The East PacificBoard

Volinovia wrote:

Yeah. I agree to all terms.

Awesome, I'll draft up a dispatch now. Good to have you back Voli ;)

Merlovich wrote:

Hold up...

How is that godmodding?

it's very unlikely for a government imperialist government to be with an anarchist for instance

Osterreich und ungarn wrote:

Who are you again?

I go by many names.

Zukchiva

New zukchiva

Sanomal

Bonket

Merlovich wrote:

Awesome, I'll draft up a dispatch now. Good to have you back Voli ;)

Good to be back.

The Unity Sisters wrote:

it's very unlikely for a government imperialist government to be with an anarchist for instance

Sure it's unrealistic to some extents, not unheard of, doesn't make it godmodding though

Merlovich wrote:

Australia dude

Also it's not legal here but cops don't care that much if you're doing it privately

dang, ya live in the future

The hing wrote:

I go by many names.

Zukchiva

New zukchiva

Sanomal

Bonket

I was about to slam you for being a dumb fledgling...but...that’s obviously not gonna happen.

The hing wrote:

Would an imperialist be a long-term ally with a pacifist nation, when there's no outside stimulus to do so?

Actually, yes it would assuming theres capital investment to be made and economic stimuli from forging an alliance of convenience.

The hing wrote:

Can we please stop trying to make ideology-less alliances?

It's unrealistic and frankly, kinda godmod.

Zuk is accurate here.
Also, I'm making a cultural and economic union for my allies and protectorates, still thinking of a proper theme. ;-;

Merlovich wrote:

Sure it's unrealistic to some extents, not unheard of, doesn't make it godmodding though

...true

Demiurges wrote:

Actually, yes it would assuming theres capital investment to be made and economic stimuli from forging an alliance of convenience.

*still blocked most likely*

Meet me at tilted towers

Demiurges wrote:

Actually, yes it would assuming theres capital investment to be made and economic stimuli from forging an alliance of convenience.

Merlovich wrote:

Sure it's unrealistic to some extents, not unheard of, doesn't make it godmodding though

True, what I meant though is that it's either a) alliances have to be extremely like-minded, b) allainces HAVE to accept the fact that members will misbehave, and have to impose sanctions and kick them out, and b) sometimes alliances will dissolve.

So I was kinda a bit overreacting when I said "godmodding", but large scale alliances will not survive long with different ideologies that oppose each other.

The Angel of Charity wrote:

Zuk is accurate here.
Also, I'm making a cultural and economic union for my allies and protectorates, still thinking of a proper theme. ;-;

I though you left?

The hing wrote:

True, what I meant though is that it's either a) alliances have to be extremely like-minded, b) allainces HAVE to accept the fact that members will misbehave, and have to impose sanctions and kick them out, and b) sometimes alliances will dissolve.

So I was kinda a bit overreacting when I said "godmodding", but large scale alliances will not survive long with different ideologies that oppose each other.

This is true, I agree with that completely, just that godmodding isn't the correct term

King fruit wrote:

I though you left?

Now why would you think that?

The hing wrote:

True, what I meant though is that it's either a) alliances have to be extremely like-minded, b) allainces HAVE to accept the fact that members will misbehave, and have to impose sanctions and kick them out, and b) sometimes alliances will dissolve.

So I was kinda a bit overreacting when I said "godmodding", but large scale alliances will not survive long with different ideologies that oppose each other.

Hence why I put a limit on the alliance and vet everyone before I let them in along with taking in other considerations and calculations.

The hing wrote:

True, what I meant though is that it's either a) alliances have to be extremely like-minded, b) allainces HAVE to accept the fact that members will misbehave, and have to impose sanctions and kick them out, and b) sometimes alliances will dissolve.

So I was kinda a bit overreacting when I said "godmodding", but large scale alliances will not survive long with different ideologies that oppose each other.

vuk i have this
still the same old template

*Thinks about joining*

Merlovich wrote:

This is true, I agree with that completely, just that godmodding isn't the correct term

Yea, it isn't. My bad.

Though I do believe JU was realistic, as in Asendavia pretty much was so powerful that the others couldn't break the rules, or they would get destroyed.

EU wasn't, since it had the OOC planning rule.

The hing wrote:

Yea, it isn't. My bad.

Though I do believe JU was realistic, as in Asendavia pretty much was so powerful that the others couldn't break the rules, or they would get destroyed.

EU wasn't, since it had the OOC planning rule.

Charitian empire?

Goodnight everyone, Ave Cadia and farewell.

The Angel of Charity wrote:

Charitian empire?

Kinda realistic though logistics would seem a bit hard (yes, the way you portray it is reasonable, but many factors exist).

Seeing that you're on The Angel of Charity

I should be on by tomorrow to continue the war RP.

(Currently taking uhm... A slight poo in the washroom.)

Anyways, see u till then.