Auctor Posted April 27, 2017 Share Posted April 27, 2017 I don't think we had an expectation they would break their NAP's. Not actually hitting alliances that committed the grave sin of defending us would have been just fine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tevron Posted April 27, 2017 Share Posted April 27, 2017 (edited) I don't think we had an expectation they would break their NAP's. Not actually hitting alliances that committed the grave sin of defending us would have been just fine. And I agree with that, but I see people like greatkitteh dropping the text of that treaty in several threads, and I recently read some of those to see what was actually said. https://politicsandwar.com/forums/index.php?/topic/13434-the-knights-radiant-declaration-of-war/?p=248720 https://politicsandwar.com/forums/index.php?/topic/13434-the-knights-radiant-declaration-of-war/?p=248756 Specifically, you were among those who expected TKR to break their NAP, in the above quote that includes you, you stress the importance of honoring defensive treaty obligations above others. To be honest, I don't think TKR handled this the best, but there has been this rhetoric circulating for quite some time, and you were among those spreading it. It is easy to say now that you have changed your opinion on the matter, and good for you, that's being a human, but it doesn't mean that the expectation wasn't there back then because I can just look at the forums and see that in a lazy minute. I'm sure there's more on this, but I'd rather not waste the next one on it. xD EDIT: Important messup in typing Edited May 2, 2017 by Tevron 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hadesflames Posted April 28, 2017 Share Posted April 28, 2017 And I agree with that, but I see people like greatkitteh dropping the text of that treaty in several threads, and I recently read some of those to see what was actually said. https://politicsandwar.com/forums/index.php?/topic/13434-the-knights-radiant-declaration-of-war/?p=248720 https://politicsandwar.com/forums/index.php?/topic/13434-the-knights-radiant-declaration-of-war/?p=248756 Specifically, you were among those who expected NPO to break their NAP, in the above quote that includes you, you stress the importance of honoring defensive treaty obligations above others. To be honest, I don't think TKR handled this the best, but there has been this rhetoric circulating for quite some time, and you were among those spreading it. It is easy to say now that you have changed your opinion on the matter, and good for you, that's being a human, but it doesn't mean that the expectation wasn't there back then because I can just look at the forums and see that in a lazy minute. I'm sure there's more on this, but I'd rather not waste the next one on it. xD But...None of NPO's allies hit any of NPO's other allies in this war...In NPOFT, a fair number of TKR's allies all hit one of TKR's allies all at once. You're comparing apples to oranges. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tevron Posted April 28, 2017 Share Posted April 28, 2017 But...None of NPO's allies hit any of NPO's other allies in this war...In NPOFT, a fair number of TKR's allies all hit one of TKR's allies all at once. You're comparing apples to oranges. I understand that, if you read my post with a bit more scrutiny, you would see I was replying to Auctor about a different war, one that I mistakenly brought up, but upon which he made a claim. He said this: I don't think we had an expectation they would break their NAP's. Not actually hitting alliances that committed the grave sin of defending us would have been just fine. I showed him how he had a different expectation in the past based on his own forum posts. I hope that clarified things! (Though on the other hand, to add a little fuel to the fire, Mensa was hit by Zodiac, an ally of BK. If NPO truly is mad about what TKR did and considered it dishonorable, they should perhaps take some consideration into BK's actions this war.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kastor Posted April 29, 2017 Share Posted April 29, 2017 Basically TKR are bad allies, sphere oriented, and treaties don't matter to them, only Syndisphere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cypher Posted April 29, 2017 Share Posted April 29, 2017 Basically TKR are bad allies, sphere oriented, and treaties don't matter to them, only Syndisphere. You could replace TKR with BK, Zodiac, Cornerstone and a few others with the way they've been conducted themselves this war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smith Posted April 29, 2017 Share Posted April 29, 2017 Basically TKR are bad allies, sphere oriented, and treaties don't matter to them, only Syndisphere. >tries to switch sides pre war >calls others bad allies 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auctor Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 (edited) And I agree with that, but I see people like greatkitteh dropping the text of that treaty in several threads, and I recently read some of those to see what was actually said. https://politicsandwar.com/forums/index.php?/topic/13434-the-knights-radiant-declaration-of-war/?p=248720 https://politicsandwar.com/forums/index.php?/topic/13434-the-knights-radiant-declaration-of-war/?p=248756 Specifically, you were among those who expected NPO to break their NAP, in the above quote that includes you, you stress the importance of honoring defensive treaty obligations above others. To be honest, I don't think TKR handled this the best, but there has been this rhetoric circulating for quite some time, and you were among those spreading it. It is easy to say now that you have changed your opinion on the matter, and good for you, that's being a human, but it doesn't mean that the expectation wasn't there back then because I can just look at the forums and see that in a lazy minute. I'm sure there's more on this, but I'd rather not waste the next one on it. xD I don't think you read my post. I refer to defensive treaty obligations but our treaty was in fact a defensive treaty. I would have considered it entirely appropriate if they'd chosen not to hit alliances defending us while also not hitting their own allies. In doing so they'd have discharged their defensive treaty obligations to us in at the very basic level not harming our defense. EDIT: to iterate, I'm arguing the exact same consistent argument in the post you linked. Read the post I was responding to for context. Edited May 2, 2017 by Auctor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prefonteen Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 Yes but you disagree and that makes your opinion stupid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greatkitteh Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 >tries to switch sides pre war >calls others bad allies >doesnt let allies switch sodes out of their own (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) saltines >calls others bad allies Quote :sheepy: :sheepy: Greatkitteh was here.- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auctor Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 Yes but you disagree and that makes your opinion stupid.I didn't disagree. I made the exact same consistent argument in the past as I'm making now. The only argument that I've changed my position on this relies on the pretense that I'm somehow responsible for the content of someone else's post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prefonteen Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 I didn't disagree. I made the exact same consistent argument in the past as I'm making now. The only argument that I've changed my position on this relies on the pretense that I'm somehow responsible for the content of someone else's post. You just disagreed again. Stop making stupid posts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ole Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 I didn't disagree. I made the exact same consistent argument in the past as I'm making now. The only argument that I've changed my position on this relies on the pretense that I'm somehow responsible for the content of someone else's post. Something that we can all clearly see i am. I Agree, you go girl! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greatkitteh Posted May 5, 2017 Share Posted May 5, 2017 You just disagreed again. Stop making stupid posts. I disagree he Disagreed. Quote :sheepy: :sheepy: Greatkitteh was here.- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
durmij Posted May 23, 2017 Share Posted May 23, 2017 (edited) Edited May 23, 2017 by durmij 4 Quote https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjI4ROuPyuY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JUUEHv8GHcE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sketchy Posted May 23, 2017 Share Posted May 23, 2017 -snip- HBE was just pretending to honor their treaties. 3 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.