Jump to content

Nordreich Kaiserlich Decree


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 558
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

[s]Dodge the losing war with actual signed allies and hop on to the winning fight, the initial aggressive attack no less, with nothing more than a verbal agreement.

For shame.[/s]

Oh wait, I forgot you were actually in that war for a couple days. Meh. Sort of makes it even worse though.

Edited by HeroofTime55
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The best part of this topic is all the subtle confusion of people not knowing if what NoR did was right in their own eyes, if they should hail them or not, and if their attack on NPO was aggressive but okay or to throw them in with DH. The FAN DoW has the same feel to it. Good stuff.

For that, I congratulate NoR and FAN for making Planet Bob more fun. The whole treaty web mess is a problem, we all know it, and going in without formal treaty is good for Planet Bob, mixes things up. NoR and FAN are great examples of how to mend relationships. Interesting that NoR/FAN and NPO are such contrasting examples of how to do and not to do foreign affairs.

You've built a fine alliance NoR, good luck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Steve Buscemi' timestamp='1299275642' post='2652726']
The best part of this topic is all the subtle confusion of people not knowing if what NoR did was right in their own eyes, if they should hail them or not, and if their attack on NPO was aggressive but okay or to throw them in with DH. The FAN DoW has the same feel to it. Good stuff.

For that, I congratulate NoR and FAN for making Planet Bob more fun. The whole treaty web mess is a problem, we all know it, and going in without formal treaty is good for Planet Bob, mixes things up. NoR and FAN are great examples of how to mend relationships. Interesting that NoR/FAN and NPO are such contrasting examples of how to do and not to do foreign affairs.

You've built a fine alliance NoR, good luck.
[/quote]

I think that's because, while some folks have a really hard time justifying an outright aggressive attack on someone for no reason, FAN has a pretty good reason, and even if you decry the method, you have to admit that they, of all alliance, have a pretty airtight CB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='pezstar' timestamp='1299275843' post='2652732']
I think that's because, while some folks have a really hard time justifying an outright aggressive attack on someone for no reason, FAN has a pretty good reason, and even if you decry the method, you have to admit that they, of all alliance, have a pretty airtight CB.
[/quote]

That'll be the only one then ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Alterego' timestamp='1299266101' post='2652619']
Hey congrats on becoming the new Legion. They bashed your allies and extorted them to your "satisfaction while you watched Paralysed with fear. Now you repay their actions against your ally by becoming their meatshield. Hang your heads in shame. Nordreich, where no treaty is more binding than actual treaties
[/quote]
Who did? I don't really remember Doomhouse being involved in the DT front.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Emperor Khan' timestamp='1299273379' post='2652696']
So Captain Flinders was talking crap then?
[/quote]

No.

He was saying that the bonds between DT and NoR are serious enough that if anyone had hit DT and tried to put more pressure on them to accept terms they werent happy with......NoR would have rolled regardless of what that meant to the recent 'terms' they had signed. Along with others... ;)

Edited by chefjoe
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='raasaa' timestamp='1299273188' post='2652691']
its a part of their peace agreement with wF. Read it....

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=98159
[/quote]

In the strictest of terms, I'm not sure CSN actually fell within "any alliance who is engaged in combat with the New Polar Order or the New Pacific Order, or any collateral alliance who has declared war, by whatever means, in support of aforementioned combatants or in support of any party who has entered into conflict in support of those same combatants", because we didn't come in via an explicit treaty nor did we explicitly cite our reasoning.

It would probably have gone against the spirit of the treaty for them to attack us though, if not the exact wording of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Lord Brendan' timestamp='1299277257' post='2652749']
In the strictest of terms, I'm not sure CSN actually fell within "any alliance who is engaged in combat with the New Polar Order or the New Pacific Order, or any collateral alliance who has declared war, by whatever means, in support of aforementioned combatants or in support of any party who has entered into conflict in support of those same combatants", because we didn't come in via an explicit treaty nor did we explicitly cite our reasoning.

It would probably have gone against the spirit of the treaty for them to attack us though, if not the exact wording of it.
[/quote]

Well, you declared on LoSS who came into support TIO, who supported Polar. It wasn't a separate war, so it would violate the exact wording.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good luck. Nordreich is definitely one of the better alliances out there militarily, so this might hurt a little bit, NPO.


Edit: Still bitter, though, I see. You were quick to blame CSN, and declare that the war was going on only because of [i]their[/i] actions, and you now absolutely refuse to recognize CSN's assistance by negotiating further. Instead, you have to credit somebody -- anybody -- but CSN.

[quote]NoR would have rolled regardless of what that meant to the recent 'terms' they had signed.[/quote]

Those who blatantly break terms often do not get second chances for a very, very long time. It wouldn't have ended well for NoR. Luckily, cooler heads prevailed.

Edited by Penkala
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Antoine Roquentin' timestamp='1299277354' post='2652751']
Well, you declared on LoSS who came into support TIO, who supported Polar. It wasn't a separate war, so it would violate the exact wording.
[/quote]

But after TIO surrendered, the war was disconnected from the main one, at least until R&R joined.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Emperor Khan' timestamp='1299273379' post='2652696']
So Captain Flinders was talking crap then?
[/quote]
nopes. If needed, they would have defended DT...along with a bunch of DT's other allies.

Also, if any new alliances had declared war on DT, then NoR would have defended them without breaking any agreements :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='raasaa' timestamp='1299277645' post='2652757']
nopes. If needed, they would have defended DT...along with a bunch of DT's other allies.

Also, if any new alliances had declared war on DT, then NoR would have defended them without breaking any agreements :P
[/quote]

By the same token, if any NPO allies respond against NoR you are permitted to defend them yes?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='chefjoe' timestamp='1299277190' post='2652748']
No.

He was saying that the bonds between DT and NoR are serious enough that if anyone had hit DT and tried to put more pressure on them to accept terms they werent happy with......NoR would have rolled regardless of what that meant to the recent 'terms' they had signed.[/quote]
Very hard to believe they would have. It's pretty clear that DT weren't happy with the terms yet NoR describe them as satisfactory, doesn't add up.

[quote name='chefjoe' timestamp='1299277190' post='2652748'] Along with others... ;)
[/quote]
Yeah, shame that didn't happen.;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Emperor Khan' timestamp='1299277944' post='2652763']
Very hard to believe they would have. It's pretty clear that DT weren't happy with the terms yet NoR describe them as satisfactory, doesn't add up.


Yeah, shame that didn't happen.;)
[/quote]
While we may not of been happy, they were satisfactory enough for us to agree to them. And since we agreed to them then our ally sees them the say way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='pezstar' timestamp='1299275843' post='2652732']
FAN has a pretty good reason, and even if you decry the method, you have to admit that they, of all alliance, have a pretty airtight CB.
[/quote]

Well if there reason was the perma war then I would get it. But from what we've heard from them (althought I haven't really read much of the OWF the past couple weeks) the reason for the war has been more along the lines of "You didn't send us enough diplomats" or something along those lines.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm really not sure what to make of this. I've always had a deep respect for FAN and I love NoR, so I'll give you guys a good luck.
Though I'm mildly confused . . . time to find some of you on IRC to clarify :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='supercoolyellow' timestamp='1299278440' post='2652770']
Well if there reason was the perma war then I would get it. But from what we've heard from them (althought I haven't really read much of the OWF the past couple weeks) the reason for the war has been more along the lines of "You didn't send us enough diplomats" or something along those lines.
[/quote]

They've pretty clearly stated that it was the perma war, and that the reason they haven't "gotten over it" is that NPO didn't bother to send diplomats or actually perform any real diplomacy to ease tensions or anything like that. It wasn't enough for NPO to suddenly declare peace with FAN while Karma was holding a gun to their head. They needed to actually go fix the problem afterward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look, I don't mind fighting you, but do you really have to use "we're just following an agreement" as a cop out? You're not really any less responsible for your actions because your friend who charged in first asked you to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Penkala' timestamp='1299277436' post='2652752']
Good luck. Nordreich is definitely one of the better alliances out there militarily, so this might hurt a little bit, NPO.


Edit: Still bitter, though, I see. You were quick to blame CSN, and declare that the war was going on only because of [i]their[/i] actions, and you now absolutely refuse to recognize CSN's assistance by negotiating further. Instead, you have to credit somebody -- anybody -- but CSN.



Those who blatantly break terms often do not get second chances for a very, very long time. It wouldn't have ended well for NoR. Luckily, cooler heads prevailed.
[/quote]

I don't think they actually care about that a lot.
[quote name='Lord Brendan' timestamp='1299277761' post='2652759']
By the same token, if any NPO allies respond against NoR you are permitted to defend them yes?
[/quote]

Technically.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote]Make sure you demand 40k tech reps!! [/quote]

I'm quite sure that NoR will not demand, nor support or allow the demand, of any form of reparations from NPO.

[quote]They've pretty clearly stated that it was the perma war, and that the reason they haven't "gotten over it" is that NPO didn't bother to send diplomats or actually perform any real diplomacy to ease tensions or anything like that. It wasn't enough for NPO to suddenly declare peace with FAN while Karma was holding a gun to their head. They needed to actually go fix the problem afterward.[/quote]

Pretty much this.

Edited by Penkala
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...