Jump to content

From New Orleans


Rebekah Mikaelson
 Share

Recommended Posts

 

It has come to our attention that persons still believe that we cancelled on House Arryn. 

Just to clarify, the last 2 treaties "dropped" were not cancelled by The Originals but were cancelled by leaders/officers of those alliances. 

image.png?width=360&height=104

House Arryn's reasoning for cancelling the treaty was that they saw no benefit in it. That said, we were actively working with their FA dept on a way to resolve the issue however once they cancelled the treaty, this negated all obligations to assist in any way, shape or form. 

 

That said, The Originals is not looking to join the war nor to assist any alliance within the war for the duration of the war and asks that all alliances respect this. Whether they deem us friend or foe.

 

User Images

  • Upvote 3
  • Downvote 17
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Rebekah Mikaelson said:

 

That said, The Originals is not looking to join the war nor to assist any alliance within the war for the duration of the war and asks that all alliances respect this.

You got dropped for your war dodging (mutual defence means just that, according to your treaty you should be in the war), why continue?

After the war is done and those who were busy fighting look for war dodgers to raid you'll be without your allies to defend you.

  • Upvote 3

Screenshot_2018-12-26-00-42-07-578_com.discord098.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dio Brando said:

No.

From my understanding of the issue, House Arryn activated the defense clause. When you sign M-level defense treaties, you do not get to back out of them with justifications as pathetic as "we just didn't feel like it". You don't get to cast aside your obligations simply because your would-be enemy outnumbers you. Your word is as good as anything else, and you've, quite frankly, reneged on it in the most pitiful way. 

Have fun, I'll be looking to see what your allies do when you get into an unfavorable war and need their help.

Lol. So that's what is being said now. I see. Well to begin with, I'm not sure who they requested that with as neither myself nor the head of the FA department received any Call to Arms whatsoever from HA and before you jump to conclusions we were talking with them about a more plausible option which would have seen them remain outside the war. They refused and broke the treaty afterwards. If us not jumping head first into a war when our intervention is not even asked for is called war dodging, then by all means, call it such. However we do wish House Arryn all the best. 

 

7 hours ago, Sol Slayer said:

Yup. I canceled. Still waiting to hear the reply on new proposals on the treaty. ?

That is now up to you. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Rebekah Mikaelson said:

Lol. So that's what is being said now. I see. Well to begin with, I'm not sure who they requested that with as neither myself nor the head of the FA department received any Call to Arms whatsoever from HA and before you jump to conclusions we were talking with them about a more plausible option which would have seen them remain outside the war. They refused and broke the treaty afterwards. If us not jumping head first into a war when our intervention is not even asked for is called war dodging, then by all means, call it such. However we do wish House Arryn all the best. 

Nothing is "being said now". I am a third party who is by and large uninterested in the affairs of a peripheral alliance, but bored enough to post my thoughts on the matter. I'm not sure what you're saying here. If they did not wish for your assistance in the war, why were you attempting to dissuade them from joining? Two, you understand that an ally needing to call you to war when you have an M-level defense clause speaks volumes of your relationship dynamic, correct?

Oh well.  You guys have fun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Dio Brando said:

No.

From my understanding of the issue, House Arryn activated the defense clause. When you sign M-level defense treaties, you do not get to back out of them with justifications as pathetic as "we just didn't feel like it". You don't get to cast aside your obligations simply because your would-be enemy outnumbers you. Your word is as good as anything else, and you've, quite frankly, reneged on it in the most pitiful way. 

Have fun, I'll be looking to see what your allies do when you get into an unfavorable war and need their help.

Just sign an ODP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Dio Brando said:

Keep ignoring that ODP when your ally calls for you and let's see what happens. ;) 

This is why I think treaties should come in more than just the basic flavors. ODP/MDP/NAP doesn't cover enough scenarios. Conditional Treaties are needed! It's like only ever picking Chocolate/Strawberry/Vanilla for ice cream.

Or, you know, just less treaties and then everyone can just do what they feel is best.

 

Edited by Bartholomew Roberts
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Bartholomew Roberts said:

This is why I think treaties should come in more than just the basic flavors. ODP/MDP/NAP doesn't cover enough scenarios. Conditional Treaties are needed! It's like only ever picking Chocolate/Strawberry/Vanilla for ice cream.

Or, you know, just less treaties and then everyone can just do what they feel is best.

Very anarchist of you. 

...very fitting!

Edited by Dio Brando
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We should actually create some 'treaty status' for Coalitions. Like a 'Temporary Aggression Pact', So we can TAP that. It'd also justify the current ways coalitions operate, countering for alliances that they have no treaties with. It'd also make it clear on paper who the sides are and what's allowed. Clears up the disagreements about hitting allies of allies not fully in the co.

Edited by Epi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Bartholomew Roberts said:

This is why I think treaties should come in more than just the basic flavors. ODP/MDP/NAP doesn't cover enough scenarios. Conditional Treaties are needed! It's like only ever picking Chocolate/Strawberry/Vanilla for ice cream.

Or, you know, just less treaties and then everyone can just do what they feel is best. 

I mean. Shouldn't the conditions of activation of a treaty be included in the articles of declaration when the treaty are formed? Might be a little more work on the negotiation and paperwork side, but it doesn't really require any more treaty types. If your Treaty charter says you will only assist in the defense of your treated friend if there are steam powered giraffe fans on the opposing side, then you wouldn't activate it against a bunch of Slipknot fans.

Bottom_Border Siggy.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/19/2019 at 1:42 AM, Serva said:

We hope you are thinking about what MDoAP means, and in the future House Arryn will think before signing MDoAP with you.

 

And I hope you learn that Attacking an alliance then saying that it is hitting you is not a obligation to help

 

Furthermore you said you declared war on us because we was allied to bk however we have no treaty with them we have a treaty with ES which has a treaty with BK but mate i had our alliance stay out of the war and not hit anyone involved but you hit us so ya i say we declare war on you

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/21/2019 at 2:05 PM, Nokia Rokia said:

And I hope you learn that Attacking an alliance then saying that it is hitting you is not a obligation to help

 

Furthermore you said you declared war on us because we was allied to bk however we have no treaty with them we have a treaty with ES which has a treaty with BK but mate i had our alliance stay out of the war and not hit anyone involved but you hit us so ya i say we declare war on you

Told this to BK. They will help you with us. They hit us (we also have same stand as you). Don't blame us, blame BK for this we talk with them many times to make peace with us but they denied so we hit you. "okey"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Serva said:

Told this to BK. They will help you with us. They hit us (we also have same stand as you). Don't blame us, blame BK for this we talk with them many times to make peace with us but they denied so we hit you. "okey"

No blame KT, KT man bad

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.