Home
Aderan Wars
Red Apocalypse
Testing Server
Latest images
Register
Log in(O) empire offers a NAP to FIRE
+9
Osyndicate
Nomad
Jonathan
Alex
Universe
Admin
Vesper
Lord Ishurue
Kismet
13 posters
Page 1 of 2
Page 1 of 2 • 1, 2 
(O) empire offers a NAP to FIRE
by Kismet Thu Jan 14, 2010 4:46 am
Non Aggression Pact or a treaty is being offered to FIRE by WR which is representing all of (O)
This is also something being sent to each leader of each alliance within FIRE. This is merely the public offering. Negotiations for a NAP or Treaty can be kept in private by messaging me.
Opening Terms would be as follows:
1. No unprovoked attacks. This would mean no massing of players on either side and no attacks that fall outside the 3-tier farming policies.
2. No spies in either empire from the other.
3. Any diplomacy would go through the diplomats; this includes all farming mishaps.
4. No trying to take members from the other empire. This includes alliances within each empire.
5. (This is an addition to what was sent to each leader of each alliance in FIRE) To dissolve the NAP, no less than 7 days notice would be given before any war or invasive (meaning more than just farming) attacks would be done to the other side. If in the case that no notice is given or less than 7 days passed before an invasive attack or declaration of war, the alliance that attacks would be required to pay back all taken plus all repair costs including the going cost of each unit destroyed. If it is a failed attempt without injury, 1 billion kuwal will be paid to each member attacked by the member/alliance that attacked.
kismet
WR Commander
WR Diplomat
(O) Diplomat
[edit: this would be set for ALL members of both empires, but to fully know, everyone would have to know the secret alliances within each empire - I have only messaged the public alliances of both empires]
This is also something being sent to each leader of each alliance within FIRE. This is merely the public offering. Negotiations for a NAP or Treaty can be kept in private by messaging me.
Opening Terms would be as follows:
1. No unprovoked attacks. This would mean no massing of players on either side and no attacks that fall outside the 3-tier farming policies.
2. No spies in either empire from the other.
3. Any diplomacy would go through the diplomats; this includes all farming mishaps.
4. No trying to take members from the other empire. This includes alliances within each empire.
5. (This is an addition to what was sent to each leader of each alliance in FIRE) To dissolve the NAP, no less than 7 days notice would be given before any war or invasive (meaning more than just farming) attacks would be done to the other side. If in the case that no notice is given or less than 7 days passed before an invasive attack or declaration of war, the alliance that attacks would be required to pay back all taken plus all repair costs including the going cost of each unit destroyed. If it is a failed attempt without injury, 1 billion kuwal will be paid to each member attacked by the member/alliance that attacked.
kismet
WR Commander
WR Diplomat
(O) Diplomat
[edit: this would be set for ALL members of both empires, but to fully know, everyone would have to know the secret alliances within each empire - I have only messaged the public alliances of both empires]
Last edited by Kismet on Thu Jan 14, 2010 5:07 am; edited 2 times in total (Reason for editing : added #5; 2nd edit says [edit])
Kismet- Aderan Worker
- Age : 52
Number of posts : 102
Registration date : 2009-04-01
Re: (O) empire offers a NAP to FIRE
by Lord Ishurue Sun Jan 17, 2010 8:00 pm
(FIRE) HC has voted and I will be the diplomat for this issue .
If NPO and WR want a Non Aggression Pact with (FIRE) then its gonna be under these terms only .
(FIRE) , NPO & WR , promise to only perform profitable Farming and Raiding on each others Active Players .
Regards
Ishurue (FIRE) HC Member 1IC of Mujengan
If NPO and WR want a Non Aggression Pact with (FIRE) then its gonna be under these terms only .
(FIRE) , NPO & WR , promise to only perform profitable Farming and Raiding on each others Active Players .
Regards
Ishurue (FIRE) HC Member 1IC of Mujengan
Lord Ishurue- Aderan Assassin
- Alliance :
Mujengan
The Unlimited Elite Gun Force
Age : 36
Number of posts : 666
Registration date : 2009-11-05
Re: (O) empire offers a NAP to FIRE
by Vesper Thu Jan 21, 2010 6:41 pm
Wow and i thought TIE and kenzu had slow discussions about treaties...
Vesper- Aderan Assassin
- Alliance : Commonwealth
Number of posts : 518
Registration date : 2009-08-11
Re: (O) empire offers a NAP to FIRE
by Admin Thu Jan 21, 2010 6:52 pm
lol and your response coming 4 days after the fact is any faster? 
nvm, read ishurues post again, if they held a vote after kenzu made topic then 3 days for such a reply is normal considering it wasn't anything urgent
nvm, read ishurues post again, if they held a vote after kenzu made topic then 3 days for such a reply is normal considering it wasn't anything urgent
Admin- Admin
- Number of posts : 4363
Registration date : 2008-08-18 -
Re: (O) empire offers a NAP to FIRE
by Universe Thu Jan 21, 2010 10:18 pm
Kismet.Admin wrote:lol and your response coming 4 days after the fact is any faster?
nvm, read ishurues post again, if they held a vote after kenzu made topic then 3 days for such a reply is normal considering it wasn't anything urgent
Or Kenzu? Inquiring minds.. *scratches the palm of her armoured hand with the icy sawblade of her chainsword*If one is the other; Pax interruptus.
Universe- Aderan Spy
- ID : 510
Or the year Clovis officially establishes Frankish Kingdom - Birth of France.
Alliance : Nah..
Age : 37
Number of posts : 367
Location : the Netherlands
Registration date : 2009-10-05
Re: (O) empire offers a NAP to FIRE
by Admin Thu Jan 21, 2010 11:15 pm
If one is the otherUniverse wrote:Kismet.
If one is the other; Pax interruptus.
the other is both
To be both is to be confused
Confused is the one who makes mistakes
The flames of destruction are always right
Chill Hannibal
Usual habits die hard
didn't even notice that it was kismet and assumed it was kenzu who wrote it.Plus if you look closely you can clearly see that it's not completely kenzu's style of writing, some words just stand out too much
Admin- Admin
- Number of posts : 4363
Registration date : 2008-08-18 -
Re: (O) empire offers a NAP to FIRE
by Lord Ishurue Fri Jan 22, 2010 1:38 am
Vesper wrote:Wow and i thought TIE and kenzu had slow discussions about treaties...
I do agree , The moment i saw this post i wanted to start negotating etc. or at very least post will talk to you ingame PMs , But if I had done that I would be Disrespecting (FIRE) HC .
Lord Ishurue- Aderan Assassin
- Alliance :
Mujengan
The Unlimited Elite Gun Force
Age : 36
Number of posts : 666
Registration date : 2009-11-05
Re: (O) empire offers a NAP to FIRE
by Kismet Fri Jan 22, 2010 8:12 am
In regards to a NAP - there has to be some punishment for those who do not stand by the NAP agreement.
Farming must be within the 3-tier farming policy each FIRE leader has on their profiles.
I would like a definition of "Active Players" from FIRE before I make a decision on that point.
What about the members of each empire with a 0 defense? Does this mean you would not be attacking members with a 0 defense as you claim those are inactive? Or members with a defense and at least 50k uu? Please define that for me.
My additions to that would be:
1: Spies: any spy found within either FIRE or (O) will be hunted down. This includes if the "spy" runs and hides behind someone else's alliances skirt. When found, they alliance hiding the spy cannot retaliate for the destruction of such spy. The spy would be the only one targeted. The alliance harboring the spy would not be able to "help" the spy (aka target) with kuwal, uu or anything else until s/he hasn't been attacked for 24 hours.
2. If a NAP is to be removed, notice MUST be given to the other diplomat no less than 3 days, preferably 7 days notice. This would show hostile intentions, but neither side would attack during that time. For example:
FIRE decides they want to remove the NAP. They notify me on Feb 1, 2010 (example, remember? feb 1 was a good easy date!) that they are removing the NAP in 3 days.. The SOONEST they could attack would be Feb 4, 2010. 72 hours AFTER the notification. To attack before that date would mean they've violated the NAP and honor. In reverse, once (O) has been notified, (O) cannot attack FIRE until Feb 4, 2010 either. It is a 3 day period of peace. Farming and raiding without ASSAULTS and INVASIONS and ASSASSINATIONS would not be allowed. If they give a 7 day notice, no one would be able to attack or mass before Feb 8, 2010.
This is courtesy and precludes the "surprise attack" that one side would be planning against the other. This also helps protect both empires, not just (O).
As FIRE has already elected a diplomat, any confusion about the NAP would go between myself and Ish. (this eliminates my #3)
Another consideration would be that neither empire would demand or require the other empire to curtail or eliminate recruiting or how many people in the other's empire. This includes any inactives as any definition given for inactives could easily be farmed or raided as their defense would be 0. It also does not exclude that some of those members DO login regularly. For what purpose is theirs to explain. Some just seem to like keeping a 0 defense. This is not a requirement for the NAP, but merely a consideration.
@Admin, I know Kenzu and Kismet both start with K, but the 2nd letter is still different
Also, Kenzu is forbidden from acting in foreign affairs by the Peace Treaty with TIE. No offense to you m'dear, just reminding.
Separate note: I have been sick for many days. Seems a stomach virus of sorts is going around in the South USA. However, I did talk to Ish briefly on MSN earlier today and Syndicate is my backup diplomat. Note though, he is new to diplomacy and he wouldn't sign a NAP without my approval on it, but he would be able to negotiate in the event I was gone for a week (I'd be on protection at that time, so that would be an indication).
Recap:
Farming and raiding (farming within the 3 tier policy) "Active Members" (needing definition)
In addition, add in my #1 and #2 above (spies & NAP removal)
I await your reply Ish
Farming must be within the 3-tier farming policy each FIRE leader has on their profiles.
I would like a definition of "Active Players" from FIRE before I make a decision on that point.
What about the members of each empire with a 0 defense? Does this mean you would not be attacking members with a 0 defense as you claim those are inactive? Or members with a defense and at least 50k uu? Please define that for me.
My additions to that would be:
1: Spies: any spy found within either FIRE or (O) will be hunted down. This includes if the "spy" runs and hides behind someone else's alliances skirt. When found, they alliance hiding the spy cannot retaliate for the destruction of such spy. The spy would be the only one targeted. The alliance harboring the spy would not be able to "help" the spy (aka target) with kuwal, uu or anything else until s/he hasn't been attacked for 24 hours.
2. If a NAP is to be removed, notice MUST be given to the other diplomat no less than 3 days, preferably 7 days notice. This would show hostile intentions, but neither side would attack during that time. For example:
FIRE decides they want to remove the NAP. They notify me on Feb 1, 2010 (example, remember? feb 1 was a good easy date!) that they are removing the NAP in 3 days.. The SOONEST they could attack would be Feb 4, 2010. 72 hours AFTER the notification. To attack before that date would mean they've violated the NAP and honor. In reverse, once (O) has been notified, (O) cannot attack FIRE until Feb 4, 2010 either. It is a 3 day period of peace. Farming and raiding without ASSAULTS and INVASIONS and ASSASSINATIONS would not be allowed. If they give a 7 day notice, no one would be able to attack or mass before Feb 8, 2010.
This is courtesy and precludes the "surprise attack" that one side would be planning against the other. This also helps protect both empires, not just (O).
As FIRE has already elected a diplomat, any confusion about the NAP would go between myself and Ish. (this eliminates my #3)
Another consideration would be that neither empire would demand or require the other empire to curtail or eliminate recruiting or how many people in the other's empire. This includes any inactives as any definition given for inactives could easily be farmed or raided as their defense would be 0. It also does not exclude that some of those members DO login regularly. For what purpose is theirs to explain. Some just seem to like keeping a 0 defense. This is not a requirement for the NAP, but merely a consideration.
@Admin, I know Kenzu and Kismet both start with K, but the 2nd letter is still different
Also, Kenzu is forbidden from acting in foreign affairs by the Peace Treaty with TIE. No offense to you m'dear, just reminding.Separate note: I have been sick for many days. Seems a stomach virus of sorts is going around in the South USA. However, I did talk to Ish briefly on MSN earlier today and Syndicate is my backup diplomat. Note though, he is new to diplomacy and he wouldn't sign a NAP without my approval on it, but he would be able to negotiate in the event I was gone for a week (I'd be on protection at that time, so that would be an indication).
Recap:
Farming and raiding (farming within the 3 tier policy) "Active Members" (needing definition)
In addition, add in my #1 and #2 above (spies & NAP removal)
I await your reply Ish
Kismet- Aderan Worker
- Age : 52
Number of posts : 102
Registration date : 2009-04-01
Re: (O) empire offers a NAP to FIRE
by Alex Fri Jan 22, 2010 9:10 am
This is nothing official, Ish is the diplomat for this case but:
From what I read in Ish's post, only profitble farming is allowed on Active players but on inactive players the farming policy (And mayby the entire NAP?? CLARIFICATIN NEEDED) wouldn't apply. So yes farming would occur on 0 defence players and other inactives.
As I said thats just how I read it, nothing official in what I said.
-Alex
From what I read in Ish's post, only profitble farming is allowed on Active players but on inactive players the farming policy (And mayby the entire NAP?? CLARIFICATIN NEEDED) wouldn't apply. So yes farming would occur on 0 defence players and other inactives.
As I said thats just how I read it, nothing official in what I said.
-Alex
Alex- Coalition Officer
- ID : Whaddya wanna know this for huh?
-123
Alliance : None at the moment.
Number of posts : 1026
Location : Australia
Registration date : 2009-10-21
Re: (O) empire offers a NAP to FIRE
by Lord Ishurue Fri Jan 22, 2010 2:43 pm
Kismet wrote:In regards to a NAP - there has to be some punishment for those who do not stand by the NAP agreement.
I would like a definition of "Active Players" from FIRE before I make a decision on that point.
What about the members of each empire with a 0 defense? Does this mean you would not be attacking members with a 0 defense as you claim those are inactive? Or members with a defense and at least 50k uu? Please define that for me.
In (FIRE) we kick out members who haven't logged in every 24 hours or Don't give a notice of inactivity b4 becoming inactive .FTR all (FIRE) members are active . Here is a WR inactive Trigunfan213 210,762 Miraya [07 Jan] 12:19 S C A
Kismet wrote:
My additions to that would be:
1: Spies: any spy found within either FIRE or (O) will be hunted down. This includes if the "spy" runs and hides behind someone else's alliances skirt. When found, they alliance hiding the spy cannot retaliate for the destruction of such spy. The spy would be the only one targeted. The alliance harboring the spy would not be able to "help" the spy (aka target) with kuwal, uu or anything else until s/he hasn't been attacked for 24 hours.
Absolutely not , This is a NAP not a peace treaty . If i think u got a spy in (FIRE) we will act accordingly to the situation .
Kismet wrote:
2. If a NAP is to be removed, notice MUST be given to the other diplomat no less than 3 days, preferably 7 days notice. This would show hostile intentions, but neither side would attack during that time.
Well as per that , NAP's end when Diplomacy fails . FTR (FIRE) had no intention of attacking WR . you may have confused it with this post . https://aderanwars.forumotion.com/empire-wars-treaties-f3/ambition-of-chaos-t1155.htm
as per this NAP (FIRE) elected me for this issue ,but If a New Federation member breaks The Pinnacle of Tiers Farming Policy then it would make more sense to contact NF HC .Kismet wrote:
As FIRE has already elected a diplomat, any confusion about the NAP would go between myself and Ish. (this eliminates my #3)
Last edited by Ishurue on Sat Jan 23, 2010 7:53 pm; edited 2 times in total
Lord Ishurue- Aderan Assassin
- Alliance :
Mujengan
The Unlimited Elite Gun Force
Age : 36
Number of posts : 666
Registration date : 2009-11-05
Re: (O) empire offers a NAP to FIRE
by Vesper Fri Jan 22, 2010 7:36 pm
Knew that would get things going
Vesper- Aderan Assassin
- Alliance : Commonwealth
Number of posts : 518
Registration date : 2009-08-11
Re: (O) empire offers a NAP to FIRE
by Universe Fri Jan 22, 2010 10:40 pm
Did I read 'skirt' in there somewhere? Good stuff. I like that.
Universe- Aderan Spy
- ID : 510
Or the year Clovis officially establishes Frankish Kingdom - Birth of France.
Alliance : Nah..
Age : 37
Number of posts : 367
Location : the Netherlands
Registration date : 2009-10-05
Re: (O) empire offers a NAP to FIRE
by Kismet Sun Jan 24, 2010 5:06 am
Ishurue wrote:Kismet wrote:In regards to a NAP - there has to be some punishment for those who do not stand by the NAP agreement.
I would like a definition of "Active Players" from FIRE before I make a decision on that point.
What about the members of each empire with a 0 defense? Does this mean you would not be attacking members with a 0 defense as you claim those are inactive? Or members with a defense and at least 50k uu? Please define that for me.
In (FIRE) we kick out members who haven't logged in every 24 hours or Don't give a notice of inactivity b4 becoming inactive .FTR all (FIRE) members are active . Here is a WR inactive Trigunfan213 210,762 Miraya [07 Jan] 12:19 S C AKismet wrote:
My additions to that would be:
1: Spies: any spy found within either FIRE or (O) will be hunted down. This includes if the "spy" runs and hides behind someone else's alliances skirt. When found, they alliance hiding the spy cannot retaliate for the destruction of such spy. The spy would be the only one targeted. The alliance harboring the spy would not be able to "help" the spy (aka target) with kuwal, uu or anything else until s/he hasn't been attacked for 24 hours.
Absolutely not , This is a NAP not a peace treaty . If i think u got a spy in (FIRE) we will act accordingly to the situation .Kismet wrote:
2. If a NAP is to be removed, notice MUST be given to the other diplomat no less than 3 days, preferably 7 days notice. This would show hostile intentions, but neither side would attack during that time.
Well as per that , NAP's end when Diplomacy fails . FTR (FIRE) had no intention of attacking WR . you may have confused it with this post . https://aderanwars.forumotion.com/empire-wars-treaties-f3/ambition-of-chaos-t1155.htmas per this NAP (FIRE) elected me for this issue ,but If a New Federation member breaks The Pinnacle of Tiers Farming Policy then it would make more sense to contact NF HC .Kismet wrote:
As FIRE has already elected a diplomat, any confusion about the NAP would go between myself and Ish. (this eliminates my #3)
Without getting into all the colors and bolds - Who would I need to contact when you say NF HC????
I can agree to the Farming and raiding - I would like to know who gave you this:
Trigunfan213 210,762 Miraya [07 Jan] 12:19 S C A
As always, it's not just about a NAP for me. I strive for peace so I look towards a peace treaty after the NAP.
Kismet- Aderan Worker
- Age : 52
Number of posts : 102
Registration date : 2009-04-01
Re: (O) empire offers a NAP to FIRE
by Kismet Sun Jan 24, 2010 5:22 am
After talking to Ish on MSN... he has answered my questions I had in my previous post.
I agree to the NAP... only profitable farming and raiding on active members.
I agree to the NAP... only profitable farming and raiding on active members.
Kismet- Aderan Worker
- Age : 52
Number of posts : 102
Registration date : 2009-04-01
Re: (O) empire offers a NAP to FIRE
by Lord Ishurue Sun Jan 24, 2010 5:54 am
Kismet wrote:After talking to Ish on MSN... he has answered my questions I had in my previous post.
I agree to the NAP... only profitable farming and raiding on active members.
.
on behalf of (FIRE) we agree to this nap .
Regards
Ishurue 1IC of Mujengan (FIRE) HC Member
Lord Ishurue- Aderan Assassin
- Alliance :
Mujengan
The Unlimited Elite Gun Force
Age : 36
Number of posts : 666
Registration date : 2009-11-05
Re: (O) empire offers a NAP to FIRE
by Kismet Sun Feb 07, 2010 4:52 pm
We have a new member in our empire - Commintern.
The leader of Commintern is rudsaint.
Will Commintern be included within this NAP as it is a public alliance or shall we start this all over again to include them?
Personally I'd really prefer just adding them to the list and bring them up to speed on the NAP and give them the general 3-tier farming policy we've agreed upon.
This is if Ishurue agrees. (*since it's the same issue, I don't know why another person would be named diplomat*)
Thanks much
kismet
The leader of Commintern is rudsaint.
Will Commintern be included within this NAP as it is a public alliance or shall we start this all over again to include them?
Personally I'd really prefer just adding them to the list and bring them up to speed on the NAP and give them the general 3-tier farming policy we've agreed upon.
This is if Ishurue agrees. (*since it's the same issue, I don't know why another person would be named diplomat*)
Thanks much
kismet
Kismet- Aderan Worker
- Age : 52
Number of posts : 102
Registration date : 2009-04-01
Re: (O) empire offers a NAP to FIRE
by Jonathan Sun Feb 07, 2010 5:09 pm
comnitern good
it gruppe of otuisders
it gruppe of otuisders
Jonathan- Mercenary
- Number of posts : 15
Registration date : 2010-01-11
Re: (O) empire offers a NAP to FIRE
by Lord Ishurue Sun Feb 07, 2010 9:35 pm
Commintern who are they ?
Lord Ishurue- Aderan Assassin
- Alliance :
Mujengan
The Unlimited Elite Gun Force
Age : 36
Number of posts : 666
Registration date : 2009-11-05
Re: (O) empire offers a NAP to FIRE
by Nomad Sun Feb 07, 2010 9:51 pm
Looks like 2 guys who have just started, army sizes of between 1 and 2K men.
Nomad- Alliance Leader
- ID :
Number of posts : 4259
Location : Everywhere and nowhere at all.
Registration date : 2008-12-17
Re: (O) empire offers a NAP to FIRE
by Jonathan Sun Feb 07, 2010 11:28 pm
i dun no wen statrd
gute gruppe von andres speil
gute gruppe von andres speil
Jonathan- Mercenary
- Number of posts : 15
Registration date : 2010-01-11
Re: (O) empire offers a NAP to FIRE
by Universe Mon Feb 08, 2010 3:54 pm
Yawn, Jonathan. Yawn.
Good luck, Comintern.
More commies.. they just won't die..
Good luck, Comintern.
More commies.. they just won't die..
Universe- Aderan Spy
- ID : 510
Or the year Clovis officially establishes Frankish Kingdom - Birth of France.
Alliance : Nah..
Age : 37
Number of posts : 367
Location : the Netherlands
Registration date : 2009-10-05
Re: (O) empire offers a NAP to FIRE
by Osyndicate Mon Feb 08, 2010 4:21 pm
Universe, what makes you think they are commies? Wouldn't they at least have the decensy to have 2 ms in their alliance name?
Btw, nice sig, one of the smoothest I have seen yet. Who did it?
Btw, nice sig, one of the smoothest I have seen yet. Who did it?
Osyndicate- Aderan Miner
- ID : Syndicate
592
SS Currently Active.
Alliance : World Republic.
Minister of Foreign Affairs.
Age : 31
Number of posts : 208
Location : Behind you...
Registration date : 2009-05-02 -
Re: (O) empire offers a NAP to FIRE
by Sandwalker Mon Feb 08, 2010 5:03 pm
Osyndicate wrote:Universe, what makes you think they are commies? Wouldn't they at least have the decensy to have 2 ms in their alliance name?
Btw, nice sig, one of the smoothest I have seen yet. Who did it?
Here it is, my good man: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comintern
The Communist International (shortened Comintern, also known as the Third International) was an international communist organization founded in Moscow in March 1919.
Indeed, what a stretch of the imagination to think they're commies!
)
Sandwalker- Aderan Super Soldier
- Number of posts : 750
Registration date : 2009-01-11
Re: (O) empire offers a NAP to FIRE
by Jiro Mon Feb 08, 2010 5:12 pm
Just for parctical purposes, could Comintern add a (O) to their alliance name, also to distinguish them from COMINTERN, lead by KimIIISung?
And welcome to the game.
And welcome to the game.
Last edited by Jiro on Mon Feb 08, 2010 5:20 pm; edited 1 time in total
Jiro- Aderan Spy
- Number of posts : 487
Location : the Netherlands
Registration date : 2009-09-24 -
Re: (O) empire offers a NAP to FIRE
by Special Agent 47 Mon Feb 08, 2010 5:18 pm
Osyndicate wrote:Universe, what makes you think they are commies? Wouldn't they at least have the decensy to have 2 ms in their alliance name?
Btw, nice sig, one of the smoothest I have seen yet. Who did it?
The same artist who did mine. He doesn't play AW but he does play another game I also play. If you like I'll arrange a meeting, or get his MSN for you.
Just PM me, ingame would get a faster response.
Special Agent 47- Aderan Assassin
- ID : http://www.aderanwars.com/stats.php?id=427
Alliance : [ The_Marauders ]
Number of posts : 556
Location : Preparing for my next mission.
Registration date : 2009-08-22
Page 1 of 2 • 1, 2
Page 1 of 2
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum|
|
|