Jump to content

New Pacific Order - Regnum Invictorum Treaty


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 141
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

This treaty is full of pure win. :D I support this in every way possible (obviously, since I signed it). I wish I had been one of the first people to hail this but the whole being out of town thing has me well and thoroughly hosed. :P good times.

o/ New Pacific Order
o/ Regnum Invictorum
o/ Jor, Cortath, Mary, Vektor, Learz and all the other involved parties (particulary Haf and Atlashill from the Invicta side)
o/ LolCats
o/ Jack-Boots
o/ hailing

Finis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Arcturus Jefferson' date='20 May 2010 - 10:01 PM' timestamp='1274407252' post='2306264']
They [i]did[/i] just re-sign with Invicta...
[/quote]

While a valued ally (coincidentally Valhalla maintains a PIAT with Invicta), you don't honestly see Invicta as the lynchpin of their new group of allies, do you? <_<

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='ChairmanHal' date='20 May 2010 - 07:13 PM' timestamp='1274407980' post='2306283']
While a valued ally (coincidentally Valhalla maintains a PIAT with Invicta), you don't honestly see Invicta as the lynchpin of their new group of allies, do you? <_<
[/quote]

Invicta will never be anything more than "loyal minion". But you always need loyal minions.




To do your bidding.

Edited by Sal Paradise
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Congratulations to both Invicta and NPO.

[quote name='lebubu' date='21 May 2010 - 12:15 PM' timestamp='1274408113' post='2306289']
here's to you getting crushed together soon

ooc: especially for the icanhazcheezburger imagery
[/quote]

Pleasant as always, great to see. ^_^ Stagnated habits are always fun. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='NoFish' date='20 May 2010 - 09:15 PM' timestamp='1274408122' post='2306292']
Congratulations on re-signing with your long time friends and allies, NPO. When should we expect to see the IRON, TOP and MHA treaties?
[/quote]
MCXA and GGA are yet to come ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Sal Paradise' date='20 May 2010 - 10:17 PM' timestamp='1274408246' post='2306293']
Invicta will never be anything more than "loyal minion". But you always need loyal minions.




To do your bidding.
[/quote]

LOL GPA.

Good to see this treaty signed, guys. Congrats. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Farrin Xies' date='20 May 2010 - 08:00 PM' timestamp='1274407239' post='2306263']
Invicta and us,
Treatied together today
So awesome

See, don't haiku make everything better?
[/quote]
[b]WHY YES, HAIKU DO.
THEY PROVIDE CALM, SERENE VERSE
FOR A BUSTLING BOB[/b]

Haiku aside, Invicta has had many friends and allies, be it by treaty or by continual mutual respect, and we are glad to once again call Pacifica our comrade in arms. We look forward to this new chapter in Pacifica's Monogatari and in our friendship, especially as the newest market for fans of Invicta's Twenty20 cricket league.

o/ Invicta
o/ Pacifica
o/ Shorthand names for our formal alliance names
o/ Haiku
o/ Cricket
[b]o/ BOULEVARDS \o[/b] (Which I can finally export to Pacifica without their nations having to pay KARMA tariffs on it!)

Also, :wub: Dawny :wub:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

[quote name='AirMe' date='20 May 2010 - 08:27 PM' timestamp='1274398035' post='2305980']
As you stated, they had a year and a half to build relations. Every time MK was under terms, our diplos were out attempting to make new friends.



A treaty with Ronin requires a metric ton more effort than that. Ask Gondor how long it took to get an OMP done.
[/quote]

Time well spent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Congrats generally.

[quote name='Jorost' date='20 May 2010 - 05:56 PM' timestamp='1274396170' post='2305882']
II. A direct attack on one signatory by an alliance that is not required to do so by one of its own publically-announced treaties is considered an act of war against the other signatory, and will be responded to in kind.
[/quote]

I can see the defensive value of insisting on public treaties. No surprises. However one of the arguments I've heard as to why people sign MDP's and not ODP's is that otherwise they can't argue that they were "required" to get involved. Assuming this is correct, I do not see the defensive value.

Anyone who may decide to attack any alliance I am a part of is free to sign optional treaties all they want. ;) I would rather they do so and decide later NOT to get involved on the opposite side of a war from our side (whatever side that may be - this isn't a comment on the particular signatories but rather the policy in general) than decide to make it mandatory out of fear that I'd make a big deal out of it later.

Edited by White Chocolate
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...