White Peace - France-Denmark Trade Conflict ends

[Bach]

13 minutes ago, Duncan McFail said:

There doesn't have to be a NAP or an agreement with BLACK. When I approached you guys I stated the Danes are full allies and we'd have to come down if a resolution wasn't met. When you guys flipped Cap Francois into port battle that is a declaration of war. Did you guys really think it would be okay to flip our ports and still be cool with the Danes? Do you really think we're not going to take it personally when you ally with Brits, US, and Spanish to camp our capitol 24/7? Either way you can continue having fun camping our capitol area while those meaningless blue dots disappear. Nothing personal we just enjoy the RvR.

I'm pretty sure none of us care that the end result was war with Denmark.  AUSEZ or SCAR the end result is they just flip one more off hour port than before. We could shoot the Dutch as Dutch and now we can shoot them as Danes. ICS are out of France and now we can shoot them too. Swedes were harassing the crap out of us and now we can shoot them. Danes finally have US prime time players. From the PvP stand point this is a win win for both France and Denmark.

The "Pearl Harbor" issue is as it was the honor of the agreement. That agreement called for a 72hr notice before CCCP began attacking. That is the point where everyone is pointing and saying "Ha, we knew you couldn't stick too it".   The original arguement was that the Danes said France broke the agreement while France said the Danes made the agreement in bad faith. The drama here is just a continuation of that same old argument on "treaty honor." Basically it's a big "I told ya so" gloat. But not undeserved.

There is no coalition of US, GB, France. The only agreement is a gentlemens agreement that if they are shooting pirates in pirate waters we don't shoot them. But everywhere else is fair game. It's simply a "the enemy of my enemy is my ally" sort of thing.  That couldn't possibly surprise you and I'm sure you expected as much as soon as Pirates established dominance over USA and Brit while allied to Danes. What other choice was there that could possibly challenge you?

[Cockeyed Callaway]

3 hours ago, Slamz said:

It's like this:

We're not lawyers. We come up with pretty reasonable "treaties" that take about 5 minutes to write. The treaty said nothing about the safety of pirates or pirate ports or what happens if allies get attacked. It said the treaty could be honorably ended with a 72 hour warning, and that was it.

If you want to sit here and play word games and go on about how such and such event triggered such and such hidden clause then what I'm really hearing is that next time we make a deal involving pirates or CCCP, we need to hire a lawyer and really make a rock solid treaty with no loopholes at all and spend a couple hours on it.
 

We are not going to do that.

You have made it clear that you are going to make us put more effort into dealing with you than we are prepared to put up with in a video game. In order to keep our lives simple, we will simply not deal with you at all any more. Pirate and CCCP trade ships will be sent to the bottom of the ocean until such time as we independently decide to stop, good day sir.

 

3 hours ago, Bach said:

I'm pretty sure none of us care that the end result was war with Denmark.  AUSEZ or SCAR the end result is they just flip one more off hour port than before. We could shoot the Dutch as Dutch and now we can shoot them as Danes. ICS are out of France and now we can shoot them too. Swedes were harassing the crap out of us and now we can shoot them. Danes finally have US prime time players. From the PvP stand point this is a win win for both France and Denmark.

The "Pearl Harbor" issue is as it was the honor of the agreement. That agreement called for a 72hr notice before CCCP began attacking. That is the point where everyone is pointing and saying "Ha, we knew you couldn't stick too it".   The original arguement was that the Danes said France broke the agreement while France said the Danes made the agreement in bad faith. The drama here is just a continuation of that same old argument on "treaty honor." Basically it's a big "I told ya so" gloat. But not undeserved.

There is no coalition of US, GB, France. The only agreement is a gentlemens agreement that if they are shooting pirates in pirate waters we don't shoot them. But everywhere else is fair game. It's simply a "the enemy of my enemy is my ally" sort of thing.  That couldn't possibly surprise you and I'm sure you expected as much as soon as Pirates established dominance over USA and Brit while allied to Danes. What other choice was there that could possibly challenge you?

These two statements are telling and uncover the deeper problem. On one hand the parties are asked to hold themselves to the highest moral standards, yet on the other, one of the countries offering the agreement (France) can't be bothered to spend more than five minutes defining said agreement. It occurs to me that the problem may be systemic to one of these parties (France) and their inability to make good on former promises, as opposed to the other breaking a lesser part of the current one. You need only look at the history of  France and her mistreatment of previous deals to quickly come to the conclusion that she has not shown the ability or trustworthiness to negotiate properly. Even if she did have the ability to negotiate, she has show a woeful lack of character and maturity in seeing said negotiations through. For France to now lament about broken promises should be viewed through the veil of tongue in cheek comedy. 

[Barbancourt]

Cockeyed you guys wanted to sell all of us down the river to become a servant of CCCP for a few measly hand-outs.  As far as I can tell PURGE doesn't want any deals at all, so they aren't going to be very interested in your critique.  From the snippets I saw when we tried to communicate with CCCP for negotiation they were consistently just jerks.  They wanted to dictate terms to their own pleasure, and had your man in their pocket and didn't want to hear from anyone else.

 

[Slamz]

5 hours ago, Cockeyed Callaway said:

These two statements are telling and uncover the deeper problem. 

Yes:

That pirates are meta-gamers more than players. If they spent half the time fighting in OW PvP as they spent trying to lawyer up their agreements and figure out more efficient ways to manage their spy network, they'd actually be halfway decent players, I bet.

In related news, Dharus and I killed a BLACK Santissima using 2 Cerbs:

Santi on fire: https://steamuserimages-a.akamaihd.net/ugc/866233379704939132/8B50B3F88C265145B5DF342DFDD9F0A8EEB77085/
The End: https://steamuserimages-a.akamaihd.net/ugc/866233379704938662/DE5A16BE955912EE1655608DD593190FD9EBEE5C/

Also turns out 32 pound carros make REALLY BIG leaks in a Heavy Rattlesnake.

[Skully]

13 hours ago, Slamz said:

We come up with pretty reasonable "treaties" that take about 5 minutes to write. The treaty said nothing about the safety of pirates or pirate ports or what happens if allies get attacked. It said the treaty could be honorably ended with a 72 hour warning, and that was it.

For some reason I stay far away from diplomacy. 

I'll just enjoy the stories on the sideline. 

[VirtuallyIdiotic]

20 hours ago, Slamz said:

We come up with pretty reasonable "treaties"

[Cockeyed Callaway]

17 hours ago, Barbancourt (rownd) said:

Cockeyed you guys wanted to sell all of us down the river to become a servant of CCCP for a few measly hand-outs.  As far as I can tell PURGE doesn't want any deals at all, so they aren't going to be very interested in your critique.  From the snippets I saw when we tried to communicate with CCCP for negotiation they were consistently just jerks.  They wanted to dictate terms to their own pleasure, and had your man in their pocket and didn't want to hear from anyone else.

 

Thank you for the opportunity to perhaps redirect your thinking on the subject.

"Cockeyed you guys wanted to sell all of us down the river to become a servant of CCCP for a few measly hand-outs."

   Certainly one way of looking at the situation. Another may be that ICS was attempting to limit our enemies to one direction. Thus allowing trade for the many French players who enjoy that type of play and safety for the PVE players. This may come as a shock but, there are people in France who enjoy that type of play. The deal would also have allowed us to focus our attention to the weaker and more defeatable nation to our south. Thus pleasing the PVP types.

"As far as I can tell PURGE doesn't want any deals at all, so they aren't going to be very interested in your critique."

Which is a valid statement and one of the reasons France is now experiencing the loss of her ports. Their and others inability to compromise and negotiate, is the chief reason France is isolated. That mindset of disinterest is never healthy for a nation. Which is something I would suggest you keep in mind while you defend their actions.

"From the snippets I saw when we tried to communicate with CCCP for negotiation they were consistently just jerks."

No, they are not "jerks" they are Chinese. Unless you can overcome your cultural differences you will not be able to negotiate in good faith and a valuable ally could be turned into a deadly enemy. I might add, don't trust "snippets" they can sometimes be misleading.

"They wanted to dictate terms to their own pleasure, and had your man in their pocket and didn't want to hear from anyone else."

Every nation negotiates for their own benefit. What you see as being in someone's pocket, could just as easily be seen as coming to a mutual understanding.

The events that have transpired over the last few days occurred within a week of ICS's leaving. It could be argued that ICS was a major bulwark preventing them. Yep,...those backstabbing, spying, worthless, nation destroying, in the pocket of CCCP, ICS traitors, may actually have been keeping France from being one ported. That however is just one opinion, I'm sure you and many others feel differently. But don't worry, I'm sure you can fight your way out of this mess or you could...dare I say...negotiate, LOL, sorry, I know that's not France's strong suit. At least not anymore.

Edited August 3, 2017 by Cockeyed Callaway

[Barbancourt]

4 hours ago, Cockeyed Callaway said:

No, they are not "jerks" they are Chinese. Unless you can overcome your cultural differences you will not be able to negotiate in good faith and a valuable ally could be turned into a deadly enemy. I might add, don't trust "snippets" they can sometimes be misleading.

 

Condescending tone and refusal to communicate with anyone that wouldn't roll over and let them have their way == jerks.  In the end they would only talk to a third party == jerks.  We gave them a sweetheart deal in the end, and they sat in a corner and pouted == jerks.  I work in a joint chinese-american project, so I didn't just fall off the haywagon in Kentucky.  It works both ways.

 

 

4 hours ago, Cockeyed Callaway said:

   Certainly one way of looking at the situation. Another may be that ICS was attempting to limit our enemies to one direction. Thus allowing trade for the many French players who enjoy that type of play and safety for the PVE players. This may come as a shock but, there are people in France who enjoy that type of play. The deal would also have allowed us to focus our attention to the weaker and more defeatable nation to our south. Thus pleasing the PVP types.

We ended up with stagnation.  "Peace".  People didn't really want to squeeze the Dutch after they stopped trying to fight us.  Even without that they imploded on their own.  We tried to play with the Brits for a while, but then it became apparent where the imbalance actually was and attention was redirected towards the pirates.  Now we have the fight we should really have had all along, and the question is whether it can be waged within the structure of Naval Action or not.  It is an experiment. 

 

4 hours ago, Cockeyed Callaway said:

ICS traitors

I am trying not to take that tone.  ICS made a deal with CCCP that was really intensely disliked by the rest of us.  Leave it at that.  The real crapstorm was the very personal bickering that erupted in nation chat, which is beyond the scale a noob like myself can understand.  The inability of the clans to get a couple adults in a room to talk effectively boggles my mind.  I stopped reading nation chat, just like I never read global chat.  Anyhow, we exerted our control over our territories as we believed to be our right and forced a compromise which was very accomodating to everyone.  Now CCCP is invading us for the third time since the Wipe, but fortunately it will provide the opportunity to create a natural resolution. 

 

Edited August 3, 2017 by Barbancourt (rownd)

[Vllad]

5 hours ago, Cockeyed Callaway said:

But don't worry, I'm sure you can fight your way out of this mess or you could...dare I say...negotiate, 

I think you already know the answer. France would rather fight. 

[VirtuallyIdiotic]

should also like to mention CCCP like to roleplay so you are not really talking with them on a personal level but rather the character they have created for the time period this game is set in and what they see as how their character will act. CCCP does not speak for all the clans in Danmark as they have told me multiple times when negotiating with them and while I have been in Danmark. So any deal will have to be dealt with all of the Danish clans and not just one. Not to mention you have to make sure your wording is almost flawless and need to make sure you cover your bases. Do not need things lost in translation and CCCP does not assume anything and take what is put down in a literal sense. 

[VirtuallyIdiotic]

5 hours ago, Louis Garneray said:

that's really funny...
CCCP is roleplaying?
And you say what ? We are the ones who needs to be careful because things get lost in translation?

Okay bub. 

[Barbancourt]

6 hours ago, Davos Seasworth said:

should also like to mention CCCP like to roleplay so you are not really talking with them on a personal level but rather the character they have created for the time period this game is set in and what they see as how their character will act.

 

OK, CCCP role-played contempt for France.  We role-played a nation under threat and occupation.  IMO, there is no space for role-playing "alliance" there.

 

[VirtuallyIdiotic]

16 minutes ago, Barbancourt (rownd) said:

OK, CCCP role-played contempt for France.  We role-played a nation under threat and occupation.  IMO, there is no space for role-playing "alliance" there.

I am merely stating what they do. Was just providing information without villainizing either side.

[Barbancourt]

25 minutes ago, Davos Seasworth said:

I am merely stating what they do. Was just providing information without villainizing either side.

Yep, I gotcha  o7

[Barbancourt]

now now, we were making progress

[Slamz]

On 8/3/2017 at 3:11 PM, Cockeyed Callaway said:

But don't worry, I'm sure you can fight your way out of this mess or you could...dare I say...negotiate

The best negotiation tool is OW PvP.

 

[Thonys]

Excuse me..but.....uhh 

Bovenwinds is Dutch 

So all have to pay  TAX......to the Dutch

 

Soon...

Edited August 5, 2017 by Thonys