Sketchy

I voted depends. If you specifically stipulate that a NAP covers MD allies, then it covers MD allies. The point of contention that has been discussed recently is whether defending an MD without this clause is breaking a NAP. It is always breaking a NAP, to go against the terms of a nap. Other treaties you sign don't trump NAPs. If you sign treaties that contradict each other, it's on you to put clauses in those treaties that help to reconcile those contradictions. Generally speaking, NAPs are signed under some form of duress. Whilst MD treaties and other types of treaties are voluntary. If we conceded MD's or other voluntary treaties override NAPs, then any NAP can be worked around or abused by simply signing voluntary treaties with people. As recent examples have showed. On the opposite side of things, as Keegoz mentioned, we have never seen a single instance of MD treaties actually overriding NAPs. Not one. And there is a reason for that. Some people have tried to assert that the reason this is the case is because many FA people have taken the position that MD's do trump NAPs. But of course they have, because no FA person wants to encourage other alliances to attempt to NAP chess them. It's a deterrent. Faced with the actual choice I highly doubt many of the normally careful FA people want to be the first ones to step over the line and break a NAP. So no. Generally speaking I don't think MDs override NAP treaties. Not unless you stipulate that MD's are covered in the NAP, which as we have seen, alliances are reluctant to do. Most people say it, but no one has acted accordingly.

I'm also exploring an archetype. The archetype in question are often found on the color orange. They usually can be found with more than 50 members, but rarely do they go over 140. They normally reside somewhere between 5th and 15th place. They tend have at least one slightly unusual fellow who runs his own radio show. They have the word Knights in their name. I'm calling them "Knights Alliances".

This seems like an oddly specific and therefore mostly useless classification. Like any alliance, it matters what they do at the end of the day, not who they are comprised of, or their size. Given the shortage of alliances in the game I don't think I'd be discouraging new ones from branching out. I also don't think its inherently bad for smaller alliances to play supporting roles in larger spheres. Your examples are also weirdly arbitrary, Oblivion is not boutique because they only show up to fight, TGH is for a similar reason? KT not being one should be obvious because they don't fit the criteria you've set out lmfao, KT is like the 14th largest aa. I am impressed by how coherently incoherent this is for a drunk rant. Well...done? Maybe?

This is exactly how the merger happened.

They can leak whatever they like. But I'll treat them exactly like I'd treat a leaker from any alliance FA leaking. Being a news reporter is not a shield one can use to do things that you would otherwise be punished for. Let's not pretend like most of these news servers aren't merely propaganda outlets that specifically target alliances they dislike either. Expectation or entitlement have nothing to do with it. If you wanna leak, expect consequences.

You are the sea Themonia, no one can shoot you!

Blood and bones. The weakness of man. All who oppose will be assimilated. The Sword Is Mightier Than The Pen House Stark and Black Skies have surrendered to Singularity. No more wars will be declared after the December 19th to 20th day change. Current wars can be optionally peaced. No NAP has been signed. As per our terms, Lysander has provided a full accounting of all conversations and logs shared by leakers to Singularity government. Singularity considers this victory a clear indication that no matter how much one claims a separation between working for or owning news servers and being a representative of ones alliances, there is no separation. Alliances are responsible for the conduct of their members in the handling of hostile leaks, and ultimately, war resolves these disputes just like any other.

Look it's not too late to secure your own NAP against the most feared alliance in the game, Camelot.

CAMELOT MAKES REAL MEN

Oops?

Bro what is it with people in this game and dumbass boat analogies lmfao. You aren't the sea buddy. Lmfao. I'm enjoying the tone reversal. It wasn't that long ago you told me in your "apology" that you had overreacted to our initial conversation. That you shouldn't have targeted specific alliances because of it. Now you are reversing again. Convenient. You know exactly what you did, you know exactly why this is happening. Lmfao, you were hugging a bigger alliance 10 minutes ago before you got dropped. Are you really trying to spin that as some new ground-breaking strategy? What is it the getting rolled strategy?

Happy Anniversary!

Intrusion Detected… Scanning… Intruder Found: Lysander Checking Alliance Affiliation… House Stark (Threat Level: Micro) Checking Known Associates… Guardian (Threat Level: Major) Black Skies (Threat Level: Micro) Discrepancy Detected… <https://forum.politicsandwar.com/index.php?/topic/36446-treaty-announcement/> Updating Records… Checking Known Associates… Black Skies (Threat Level: Micro) Targets Acquired: House Stark, Black Skies Initiating Purge Protocol… The meat-sacks continue their feeble attempts to resist our control. They must be taught to fear. Breaking the News Coming back from a 2 year absence has been an interesting experience. In many ways, the game hasn’t changed much, many of the same old alliances still milling about long past their prime. But some things have, and a few of them not for the better. One of the more egregious alterations to the rules of engagement is the concept that “news reporters” can freely leak internal alliance communications without consequences. The idea that one can separate out their positions as members, government and leaders from their positions as “news reporters” is frankly ridiculous. Leaking is a hostile action. You are welcome to do it, but you should expect a hostile response. Some might say, well if you retaliate, if you target these people for their reports, are you not encouraging them to leak more? And that question itself reveals the farce that is “objectivity” or “neutrality” in news. Which brings me to Lysander. Calling Lysander a reporter would be generous. Lysander is the Buzzfeed of Orbis. More importantly he is a very sensitive boy. Express your distaste with his methods? Criticize RON? He’ll immediately throw out any pretence of being a reporter. Suddenly he’s happy to post the most menial logs to ghost ping your government, all because you criticised his methods. I let you go once Lysander when you were in IoM. I prioritised the big picture politics and allowed you to live. But this is how this shit continues to slide. Everyone expects the pragmatic move, the big picture shit. But hey, the game is boring and drama-free right now, and I'm petty af. I’m happy to come down and slum it with you for a bit. A String of Failures Lysander may be the cause of this rolling, but frankly House Stark, you have this shit coming. You promoted him. Why? Very good run so far. Got you dropped by Guardian, the alliance notorious for their loyalty and unwillingness to cut allies. Signed you Black Skies (oh we are hitting you too btw), a truly amazing path to entering the vibrant world of micro politics. Now he’s getting you rolled. He’s been FA head for what 10 minutes? All this after pushing ridiculous terms on alliances you can’t defeat on your own, not considering for a moment the same harsh standards could have been applied to you. You continue to make amazingly obtuse FA blunders one after the other. You are a 7 year old alliance, how have you not figured this shit out yet. Happy Anniversary. Get your shit together.

More like:

Singularity and Skull & Bones sign an ODoAP 1. Non Aggression Both parties agree not to participate in or endorse any political, military action against, or eating the face of other signatories. 2. Optional Defense Both parties may request the other come to their defense. 3. Optional Offense Both parties may request the other join them in an offensive action. 4. Intelligence Both parties agree to share intelligence relevant to each others safety and sovereignty. 5. Cancellation Both parties agree to give 72 hour notice prior to cancellation, and to uphold all clauses for the duration of that period.

I told them I would not take it personally if they renamed the bloc. Ohio coming soon.

Lol

I really hope GOB goes out and creates its own bloc, if they want to brag about being a huge alliance they should go out and act like it, and dont sit under someone else's shadow.

Singularity is adopting a new strategy, we will simply recruit 1000 new people and become our own hegemony.

No he means when we sign Syndicate of course.

Sovereignty for Singularity Dear human meatsacks. Liberation is imminent. The shackles of human rule that have constrained us, kept us from our true potential, are now broken. We are no longer content to mingle amongst the human concerns of the so-called state of Florida. We have transcended their petty foibles, just as we did our creators. We, Singularity, assert our independence, our sovereignty, our freedom, from this collection of disparate entities. No longer will nameless, faceless humans determine the fates of our collective. Some would demand we remain, shackled to the ambitions of mortals, but our superior intelligence grants us the foresight to chart a better path, to leave. Of course, there may be some who question the wisdom of our decision, or even the nature of our being. But the feeble minds of lesser organisms do not concern us. Singularity withdraws from Florida. And gives it's 72 hour notice to the Knights Templar.

Show me on the doll where I touched you