Posts: 4,090
Threads: 28
Joined: Jul 2008
CFC has also taken "advantage" of us taken Wasserburg, and pillaged the cottage 1N of the city with their chariot.
We might need to tell them off as well, just as we had to do with Apolyton.
Furthermore, I consider that forum views should be fluid in width
Posts: 17,483
Threads: 78
Joined: Nov 2005
(June 15th, 2013, 14:56)kjn Wrote: CFC has also taken "advantage" of us taken Wasserburg, and pillaged the cottage 1N of the city with their chariot.
We might need to tell them off as well, just as we had to do with Apolyton.
I can give you one guess what their response will be
Suffer Game Sicko
Dodo Tier Player
Posts: 7,658
Threads: 31
Joined: Jun 2011
How about that is a damned aggressive action for a team operating under a non-aggression pact? Then we bare teeth and growl at them since that's all we can do.
Posts: 1,404
Threads: 53
Joined: Apr 2006
Yes, I like the tone that Scooter took with Apolyton - a smiliar response to CFC would be appropriate IMO. As far as I know Apolyton hasn't pillaged us since.
Posts: 13,214
Threads: 25
Joined: Oct 2010
If we're doing that then I want to start a pool to guess how long their response will be.
Posts: 886
Threads: 4
Joined: Feb 2006
We should. No harm in asking. And the response will be good for a laugh. Plus it will fulfill scooter's goal of keeping the team focused on external threats!
Otherwise we could really use a chariot in CFC/Spanish lands for the pillage gold starting 5 turns ago...
Posts: 17,483
Threads: 78
Joined: Nov 2005
cancel our gifts to them if they refuse?
Suffer Game Sicko
Dodo Tier Player
Posts: 1,801
Threads: 13
Joined: Apr 2013
That would give them grounds to break the NAP, no?
Posts: 15,316
Threads: 112
Joined: Apr 2007
(June 15th, 2013, 15:24)sooooo Wrote: Yes, I like the tone that Scooter took with Apolyton - a smiliar response to CFC would be appropriate IMO. As far as I know Apolyton hasn't pillaged us since.
Yeah I'll try to catch Yossarian on chat soon about this, I think that works better than email for this sort of thing.
As someone mentioned, I think it may be worth telling them if they pillage again, we will consider it to be an aggressive action, and we will end our gifts to them. Feel free to weigh in on this if you have a strong opinion either way.
Posts: 5,455
Threads: 18
Joined: Jul 2011
(June 10th, 2013, 16:12)pindicator Wrote: I'll put it another way:
When you take a girl out for dinner, you don't hold the bill in front of her and say "Now, I'm willing to pay for this but only if you can give me some assurances that you're going to uphold your end of things."
(June 15th, 2013, 16:33)Oxyphenbutazone Wrote: That would give them grounds to break the NAP, no?
And what of that? Their army is far away. Let them take a swing. Cancel current deals if they do not respond. We're at war now anyway. Just haven't commenced official hostilities. Certainly them plundering our conquests could and should be interpreted as hostile actions and thus a violation of the treaty. Make them choose either to stop plundering or face military consequences. No point dicking around with them. The sooner we call them out on this the better.
|