PackAnimal Posted March 24, 2017 Share Posted March 24, 2017 So you're just conceding that Rose was nothing more than a gloried NAP? Even Steve could've done better than that. Please refer to the previous post which I have updated for you. You should do some of your normal stupid stuff to get you rolled by Pantheon, Rose and Mensa; that'd be amusing 3 Quote Mans two modes of existence can be thought of as his light and dark side. He is either the Protector or the Ravager. The Immovable Object or the Unstoppable Force. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seeker Posted March 25, 2017 Share Posted March 25, 2017 (edited) Coalition warfare bro. Ironically coalition warfare is the same reason Pantheon wasn't defended when they were hit by TEst and co. Also we had an ODP at the time Valkyrie hit us, and on opposing sides of a war, it would be an unrealistic expectation for them to have come into defend us (especially when they were already at war). Fear the mighty 2-man blitz. Everyone knows the 2-man blitz is the best strategy! /shrug Everyone needs a wake up call eventually even though it probably should have been more obvious it wasn't going to work well when you have nobody running any sort of Defense.. Lol! Edited March 25, 2017 by Seeker Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sketchy Posted March 25, 2017 Author Share Posted March 25, 2017 (edited) So you're just conceding that Rose was nothing more than a gloried NAP? Even Steve could've done better than that. Clearly the word optional is beyond your understanding. May I suggest voluntary? Perhaps non-compulsory? Edited March 25, 2017 by Sketchy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kastor Posted March 25, 2017 Share Posted March 25, 2017 Clearly the word optional is beyond your understanding. May I suggest voluntary? Perhaps non-compulsory? So you're okay with them not honoring a treaty and attacking your ally? Because you were attacked and they had an obligation(or an optional obligation) to defend you, while neither UPN nor VE had attacked any of their direct allies. You're fine with that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khorne Posted March 25, 2017 Share Posted March 25, 2017 So you're okay with them not honoring a treaty and attacking your ally? Because you were attacked and they had an obligation(or an optional obligation) to defend you, while neither UPN nor VE had attacked any of their direct allies. You're fine with that? Optional obligation? Ma dude crack doesn't suit you. 1 Quote "To give anything less than your best is to sacrifice the gift." ~ Prefontaine Pure Gold, ~KT chat: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Sketchy Posted March 25, 2017 Author Popular Post Share Posted March 25, 2017 Funnily enough, there was one alliance(I believe Valkyrie) that attacked Rose during Silent and they were nowhere to be found nor did they even think about honoring their treaty with Rose. So you're okay with them not honoring a treaty and attacking your ally? Because you were attacked and they had an obligation(or an optional obligation) to defend you, while neither UPN nor VE had attacked any of their direct allies. You're fine with that? Each signatory has the right to ask the other to come to their defense. Such aid can be in the form of military, economic, and diplomatic assistance. However, there is no obligation on the part of the signatories to offer such aid. Each signatory must respect the decision of the other, both in the affirmative or the negative. You claimed they didn't honor our treaty, I claimed they didn't dishonor it. They didn't break any of the clauses in our treaty therefore they didn't dishonor it. Additionally, even if at the time we had an MDP like this one, they still wouldn't be obligated to defend us from Valkyrie, since its non-chaining and we attacked Valkyries allies first. Using this logic, Rose should have entered in defense of Pantheon against TEst and Roz Wei. How I feel about them attacking VE/UPN has little to do with whether or not they broke a treaty, my "feelings", nor yours dictate what the terms of a treaty are. Anyway, I answered your question as requested, now I'm gonna revert to shitposting. 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Placentica Posted March 25, 2017 Share Posted March 25, 2017 I'm glad the game has progressed to a point where alliances can have more complex histories. And I think under Pantheon's current leadership, they are just fine. Fun to talk about the past, but the present is more telling I think here. Congrats to Rose and Pantheon! I really like slow burns from ODP to MDP. 1 Quote Hello! If you don't like this post please go here: https://politicsandwar.com/forums/index.php?app=core&module=usercp&tab=core&area=ignoredusers 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.