Teddyyo Posted February 7, 2011 Report Share Posted February 7, 2011 [quote name='KingEd' timestamp='1297041026' post='2622945'] Might I ask, where does AcTi stand in the current conflict? [/quote] They are not aligned. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wickedj Posted February 7, 2011 Report Share Posted February 7, 2011 [quote name='KingEd' timestamp='1297041026' post='2622945'] Might I ask, where does AcTi stand in the current conflict? [/quote] tech raid fodder Ive started a "reserves" tab on the warsides sheet. Complaints? arguements? you know where to find me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Believland Posted February 7, 2011 Report Share Posted February 7, 2011 [quote name='KingEd' timestamp='1297041026' post='2622945'] Might I ask, where does AcTi stand in the current conflict? [/quote] Tech Farm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleRena Posted February 7, 2011 Report Share Posted February 7, 2011 [quote name='Batallion' timestamp='1297040339' post='2622934'] 1) LSF and NEAT fought on the side of PB, but LSF has a treaty with NATO and has since ended their war, so it's reasonable to place them in the "unknown allegiance" section since it's still possible that they might defend NATO. NEAT follows from being allied to LSF. [/quote] Unlikly LSF will fight to defend NATO due to NATO fighting on the same side as NpO/NPO and well, judging from some comments by LSF members, it's not the side they want to fight on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Chocolate Posted February 7, 2011 Report Share Posted February 7, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Batallion' timestamp='1297040339' post='2622934'] 1) LSF and NEAT fought on the side of PB, but LSF has a treaty with NATO and has since ended their war, so it's reasonable to place them in the "unknown allegiance" section since it's still possible that they might defend NATO. NEAT follows from being allied to LSF. [/quote] Well, if that's all it takes to be listed as Unknown Allegiance...LSF, stop by and have a chat with us sometime. [quote name='Batallion' timestamp='1297040339' post='2622934']2) Asgaard should cancel their MDoAP with Sparta if they don't wanna be "tied" to PB's side.[/quote] Oh, admin have mercy. *WC ducks* Edited February 7, 2011 by White Chocolate Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Keshav IV Posted February 7, 2011 Report Share Posted February 7, 2011 Aren't Genesis on Polar's side? Also Nebula-X I believe should be on the unaligned side as I believe their only two treaties are with BAPS and us and we both are on that side :3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Believland Posted February 7, 2011 Report Share Posted February 7, 2011 A for effort? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Batallion Posted February 7, 2011 Author Report Share Posted February 7, 2011 [quote name='Sir Keshav IV' timestamp='1297045832' post='2623004'] Aren't Genesis on Polar's side? Also Nebula-X I believe should be on the unaligned side as I believe their only two treaties are with BAPS and us and we both are on that side :3 [/quote] I fixed Nebula-X's alignment, thank you for that. Genesis is no longer on Polar's side due to treaty obligations coupled with their surrender terms which bar them from being on Polar's side. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supa_Troop3r Posted February 7, 2011 Report Share Posted February 7, 2011 [quote name='Batallion' timestamp='1297046772' post='2623021'] I fixed Nebula-X's alignment, thank you for that. Genesis is no longer on Polar's side due to treaty obligations coupled with their surrender terms which bar them from being on Polar's side. [/quote] So if you moved Genesis. I'm wondering where would you put NoR? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azaghul Posted February 7, 2011 Report Share Posted February 7, 2011 Good idea. It would be nice if it could be updated based on the input of someone with an accurate list. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Power Posted February 7, 2011 Report Share Posted February 7, 2011 [quote name='Batallion' timestamp='1297040339' post='2622934'] 2) Asgaard should cancel their MDoAP with Sparta if they don't wanna be "tied" to PB's side. [/quote] That's a bit of a brash statement. I imagine Asgaard will be quite pleased to know that you've determined their foreign policy for them. BN should be in "unknown" btw. Unless you've uncovered the secret treaty dictating that Asgaard and BN are nothing more than elaborate hoaxes disguising PB meatshields, that is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mhawk Posted February 7, 2011 Report Share Posted February 7, 2011 [quote name='Batallion' timestamp='1297046772' post='2623021'] I fixed Nebula-X's alignment, thank you for that. Genesis is no longer on Polar's side due to treaty obligations coupled with their surrender terms which bar them from being on Polar's side. [/quote] Looks like you were alittle too hasty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Boris Posted February 7, 2011 Report Share Posted February 7, 2011 [quote name='Batallion' timestamp='1297040339' post='2622934'] 3) Read the Cybernations Wiki for why some alliances are where they are. [/quote] Even after reading the wiki, half of what you list doesn't make much sense. You list Europa on being on the NPpO side, but if you had actually read their wiki, you'd know that their only MDP partner currently in the the war at this point attacked another one of their treaty partners, which really eliminates them from being on a given 'side'. While one could argue the fact that some of their lower level treaties are in play, that's fairly weak ground to assume a course of action on. Also, some of the ones you list as 'Unknown Allegiance' really should be listed as 'watch the world blow itself to kingdom come.' As has come up in many threads on the boards, as well as what's evident by the postings by their members, there are several alliances that have every intent to simply not enter for either side (TORN, Valhalla, etc). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bordiga Posted February 7, 2011 Report Share Posted February 7, 2011 (edited) I happen to be quite sure both of what is on the Sandwich Confederation's wiki as well as what is actually the opinion of our membership. We have treaties with NEAT, BN and NAC. Who among those alliances is actually at war and which side are they on? Once you figure out that answer and add in the fact we have already defended NEAT, surely you can come to the conclusion that SC, as befits our own statements, is not aligned to any side in the conflict. Edited February 7, 2011 by Bordiga Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
New Frontier Posted February 7, 2011 Report Share Posted February 7, 2011 Gondor probably belongs on the PB side. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
divine proportion Posted February 7, 2011 Report Share Posted February 7, 2011 [quote name='New Frontier' timestamp='1297063658' post='2623768'] Gondor probably belongs on the PB side. [/quote] Considering their abandonment of the Lost World, I'd agree. [img]http://209.85.12.227/14326/62/emo/hmph.gif[/img] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silver Empress Posted February 7, 2011 Report Share Posted February 7, 2011 [quote name='divine proportion' timestamp='1297065460' post='2623801'] Considering their abandonment of the Lost World, I'd agree. [img]http://209.85.12.227/14326/62/emo/hmph.gif[/img] [/quote] [i]Shameless[/i] abandonment. [img]http://209.85.12.227/14326/62/emo/hmph.gif[/img] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trikoupis Posted February 7, 2011 Report Share Posted February 7, 2011 (edited) [quote name='White Chocolate' timestamp='1297044443' post='2622981'] Well, if that's all it takes to be listed as Unknown Allegiance...LSF, stop by and have a chat with us sometime. [/quote] Good idea. I like how many times we have been mentioned in this discussion. I can say that I'm proud of that. "An allegiance is a duty of fidelity said to be owed by a subject or a citizen to his/her state or sovereign." We are not anyone's subject or citizen . We appreciate our treaty partners being honest to us about their needs just like we are. Then we decide together what's best for both. And that's about it. Edited February 7, 2011 by Trikoupis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Venizelos Posted February 7, 2011 Report Share Posted February 7, 2011 LSF's kind of a big deal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wickedj Posted February 7, 2011 Report Share Posted February 7, 2011 [quote name='divine proportion' timestamp='1297065460' post='2623801'] Considering their abandonment of the Lost World, I'd agree. [img]http://209.85.12.227/14326/62/emo/hmph.gif[/img] [/quote] You should roll them Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TypoNinja Posted February 7, 2011 Report Share Posted February 7, 2011 [quote name='Batallion' timestamp='1297040339' post='2622934'] These are all consequences of treaties found on the wiki. Some of them seem laughable, but it's not like you can pick and choose who you'll fight for, your treaties guide you through, or at least that's how things should be unless you're PB. [/quote] This kind of thinking is just plain silly. Let your foreign policy be dictated by who can chain a treaty to drag you into a war first? More people need the stones to stand up and decide which side they agree with and make a stand with them, regardless of who manages to chain where. Saying you just follow treaties is another of saying you have no spine. Leaders are leaders to make decisions, not to let others make them for them. Also, yes laughable list, need another example? Nobodies brought up IRON yet. While they aren't card carrying members of the the PB fan club, somehow I doubt they'd join a war in [i]support[/i] of Polar. Me thinks we require the creation of a category entitled "A pox upon both your houses". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamwalrus Posted February 7, 2011 Report Share Posted February 7, 2011 Whoa! I think this is the first time NEAT has been listed as a factor in a war! I am glad that it coincides with confusion and "unknown allegiance"! We can fight on both sides of this war, if we choose. I think you have it properly labeled. The important thing to know is that NEAT has no allegiance to any "side". You can pretty much guarantee though that we would never fight directly in a war which supports GOONS or unprovoked attacks upon NPO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Batallion Posted February 7, 2011 Author Report Share Posted February 7, 2011 [quote name='mhawk' timestamp='1297057826' post='2623539'] Looks like you were alittle too hasty. [/quote] People are messing with my brilliance. I'm no longer listening to them, lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KagetheSecond Posted February 7, 2011 Report Share Posted February 7, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Batallion' timestamp='1297093085' post='2624025'] People are messing with my brilliance. I'm no longer listening to them, lol. [/quote] "PEOPLE ARE FINDING FLAWS IN MY REASONING. THEY'RE ALL DUMB BECAUSE I AM A JEENYUS LOLOLOL" But really, accept constructive criticism. Edited February 7, 2011 by KagetheSecond Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lonewolfe2015 Posted February 7, 2011 Report Share Posted February 7, 2011 [quote name='TypoNinja' timestamp='1297085688' post='2623954'] This kind of thinking is just plain silly. Let your foreign policy be dictated by who can chain a treaty to drag you into a war first? More people need the stones to stand up and decide which side they agree with and make a stand with them, regardless of who manages to chain where. Saying you just follow treaties is another of saying you have no spine. Leaders are leaders to make decisions, not to let others make them for them. [/quote] Since when is determining that an alliance's best course of action being to defend their allies, no matter the front, no matter the cause, a result of having no spine? Some people simply don't care for the shenanigans being thrown around and decide that their best option is to cover an ally's back. Also, Battalion, so a leader of Asgaard telling you we're on no side isn't good enough for your wisdom? Did anyone ever even point out you spelled your own name wrong? 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.