Fantastico Posted January 17, 2010 Report Share Posted January 17, 2010 The best of friends need to tell each other when they are wrong; and the worst of enemies should tell each other when they're right. Good luck in your new course, and thank you for what I've quoted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magicninja Posted January 17, 2010 Report Share Posted January 17, 2010 I hope the situation never arises so that this move can be misconstrued as some sort of copout. Good luck though. Definitely an interesting move. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trinite Posted January 17, 2010 Report Share Posted January 17, 2010 Well that's one way to go. Good luck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spaarlaamp Posted January 17, 2010 Report Share Posted January 17, 2010 This is lame. Without treaties you can't be drawn into a war. This is just a weak passive move. You might aswell change your name to gpä.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Taco Posted January 17, 2010 Report Share Posted January 17, 2010 MHAil! Grämmies. This should keep things interesting. I like the novel approach. And like I said in a different thread, Gre could cancel on MHA, but it wouldn't change the relationship any, we would still be Härmlin brothers. So in a sense that proves the validity of this move. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valtamdraugr Posted January 17, 2010 Report Share Posted January 17, 2010 (edited) Oh... I'm digging this !@#$ edit: 2010 might be remebered as the "Common sense" era Edited January 17, 2010 by Valtamdraugr Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guzalot Posted January 17, 2010 Report Share Posted January 17, 2010 Interesting. Good luck with this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Blake Posted January 17, 2010 Report Share Posted January 17, 2010 At least there are no treaties to violate for the next war you enter (but I guess the previous announcement cover that). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The AUT Posted January 17, 2010 Report Share Posted January 17, 2010 The Grämlins hereby announces the cancellation of all its remaining treaties, with the exception of The Härmlin Accords which has no cancellation clause. The Grämlins no longer feels that friendship and allies need be tied by pieces of poorly-written ePaper. Have you guys notified the Codex of your cancellation as well? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorConcept Posted January 17, 2010 Report Share Posted January 17, 2010 This is lame. Without treaties you can't be drawn into a war. This is just a weak passive move. You might aswell change your name to gpä.. They still have their treaty with MHA. And their ties to former allies such as us whom would be willing to fight for them if need be without the need of a treaty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ragashingo Posted January 17, 2010 Report Share Posted January 17, 2010 Interesting move and perhaps sustainable if you make sure your FA team keeps your allies friends up to date on how friendly you are with them. It is a bit sad to see ya'll forgoing treaties though. They're a large part of this world and stepping back from this is a choice to not participate in that aspect. Also I believe you will eventually find that the political and reassurance value of treaties is greater than you think. When the next big war comes there may be many outside your close allies friends who will likely be unsure of where you stand. That uncertainty could cause complications and ultimately the loss of the war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duncan King Posted January 17, 2010 Report Share Posted January 17, 2010 (edited) Well, this certainly saves you the trouble of having to wiggle out of treaty obligations. Way to be proactive and cancel them before you have to disregard them. Edited January 17, 2010 by Duncan King Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drostan Posted January 17, 2010 Report Share Posted January 17, 2010 (edited) While I too find myself inclined to hail this move as a great step forward... I agree with spaar in that this could really go both ways. Without treaties obligating an alliance to fight, I'll bet it becomes very easy to talk oneself into neutrality and staying out of a lot of conflicts. Time will tell the story on this one, but I think paperless diplomacy makes it a lot easier to see alliances for what they really are. That being said, I've got faith that the Grems won't use this to stay side-lined if a friend comes under fire. Since there's no more papers to be signed, I'd like to state that I think most of us in Kronos consider the Grems our friends I just hope that if someone decides to take the initiative and attack Grems (please do), that the world will prove the merit of this move with its support. I have no doubt of it. Best of luck with this Grems, and I sincerely hope this will serve as an example for many other alliances. Even if they don't want to dive in head-first, at least simplify your paper by getting rid of those musty old treaties everyone knows are not representative of your relations. Most alliances have at least one of these... take it out back, and shoot it! o/ EDIT: That's the other great thing about this move, it forces diplomats to be on their A game and not to lapse into complacency as is too often after a treaty gets signed. Grems will have to go out of their way to let their friends know who they are, but I don't see that as a bad thing. I'd rather that than be chained to people I haven't even spolen with for months. I think it's a good thing that people won't have as clear an idea what the sides in a war will be, it certainly makes curb-stomping harder. The one downside is that it may just lead to everyone having no guts at all and stagnation. But it will only take one alliance in a paperless world to set off quite a chain reaction. *gets giddy at the thought of wars where courage actually means something* Edited January 17, 2010 by Drostan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Watson895 Posted January 17, 2010 Report Share Posted January 17, 2010 This is lame. Without treaties you can't be drawn into a war. This is just a weak passive move. You might aswell change your name to gpä.. Why would one need treaties to join a war? Just because it is a reason to join does not mean it is a prerequisite. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zangmonkey Posted January 17, 2010 Report Share Posted January 17, 2010 (edited) Have you guys notified the Codex of your cancellation as well? I re-read the codex after seeing your post just to verify the fact that you're not making any sense here. Edited January 17, 2010 by Matthew PK Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zangmonkey Posted January 17, 2010 Report Share Posted January 17, 2010 Well, this certainly saves you the trouble of having to wiggle out of treaty obligations. Way to be proactive and cancel them before you have to disregard them. Can you link me towards some reading which would help me understand your hostility? Perhaps I've overlooked some things that affirm your perspective. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingEd Posted January 17, 2010 Report Share Posted January 17, 2010 Cool, this "new" Gramlims is very exciting and doing a lot of stuff. Good luck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spaarlaamp Posted January 17, 2010 Report Share Posted January 17, 2010 Why would one need treaties to join a war? Just because it is a reason to join does not mean it is a prerequisite. Joining a war without treaties is called 'bandwagoning'. That's why. It isn't accepted in this community. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spaarlaamp Posted January 17, 2010 Report Share Posted January 17, 2010 They still have their treaty with MHA. And their ties to former allies such as us whom would be willing to fight for them if need be without the need of a treaty. That is only one alliance. And I bet that treaty is non-chaining. So in the very slim chance that MHA gets attacked for no good reason Grä has to jump in. That will never happen. As for attacking alliances without treaties obligating you to do it, won't be done, will never be accepted. (sorry made that point already ) Question to the Grämlins: Do you still protect The Hives? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hizzy Posted January 17, 2010 Report Share Posted January 17, 2010 Joining a war without treaties is called 'bandwagoning'. That's why. It isn't accepted in this community. Bandwagoning refers more to joining a lopsided war for no reason but to benefit yourself... either by sucking up to the winners, getting a tech raid, or getting a piece of the surrender terms. Things that Gremlins have obviously showed a history of doing in the past. Right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zangmonkey Posted January 17, 2010 Report Share Posted January 17, 2010 Joining a war without treaties is called 'bandwagoning'. That's why. It isn't accepted in this community. Your definition of bandwagoning differs from mine. I've always considered bandwagoning joining to further crush an opponent or to seek spoils of a low-risk war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Posted January 17, 2010 Report Share Posted January 17, 2010 (edited) Question to the Grämlins: Do you still protect The Hives? Anyone who touches it will see. I don't advise it. Edited January 17, 2010 by Penlugue Solaris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D34th Posted January 17, 2010 Report Share Posted January 17, 2010 Will be interesting to see how this will work. Good luck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
i surge i Posted January 17, 2010 Report Share Posted January 17, 2010 Good luck even though i hate to see this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spaarlaamp Posted January 17, 2010 Report Share Posted January 17, 2010 Bandwagoning refers more to joining a lopsided war for no reason but to benefit yourself... either by sucking up to the winners, getting a tech raid, or getting a piece of the surrender terms.Things that Gremlins have obviously showed a history of doing in the past. Right? Grämlins can easily decide which war to join now. Call me a pessimist, but I don't think they will join a certain losing fight now. They'll just say deplomacy with that alliance has been lacking the last few weeks and see no reason to join the conflict. As for the history: Sure, but this has never been done. Have the Grämlins ever joined a war simply for friendship and without a treaty? Has anyone? Your definition of bandwagoning differs from mine.I've always considered bandwagoning joining to further crush an opponent or to seek spoils of a low-risk war. Again. Grämlins could easily go for low-risk wars only. No-one could say anything about that, because formally they have to do nothing. Anyone who touches them will see. Them? Only one nation left. And I would have tried it if in my range. Btw: Just like NSO the Grämlins basicly signed a ODP with the whole planet Bob. And that doctrine was lame too right? 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.