EVE Search - NAP breaking, betraying, and omgwtf traitors

All Channels

Corporation, Alliance and Organization Discussions

NAP breaking, betraying, and omgwtf traitors

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Dao 2	Posted - 2006.05.15 02:25:00 - [1] Well I've seen a lot of threads, though plenty more then me ;p. But I just gotta say, "traitor" threads are VERY common. So I took a quick thought on it, and just gotta say. so what if someone betrays you? doesn't mean anything. most recent example: ASCN vs TS TS says ASCN frontier is betraying them or blah blah whatever. (well at least stony did :\|, and that other guy ;p) So? Alliances change, times change. Things have to change. Maybe you aren't what you once were, maybe the "betrayer" alliance had to change, it happens all the time. Just cause you had to go as part of the bargain doesn't say anythin about the other character (well depends on the manner of it being done, as in ASCN's case i see nothing wrong with it) Expect any promise in this game to be broken eventually, the few that keep to their promise no matter what, even to the extreme detriment of themselves (or complete destruction ;p). I ain't sure how to explain em. Of the most honorable no doubt, but is it is stupid of them? can't say myself ;p I used to be one of the people who saw "betrayl" in bad light, but now I can see there is no point ;p If its done in an honorable fashion, and at least tried to keep up with the promise, i see nothing wrong with "the new way". end! btw i no theres numerious run on sentences, other grammer mistakes, and spelling mistakes. Go ahead and see if i care ;D ------------------------------------------------ NEWLY ADDED ON 1/19 (though applies to all posts before ;p) the usual "I don't represent my corp or alliance" and stuffs like that Also the gal
shadyfox99	Posted - 2006.05.15 02:35:00 - [2] This is why alliance politics are bad....and pointless. (although it is kind of funny to watch alliances who think they are safe, mainly because of their allies, get their arses kicked when their "friends" turn on them) Originally by: HostageTaker Use your brain and use your main! OMFG I just rhymed!
Sean Hannity	Posted - 2006.05.15 02:35:00 - [3] Nobody likes a liar, just ask Rush!
Tecam Hund	Posted - 2006.05.15 02:37:00 - [4] Breaking a NAP is an act of war, not a betrayal really (however depending on situation it can leave a bad mark on your reputation). Politics is dirty business and one never should trust an alliance with the powerful.
Body Count	Posted - 2006.05.15 02:40:00 - [5] Reputation matters a lot to some people. So does honor. Some groups like The MC pride themselves on their honor and reputation and people respect them for it. Some groups don't have a good reputation and all their posts and thoughts tend to get ignored or they're not taken seriously. Burn Eden gets a LOT of flack. Don't know if it's deserved or not but they do. Then there are other groups like ASCN who get accused of treachery on a regular basis but it doesn't seem to harm their reputation at all. You were in PA I know there have been lots of feelings amongst the PA corps at one time or another of one corp or alliance betraying you.
Dao 2	Posted - 2006.05.15 02:50:00 - [6] Originally by: Tecam Hund Breaking a NAP is an act of war, not a betrayal really (however depending on situation it can leave a bad mark on your reputation). Politics is dirty business and one never should trust an alliance with the powerful. invading an alliance that u have set to neutral is an act of war ;p breaking naps is different ;p ------------------------------------------------ NEWLY ADDED ON 1/19 (though applies to all posts before ;p) the usual "I don't represent my corp or alliance" and stuffs like that Also the gal
Dao 2	Posted - 2006.05.15 02:50:00 - [7] Originally by: Body Count Reputation matters a lot to some people. So does honor. Some groups like The MC pride themselves on their honor and reputation and people respect them for it. Some groups don't have a good reputation and all their posts and thoughts tend to get ignored or they're not taken seriously. Burn Eden gets a LOT of flack. Don't know if it's deserved or not but they do. Then there are other groups like ASCN who get accused of treachery on a regular basis but it doesn't seem to harm their reputation at all. You were in PA I know there have been lots of feelings amongst the PA corps at one time or another of one corp or alliance betraying you. It does, and MC can afford to honor all their deals pretty much cause their short term ones ;p if they kept them for say a year, something would change and I wouldn't at all mind really, stuff ain't perma ;p Honor means a lot, but i'm saying u can't seriously expect people to keep them when stuff in this game changes so often that nothing is the same as it was when it was first made ;p. Burn Eden get a lot of **** yeah ;p I don't see any of it saying their dishonorable though ;p I mean they never made promises in the first place :D ;p the 2 alliances that i remeber betraying PA (while i was in it) is 1) xelas, like i said it depends on the manner of the "betrayl", and secretly napping BoB is one that scratches my book 2)forsaken empire, i dunno how i would feel if they did it normally, but the lies that were the "reasons" ticked me off a lot ;p ok well i guess theres a 3rd G/Iron, don't have anything bad to say about that i guess, they did what they decided was best for them. Times changed, All sides changed, and they decided to do what they felt like they had to do. ------------------------------------------------ NEWLY ADDED ON 1/19 (though applies to all posts before ;p) the usual "I don't represent my corp or alliance" and stuffs like that Also the gal
Dao 2	Posted - 2006.05.15 02:51:00 - [8] Edited by: Dao 2 on 15/05/2006 02:54:45 Originally by: shadyfox99 This is why alliance politics are bad....and pointless. (although it is kind of funny to watch alliances who think they are safe, mainly because of their allies, get their arses kicked when their "friends" turn on them) true ;) edit: well the part in the ( ) ;p ------------------------------------------------ NEWLY ADDED ON 1/19 (though applies to all posts before ;p) the usual "I don't represent my corp or alliance" and stuffs like that Also the gal
Vasko	Posted - 2006.05.15 03:12:00 - [9] I read somwhere that ascn offerd some tribal to join before the war, that was very nice of ascn to do so, and then also giving tribal time to get there assets together and out. if that isnt friendly then i dont know what is. And by the looks of how fast tribal lost there stations tribal was getting weak and if ascn wouldnt of done it themselves some other force would of tried and ascn would be involved anyhow. atleast moving now they dont need to fight another invading force stronger then tribal...
Tecam Hund	Posted - 2006.05.15 03:13:00 - [10] Originally by: Dao 2 Originally by: Tecam Hund Breaking a NAP is an act of war, not a betrayal really (however depending on situation it can leave a bad mark on your reputation). Politics is dirty business and one never should trust an alliance with the powerful. invading an alliance that u have set to neutral is an act of war ;p breaking naps is different ;p Would you call German invasion of USSR a betrayal though? What I mean is NAPs are mostly temporary agreements and last until they stop being benefitial to either side. You could of course cancel the nap and attack in 5 minites after that, but people would still feel the same and situation doesn't change. Opening fire on allied forces during the joint operation would be a betrayal in my opinion. It seems like in EVE NAPs mean anything from what they should (none-agression pacts) to full alliances. Just want to make it clear that I am talking about the proper NAPs. One should begin working on invasion/defence plan at the same time as signing the NAP. I see the point though. Technically it is a betrayal to break the NAP, but I think it depends on who you break it with, and it is a widely used political move.
Dao 2	Posted - 2006.05.15 04:10:00 - [11] Edited by: Dao 2 on 15/05/2006 04:12:43 Edited by: Dao 2 on 15/05/2006 04:12:12 Edited by: Dao 2 on 15/05/2006 04:10:58 Originally by: Tecam Hund Originally by: Dao 2 Originally by: Tecam Hund Breaking a NAP is an act of war, not a betrayal really (however depending on situation it can leave a bad mark on your reputation). Politics is dirty business and one never should trust an alliance with the powerful. invading an alliance that u have set to neutral is an act of war ;p breaking naps is different ;p Would you call German invasion of USSR a betrayal though? What I mean is NAPs are mostly temporary agreements and last until they stop being benefitial to either side. You could of course cancel the nap and attack in 5 minites after that, but people would still feel the same and situation doesn't change. Opening fire on allied forces during the joint operation would be a betrayal in my opinion. It seems like in EVE NAPs mean anything from what they should (none-agression pacts) to full alliances. Just want to make it clear that I am talking about the proper NAPs. One should begin working on invasion/defence plan at the same time as signing the NAP. I see the point though. Technically it is a betrayal to break the NAP, but I think it depends on who you break it with, and it is a widely used political move. wasn't talking abotu the ingame "official" nap ;p sometimes those are temporary and all that ;p what i meant was for real napping, allying, then later "betraying" ;p edit: rl comparison of betrayl to eve is not a good idea ;p stuff in eve happens much faster. 2nd edit: the ingame NAP is a fancy + standing ;p 3rd edit: that also has some logistical reasons to go with it ;p ------------------------------------------------ NEWLY ADDED ON 1/19 (though applies to all posts before ;p) the usual "I don't represent my corp or alliance" and stuffs like that Also the gal
ArcticFox	Posted - 2006.05.15 08:25:00 - [12] I think you're confusing NAP with some kind of permanent alliance. If someone randomly starts attacking while a NAP is in effect that is clearly breaking the pact. However, nowhere is it implied that a NAP is permanent, so if it is formally cancelled with plenty of notice I don't see how it can fairly be considered betrayal or treachery. NAP doesn't mean 'yay, friends forever' it means 'we're not shooting you and you're not shooting us right now.' ---------------------------------- "There's no +6 Sword of WTFPWN in Eve." - Er... Some person on the forum...
Hardin	Posted - 2006.05.15 08:42:00 - [13] Anyone ever play the game Diplomacy? -------------------------------------------- Smiting pirates and terrorists for Amarr
Rod Blaine	Posted - 2006.05.15 09:36:00 - [14] Let me ask you. If you have a relationship with another person or group. Do you expect that relationship to last without it needing to be kept up ? And even if it is kep up and re-affirmed regularly, does it neccesarily go beyond changing circumstances ? Tbh, permanent relationships are in general illogical in a changing environment. So, you either change your reltaionship with the environment and make sure it's kept up to date, or it ends sooner or later. The word betrayal has nothing to do with it at all. People mistake an understanding of mutual benefit for a promise here. Power to the players !
Darth Hammer	Posted - 2006.05.15 10:06:00 - [15] The time I have spent reading these forums have taught me alot of the political landscape .Basicaly which entities are honorable and turstworthy and which are not.I do take alot of the threads with a grain of salt ,but it appears the large entities that are on top stay there becuase they are willing to do any thing to any one at any time to further their ends.All I can say is the way life usualy works is what goes around, comes around.It has been my experiance that when eventualy the same thing hapens to them they will scream the loudest of any . CEO
Taurequis	Posted - 2006.05.15 10:24:00 - [16] Originally by: Rod Blaine Let me ask you. If you have a relationship with another person or group. Do you expect that relationship to last without it needing to be kept up ? And even if it is kep up and re-affirmed regularly, does it neccesarily go beyond changing circumstances ? Tbh, permanent relationships are in general illogical in a changing environment. So, you either change your reltaionship with the environment and make sure it's kept up to date, or it ends sooner or later. The word betrayal has nothing to do with it at all. People mistake an understanding of mutual benefit for a promise here. Well posted. Says it all here. Taurequis
Dao 2	Posted - 2006.05.15 13:12:00 - [17] Originally by: ArcticFox I think you're confusing NAP with some kind of permanent alliance. If someone randomly starts attacking while a NAP is in effect that is clearly breaking the pact. However, nowhere is it implied that a NAP is permanent, so if it is formally cancelled with plenty of notice I don't see how it can fairly be considered betrayal or treachery. NAP doesn't mean 'yay, friends forever' it means 'we're not shooting you and you're not shooting us right now.' yeah thats what i meant ;p but im saying NO alliance is permanent, some ppl seem to think it should be ;p ------------------------------------------------ NEWLY ADDED ON 1/19 (though applies to all posts before ;p) the usual "I don't represent my corp or alliance" and stuffs like that Also the gal
Dao 2	Posted - 2006.05.15 13:13:00 - [18] Originally by: Rod Blaine Let me ask you. If you have a relationship with another person or group. Do you expect that relationship to last without it needing to be kept up ? And even if it is kep up and re-affirmed regularly, does it neccesarily go beyond changing circumstances ? Tbh, permanent relationships are in general illogical in a changing environment. So, you either change your reltaionship with the environment and make sure it's kept up to date, or it ends sooner or later. The word betrayal has nothing to do with it at all. People mistake an understanding of mutual benefit for a promise here. what im saying ;p cept better worded, cept for maybe the last part, it isn't always for mutual benefit ;p ------------------------------------------------ NEWLY ADDED ON 1/19 (though applies to all posts before ;p) the usual "I don't represent my corp or alliance" and stuffs like that Also the gal
Elenia Kheynes	Posted - 2006.05.15 13:30:00 - [19] Originally by: Hardin Anyone ever play the game Diplomacy? Betraying in that game is bad because afterwards people don't trust you anymore in the next games tbh I like the word "traitor", people get sooo upset about it when you use it. They're always looking for excuses, justifications etc... Except for some people like Guilding Hand Social Club, I don't remember much people betraying then saying "yes I betrayed you, so what?" Dear friendly customer... Can I have your money ?
Raem Civrie	Posted - 2006.05.15 14:31:00 - [20] Originally by: Elenia Kheynes Originally by: Hardin Anyone ever play the game Diplomacy? Betraying in that game is bad because afterwards people don't trust you anymore in the next games tbh I like the word "traitor", people get sooo upset about it when you use it. They're always looking for excuses, justifications etc... Except for some people like Guilding Hand Social Club, I don't remember much people betraying then saying "yes I betrayed you, so what?" GHSC are not traitors. What they do is not betrayal, but rather Utilization of Unfortunate General And Specific Trust. Not betrayal. What they do is not corporate theft either, but Displacement of Shared Assets. And they don't murder, they Mercilessly Snuff The Life Out Of Worthless Sobs Who Probably Deserved It Since Someone Bothered Paying The GHSC To Do It. ---- Cultural Advisor of the Omber Administration
Dao 2	Posted - 2006.05.15 19:22:00 - [21] Originally by: Elenia Kheynes Originally by: Hardin Anyone ever play the game Diplomacy? Betraying in that game is bad because afterwards people don't trust you anymore in the next games tbh I like the word "traitor", people get sooo upset about it when you use it. They're always looking for excuses, justifications etc... Except for some people like Guilding Hand Social Club, I don't remember much people betraying then saying "yes I betrayed you, so what?" there has to be a deal in the first place to betray ;p ghsc didn't have one. ------------------------------------------------ NEWLY ADDED ON 1/19 (though applies to all posts before ;p) the usual "I don't represent my corp or alliance" and stuffs like that Also the gal
HatePeace LoveWar	Posted - 2006.05.15 21:07:00 - [22] It's a game, war is fun, ASCN needed to make fun things happen for their members. If anything TS are naive for not expecting this. Carrier & Fighter Sales
Johnny Wulgaru	Posted - 2006.05.15 21:18:00 - [23] Bah! All this betrayel crap is just that, crap. Relationships change ffs. It's part of life and gaming is no different. Let's take DDC/CLS breaking from Xetic back then, that seems to be a favorite little whine from people and constantly brought up, over.. and over.. and over.. Why protect/fly for those that don't deserve it, nor will fight for their own survival? And there may have been other corps fighting in their own way, but they just got jealous they weren't invited to go with cls/ddc so they felt abandoned. BOOHOO Whatever. Even when IRON/G pulled a blue on blue sneak attack.. OMG now comes ASCN whinage. What like 3 battleships and a couple of haulers or something were whacked during that? You'd think ASCN's first born were all kidnapped and eaten. Don't even get my started about the ASCN betrayed TS bull. Oh please, give it a rest and get over it. Your time in PS was coming to an end no matter what. ASCN just happened to get to it first. ASCN's time will come too. So betrayel is just so much spin. Personal betrayels do happen in this game but organization level is just politics. People whining and being all butt hurt just want something to feel righteous about, like they are the honorable, the betrayed, blah blah blah. So sez Johnny~~
Soulis	Posted - 2006.05.15 22:09:00 - [24] Originally by: HatePeace LoveWar war is fun all that needs to be said Shinra - The Good Guys
Karunel	Posted - 2006.05.15 22:16:00 - [25] Quote: Anyone ever play the game Diplomacy? Haha, best board game ever. A very good explanation of what NAP's are about just by mentioning that game too, lots of "He's not gonna attack mSONOFABI**H!!" memories coming back.
Chopzor	Posted - 2006.05.16 07:55:00 - [26] lol
Bexxly	Posted - 2006.05.16 14:53:00 - [27] Originally by: Chopzor lol Hey you have your avatar! I R t3h Bexleh lol
Fabienne Runestar	Posted - 2006.05.16 19:20:00 - [28] The way I see it there is more than likely a good reason why an alliance breaks a nap, in most instances. Without getting into details sometimes its as simple as not wanting to put up with bs from the other alliance, such as watching them scout for enemies, or their killing friends of your alliance in your space etc. If a NAP is to hold bull like that needs to stop, and be apologized by the offending alliance in such a way that the first alliance feels comfortable with alliance Bs actions. Alliance A may feel they have no other choice but to break the NAP with Alliance B if B's members push them to it. I don't think it's traitorious, more a long the lines of 'Shame me once, shame on you. Shame me twice shame on me.' type of senario. Traitors imo can only happen within an alliance or corp. A traitor would be someone willingly selling secrets to an enemey or someone who pulls off a corp or alliance coupe but not an alliance going to war against a precieved enemy. These are my opinions and represent my own opinions, not those of my Corp or my Alliance, or the rest of EVE. --

Pages: [1] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.