sethb Posted August 18, 2009 Report Share Posted August 18, 2009 Honestly, if your doing something for a friend I don't see why a treaty is necassary, which is why I think white peace is the best option here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bird of Passage Posted August 18, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 18, 2009 (edited) Well I'd have to double check, but I believe the exact policy is ZI or reps of 3x damage caused, but as bama pointed out...If you want us to treat him as an alliance (ha) even of one (why the hell not). Then we end up with, him declaring aggressively on us without treaty. (I don't ever recall seeing a FAIL Solitude treaty of any kind, (neither have wiki pages) If you know of one though please point me at it. In that case, he (his alliance?) is bandwagoning, and just about everybody takes a pretty dim view of that too. But hey, I'm just being grouchy right now, maybe we'll grab a beer, decide the hilarity was worth it and let him go. Solitude follows the Moldavi Doctrine. It does not require a treaty to defend another (though I do not denounce treaties). Edited August 18, 2009 by Bird of Passage Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonOfHoward Posted August 18, 2009 Report Share Posted August 18, 2009 It's up to VE gov't and TJO gov't to offer you white peace. You're free to surrender at anytime. Not sure what the terms would be but you could find out and possibly get white peace that way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Velken Posted August 18, 2009 Report Share Posted August 18, 2009 These 1 man alliances (if you consider them an alliance) seem to becoming a trend lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bird of Passage Posted August 18, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 18, 2009 (edited) It's up to VE gov't and TJO gov't to offer you white peace. You're free to surrender at anytime. Not sure what the terms would be but you could find out and possibly get white peace that way. Sol claims that Viridia is currently deliberating. I am expecting some sort of verdict from him, or from someone in the Viridian Government in the near future. As to the Jedi, I am yet unsure as to whether or not they consider themselves a part of this war, or if Azural acted of his own accord. Azural wishes to continue for the duration of the standard seven days, and I am by no means unwilling to oblige. If the Jedi Masters consider themselves officially at war with Solitude, then they may contact me to clarify their position, at which point, we may negotiate. Otherwise, I have no quarrels with the Jedi. Edited August 18, 2009 by Bird of Passage Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhysicsJunky Posted August 18, 2009 Report Share Posted August 18, 2009 Ironically all the outside parties clamoring for some sort of white peace may have heavily reduced the likelihood of it. As it stood VE had little to gain by pursuing him all the way to ZI and with some private petitioning and a couple days out of the spotlight he might have been let off easy. Instead the issue has now been spun into some sort of sovereignty/bad press mess and issuing a white peace now would be seen as caving rather than mercy. Quite possible that bad press rather than white peace was the aim of the commenters, quite possible Solitude doesn't have a problem with it. Always an interesting dynamic nonetheless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TypoNinja Posted August 18, 2009 Report Share Posted August 18, 2009 Ironically all the outside parties clamoring for some sort of white peace may have heavily reduced the likelihood of it. As it stood VE had little to gain by pursuing him all the way to ZI and with some private petitioning and a couple days out of the spotlight he might have been let off easy. Instead the issue has now been spun into some sort of sovereignty/bad press mess and issuing a white peace now would be seen as caving rather than mercy. Quite possible that bad press rather than white peace was the aim of the commenters, quite possible Solitude doesn't have a problem with it. Always an interesting dynamic nonetheless. Actually our DoW on GDI even said it'd end in white peace, so I'm not sure why the hubub in the first place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhysicsJunky Posted August 18, 2009 Report Share Posted August 18, 2009 Actually our DoW on GDI even said it'd end in white peace, so I'm not sure why the hubub in the first place. Hubdub, at least in this thread, is related to Solitude which isn't necessarily covered by your commitment to white peace against GDI. Seeing as one of your members posted "Good luck, but I think you are going to ZI," along with the following comments by others, it seems to be suggesting there wasn't going to be white peace forthcoming with Solitude. Perhaps they and I have misread something but I definitely see what they were petitioning, even if I don't necessarily agree with the reasoning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonOfHoward Posted August 18, 2009 Report Share Posted August 18, 2009 (edited) Hubdub, at least in this thread, is related to Solitude which isn't necessarily covered by your commitment to white peace against GDI. Seeing as one of your members posted "Good luck, but I think you are going to ZI," along with the following comments by others, it seems to be suggesting there wasn't going to be white peace forthcoming with Solitude. Perhaps they and I have misread something but I definitely see what they were petitioning, even if I don't necessarily agree with the reasoning. No one can really say if there was white peace forthcoming or not. All we can say for sure is that as a result of this thread opinions are being formed. That being said white peace may still be possible even if no VE members are willing to accept white peace from Solitude. Edited August 18, 2009 by SonOfHoward Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Margrave Posted August 18, 2009 Report Share Posted August 18, 2009 I joined this fight in order to stand alongside Bird Of Passage and support the individuals strength in the Cyberverse. This being the situation, I will also offer white peace to all of my engaged parties, if they will accept it or no. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayhawkColin Posted August 19, 2009 Report Share Posted August 19, 2009 Who are you again?? ZI has never been a deterent for this sort of behaviour. EVER. Please don't go thinking that you're going to be making sure "nobody else gets it into their heads crap like this is a good idea" because you're not.And if you sincerely think that, you're completely full of yourself. ZI has never been a deterrent for going rogue? What CN have you been playing? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poyplemonkeys Posted August 19, 2009 Report Share Posted August 19, 2009 He declared on the 15th, today is the 18th ...Giving him white peace would be like saying "Hey guys, come attack us. There will be no repercussions, and you can peace out after day 3 if you want." How would you like it if I claim someone who is an enemy of nemesis is my ally, create a 1 man alliance, and start attacking someone random in nemesis. I doubt that you would be fine with it after 3 days. If you were defending another alliance who was at war with us due to an aggressive war we'd declared, I'd be very surprised if you didn't receive peace from Nemesis at the same time as the alliance you're defending. Particularly when it's made abundantly clear throughout that you bear no ill will towards Nemesis in any way. Not entirely sure how 3 days is relevant since it's been claimed in this very thread that he's being ZI'd for defending his friends. 1 day of war, 3 days of war, 1 week of war? Who cares, the only timing that matters is how long it takes VE to reduce his nation to rubble in a ZI sentance, so why even bring it up? So because we dont support people who attack us we deserve to get attacked ? I'd suggest you don't put words in my mouth in future. If you're unsure about the meaning of my words, ask me rather than jumping to foolish confusions. It's just easier for both of us. What I was actually saying is when you prolong wars in an entirely unnecessary fashion, you deserve to take damage doing so. It's a long held belief of mine, mainly brought about by FAN's situation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Wilson Posted August 19, 2009 Report Share Posted August 19, 2009 It all depends on your point of view, Solaris. You defended NPO against a raid, not a full-scale alliance war. VE escalated it into a full-scale alliance war. Although it was justified, you escalated. RV defended, Solitude defended RV. Have you been taking stupid pills lately? Do you remembered why the VE attacked? Or are you forgetting that GDI started thia mess. In case u forgot, heres a timeline for you. -GDI nation attacks NPO -VE orders a nation to retaliate against the GDI nation -Ryan goes to Impero and demands peace. Impero says 9 mil for peace. Ryan threatens war and ends the conversation -GDI nations hit VE nations -VE declares war -FAIL attacks VE Solitude as one nation attacks VE Now please tell me who the aggresor is. ooc: please pardon the spelling errors folks. i'm using a phone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Infidel Israeli Posted August 19, 2009 Report Share Posted August 19, 2009 Solitude follows the Moldavi Doctrine. It does not require a treaty to defend another (though I do not denounce treaties). haha, I was waiting for when someone would pull this one out Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solaris Posted August 19, 2009 Report Share Posted August 19, 2009 Solitude follows the Moldavi Doctrine. It does not require a treaty to defend another (though I do not denounce treaties).Well, we have little interest on whatever doctrines you might be following. Please contact a representative of our Defense Department for getting peace as per the Impero Doctrine. Thank you for your cooperation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TypoNinja Posted August 19, 2009 Report Share Posted August 19, 2009 (edited) If you were defending another alliance who was at war with us due to an aggressive war we'd declared, I'd be very surprised if you didn't receive peace from Nemesis at the same time as the alliance you're defending. Well we see a distinction between people following treaties and people who band wagon on for !@#$s and giggles. Sol summed it up beautifully, The (new) moldavi doctrine is your policy not ours, our policy is that rogue nations get ZI'd, you fit the bill. Edit: For clarity, 'you' refers to the OP not the guy I quoted. Edited August 19, 2009 by TypoNinja Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hunterman1043 Posted August 19, 2009 Report Share Posted August 19, 2009 (edited) This all just seems like an abuse of position IMO. Edited August 19, 2009 by Hunterman1043 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bird of Passage Posted August 19, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 19, 2009 haha, I was waiting for when someone would pull this one out Solitude's adherence to the Moldavi Doctrine was previously made clear in its first Calls. I must inquire, given that fact, as to why you have been waiting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poyplemonkeys Posted August 20, 2009 Report Share Posted August 20, 2009 (edited) Well we see a distinction between people following treaties and people who band wagon on for !@#$s and giggles. Bandwagon on for !@#$s and giggles? Bird of Passage doesn't seem to be a '!@#$s and giggles' type of player to me. Maybe I'm being foolish taking him at face value when he claims his only interest is to defend his friends, and he bears no ill will towards Viridian Entente. I highly doubt it's me that is acting the fool though. It's a shame that NSO hasn't managed to teach you the true value of treaties yet. I can only hope one day VE learns. Edited August 20, 2009 by Poyplemonkeys Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solaris Posted August 20, 2009 Report Share Posted August 20, 2009 Bandwagon on for !@#$s and giggles? Bird of Passage doesn't seem to be a '!@#$s and giggles' type of player to me. Maybe I'm being foolish taking him at face value when he claims his only interest is to defend his friends, and he bears no ill will towards Viridian Entente. I highly doubt it's me that is acting the fool though.All 'one man' alliances can be classified to the '!@#$s and giggles' category, as far as I'm concerned.It's a shame that NSO hasn't managed to teach you the true value of treaties yet. I can only hope one day VE learns.I do know the true value of treaties. Do you? Does NSO? How would you describe the true value of treaties? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Il Impero Romano Posted August 20, 2009 Report Share Posted August 20, 2009 (edited) Bandwagon on for !@#$s and giggles? Bird of Passage doesn't seem to be a '!@#$s and giggles' type of player to me. Maybe I'm being foolish taking him at face value when he claims his only interest is to defend his friends, and he bears no ill will towards Viridian Entente. I highly doubt it's me that is acting the fool though.It's a shame that NSO hasn't managed to teach you the true value of treaties yet. I can only hope one day VE learns. Solitude, despite the flag, is not an alliance. He attacked our alliance as a rogue. If he wishes to pay reps for any damages he did to the nations he attacked, he is free to go, otherwise we follow standard protocol and continue attacks until he no longer has infrastructure. Edited August 20, 2009 by Il Impero Romano Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poyplemonkeys Posted August 20, 2009 Report Share Posted August 20, 2009 All 'one man' alliances can be classified to the '!@#$s and giggles' category, as far as I'm concerned.I do know the true value of treaties. Do you? Does NSO? How would you describe the true value of treaties? An alliance's treaties are not a list of those they will exclusively defend, it is a list of those they have sworn to defend. Treaties are not designed to exclude all other actions not covered by a treaty. Tyga put it more eloquently than I would so I'll just quote him instead. There is no value in a signed bit of paper, just in the relationship between the names on that paper. You call him a rogue, I see him as someone defending a friend. Why should he need a piece of paper to do so? I'm going to bow out of this thread now as neither of us seems to be bringing anything new to the table at this point, and arguing in circles gives me no enjoyment. Good luck in obtaining your peace Solitude 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.