Tick1 Posted November 14, 2009 Report Share Posted November 14, 2009 (edited) Interesting, thank you.What sort of treaty was it? A ToA? This might be breaking with protocol, somewhat, but under the circumstances...to ensure there is no misunderstanding, herewith is the M*A*S*H/KofN MDP in full and in so far as we are presenting it here, we seek to not only maintain it but with your friendship & aid to expand it to encompass a greater sphere of comraderie:AN MDP BETWEEN THE KNIGHTS OF NI! AND THE MIGHTY ARMED STATES OF HONOR (M*A*S*H) I. Preamble The Knights of NI! (Herein known as the KofN) and the Mighty Armed States of Honor (Herein known as M*A*S*H) decided that there was too much awesomeness in each other to be kept seperate . Therefore, an MDP was the only logical step to take. II. Peace We won't attack each other, spy on each other, or perform any malicious act against each other. This includes smashing our guitars. Not cool, man, not cool. III. Aid If one alliances needs some money, and the other has the money to spare, then they shall be given the goods. IV. Intelligence If one alliance figures out that a random alliance decides to infringe on the other's awesomeness, they shall warn them, lest awesomeness be removed from the alliance. V. Mutual Defense If someone decides to attack one of the signatories, then it is an attack on both, not just the one signatory. Attacks constitute declarations of war, espionage, and making out with our girlfriends. VI. Cancellation If one of the articles in this treaty is broken, then it shall be rendered null and void. However, if one alliance decides that they no longer want to share awesomeness, then they shall be required to give the other alliance 48 hours notice before it's canceled. Fat chance, I know, but it's always possible. Signed, For the Knights of NI!, KofN President, .FBI. (Re-signed 6/15/2008 by) MoFA of the KofN, Capt. "Aloha" (originally signed by Apollo King) For the Mighty Armed States of Honor (M*A*S*H), Commanding Officer - Flonker Executive Officers - Ruphus and boomerisgod Senior Drill Instructor - Col Fitswilliam Officer of Foreign Affairs - Linkmandx Officer of Internal Affairs - Bedford Forrest Enlistment Officer - Dran129 Payroll Officer - --Chase-- Chief JAG Justice - Osagi89 Edit: This is the original treaty. Edited November 14, 2009 by Tick1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yankees Empire Posted November 14, 2009 Report Share Posted November 14, 2009 I seem to remember NEO doing the same thing. There was plenty of outrage then, and they ended up getting rolled because of it. Poor show, Athens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tick1 Posted November 14, 2009 Report Share Posted November 14, 2009 hahahahaha I've raided more raids than all of Athens and FoB have against Knights of Ni! at the moment.There is a huge difference however between raiding someone on "none" or in a small, 3 man AA, where there is almost no sense of community, and raiding an alliance that is big enough to have forums with embassies. Embassies that have not been used until this raid may I add. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enderland Posted November 14, 2009 Report Share Posted November 14, 2009 Embassies that have not been used until this raid may I add. So alliances with inactive embassies are raidable? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tick1 Posted November 14, 2009 Report Share Posted November 14, 2009 So alliances with inactive embassies are raidable? I don't speak on behalf of CnG, but alliance with no treaties and no active embassies are always raid-able with approval in my opinion. Which is why we allow raiding in our charter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heft Posted November 14, 2009 Report Share Posted November 14, 2009 That looks like a treaty to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neo Uruk Posted November 14, 2009 Report Share Posted November 14, 2009 hahahahaha I've raided more raids than all of Athens and FoB have against Knights of Ni! at the moment.There is a huge difference however between raiding someone on "none" or in a small, 3 man AA, where there is almost no sense of community, and raiding an alliance that is big enough to have forums with embassies. Since a raid doesn't destroy sense of community (or you have a weak community) I don't see where you're coming from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enderland Posted November 14, 2009 Report Share Posted November 14, 2009 Since a raid doesn't destroy sense of community (or you have a weak community) I don't see where you're coming from. That's true, getting attacked has no negative effect on the community of an alliance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ddog241 Posted November 14, 2009 Report Share Posted November 14, 2009 That looks like a treaty to me. you are correct good sir. now i know i wasnt just see'in things Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neo Uruk Posted November 14, 2009 Report Share Posted November 14, 2009 That's true, getting attacked has no negative effect on the community of an alliance. Realistically if you were a good friend of somebody you wouldn't expect them to abandon you because of small damages, would you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tick1 Posted November 14, 2009 Report Share Posted November 14, 2009 (edited) That looks like a treaty to me. Yet no one from M*A*S*H knows about it. So what are the possibilities that the treaty was canceled? What are the possibilities the treaty was forged by boomerisgod? Considering Knights of Ni! aren't active on (IRC) Edited November 14, 2009 by Tick1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vilien Posted November 14, 2009 Report Share Posted November 14, 2009 I don't speak on behalf of CnG, but alliance with no treaties and no active embassies are always raid-able with approval in my opinion. Which is why we allow raiding in our charter. So it's not the size of the alliance really, but more what you can get away with? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neo Uruk Posted November 14, 2009 Report Share Posted November 14, 2009 So it's not the size of the alliance really, but more what you can get away with? That's the basic principle of tech raiding: Profit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enderland Posted November 14, 2009 Report Share Posted November 14, 2009 Realistically if you were a good friend of somebody you wouldn't expect them to abandon you because of small damages, would you? That doesn't refute anything I said. Getting attacked like this will hurt, or damage, or possibly destroy their sense of community. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tick1 Posted November 14, 2009 Report Share Posted November 14, 2009 (edited) So it's not the size of the alliance really, but more what you can get away with? Those are your words not mine. (There are always risks involved in raiding. What if they attack back? What if they use other forces besides ground attacks? What if they ask for reps? What if they declare war on us?) Edited November 14, 2009 by Tick1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neo Uruk Posted November 14, 2009 Report Share Posted November 14, 2009 That doesn't refute anything I said.Getting attacked like this will hurt, or damage, or possibly destroy their sense of community. They aren't a close community with a lot of resolve then. Any strong bond of friendship endures pain and suffering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enderland Posted November 14, 2009 Report Share Posted November 14, 2009 Those are your words not mine. But they accurately represent everything that FoB and Athens stand for with respect to raiding nonetheless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shinpah Posted November 14, 2009 Report Share Posted November 14, 2009 So it's not the size of the alliance really, but more what you can get away with? Perhaps. The real question that comes to my mind is that if we were to continue this action, would we be able to change standards to allow it to be accepted or would we end up getting rolled Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vilien Posted November 14, 2009 Report Share Posted November 14, 2009 (edited) Those are your words not mine. I present you with your words: I don't speak on behalf of CnG, but alliance with no treaties and no active embassies are always raid-able with approval in my opinion. Which is why we allow raiding in our charter. Perhaps.The real question that comes to my mind is that if we were to continue this action, would we be able to change standards to allow it to be accepted or would we end up getting rolled I think you should be more concerned with getting rolled simply for existing and not having enough treaties. Edited November 14, 2009 by Vilien Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enderland Posted November 14, 2009 Report Share Posted November 14, 2009 They aren't a close community with a lot of resolve then. Any strong bond of friendship endures pain and suffering. Heh. That STILL doesn't change what I said from being true. Though what you said at the end does indicate that this will cause "pain and suffering" to the attacked alliance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enderland Posted November 14, 2009 Report Share Posted November 14, 2009 Perhaps.The real question that comes to my mind is that if we were to continue this action, would we be able to change standards to allow it to be accepted or would we end up getting rolled Karma's a !@#$%*? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shinpah Posted November 14, 2009 Report Share Posted November 14, 2009 I think you should be more concerned with getting rolled simply for existing and not having enough treaties. I would not consider that relevant to my situation. Note to self: more treaties Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Kremlin Posted November 14, 2009 Report Share Posted November 14, 2009 Attacks constitute declarations of war, espionage, and making out with our girlfriends. Looks like Athens is safe since this was only a tech raid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neo Uruk Posted November 14, 2009 Report Share Posted November 14, 2009 Heh. That STILL doesn't change what I said from being true. It means that if they have a sense of community they can get through this, and if they fold they're just a bunch of ghosts sharing an AA. Though what you said at the end does indicate that this will cause "pain and suffering" to the attacked alliance. I don't think anybody here has denied that there is some frustration and slight damages that come with being raided. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vilien Posted November 14, 2009 Report Share Posted November 14, 2009 I would not consider that relevant to my situation.Note to self: more treaties Good to see that you have an excellent sense of irony. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts