T Paine Posted December 19, 2009 Report Share Posted December 19, 2009 (edited) I wasn't aware that Wolfpack had actually attempted to work with Justice since they hadn't indicated that at all. Outrage retracted. Well, they did only tell Wolf Empire why they were dropping us two days after they canceled our treaty. Actually, according to our ex-leader, little was even said before they tried to "fix" the problems they had with us. edit: grammar fail Edited December 19, 2009 by T Paine Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vilien Posted December 19, 2009 Report Share Posted December 19, 2009 Well, they did only tell Wolf Empire why they were dropping us two days after they canceled our treaty. Actually, according to our ex-leader, little was even said before they tried to "fix" the problems they had with us.edit: grammar fail My outrage was reserved for the Justice-Wolfpack incident. If you wish to apply for your own outrage, please file the appropriate forms in triplicate at the Office of Complaints and Grievances between the hours of 11:59 and 12:00 AM. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Locke Posted December 19, 2009 Report Share Posted December 19, 2009 This isn't the first alliance they've dropped. It seems that Wolfpack is just dropping as many treaties as they can, imo. Something tells me you're bitter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T Paine Posted December 19, 2009 Report Share Posted December 19, 2009 Something tells me you're bitter. Just a little disappointed that they decided to ditch us for such little causes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wickedj Posted December 19, 2009 Report Share Posted December 19, 2009 Frankly, if Wolfpack went to war with CSN for a bunch of ingrates who lack all the common sense on Bob, it would be very foolish, because it would then be an aggressive war by both Justice and Wolfpack. Then Wolfpack would just be committing suicide at the hands of SF because they thought it was a good idea to go to war for the sake of one of the worst protectorates anyone could ever have. Good sir you assume we would share the carnage We, as warmongers, would be far too greedy to share such a war with anyone other than ourselves In other news, i hear theres a GREAT alliance out there called Justice looking for a protectorate..yours for the taking Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nutkase Posted December 19, 2009 Report Share Posted December 19, 2009 This isn't the first alliance they've dropped. It seems that Wolfpack is just dropping as many treaties as they can, imo. As they have also honoured treaty's. Jumping in for a ally against a vastly superior alliance. I love all the Moral bandwagon going on without even checking the facts. "OMG they dropped a treaty, they must be evil"....ahahaha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LegendoftheSkies Posted December 19, 2009 Report Share Posted December 19, 2009 Maybe this is a lesson not to sign a protectorate with every single alliance who asks for one. Some people shouldn't be forming alliances. And lo it shall be known throughout the land, do not arbitrarily sign protectorates with random collections of !@#$%bags who call themselves alliances. In other news, i hear theres a GREAT alliance out there called Justice looking for a protectorate..yours for the taking Justice shall henceforth be under the protection of The Corporation. You can expect our DoW on CSN before next update. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoFish Posted December 19, 2009 Report Share Posted December 19, 2009 It seems to me that while Wolfpack can't be faulted for their reasons for canceling this or their other protectorates, the fact that they've dropped several in such a short period of time (WOLF, Wolf Empire and now justice, if memory serves) would seem to indicate that they don't have the best judgment on who to take on as protectorates in the first place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starcraftmazter Posted December 19, 2009 Report Share Posted December 19, 2009 Perhaps you should speak to Wolfpack before coming to conclusions. The cancellation of their treaty sends a pretty strong indication of their level of commitment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canik Posted December 19, 2009 Report Share Posted December 19, 2009 It seems to me that while Wolfpack can't be faulted for their reasons for canceling this or their other protectorates, the fact that they've dropped several in such a short period of time (WOLF, Wolf Empire and now justice, if memory serves) would seem to indicate that they don't have the best judgment on who to take on as protectorates in the first place. I don't think Wolfpack would deny they haven't picked the best protectorates lately. It hasn't hurt anyone, other than Wolfpack's reputation on picking protectorates. So, who cares? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CreativName Posted December 19, 2009 Report Share Posted December 19, 2009 (edited) It's not the cancellation. It's the fact that Wolfpack did absolutely nothing to assist their protectorate. It's their job to make sure that Justice doesn't get into situations like the one they got into, and the fact that Wolfpack refused to defend them even when they were treaty bound to do so says a lot about their alliance. I don't think that Wolfpack would like any more to protect an alliance in which two of the leaders have gone rogue. edit: By rogue, I mean literally attacking a random (aligned) person for the hell of it, blowing the crap out of my nation and not expecting repercussions (This made me laugh). As WickedJ already stated, Wolfpack doesn't even have to defend Justice if Justice was the aggressor. Edited December 19, 2009 by CreativName Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haflinger Posted December 19, 2009 Report Share Posted December 19, 2009 It seems to me that while Wolfpack can't be faulted for their reasons for canceling this or their other protectorates, the fact that they've dropped several in such a short period of time (WOLF, Wolf Empire and now justice, if memory serves) would seem to indicate that they don't have the best judgment on who to take on as protectorates in the first place. WOLF and Wolf Empire are the same alliance. Otherwise, yeah, you might have a point. Thanks, Wickedj and Goose for helping to clarify the situation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Janova Posted December 19, 2009 Report Share Posted December 19, 2009 It's hilarious that people jump on Wolfpack for this. You aren't obliged to help your protectorate if it initiates an aggressive war, and as documented in CSN's thread, Justice were not interested in mediation, diplomacy or anything like that from CSN – it's easy to see that they could have ignored Wolfpack's attempt to get some sane thoughts into their heads too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kriekfreak Posted December 19, 2009 Report Share Posted December 19, 2009 Who cares. Just roll Wolfpack and CDT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kindom of Goon Posted December 19, 2009 Report Share Posted December 19, 2009 What Bob said really, not sure how anyone can expect Wolfpack to do much other than cancel in this case (from what I've seen anyway). Though it does help my argument that protectorate treaties are silly and largely pointless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
omgitshim Posted December 19, 2009 Report Share Posted December 19, 2009 Clearly, you don't read any announcements.When an alliance is protecting another, it is generally accepted that....they should....protect said alliance, hence why people are rightly critical of wolfpack. so justice can just freely run and declare on any alliance? then expect Wolfpack to get into a war they didnt start and have nothing to do with? i smell !@#$%^&* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magicninja Posted December 19, 2009 Report Share Posted December 19, 2009 I guess I can;t blame Wolfpack for not jumping into the war. Protectorates are canceled for less but what I want to know is if they offered diplomatic help before it got to this point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Boris Posted December 19, 2009 Report Share Posted December 19, 2009 It's hilarious that people jump on Wolfpack for this. You aren't obliged to help your protectorate if it initiates an aggressive war, and as documented in CSN's thread, Justice were not interested in mediation, diplomacy or anything like that from CSN – it's easy to see that they could have ignored Wolfpack's attempt to get some sane thoughts into their heads too. Once again Bob comes in to save a thread from a bunch of lowly degenerates. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nutkase Posted December 19, 2009 Report Share Posted December 19, 2009 Once again Bob comes in to save a thread from a bunch of lowly degenerates. Here I was, thinking you loved me boris B) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ejayrazz Posted December 19, 2009 Report Share Posted December 19, 2009 (edited) Why is this such a big shocker?Do you guys even read half of the announcements ? A member of Justice attacked a member of USN and Justice did not do respond the way they should have I really dont think Wolfpack is the bad guy here. Edit: mixed up USN and Justice Neither do I, but a protectorate is a protectorate. (The following is a general statement, not necessarily towards Wolfpack) I remember the old days when a treaty, even a protectorate, was friendship. It was through thick and thin. If you canceled, you were an evil person. Now, because the treaty web is so ridiculous, people cancel left and right in these situations, becoming an acceptable norm. Although Bob Janova presents a logical argument, this just collides with mine into one meaning: Stop signing with people you TRULY do not know. May this be a lesson to all; be careful with who you sign your word to. Edit: I should also mention I understand Wolfpack's attempts and should have clarified on this, but I still disagree with their cancellation at this point in time. Maybe they feel it was necessary to do it during this war, so to speak, but I have always been a fan of doing it afterwards. Its just how the politics have worked for a long time. Edited December 19, 2009 by Ejayrazz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
popsumpot Posted December 19, 2009 Report Share Posted December 19, 2009 Well, they did only tell Wolf Empire why they were dropping us two days after they canceled our treaty. Actually, according to our ex-leader, little was even said before they tried to "fix" the problems they had with us.edit: grammar fail That sounds like alot off butthurt to me. Anyway, you're in a six-man alliance that even your own alliance leader bailed on, twice! Who else can you blame? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mmansfield68 Posted December 19, 2009 Report Share Posted December 19, 2009 Understandable, and a move most saw coming. Trying to protect Justice is like trying to vouch for Tiger Woods' high moral fiber and good judgement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dejarue Posted December 19, 2009 Report Share Posted December 19, 2009 (edited) Ejay, Wolfpack did what they were supposed to. They provided mediation, diplomatic support, and tried to arrange a peaceful agreement. There isn't much need to carry a treaty on when the people you hold it with belligerently ignore any attempts at contact and diplomacy with their treaty partners. It should be patently obvious that Wolfpack isn't in a MADP agreement, and doesn't have to blindly follow Justice on a suicide charge. And based on Justice's behavior in the past 3 or 4 weeks, they shouldn't have any treaty arrangements in the future, either. Therefore, you get threads like this. They could've waited until after the war to cancel, but what's the point? Honestly, if you read the thread, this is all pretty apparent, in my opinion. I'm interested to know what Wolfpack did in order to diffuse the tension that lead to war on their protectorate. Although I think I might know the answer ahead of time... It appears that you don't know the answer at all. You know what happens when you assume... Edited December 19, 2009 by deja Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ejayrazz Posted December 19, 2009 Report Share Posted December 19, 2009 (edited) Ejay, Wolfpack did what they were supposed to. They provided mediation, diplomatic support, and tried to arrange a peaceful agreement. There isn't much need to carry a treaty on when the people you hold it with belligerently ignore any attempts at contact and diplomacy with their treaty partners. It should be patently obvious that Wolfpack isn't in a MADP agreement, and doesn't have to blindly follow Justice on a suicide charge. And based on Justice's behavior in the past 3 or 4 weeks, they shouldn't have any treaty arrangements in the future, either. Therefore, you get threads like this. They could've waited until after the war to cancel, but what's the point? Honestly, if you read the thread, this is all pretty apparent, in my opinion. It is apparent, hence my explanation in my post: Be more careful with who you sign with -- which, even with your explanation, still stands and should have been apparent for three years by now. I should also mention I understand Wolfpack's attempts and should have clarified on this, but I still disagree with their cancellation at this point in time. Maybe they feel it was necessary to do it during this war, so to speak, but I have always been a fan of doing it afterwards. Its just how the politics have worked for a long time. Edited December 19, 2009 by Ejayrazz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dejarue Posted December 19, 2009 Report Share Posted December 19, 2009 Oh okay. I thought from your tone that you were disappointed that Wolfpack didn't stand by Justice "through thick and thin". 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.