Sir Scarfalot Posted May 29 Share Posted May 29 Obviously this is the most complicated question of all. Should Camelot pay reps? Be rolled out of the game? Should TFP and Rose be rolled out of the game for breaching the NAP first? Should they pay reps? Should we just let Camelot’s actions slide and not give nor take anything from them? Personally I’d like to let Camelot’s reputation damage be enough as long as they pay back their existing debts but I’d be interested in more possibilities. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VoidTree Posted May 29 Share Posted May 29 why did you have to split this into three posts bruh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Scarfalot Posted May 30 Author Share Posted May 30 13 minutes ago, Oscarine said: why did you have to split this into three posts bruh I probably shouldn't have, but there's three main issues to discuss and a centralized post would get messy imo 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John M Keynes Posted May 30 Share Posted May 30 (edited) On 5/29/2025 at 7:03 PM, Sir Scarfalot said: I probably shouldn't have, but there's three main issues to discuss and a centralized post would get messy imo fixed the formatting for u lol 1: Was Camelot actually proxied by Rose/TFP/other signatories? It’s not exactly a simple question since it depends on the definition of what it means to be proxied as well as the mens rea of the actors. I say that Camelot’s relationship with Samurai provides probably the best argument: if you can protect an otherwise pirate alliance that hits your pact partners without that being an NAP breach then TFP pressuring your other protectorates into dropping you isn’t a breach, and Rose simply encouraging hits against you isn’t a breach either. It could be a reason for diplomatic resolutions though. 2: Did Camelot engage in “good-faith diplomacy” before invoking exit clauses? Again, not simple, and it depends on the mindset of the actors going in. I don’t have enough evidence to rule either way myself, so I’ll wait for logs before posting my vote. 3: What should be done about the Camelot situation? Obviously this is the most complicated question of all. Should Camelot pay reps? Be rolled out of the game? Should TFP and Rose be rolled out of the game for breaching the NAP first? Should they pay reps? Should we just let Camelot’s actions slide and not give nor take anything from them? Personally I’d like to let Camelot’s reputation damage be enough as long as they pay back their existing debts but I’d be interested in more possibilities. Original Posts https://forum.politicsandwar.com/index.php?/topic/50510-was-camelot-actually-proxied-by-rosetfpother-signatories/ https://forum.politicsandwar.com/index.php?/topic/50511-did-camelot-engage-in-“good-faith-diplomacy”-before-invoking-exit-clauses/ https://forum.politicsandwar.com/index.php?/topic/50513-what-should-be-done-about-the-camelot-situation/ Edited May 31 by John M Keynes formatting lesson 4 Quote My opinion may not reflect those of my alliance or its affiliates. Please read at your own discretion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stanko1987 Posted May 30 Share Posted May 30 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ranoss Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 they should merge into their pirate extension 👍🏿 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mayor Posted June 2 Share Posted June 2 On 5/29/2025 at 4:09 PM, Sir Scarfalot said: Be rolled out of the game? It is about time to put the Inquisition remnant out of its misery. 1 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.