Popular Post The Titan Posted May 31 Popular Post Share Posted May 31 On Monday, May 19th Camelot violated the Non-Aggression pact signed between Camelot and Rose/Penta/TFP/Arkham by declaring war on The Fighting Pacifists. Mayhem strongly condemns this action and encourages the rest of the game to do the same. We appreciate the support shown by World Task Force, and commend them for their honorable response. The Non-Aggression pact was negotiated in good faith, to the anticipated benefit of both Mayhem & allies and Camelot & allies. At no time did any party on the Rose/Penta/TFP/Arkham side of the NAP violate any of it's terms, and Camelot has been unable to provide any proof that they have. Yesterday, Camelot declared war on Rose and launched an unprovoked war against a Mayhem nation. In numerous discussions the game indicated it was up to the NAP signatories to enforce said NAP. Well, here we are. We are prepared to pursue this defensive war until such point we feel Camelot has paid for their egregious actions. TLDR: Mayhem recognizes a state of hostilities with Camelot and declares war on Samurai in defense of Rose. PS: We are well aware most of Camelot in our range is slotted. But we're doin what we can anyway! 15 3 2 Quote Peace in our time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post EpimetheusTalks Posted May 31 Popular Post Share Posted May 31 11 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AustinH Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 (edited) 22 minutes ago, The Titan said: Yesterday, Camelot declared war on Rose and launched an unprovoked war against a Mayhem nation. oh no, one war from a rookie makes the entire alliance join in, could've negotiated that, or just not put into the roh because that's a lame excuse Edited May 31 by AustinH 3 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Titan Posted May 31 Author Share Posted May 31 4 minutes ago, AustinH said: oh no, one war from a rookie makes the entire alliance join in, could've negotiated that, or just not put into the roh because that's a lame excuse Clearly negotiating with Camelot has no good results, it's why we're in this mess in the first place. And that's more substantial act of aggression than anything Epi has shown so far 3 2 Quote Peace in our time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EpimetheusTalks Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 (edited) 14 minutes ago, The Titan said: Clearly negotiating with Camelot has no good results, it's why we're in this mess in the first place. And that's more substantial act of aggression than anything Epi has shown so far @The Titan The raid on Mayhem in insufficient proof since we repeatedly offered you peace and you declined it. We are pleasantly surprised that you were willing to defend your ally Rose. However, it is rather unfortunate that you did not defend The Fighting Pacifists. It's not our place to comment on the relationships within Rose Coalition and we wish you farmers the best in this time of turmoil. Edited May 31 by EpimetheusTalks 4 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Titan Posted May 31 Author Share Posted May 31 (edited) 18 minutes ago, EpimetheusTalks said: However, it is rather unfortunate that you did not defend The Fighting Pacifists. Mayhem has no treaty with TFP at this time, and thus had no grounds to enter. Mayhem does have a treaty with Rose, coupled with the war which you did not dispute that it was not a raid, not to mention the out-of-context logs shared in both your DoWs that fail to tell the whole story with the clear intention of trying to get other parties to intervene on your behalf all seem like acts of aggression to me. You offered to peace the war, sure, you also accepted a NAP which you have now violated. You also agreed to a good faith clause which you also violated. We have to reason to believe any agreement made with Camelot would hold, whether it's as major as a NAP or as minor as peacing a single war. Edited May 31 by The Titan Grammar 1 5 3 Quote Peace in our time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Eleazar Posted May 31 Popular Post Share Posted May 31 41 minutes ago, The Titan said: TLDR: Mayhem recognizes a state of hostilities with Camelot and declares war on Samurai in defense of Rose. nice to meet old friends! 11 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kylian Mbappe Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 I aint Reading allat but Im on top Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greenhood3000 Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 1 hour ago, AustinH said: oh no, one war from a rookie makes the entire alliance join in, could've negotiated that, or just not put into the roh because that's a lame excuse Considering the player in question is a personal friend of mine in real life and that he’s in fact not a rookie and likely began playing the game with his old nation before you’d even heard of it, I believe this is no “lame excuse”. Not to mention that we are allied to Rose who have just been hit by Camelot within the past 48 hours. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EpimetheusTalks Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 (edited) 14 minutes ago, Levi Ford said: Considering the player in question is a personal friend of mine in real life and that he’s in fact not a rookie and likely began playing the game with his old nation before you’d even heard of it, I believe this is no “lame excuse”. Not to mention that we are allied to Rose who have just been hit by Camelot within the past 48 hours. Absolutely. It's impossible to mistake this player for a 'Noob'. They clearly have years of experience in the game. That's why they know that the ship meta (circa 2014) is the real way to win and that 'aircraft' can't even do real damage. Am I right? @Dr Rush Edited May 31 by EpimetheusTalks 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Titan Posted May 31 Author Share Posted May 31 6 minutes ago, EpimetheusTalks said: Absolutely. It's impossible to mistake this player for a 'Noob'. They clearly have years of experience in the game. That's why they know that the ship meta (circa 2014) is the real way to win and that 'aircraft' can't even do real damage. Am I right? @Dr Rush No no hear me out Nukes only #RipFraggle 6 Quote Peace in our time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AustinH Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 (edited) 1 hour ago, Levi Ford said: Considering the player in question is a personal friend of mine in real life and that he’s in fact not a rookie and likely began playing the game with his old nation before you’d even heard of it, I believe this is no “lame excuse”. Not to mention that we are allied to Rose who have just been hit by Camelot within the past 48 hours. I'm sorry i don't have Clairvoyance and acces to the game's database circa 2014. It is inexcusable for me to not know even all the nations that have happened before my inception into the game. Your Cb of "defending rose" is fine i have no problem with that. Also, i take it if one of your rookies or any member declares a single war on us or any of our O/M treatied alliances then I can pull my alliance to beige your alliance yes? Edited May 31 by AustinH 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Scarfalot Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 3 hours ago, Eleazar said: nice to meet old friends! Man, I thought you'd actually gotten a bank raid in more recently than last year, get new material 😕 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleazar Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 58 minutes ago, Sir Scarfalot said: Man, I thought you'd actually gotten a bank raid in more recently than last year, get new material 😕 will do, wish me luck 🥳 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Titan Posted May 31 Author Share Posted May 31 3 hours ago, AustinH said: Also, i take it if one of your rookies or any member declares a single war on us or any of our O/M treatied alliances then I can pull my alliance to beige your alliance yes? If we also happen to be parading around on the forums trying to get people to hit you, unilaterally “withdraw” from (aka knowingly violate) a NAP and blitz your allies, then yes, you may 2 Quote Peace in our time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stanko1987 Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 Fun times 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Scarfalot Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 10 hours ago, Stanko1987 said: Fun times Last. Year. Brag about the current war, surely you can? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greenhood3000 Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 16 hours ago, AustinH said: I'm sorry i don't have Clairvoyance and acces to the game's database circa 2014. It is inexcusable for me to not know even all the nations that have happened before my inception into the game. Your Cb of "defending rose" is fine i have no problem with that. Also, i take it if one of your rookies or any member declares a single war on us or any of our O/M treatied alliances then I can pull my alliance to beige your alliance yes? If we were to blitz one your allies whilst breaking an NAP I’d say that’s a fair enough reason believe it or not 😁 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greenhood3000 Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 17 hours ago, EpimetheusTalks said: Absolutely. It's impossible to mistake this player for a 'Noob'. They clearly have years of experience in the game. That's why they know that the ship meta (circa 2014) is the real way to win and that 'aircraft' can't even do real damage. Am I right? @Dr Rush And you’ve been playing since 2017 right? Yet you seem to think that NAP’s are something that can be broken when you word it as a ‘withdrawal’ not to mention you seem to be the most insufferable person in Orbis so how you ever rose to power in a top 15 alliance is beyond me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stanko1987 Posted June 1 Share Posted June 1 4 hours ago, Sir Scarfalot said: Last. Year. Brag about the current war, surely you can? It's a war. What is there to brag about besides burning pixels. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Scarfalot Posted June 1 Share Posted June 1 12 minutes ago, Stanko1987 said: It's a war. What is there to brag about besides burning pixels. Exactly, so brag about the current war, not last year's raids Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stanko1987 Posted June 1 Share Posted June 1 16 minutes ago, Sir Scarfalot said: Exactly, so brag about the current war, not last year's raids Ok boss. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AustinH Posted June 1 Share Posted June 1 (edited) 8 hours ago, Levi Ford said: If we were to blitz one your allies whilst breaking an NAP I’d say that’s a fair enough reason believe it or not 😁 So the main cb is to "Protect" Rose and to punish nap breaking then. Then yeah going back to the original statement that part did not need to be there Edited June 1 by AustinH mis spell Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stanko1987 Posted June 1 Share Posted June 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EpimetheusTalks Posted June 1 Share Posted June 1 (edited) 21 hours ago, Levi Ford said: And you’ve been playing since 2017 right? Yet you seem to think that NAP’s are something that can be broken when you word it as a ‘withdrawal’ not to mention you seem to be the most insufferable person in Orbis so how you ever rose to power in a top 15 alliance is beyond me. I believe that NAPs can be broken and Rose broke ours. For example, Myrmidon agreed a NAP with us right before hitting us. It's fair to say they broke a NAP and we don't have to honour its terms anymore. That's precisely the argument Mayhem is using here too, they're saying we broke the NAP and therefore they're not bound by it. The difference between us and Myrmidon/Mayhem is that we gave the other side warning and conditions on which to rejoin the NAP. Whereas when these alliances said we broke it they committed to immediate war. We hit TFP over the nuke auction and we hit Rose because it was trying to build a global military coalition against us. Some people disagree with the former but I've not heard anyone disagree with the latter including Rose members. Edited June 1 by EpimetheusTalks 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.