILL <3 THEM LOL. TOP, having realized how NPO views them, have canceled their treaty in a respectful yet truthful manner. This is the best explanation I've seen in a long time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jer Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 At some point I look forward to some genuine war post recounting of how the whole thing came together--assuming people are finally willing to be honest. The details prior to my departure I'm confident in, at least those shared in #sfdelegation. The bit about getting MK on board later on I was not there for and it should be a good read. obligatory hal hints at log dump Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Litler Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 (edited) Are you serious? This is the first honest treaty cancellation I've seen in a while.Most of them are like WELL LIKE WE ARE BFFS BUT LIKE WE HAVE GONE OUR SEPARATE WAYS LOL WE STILL <3 THEM LOL. TOP, having realized how NPO views them, have canceled their treaty in a respectful yet truthful manner. This is the best explanation I've seen in a long time. I still find it hard to believe that they are just finding out that the NPO has used them as a "strategic asset". It was pretty obvious from the beginning and it was clear that they didn't care because it was a mutually beneficial relationship. Edit: don't mistake honesty with two parties apparently parting ways on bad terms. TOP must have skewed the truth at least to some degree here. Edited May 21, 2009 by Tom Litler Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rabonnobar Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 Very very sad to see, I know from my short time in TOP that they really were close to NPO (particularly that sekrit NPO agent, Saber ) for a long whiles. Best of luck to both (former) signatories. 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.