fant0m Posted May 22, 2009 Report Share Posted May 22, 2009 Any comment? I am not govenment but I am fairly sure that government approval overrides the raiding protocol (in every situation), the fact California are a TPF protectorate is inconsequential. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bzelger Posted May 22, 2009 Report Share Posted May 22, 2009 I am not govenment but I am fairly sure that government approval overrides the raiding protocol (in every situation), the fact California are a TPF protectorate is inconsequential. They are also an alliance larger than 15 members, regardless of the protectorate. Is it common to override your rules when you find an especially juicy target? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ditchboy00 Posted May 22, 2009 Report Share Posted May 22, 2009 its called going to war with your protector, and in this war if you fought for 3-4 days small alliances are guaranteed white peace. oh really now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fant0m Posted May 22, 2009 Report Share Posted May 22, 2009 What do you expected from PC? Do you think that they are in Karma side because share the high moral principles of STA, MK, Grämlins and etc? Or just for convenience? We are "in Karma" because one of our allies asked us to join the fight, the same reason virtually everyone is fighting this war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nadabethyname Posted May 22, 2009 Report Share Posted May 22, 2009 why have raiding rules if you're gonna override them? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fant0m Posted May 22, 2009 Report Share Posted May 22, 2009 They are also an alliance larger than 15 members, regardless of the protectorate. Is it common to override your rules when you find an especially juicy target? Those rules are designed for grunts like myself, we have hit 15+ member alliances before and I dare say we may one day hit another. Just because California are a TPF protectorate everyone is suddenly jumping up claiming this is some sort of conspiracy/fake raid designed to destroy a TPF protectorate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Electron Sponge Posted May 22, 2009 Report Share Posted May 22, 2009 Whole lot of bawwing itt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ditchboy00 Posted May 22, 2009 Report Share Posted May 22, 2009 Those rules are designed for grunts like myself, we have hit 15+ member alliances before and I dare say we may one day hit another. Just because California are a TPF protectorate everyone is suddenly jumping up claiming this is some sort of conspiracy/fake raid designed to destroy a TPF protectorate. isnt it in your charter that "when in doubt you can always ask around" who did you ask to see if they are still protected? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fort Pitt Posted May 22, 2009 Report Share Posted May 22, 2009 Fact check!Yes, I can see now that you are clearly unbiased. i love you Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilkenny Posted May 22, 2009 Report Share Posted May 22, 2009 I am not govenment but I am fairly sure that government approval overrides the raiding protocol (in every situation), the fact California are a TPF protectorate is inconsequential. So it is a PC Government sponsered and approved raid then. nice to know Hey D34th!!!! haven't seen you around in a while. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoshuaR Posted May 22, 2009 Report Share Posted May 22, 2009 (edited) I am unsure why some alliances I hold in high esteem connect themselves to PC. Edited May 22, 2009 by JoshuaR Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merrie Melodies Posted May 22, 2009 Report Share Posted May 22, 2009 Raiding none is one thing, raiding alliances is entirely another sad and pathetic thing. Personally cannot wait for the day PC gets its own version of KARMA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merrie Melodies Posted May 22, 2009 Report Share Posted May 22, 2009 I don't know about anyone else in PC but California being a TPF protectorate means nothing to me. A raid is a raid. Does PC regularly raid 3 v 1 ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D34th Posted May 22, 2009 Report Share Posted May 22, 2009 Hey D34th!!!! haven't seen you around in a while. Hello Kilkenny! I'm always around. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilkenny Posted May 22, 2009 Report Share Posted May 22, 2009 Hello Kilkenny! I'm always around. Yes, but I haven't seen you...must be that camo your wearing or something. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thom98 Posted May 22, 2009 Report Share Posted May 22, 2009 Now with all of this talk of it's just pc doing a alliance "tech raid" now dark templar has joined in on the tech raid, I guess it's just a tech raid and not a war if you don't DoW them? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archon Posted May 22, 2009 Report Share Posted May 22, 2009 (edited) So since they decided not to join in the war...You attack them anyway? That makes sense. Kinda like canceling your NPO treaty but then defending the alliance anyway? Sorry, I couldn't resist. I'm actually staying out of this argument, so...toodles. Edit: 'your' is directed at TPF, not at IAA, of course. It was a general comment, not meant to be directed at Chim specifically. Edited May 22, 2009 by TheNeverender Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Syrik Posted May 22, 2009 Report Share Posted May 22, 2009 Alright given the PC tech raiding rules in regards to alliances greater than 15, or are protectorates. Can we presume in accordance to your own rules full reps will be paid in addition to the revocation of raiding of the offending members for 30 days? Or is that little thing thrown out just because it's TPF's protectorate? I don't know about anyone else in PC but California being a TPF protectorate means nothing to me. A raid is a raid. http://poisonclan.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=1047 Your information errs slightly from reality, mhawk. Yes, they are an alliance greater than 15 members. No, they do not have an active protectorate agreement. We're simply waiting on California to accept the peace offers that were sent to them to wrap this up. As TPF currently has no formal connections with California, we'd appreciate it if you would allow them to represent themselves in this matter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mhawk Posted May 22, 2009 Report Share Posted May 22, 2009 (edited) http://poisonclan.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=1047Your information errs slightly from reality, mhawk. Yes, they are an alliance greater than 15 members. No, they do not have an active protectorate agreement. We're simply waiting on California to accept the peace offers that were sent to them to wrap this up. As TPF currently has no formal connections with California, we'd appreciate it if you would allow them to represent themselves in this matter. You are lying, they are a protectorate and have been sending you messages as such. For example. [04:21] <mushi> I have been instructed by my alliance, which is a protectorate of TPF (as stated in my profile), as well as a TPF representative, to neither accept your peace offer nor retaliate. [04:21] <mushi> You have conducted a raid upon a protected alliance with a membership of over 15 nations. You are in violation of the Poison Clan Raid Rules, link provided below. [04:21] <mushi> http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Poison_...Clan_Raid_Rules [04:21] <mushi> TPF and California leadership will be in contact with the Poison Clan leadership shortly, if not already. Hopefully, this conflict will be resolved peacefully. Basically you are saying they are not a protectorate because PC says they are not? We say they are, they have been listed on our wiki forever, they say they are and have been in contact with me. Edited May 22, 2009 by mhawk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
der_ko Posted May 22, 2009 Report Share Posted May 22, 2009 The decent thing to do is for TPF to drop all their protectorates since they are just giving the protectorate a false sense of security given TPFs complete inability to enforce said treaty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SyndicatedINC Posted May 22, 2009 Report Share Posted May 22, 2009 So aimed at taunting TPF or not PC is raiding an alliance that minds its own business, is well over a year old, is neutral in the current conflict (despite having treaty that would have allowed them to attack PC), and has 18 members. They do this even filling up 3 defensive slots on some of them, and avoid the more powerful ones. Gee it seems that we have been granted a glimpse as to the inner workings of Poison Clan Headquarters: You should be ashamed of yourselves. Then again you don't seem to be much into upholding your word of honour in treaties, so why would one expect that you would actually show some class or courage on the battlefield? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thom98 Posted May 22, 2009 Report Share Posted May 22, 2009 When does a raid become a war? There are now 3 alliances involved on this attack, it seems to be much more than an alliance tech raid, 24 current battles seems a bit large for tech raid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fant0m Posted May 22, 2009 Report Share Posted May 22, 2009 (edited) You should be ashamed of yourselves. Then again you don't seem to be much into upholding your word of honour in treaties, so why would one expect that you would actually show some class or courage on the battlefield? Name me one time PC has not honoured a treaty, we would burn in hell for any of our allies. I of course know you mean the TPF NAP which TPF themselves designed so that they could try and keep PC at bay while making the treaty vague enough so that they could attack us at the drop of a hat. But guess what, we beat them to it. Edited May 22, 2009 by fant0m Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thom98 Posted May 22, 2009 Report Share Posted May 22, 2009 The decent thing to do is for TPF to drop all their protectorates since they are just giving the protectorate a false sense of security given TPFs complete inability to enforce said treaty. Decent? Would be someone from karma to intervene on the behalf of a neutral alliance doing it's best to stay out of the conflict. Then again that would take someone to stand for doing what's right against someone who is doing something wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khalai Protoss Posted May 22, 2009 Report Share Posted May 22, 2009 Let's not pin the actions of PC, just or unjust, on Karma as a whole. 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.