Fadeev Posted December 19, 2010 Report Share Posted December 19, 2010 I personally would adore the sweet smell of the NEW ZI! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vespassianus Posted December 19, 2010 Report Share Posted December 19, 2010 Kill them all NEW! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shovel Posted December 19, 2010 Report Share Posted December 19, 2010 Much respect NEW. Stick to your guns. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Miller Posted December 19, 2010 Report Share Posted December 19, 2010 [quote name='Robster83' timestamp='1292759686' post='2544301'] Thus far your protectors haven't shown anything to follow their claims of nukes and ZI for raiders. The only man with some balls it seems is Ertyy of Gramlins, a one man crusade to stand up for whats right. [/quote] He's personally stood up for things before... if only to sit back down rather quickly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Caparo Posted December 19, 2010 Report Share Posted December 19, 2010 I dont see any problem here, most alliance say in there disbandment post that they are protected by an alliance, Dark Fist said nothing related to that. Therefore, its fair game. give em hell NEW. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirWilliam Posted December 19, 2010 Report Share Posted December 19, 2010 [quote name='Haflinger' timestamp='1292769918' post='2544415'] I don't agree with NEW here, but at least they're not being hypocrites. A number of alliances - every single one that participated in the Red Raiding Safari - have made the argument that a nation has to be a formal member of an alliance that is either treatied to another alliance or above a minimum size to have any sovereignty. Dark Fist disbanded, so they don't have any formal members anymore. [/quote] I fail to see any correlation between that situation and this one (which seems to be implied). The fundamental difference between that situation and this one is that the red nations weren't protected (the modified Revenge Doctrine merely states that red nations should not be raided, not that they will be protected, and Article II Section B of Red Dawn merely states that the signatories will work to resolve such raids), whereas the nations constituting the DF AA were clearly protected by those stating it. [quote name='Haflinger' timestamp='1292769918' post='2544415'] I do hope that International wins this one, because then maybe people will say it's OK to protect alliance affiliations even without a formal alliance structure for the protected AA. [/quote] Judging from this thread, seemingly everyone other than NEW already says that. [quote name='Lord Caparo' timestamp='1292774372' post='2544458'] I dont see any problem here, most alliance say in there disbandment post that they are protected by an alliance, Dark Fist said nothing related to that. [/quote] It [i]was[/i] stated in the disbandment thread, a couple times (just not in the OP). NEW even acknowledges they saw the posts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Caparo Posted December 19, 2010 Report Share Posted December 19, 2010 [quote] It [i]was[/i] stated in the disbandment thread, a couple times (just not in the OP). NEW even acknowledges they saw the posts. [/quote] I Acknowledge that, but the fact still stands that 99.9% of alliances state it in the original disbandment notice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abdur Posted December 19, 2010 Report Share Posted December 19, 2010 [quote name='SirWilliam' timestamp='1292774565' post='2544461'] It [i]was[/i] stated in the disbandment thread, a couple times (just not in the OP). NEW even acknowledges they saw the posts. [/quote] I think what NEW are trying to say here is: IF you guys wanted to protect them, MAKE AN OFFICIAL ANNOUNCEMENT. TPE did that later on in the thread. But in the beginning, there was nothing except words from a TPE gov member. (And another alliance gov member, The INT, was it?) [spoiler]Let the stagnation end.[/spoiler] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnCapistan Posted December 19, 2010 Report Share Posted December 19, 2010 [quote name='Lord Caparo' timestamp='1292774702' post='2544463'] I Acknowledge that, but the fact still stands that 99.9% of alliances state it in the original disbandment notice. [/quote] It was still said publicly. Just because it's not stated in an OP doesn't mean it's not true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finnish Commie Posted December 19, 2010 Report Share Posted December 19, 2010 [quote name='abdur' timestamp='1292774813' post='2544465'] I think what NEW are trying to say here is: IF you guys wanted to protect them, MAKE AN OFFICIAL ANNOUNCEMENT. TPE did that later on in the thread. But in the beginning, there was nothing except words from a TPE gov member. (And another alliance gov member, The INT, was it?) [spoiler]Let the stagnation end.[/spoiler] [/quote] Well NEW started raiding remnants of DF eight hours after TPE had posted it's very, very clear-cut warning. So it doesn't really matter if it wasn't the first reply or in the OP, NEW knew that DF had protection and went in in any case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Caparo Posted December 19, 2010 Report Share Posted December 19, 2010 [quote name='Mr Damsky' timestamp='1292774934' post='2544467'] It was still said publicly. Just because it's not stated in an OP doesn't mean it's not true. [/quote] As with what Abdur said, usually its in the OP or in an announcement. the DEAD alliances EX ALLIES said it in passing, not as in an official post in the thread until TPE came along. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Caparo Posted December 19, 2010 Report Share Posted December 19, 2010 [quote name='Finnish Commie' timestamp='1292774995' post='2544468'] Well NEW started raiding remnants of DF eight hours after TPE had posted it's very, very clear-cut warning. So it doesn't really matter if it wasn't the first reply or in the OP, NEW knew that DF had protection and went in in any case. [/quote] Give me an alliance that isnt NEW that has raided a disbanded AA under protection? im sure they arent the only ones. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnCapistan Posted December 19, 2010 Report Share Posted December 19, 2010 (edited) [quote name='Lord Caparo' timestamp='1292775060' post='2544469'] As with what Abdur said, usually its in the OP or in an announcement. the DEAD alliances EX ALLIES said it in passing, not as in an official post in the thread until TPE came along. [/quote] Why the hell does it matter. They told you they were protected [b]and[/b] provided proof of said protection. NEW should have peaced out immediately and payed reps for their stupidity. But they didn't and here we are now. [quote name='Lord Caparo' timestamp='1292775123' post='2544470'] Give me an alliance that isnt NEW that has raided a disbanded AA under protection? im sure they arent the only ones. [/quote] They're not, but what does that matter? Just because you're not the only person that $%&@ed up doesn't make it okay, in fact it makes it worse because you should know better. Edited December 19, 2010 by Mr Damsky Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Caparo Posted December 19, 2010 Report Share Posted December 19, 2010 [quote name='Mr Damsky' timestamp='1292775182' post='2544471'] Why the hell does it matter. They told you they were protected [b]and[/b] provided proof of said protection. NEW should have peaced out immediately and payed reps for their stupidity. But they didn't and here we are now. [/quote] It was pretty much like a raid on a protectorate, you can get peace easily but you probably wont get reps. NEW has since sent peace to all the DF nations remaining. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirWilliam Posted December 19, 2010 Report Share Posted December 19, 2010 [quote name='Lord Caparo' timestamp='1292774702' post='2544463'] I Acknowledge that, but the fact still stands that 99.9% of alliances state it in the original disbandment notice. [/quote] Regardless of its location, it was stated. That's ultimately all that matters. [quote name='abdur' timestamp='1292774813' post='2544465'] I think what NEW are trying to say here is: IF you guys wanted to protect them, MAKE AN OFFICIAL ANNOUNCEMENT. TPE did that later on in the thread. But in the beginning, there was nothing except words from a TPE gov member. (And another alliance gov member, The INT, was it?) [spoiler]Let the stagnation end.[/spoiler] [/quote] The heads of alliances stated they would be protecting the AA. It doesn't really get much more official than that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnCapistan Posted December 19, 2010 Report Share Posted December 19, 2010 [quote name='Lord Caparo' timestamp='1292775266' post='2544475'] It was pretty much like a raid on a protectorate, you can get peace easily but you probably wont get reps. [/quote] Every time I've ever had a protectorate with someone and they were raided I've always gotten reps. Well, almost every time Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abdur Posted December 19, 2010 Report Share Posted December 19, 2010 [quote name='SirWilliam' timestamp='1292775267' post='2544476'] The heads of alliances stated they would be protecting the AA. It doesn't really get much more official than that. [/quote] What I am saying is that, knowing how much DF is hated. The least they could have done is make an official announcement. That is, if they REALLY wanted to protect DF. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delta1212 Posted December 19, 2010 Report Share Posted December 19, 2010 [quote name='Lord Caparo' timestamp='1292775266' post='2544475'] It was pretty much like a raid on a protectorate, you can get peace easily but you probably wont get reps. NEW has since sent peace to all the DF nations remaining. [/quote] You must deal with some atrocious protectors if that's what you think common practice for attacking a protectorate is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Caparo Posted December 19, 2010 Report Share Posted December 19, 2010 [quote name='Mr Damsky' timestamp='1292775361' post='2544479'] Every time I've ever had a protectorate with someone and they were raided I've always gotten reps. Well, almost every time [/quote] I was in an alliance protected by GATO, i was raided by GOONS, got no reps just peace, raided by FOK, got the exact same. therefore why does NEW have to pay up when these well connected alliances can get away with anything? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Caparo Posted December 19, 2010 Report Share Posted December 19, 2010 [quote name='Delta1212' timestamp='1292775809' post='2544485'] You must deal with some atrocious protectors if that's what you think common practice for attacking a protectorate is. [/quote] I must have, but therefore, it still stands at it has happened to plenty of protectorates whos protector has just ignored the aggressor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delta1212 Posted December 19, 2010 Report Share Posted December 19, 2010 [quote name='Lord Caparo' timestamp='1292775856' post='2544487'] I was in an alliance protected by GATO, i was raided by GOONS, got no reps just peace, raided by FOK, got the exact same. therefore why does NEW have to pay up when these well connected alliances can get away with anything? [/quote] I repeat, you must deal with some atrocious protectors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnCapistan Posted December 19, 2010 Report Share Posted December 19, 2010 [quote name='Lord Caparo' timestamp='1292775856' post='2544487'] I was in an alliance protected by GATO, i was raided by GOONS, got no reps just peace, raided by FOK, got the exact same. therefore why does NEW have to pay up when these well connected alliances can get away with anything? [/quote] I'm sorry your protectorate was apparently to incompetent to ask for reps, that being said that's usually not what happens. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Caparo Posted December 19, 2010 Report Share Posted December 19, 2010 (edited) [quote name='Delta1212' timestamp='1292775943' post='2544490'] I repeat, you must deal with some atrocious protectors. [/quote] well, unlike the people NEW raided, we were an ALLIANCE, who had an alliance STRUCTURE therefore we should have been given reps, though we didnt, so why should NEW have to when they already have given peace? [quote name='Mr Damsky' timestamp='1292775992' post='2544491'] I'm sorry your protectorate was apparently to incompetent to ask for reps, that being said that's usually not what happens. [/quote] Usually protectors just either ignore it, deal with it or make a fuss, usually the first option. Edited December 19, 2010 by Lord Caparo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirWilliam Posted December 19, 2010 Report Share Posted December 19, 2010 [quote name='abdur' timestamp='1292775520' post='2544482'] What I am saying is that, knowing how much DF is hated. The least they could have done is make an official announcement. That is, if they REALLY wanted to protect DF. [/quote] I feel ya. I'm saying though that an official statement of intent to protect an AA [i]was[/i] made (just not in the manner some desire). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnCapistan Posted December 19, 2010 Report Share Posted December 19, 2010 (edited) [quote name='Lord Caparo' timestamp='1292776043' post='2544493'] Usually protectors just either ignore it, deal with it or make a fuss, usually the first option. [/quote] Once again that's not what usually happens. I've been raided as a protectorate and have gotten reps, and I've had my protectorates raided and have gotten them reps. Trust me I'm a doctor. Edited December 19, 2010 by Mr Damsky 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.