An Announcement from the Orange Defense Network

[Hymenbreach]

That's a filthy filthy lie. You ask Imperial like every other week.

I just want to get in his harem, hush now.

[King William IV]

Now you're putting words in my mouth, Will. I did not ask Legion to ignore treaties. I did ask them to join a bloc with a superiority clause. My goal wasn't strictly to fight with Karma, it was to fight against the NPO without getting mixed in what I could tell even then would be a cluster!@#$ of a coalition opposing them. I believe I pitched it as an "independent bloc". I truly meant it to be that. The bloc fell through, and I continued to oppose NPO, which resulted in us fighting with Karma.

I am in essence not going through the bloc part of history, but going right to just before the Karma war. I was for the bloc idea, but we didn't agree on members. If we had that independent bloc regardless, Legion wouldn't have fought against NPO still. We would have remained neutral if all else happened. I do not try to put words in your mouth good sir

[Haflinger]

Ah, it seems I was wrong earlier, looks like the real story is getting out after all.

Hmmm. Or at least some parts of it.

[Lincongrad]

Yes, because asking them to stick with their oldest allies is a terrible and morally wrong thing to do.

This sarcasm would be quite clever if not for the OP. Like I said, it was an issue of give and take. We asked you to support us against Vanguard. We didn't cancel on you then.

Disclaimer: I have no current problem with Vanguard.

[King William IV]

Trolling your allies, un cool bro.

Yes, because asking them to stick with their oldest allies is a terrible and morally wrong thing to do. We found that the Legion treaty is no longer suitable to our needs. And our future FA direction, no more sitting on the fence.

Point 2. we had no real reason to go to war with NPO. We also hit FEAR and NATO because they hit our allies, and we followed through on our commitments.

Please keep your 7 day old opinions to yourself. If you knew what happened pre war while you were in FCC, then MAYBE I would give you a free pass. You were not in ODN for their war with FEAR and NATO, whom both happen to have been allies of your own allies. We actually asked you way before you asked us if you would just put orrple above all and say tough to everyone else, and your response was, "we will get back to you". So yes, us asking you was terribly wrong wasn't it. Again Arsenal had nothing to do with this, but please refrain from being the new now know not in this thread.

I am done with this thread as of now.

Edited July 14, 2009 by King William IV

[Will Smith]

Point 2. we had no real reason to go to war with NPO. We also hit FEAR and NATO because they hit our allies, and we followed through on our commitments to alliances on the winning side.

fixed.

[SpoiL]

Im not surprised you find the idea of sticking with a treaty partner to the potential determent of your alliance as something you cannot fathom.

Something else that doesnt surprise me, they were only your oldest friends. Tell me something, If you hated the NPO so much you discarded your oldest friends then why did you attack FEAR and NATO instead of NPO? I would assume the kind of hatred that causes you to turn your back on your oldest ally to fight against NPO would ensure that you at least got to fight the NPO in "battle".

What a reach..

Surely you see the irony in Legion falling(quite literally) for NPO and Valhalla. Valhalla and NPO. Hats off to Z'ha'Dum

[Style #386]

fixed.

Incorrect.

[HeroicDisaster]

Please keep your 7 day old opinions to yourself. If you knew what happened pre war while you were in FCC, then MAYBE I would give you a free pass. You were not in ODN for their war with FEAR and NATO, whom both happen to have been allies of your own allies. We actually asked you way before you asked us if you would just put orrple above all and say tough to everyone else, and your response was, "we will get back to you". So yes, us asking you was terribly wrong wasn't it. Again Arsenal had nothing to do with this, but please refrain from being the new now know not in this thread.

I am done with this thread as of now.

Yes, you are correct, after serving a few terms in government and other positions. I locked myself into the FCC, I never made contact with any ODN members during my entire stay there.

[gfloyd2002]

With other cancellations recently, it's clear ODN is cleaning up their treaties. And with this one particularly, it seems ODN is working hard - even sacrificing a classic bond - to get a consistent, unified foreign policy. Regardless of one's feelings towards the history of the treaty or the merits of Legion, it looks to me like more proof of the burial of "Optional Defense Network" and the forging of a treaty web less likely to create future treaty conflicts for ODN. A move telling of character, imho.

Congratulations to ODN for their efforts, and best of luck to both parties going forward.

[Alterego]

Yes, because asking them to stick with their oldest allies is a terrible and morally wrong thing to do. We found that the Legion treaty is no longer suitable to our needs. And our future FA direction, no more sitting on the fence.

This is why you can abandon allies at the drop of a hat. Signing treaties for the shallow reason of it fulfilling your needs is what is wrong in ODN. When you put an ally before your own welfare, that means entering a war you will probably lose then you will get the respect you seem to want this week.

[SpoiL]

This is why you can abandon allies at the drop of a hat. Signing treaties for the shallow reason of it fulfilling your needs is what is wrong in ODN. When you put an ally before your own welfare, that means entering a war you will probably lose then you will get the respect you seem to want this week.

You're so right...ODN shoulda stopped after they found out that this Karma thing was likely to win, taken back their statement of support for their allies, and joined the losing side!

Check your timeline of events before giving into this 'joining the winning side' idiocy.

Edited July 14, 2009 by SpoiL

[Style #386]

This is why you can abandon allies at the drop of a hat. Signing treaties for the shallow reason of it fulfilling your needs is what is wrong in ODN. When you put an ally before your own welfare, that means entering a war you will probably lose then you will get the respect you seem to want this week.

Heroic Disaster does not speak for the ODN.

We don't sign treaties to "fulfill our needs". Speaking on behalf of myself, I would want a treaty with someone who I can honestly reply "yes" to with the following questions:

Would I defend them unconditionally in game and on the BBs?

Would I go to ZI for them?

Do I feel that they would do the same for me?

We weren't close enough to Legion that I could say that any more. That was, in part, my personal motivation.

If we lose a war, so be it. I couldn't care less. These cancellations have nothing to do with us trying to earn your respect, or that of anybody else. If you don't like my announcements, don't read them.

[Yawoo]

About time, ODN.

[shilo]

The amount of drama involved, compared to the other cancellations where both parties said "k, bye, nice having known you" says more about the treaty than anything else.

If no one were to care about it, no one would get emotional about it, no one would have said more than the OP included.

I am rather confident quite many ODNers still think very special of Legion, I hope/believe it is the other way around as well.

[HeroicDisaster]

My words were terribly chosen, my bad.

Edited July 14, 2009 by HeroicDisaster

[Tom Litler]

Does anyone find the ODN's rhetoric concerning the Legion's transformation into Pacifican/Valhallan sock puppets ironic given that they enabled purplegate as well as the curbstomp preceding it?

Try again, please. Actually no, don't. Hopefully, Orange Defense Network, your time will come when the heat around the whole "Hegemony" phenomenon dies down. I know for a fact of some pretty deep grudges you've left festering within Karma by your past "drifts apart", "differences of opinion" and ever-so-convenient "requests to stay out" of wars you'd lose.

If there's one thing ODN can be counted on to do when you ask them, it's stay out of a losing war.

[Style #386]

Does anyone find the ODN's rhetoric concerning the Legion's transformation into Pacifican/Valhallan sock puppets ironic given that they enabled purplegate as well as the curbstomp preceding it?

Try again, please. Actually no, don't. Hopefully, Orange Defense Network, your time will come when the heat around the whole "Hegemony" phenomenon dies down. I know for a fact of some pretty deep grudges you've left festering within Karma by your past "drifts apart", "differences of opinion" and ever-so-convenient "requests to stay out" of wars you'd lose.

If there's one thing ODN can be counted on to do when you ask them, it's stay out of a losing war.

This is my rhetoric. Whatever your opinion of Purplegate, that was somebody else's doing. I see no irony in different people having different points of view.

As for the "deep grudges (we've) left festering within Karma", I guess those remain to be seen. If somebody has a problem us, then they can come out and say it.

[Rafael Nadal]

NPO is currently the pariah of CN. Legion's been there. It's not something I would wish on my worst enemy, much less on an alliance that, since Purplegate, has treated us with mild condescencion but mostly respect. I acknowledge that much of Karma have legitimate grievances with NPO. They will beat NPO down for a long time and keep demanding reps. That's fine, i respect their right to do that. But after the war is over some people will continue to abuse NPO, constantly trying to get a new round of wars or force NPO out of the politics for their own political purposes. After NPO's score is cleared through a long and arduous war or heavy reps, we expect people to leave them alone. Undoubtedly some alliances will continue to try and abuse NPO for their own political or popularity gains. When these jackals of CN try and tear at NPO, Legion will stand in their way, and I hope that when the cycle comes full circle, when Legion is once again hated by all, some will remember that we tried to do the right thing.

More on topic: Arsenal, we initiated talks because we could feel the relationship falling apart. We felt like our periodic attempts at improving our relationship were met with apathy or less than halfway. During the Universalis war you chose to remain neutral even though you acknowledged that we were right, refusing to sanction Universalis for us when we asked. In essence, we felt like we were trying to do most of the work in our relationship and getting very little back except for some wonderful RL Forum posts by bigdaddychacha

I can respect the fact that you don't want to have to make hard choices in FA anymore, and that's fine. I wish you had decided differently, but you're big boys and girls over there and you know what you're doing. My ability to understand where you're coming from will let me walk away from our friendship with only a sense of regret as opposed to anger. Cheers.

You were expecting something that couldn't be done. ODN played neutral in that war because two main combatants, you and ourselves, were both MDoAP'ed to them. There has been several precedents set for that decision. Saying that, we discussed and agreed, iirc, to cancel our treaty with ODN after that war for a) not seeing things our way and b ) not coming in against other purple when they entered (just a more specific facet of not seeing things our way I guess). However, ODN was secondary to our treaty with TOP, and TOP beating us to the cancellation took our focus off ODN, and we just never got back around to canceling the treaty.

ODN sanctioning Universalis would have been a sticky situation because of OUT, in that Uni was orange and we're orange. It's very possible that ODN would have been retaliated against under the OUT ODP. Don't argue the morals of the ODP with me because I'm not a fan of it, personally.

As a side note, had we not accepted peace the night we did, Rok, Echelon, and GGA we're prepared to come in the next update. We knew this, and yet we still agreed to pay reps because we wanted to avoid the messy situation it would put Echelon and Rok in, who, if you recall, were already involved in that other war at the time. So, to whomever said asking your ally to stay out of a conflict doesn't mean just that, then maybe you just need to work on your communication skills. Sometimes I wish we hadn't accepted the peace, just to see how messy the whole thing could have become, but hindsight is 20/20.

Also, not making hard choices in FA any more? ODN used to not make any choices at all, which is why they got into such predicaments. Then, they had to make the hard choice (perhaps easy choice in the past, for those wanting the more troll style word choice) to honor or not honor certain treaties, or just go plain neutral in a conflict. ODN isn't ridding themselves of hard choices, they're just choosing better times to make them than right around war time.

Edited July 14, 2009 by Rafael Nadal

[Tom Litler]

If somebody has a problem us, then they can come out and say it.

This never happens. Not until you're under the boot, at least, and they all become emboldened.

[merlin]

Goodbye, Legion. I wish you the best of luck on your future path.

I am glad that there is some truth in this thread.

A true friend would have said 'No'. But that's ancient history now.

You are probably correct. As you said however, that is ancient history.

I think the hell just froze over again. Twice in two years, who would have thought.

Stay safe ORRPLEers and stay out of each other's gun point on the battlefield.

I want the old Franciscus back. This new one doesn't seem right at all.

[Haflinger]

Saying that, we discussed and agreed, iirc, to cancel our treaty with ODN after that war for a) not seeing things our way and b ) not coming in against other purple when they entered (just a more specific facet of not seeing things our way I guess).

Who in Purple did you want ODN to come in against?

Everyone who attacked Vanguard was an ODN treaty partner.

ODN sanctioning Universalis would have been a sticky situation because of OUT, in that Uni was orange and we're orange. It's very possible that ODN would have been retaliated against under the OUT ODP.

Not just because of OUT. This would have been a very interesting move, and speaking for myself at least I'm glad ODN didn't agree to that request.

As a side note, had we not accepted peace the night we did, Rok, Echelon, and GGA we're prepared to come in the next update. We knew this, and yet we still agreed to pay reps because we wanted to avoid the messy situation it would put Echelon and Rok in, who, if you recall, were already involved in that other war at the time. So, to whomever said asking your ally to stay out of a conflict doesn't mean just that, then maybe you just need to work on your communication skills. Sometimes I wish we hadn't accepted the peace, just to see how messy the whole thing could have become, but hindsight is 20/20.

It could have become extremely messy, especially if people kept up with the whole lying in negotiations technique (not you guys). Really interesting to see some of the truth coming out here, at last.

[Hymenbreach]

Heroic Disaster does not speak for the ODN.

We don't sign treaties to "fulfill our needs". Speaking on behalf of myself, I would want a treaty with someone who I can honestly reply "yes" to with the following questions:

Would I defend them unconditionally in game and on the BBs?

Would I go to ZI for them?

*Do I feel that they would do the same for me?*

The trouble is, the whole point that got us to this here place on the map, you wouldn't do it even when we were super close.

Edited July 14, 2009 by Hymenbreach

[Zombie Glaucon]

If you want opinions to change, you may want to start by changing your actions.

I can think of 2 alliances from OP that still need time to demonstrate that they've changed. Which two? I'll never tell.

[Rafael Nadal]

Who in Purple did you want ODN to come in against?

Everyone who attacked Vanguard was an ODN treaty partner.

Not just because of OUT. This would have been a very interesting move, and speaking for myself at least I'm glad ODN didn't agree to that request.

It could have become extremely messy, especially if people kept up with the whole lying in negotiations technique (not you guys). Really interesting to see some of the truth coming out here, at last.

I don't view PIAT's as overriding MDoAP's; not all treaties are equal. I consider MDoAP's to inherently be superior in nature, such that I asked ODN to come in against those whom I considered our MDoAP to be superior against. You'll notice that Vanguard doesn't have many PIAT's, and I try to avoid them whenever possible.

Also, anybody attacking Universalis was inherently at war with Vanguard, so really this nitpicking about we didn't attack Vanguard, only Uni is bs, and specific declarations like those are one of the things I detest about politics here.