bigwoody Posted May 23, 2009 Report Share Posted May 23, 2009 That's not the point he was making bigwoody, and I strongly suspect you know it.The point is that using the war screen to "prove" that one party hasn't offered peace is quite frankly stupid. Since it takes both parties offering peace for "Peace Declared" to show up on their alliance war screen and all I don't doubt PC did offer peace. They were raiding after all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ditchboy00 Posted May 23, 2009 Report Share Posted May 23, 2009 I do believe I just stated that no one can guarantee 100% safety. NPO proved that. What one Can guarantee is that you will be there for those you sign treaties with no matter what. That does not include "opting out" of an optional defensive treaty. Someone earlier said something about California being too big to sell tech to TPF. I dont think I ever said anything just about tech. In fact I used the word dongs. That would mean I was insinuating that California was meant to send cash to TPF after the war for rebuilding. Perhaps the knowledge of such keeps TPF fighting hard knowing that their web of protectorates will protect them afterwards with growth cash. If PC would want to end this war then they would have to end that TPF belief that no matter what damage they take they will have plenty of backing afterwards to rebuild with. Now maybe PC should have declared war but what would the CB be? Perhaps folks dont like that they raided during the war but the relationship between Protector and Raiders is one of power. If the protector(s) have no power to stop the raider(s) then the protectors have failed. Yes, the reason for this failure is the massive war but if everyone else is taking massive damage I do not see why micro alliances should not prepare to defend themselves as their protectors cannot protect them. If California came to the aid of TPF their slots would already be taken up and there would be no raids. In fact it would probably be the same players filling those slots. The moral here is, either way during a Great War the hostilities are going to spread. Its just the way the dominoes go down. When all an alliance has left is to declare the attackers as dishonorable then its time to say we cannot maintain our previous policies. Yes you did say no one can guarantee 100% safety, so again I ask what more could TPF have done? No, because its not about protecting them its about all the tech that they were easily able to buy from them during the days of the Q hegemony. HMM??? Nothing about Dongs from where I got this. BTW I am not saying this is a war. Its a tech raid on an entire alliance being protected by an alliance unable to protect them at this moment. PC wouldnt have touched California a month ago though. Also I think other people have already explained to you how California was neutral in this, so I wont even try with that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fant0m Posted May 23, 2009 Report Share Posted May 23, 2009 Oh wow, one of my Califonia raids has accepted mine and the other 2 attacking nations peace offers. But surely this is some kind of extension to our conspiracy to destroy California, it couldn't possibly be that this really was a tech raid......surely not. Maybe we assassinated "VenetianBlind" and couped the govenment of "Sex Possy" in order to declare peace with the attacking PC nations to make it look like this was a tech raid when really it's an attempt to destroy a TPF protectorate. http://www.cybernations.net/search_wars.as...&Extended=1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haflinger Posted May 23, 2009 Report Share Posted May 23, 2009 3) Some post in this thread said something about us being hypocritical because of the Bus Doctrine. Nope, Bus Doctrine specifically says that we won't tolerate the use of cruise missiles, aircraft, navy, or nukes in raids. We haven't broken that. So is the Bus Doctrine OK with raiding protectorates on Pink now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoshuaR Posted May 23, 2009 Report Share Posted May 23, 2009 HeinousOne, if your argument is that TPF signed too many treaties to defend all partners, know that they'd be in the same situation if they had signed only with NPO and California... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Velocity111 Posted May 23, 2009 Report Share Posted May 23, 2009 So is the Bus Doctrine OK with raiding protectorates on Pink now? IIRC, the Bus Doctrine is about the Pink Sphere as a whole, not about our protectorates. Our protectorates are a separate matter entirely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Otherworld Posted May 23, 2009 Report Share Posted May 23, 2009 People aren't saying it isn't a tech raid. Well..I hope not. It's just that you are doing it to spite TPF...kick them while they're down so to speak. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeinousOne Posted May 23, 2009 Report Share Posted May 23, 2009 Yes you did say no one can guarantee 100% safety, so again I ask what more could TPF have done? HMM??? Nothing about Dongs from where I got this. BTW I am not saying this is a war. Its a tech raid on an entire alliance being protected by an alliance unable to protect them at this moment. PC wouldnt have touched California a month ago though. Also I think other people have already explained to you how California was neutral in this, so I wont even try with that. It is not that I state that TPF could do more but instead that they should have done less. Of course hindsight is 20/20 but it is evident now that such massive protectorate webs can indeed become impossible to defend when hard pressed. That is not the problem of the raiding alliance as they are just doing what they do. Of course PC wouldn't have touched California a month ago. Then again a month ago PC was not at war with an enemy. During that war some of PC's members are not able to acquire targets due to Peace Mode. Thus they find new targets. Why not find targets that actually affect the alliance they are at war with? Two birds with one stone. It matters not if California is neutral now. They will not be neutral later in their gifting of aid to TPF. That affects TPF's actions in the present day, thus California is truly not neutral due to being TPF's protectorate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merrie Melodies Posted May 23, 2009 Report Share Posted May 23, 2009 (edited) 4) @Merrie Moodles, if the required persons approved a raid on your alliance, then yes, we would be allowed to raid your alliance. However, there are two problems with that. 1) The required persons would not approve said raid because your alliance actually has functioning treaties. 2) Why would we raid an alliance if we didn't think that it would be profitable? (Granted, I have raided nuclear nations and been nuked in raids, so that wasn't profitable. It might not have been the best decision on my part, but whatever, a game is a game) Thanks for clarifying. /me makes note to make sure PC never gets stronger than NSO lest we get raided. Edited May 23, 2009 by Merrie Melodies Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Velocity111 Posted May 23, 2009 Report Share Posted May 23, 2009 (edited) People aren't saying it isn't a tech raid. Well..I hope not.It's just that you are doing it to spite TPF...kick them while they're down so to speak. Actually, there are people who are saying that it isn't a tech raid. Are we doing it to spite TPF? Tbh, the amount of land, tech, and money that one could gain from raiding California takes a much higher priority over anything TPF-related for must of us. Whether or not TPF would be spited by our actions (although I assume many of us were probably aware that they would be spiteful) had little to do with the decision to raid. If anything, TPF's role in our raiding them was that they became too weak to be a protector. Thanks for clarifying./me makes note to make sure PC never gets stronger than NSO lest we get raided. Also make sure that you don't drop all your treaties while PC is stronger than you Edited May 23, 2009 by Velocity111 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newhotness Posted May 23, 2009 Report Share Posted May 23, 2009 Heres the thing, TPF COULD defend their protectorate if they wanted to. THey can bring all those nations out of peace and fight PC with an even stronger force than they are right now. Why they havent is beyond me. It may be like bigwoody said and they are negotiating reps. Or its just that TPF doesnt want to put the infra of their big nations on the line to defend one of their protectorates Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mhawk Posted May 23, 2009 Report Share Posted May 23, 2009 Oh wow, one of my Califonia raids has accepted mine and the other 2 attacking nations peace offers. But surely this is some kind of extension to our conspiracy to destroy California, it couldn't possibly be that this really was a tech raid......surely not.Maybe we assassinated "VenetianBlind" and couped the govenment of "Sex Possy" in order to declare peace with the attacking PC nations to make it look like this was a tech raid when really it's an attempt to destroy a TPF protectorate. http://www.cybernations.net/search_wars.as...&Extended=1 The idea is per our protectorate and thus your own rules we're requesting the full reps be paid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desperado Posted May 23, 2009 Report Share Posted May 23, 2009 (edited) If we were attacking California for anything other than a tech raid, we probably would've done more than sent 2 ground attacks and then sent peace. No cruise missiles, air attacks, or naval attacks (or nuclear strikes) were used. As far as I'm concerned, we've done nothing more than raid them. Are we discriminating by raiding California? I got out of anarchy 4 days ago. Since then, I've done 30 ground attacks in raids. Only the last few were from California. Honestly, I could care less about California's connection to TPF. They had tech and land, they were unprotected (according to their bios, or, if their bios were lying, then they were unprotected in that TPF couldn't protect them), so I raided. I have sent peace, and if they choose not to accept peace (apparently TPF messaged them telling them not to attack back or accept peace), then that is their choice. They changed the bios AFTER you sent taunting PM's and raided them. Also, great job blackhorse and DT for trying to bandwagon. Heres the thing, TPF COULD defend their protectorate if they wanted to. THey can bring all those nations out of peace and fight PC with an even stronger force than they are right now. Why they havent is beyond me. It may be like bigwoody said and they are negotiating reps. Or its just that TPF doesnt want to put the infra of their big nations on the line to defend one of their protectorates I didn't see NPO getting peace yet, so you should already know the answer. Edited May 23, 2009 by Desperado Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mhawk Posted May 23, 2009 Report Share Posted May 23, 2009 Heres the thing, TPF COULD defend their protectorate if they wanted to. THey can bring all those nations out of peace and fight PC with an even stronger force than they are right now. Why they havent is beyond me. It may be like bigwoody said and they are negotiating reps. Or its just that TPF doesnt want to put the infra of their big nations on the line to defend one of their protectorates This is a bunch of trash. If all the other alliances want to peace out with us and we take this PC vs TPF we'd more than be able to protect. The odds are however due to pc raiding anything that moves, if some guys were to come out for the 3rd or 4th time they would be hit by MK or NV whom are fighting hard and honorably quite effectively against us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haflinger Posted May 23, 2009 Report Share Posted May 23, 2009 IIRC, the Bus Doctrine is about the Pink Sphere as a whole, not about our protectorates. Our protectorates are a separate matter entirely. IIRC, the Bus Doctrine is about people who are raiding Pink Sphere abiding by the same rules that you guys do on your own raids. Since you guys are fine with raiding other people's protectorates, obviously the Bus Doctrine allows other people to raid protectorates, as long as they're on Pink. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heracles the Great Posted May 23, 2009 Report Share Posted May 23, 2009 I read all 15 pages, and maybe I missed it, but I'm shocked I haven't seen anyone quote the infamous line from NPO... "Do something about it..." Anyways - as I understand it, PC can raid any alliance under 15-members without question, and can raid any alliance over 15-members with permission from Twisted or CTB. Therefore all the bawwwing in the world doesn't change much. Was it opportunistic? Probably - But so is raiding the red sphere like hundreds of people have been doing. Rather then actually protect their protectorate, TPF is on here trying to use it as a PR stunt - bravo TPF... I'm sure California is glad they chose you right about now... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janax Posted May 23, 2009 Report Share Posted May 23, 2009 and PC will protect their PROTECTorates. Just like TPF is welcome to do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeinousOne Posted May 23, 2009 Report Share Posted May 23, 2009 This is a bunch of trash. If all the other alliances want to peace out with us and we take this PC vs TPF we'd more than be able to protect. The odds are however due to pc raiding anything that moves, if some guys were to come out for the 3rd or 4th time they would be hit by MK or NV whom are fighting hard and honorably quite effectively against us. What if some of your protectorates actually helped you? I mean, if PC is able to attack them then they could have attacked PC, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Velocity111 Posted May 23, 2009 Report Share Posted May 23, 2009 (edited) They changed the bios AFTER you sent taunting PM's and raided them. Also, great job blackhorse and DT for trying to bandwagon. Changed their bios... to what? Do you mean the "We were a protectorate of TPF" thing? No, that's been there for a while. Why would we send them taunting PM's before raiding them? (which would alert them to the possibility of being raided). Or do you mean we sent them taunting PM's after we raided them? I would like to know exactly what PM's you are talking about, in that case. The bios I am talking about are these bios: These screenshots were taken before I raided. These are also the exact bios I am talking about. So, I would like to know, wtf are you talking about? What did they change their bios to, and why do you assume I was referring to them? IIRC, the Bus Doctrine is about people who are raiding Pink Sphere abiding by the same rules that you guys do on your own raids. Since you guys are fine with raiding other people's protectorates, obviously the Bus Doctrine allows other people to raid protectorates, as long as they're on Pink. IIRC, this: The Bus DoctrinePreamble: In the interests of the growth and prosperity of the Pink Team, the undersigned alliances hereby enter into the protection of the Pink Team. Article I: Pink Court and Protection Requests Hence forth unaligned nations residing on the Pink Team shall be under the protection the signatories of this document, should they come under attack and request protection through the pink court. Specifically, once an unaligned pink nation has come under attack, they are encouraged to bring their case to the Pink Court (located at the PWN forums). They shall state their case, and should the members of PWN deem their cause worthy of protection, shall undertake diplomatic procedures and negotiations to procure peace for that nation. Section 1- The Use of Military Stipulation i - In particular, the signatories of PWN will be looking at instances of excessive force and extortion during tech raids against pink nations. In this situation, the signatories reserve the right to militaristic response. Stipulation ii - Further, the signatories will also negotiate peace for nations under attack for reasons other than tech raiding, should they be deemed worthy. These negotiations shall not be backed by military action. Article II: Protection Stipulations Pink nations will not be given protection automatically. Only after they have requested protection and have gone through the proper procedures laid out in the Pink Court will they be granted "protected" status. Read the doctrine, and tell me... if you really do recall correctly. Edited May 23, 2009 by Velocity111 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newhotness Posted May 23, 2009 Report Share Posted May 23, 2009 (edited) I didn't see NPO getting peace yet, so you should already know the answer. Lol. You didnt read what i said at all did you? I honestly dont know how to respond to what you said because it was so off topic. What point were you trying to make? I didnt say anything about TPF getting peace if thats what you mean. I said bring nations out of peacemode to attack more PC nations This is a bunch of trash. If all the other alliances want to peace out with us and we take this PC vs TPF we'd more than be able to protect. The odds are however due to pc raiding anything that moves, if some guys were to come out for the 3rd or 4th time they would be hit by MK or NV whom are fighting hard and honorably quite effectively against us. What im getting from this is that you dont want to defend your protectorate because you dont want to get attacked... Edited May 23, 2009 by Newhotness Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Litler Posted May 23, 2009 Report Share Posted May 23, 2009 If I were one of the larger California nations I'd nuke my raiders. My nation would be destined to burn but at least my attackers wouldn't gain anything and probably lose a lot more than I'd have to lose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JBone Posted May 23, 2009 Report Share Posted May 23, 2009 Try reading our raid rules before you comment?Our raid rules don't say we can't raid alliances over 15 members. They simply state that if the alliances is over 15 members we need the approval of The Toad (CTB) or The Master Killer (Twisted) first. Hi Banslam.....just out of curiosity which one of those two actually gave the go ahead for this raid? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iAlan Posted May 23, 2009 Report Share Posted May 23, 2009 Hai guys. I'm here to answer questions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desperado Posted May 23, 2009 Report Share Posted May 23, 2009 (edited) Changed their bios... to what?Do you mean the "We were a protectorate of TPF" thing? No, that's been there for a while. Why would we send them taunting PM's before raiding them? (which would alert them to the possibility of being raided). Or do you mean we sent them taunting PM's after we raided them? I would like to know exactly what PM's you are talking about, in that case. The bios I am talking about are these bios: These screenshots were taken before I raided. These are also the exact bios I am talking about. So, I would like to know, wtf are you talking about? What did they change their bios to, and why do you assume I was referring to them? I do not see any timestamps...thus, these shots prove nothing.(OOC?) Edited May 23, 2009 by Desperado Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astronaut jones Posted May 23, 2009 Report Share Posted May 23, 2009 People aren't saying it isn't a tech raid. Well..I hope not.It's just that you are doing it to spite TPF...kick them while they're down so to speak. You blame them? Not trolling, not even trying to, but would you really blame them, knowing the history between PC and TPF? I got friends with money, and I got money too, so we put it together and let you pick what to do. AND THEN WE DO DAT. 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.