HellAngel Posted November 14, 2009 Report Share Posted November 14, 2009 MK has always endorsed tech raiding and all this moral outrage and made up rules are ridiculous. Tech raiding against alligneds? Do i need to be afraid of getting tripled tomorrow at update? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyriq Posted November 14, 2009 Report Share Posted November 14, 2009 Bob's logic is flawed, pretty painfully as I already stated. I am amazed that Athens is creating boredom through 'an atmosphere of terror', the two don't seem to add together now do they? Morality is based on degrees of justification for acts that endanger society. Raiding an alliance versus an unaligned nation is clearly a different degree of the action of raiding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Londo Mollari Posted November 14, 2009 Report Share Posted November 14, 2009 1. You've done 4 GAs, not 2 I did 2, myself. Can't speak for everyone. 2. It's still the first day, there is still scope for 'full war, all weapons and forced reparations'. If KoN defend themselves fully (and I hope they do), are you saying that you will accept that as the inevitable risk of raiding? It's possible that they will nuke us, or even just fight back conventionally. If they do, then that's that. We're certainly not going to force them to pay reparations for defending themselves. Athens is not even involved in this as an alliance. Actually, the 3x3 raid I personally took part in, it would have been a pretty even contest had our attackers simply fought back, as they all had about double our infra, but we had somewhat of an advantage on mil wonders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kriekfreak Posted November 14, 2009 Report Share Posted November 14, 2009 Is Knights of NI allied to these? I only underlined these as I know some of the others are no longer with us and not sure but the others? Knight of NI is not allied to FOK in the sense of a military treaty. If I remember correctly they were Dutch for the most part and are on friendly terms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kpcurley Posted November 14, 2009 Report Share Posted November 14, 2009 Are you creating our policies now? If anyone wants to have some revenge on any tech raiding nation then those nations will duke it out until peace is given on both sides or the war expires, please stop the slander. HaHa, lol. It's not like Athens follows there own policy anyway. Isn't this whole business against your tech raiding policy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trace Posted November 14, 2009 Report Share Posted November 14, 2009 Tech raiding against alligneds? Do i need to be afraid of getting tripled tomorrow at update? We've always allowed raiding of aligned nations, as long as they fall under our criteria. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arrnea Posted November 14, 2009 Report Share Posted November 14, 2009 (edited) We've always allowed raiding of aligned nations, as long as they fall under our criteria. And alliance of forty nations falls under your criteria? Those must be about the most lenient criteria I've seen from an alliance that bothers at all to have raiding criteria. Edited November 14, 2009 by Arrnea Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gecko Posted November 14, 2009 Report Share Posted November 14, 2009 o/ Penkala \o For ye has the courage to speak up and stand up for what is unjust o7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shahenshah Posted November 14, 2009 Report Share Posted November 14, 2009 (edited) edit: nvm, already answered previously. Edited November 14, 2009 by shahenshah Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Diorno Posted November 14, 2009 Report Share Posted November 14, 2009 We've always allowed raiding of aligned nations, as long as they fall under our criteria. you are creating an atmosphere of terror and boredom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arrnea Posted November 14, 2009 Report Share Posted November 14, 2009 (edited) If they do mount a cohesive defense, Athens, FoB, KoFN all get to sharpen their war skills. If they don't, Athens and FoB profit. I will attempt to translate this phrase now: If they do mount a cohesive defense, Athens and FoB will get to beat KoFN down for a while. If they don't, Athens and FoB profit. I think I got it. And you wonder why an alliance in KofN's position might be afraid to exercise their right to defend their sovereignty. This is at the core of why actions such as those undertaken by Athens are creating an atmosphere of terror for smaller alliances. Edited November 14, 2009 by Arrnea Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wad of Lint Posted November 14, 2009 Report Share Posted November 14, 2009 When sanctioned alliances start getting raided for weeks and then forced to tens of thousands of tech as the price of peace, I'll start taking NPO's attempts at equivocation seriously. It is but a step that leads down a long road. We all know how the story ends. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lebubu Posted November 14, 2009 Report Share Posted November 14, 2009 Tech raiding against alligneds? Do i need to be afraid of getting tripled tomorrow at update? I think you should be excited, if anything. And alliance of forty nations falls under your criteria?Those must be about the most lenient criteria I've seen from an alliance that bothers at all to have raiding criteria. You don't know anything about MK's raiding rules, and even if you did, coming here and criticizing them is laughable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernkastel Posted November 14, 2009 Report Share Posted November 14, 2009 (edited) And alliance of forty nations falls under your criteria?Those must be about the most lenient criteria I've seen from an alliance that bothers at all to have raiding criteria. Ohsnose ... We're under 40 nations! We better not do or say anything drastic. Shhh... Edited November 14, 2009 by Beatrice Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arrnea Posted November 14, 2009 Report Share Posted November 14, 2009 (edited) You don't know anything about MK's raiding rules, and even if you did, coming here and criticizing them is laughable. You're right, I don't know anything about MK's raiding rules. That's why I asked Trace (read: not you) if an alliance of forty nations would fall under them. Edited November 14, 2009 by Arrnea Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfbite Posted November 14, 2009 Report Share Posted November 14, 2009 I hope the Knights of Ni peace out and let Athens and FoB have their pound of meat, because looking at the Knights of Ni's nations, there in no real condition to mount a defensive action, given the number of nations in anarchy, but it does not mean i agree your like Athens or FoB's action in this matter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enderland Posted November 14, 2009 Report Share Posted November 14, 2009 You guys should hit these guys next: http://www.cybernations.net/stats_alliance...iance=Aircastle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2burnt2eat Posted November 14, 2009 Report Share Posted November 14, 2009 You can talk morality all you like, as long as its the morality of tech raiding as a whole. The difference between the injustice NPO forced on Athens, and the tech raids we are performing, is that we are doing 2 ground attacks and then giving peace. Big difference between an actual raid, and one on an alliance of 40. And where's the proof of that, only two GAs? I do see some exposed spy attacks, which I don't see how those are relevant to 'raids'. What about those? NPO on the other hand went however long with full war, all weapons, then forced reparations on those they attacked, Yea, maybe because you attacked Echelon. I don't see a cause-and-effect for your attack on Knights of Ni here. As long as we're on that topic, it's nice that you went around and did the very same thing you said yourself, except they paid billions, how much did you have to pay? but I think people have already said this thread shouldn't turn into an NPO slam. Yea, because it'd be inconvenient to draw the hypocritical comparisons. Bob's logic is flawed, pretty painfully as I already stated. I am amazed that Athens is creating boredom through 'an atmosphere of terror', the two don't seem to add together now do they? What? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVFC1 Posted November 14, 2009 Report Share Posted November 14, 2009 And alliance of forty nations falls under your criteria?Those must be about the most lenient criteria I've seen from an alliance that bothers at all to have raiding criteria. He never said 40 nations was under our criteria, he just said aligned nations are fair game as long as they meet the conditions our military has set. Athens' criteria do allow 40 nations though, if it is approved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Londo Mollari Posted November 14, 2009 Report Share Posted November 14, 2009 I will attempt to translate this phrase now:I think I got it. And you wonder why an alliance in KofN's position might be afraid to exercise their right to defend their sovereignty. This is at the core of why actions such as those undertaken by Athens are creating an atmosphere of terror for smaller alliances. If they get beat down at roughly 1:1 odds, that's hardly our fault. We have no idea how well they can fight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enderland Posted November 14, 2009 Report Share Posted November 14, 2009 What? If you can't beat 'em, just say "no u!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arrnea Posted November 14, 2009 Report Share Posted November 14, 2009 (edited) If they get beat down at roughly 1:1 odds, that's hardly our fault. We have no idea how well they can fight. How is this 1:1 odds? You've got a lot more nations and nukes. Not to mention allies that would intimidate anyone thinking of defending KofN here militarily (I might be forced to eat these words tomorrow, but we'll see). Edited November 14, 2009 by Arrnea Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xoindotnler Posted November 14, 2009 Report Share Posted November 14, 2009 )): Athens )): Low blow... low blow... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alterego Posted November 14, 2009 Report Share Posted November 14, 2009 If they get beat down at roughly 1:1 odds, that's hardly our fault. We have no idea how well they can fight. 1:1? Like the 1:1 NPO had with you when they ground you up? Not their fault you were small and crap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Londo Mollari Posted November 14, 2009 Report Share Posted November 14, 2009 How is this 1:1 odds? You've got a lot more nations and nukes.Not to mention allies that would intimidate anyone thinking of defending KofN here militarily (I might be forced to eat these words tomorrow, but we'll see). You will notice that this is not an Athens + FoB action vs KoFN. If it were, you would see 3 strong nations on every one of theirs, and you would see a DoW. This is a some Athens members + some FoB members action vs KoFN. There is a distinction there. And as for myself, the odds at which I engaged were 1:1, at least as far as nations go. The two sides had some relative advantages and disadvantages other than that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts