We would have honoured our NAP. I know NAPs have historically meant nothing to you Canary, but we take our agreements seriously.
Big surprise King Grudge brings up our old history. Look in the mirror, respect your own agreements. You harbor their rebels and keep hold of a castle in order to sign people up against them when they retake it. Why? There is no real reason for this, as far as I can tell, besides an excuse to pretend they broke their NAP early for propaganda purposes. Either that or a tit for tat "fuck you" for the Hospitaller thing, which sounds like it's about as bad on paper, but in that situation was any fief taken by another faction maliciously
after the NAP was instituted?
This may be a sketchy thing to do, but its really not as bad as LCO taking in the entire hosp faction along with Sparvico in order to grant them the protection of the NAP that they had JUST made with us after hosp had taken back a couple of villages.
Arguably, it's worse. Not only was it either subterfuge or an exploit, but SEMENstorm made it perfectly clear how they felt about this castle. An open war ending abruptly because one side found a way to piggyback onto a non-aggression pact (guess there should've been more fine print?) compared to a castle being stolen and put into another faction in the NAP who is apparently unwilling to give up the fief and drop the player responsible from their roster. Only one of these circumstances resulted in a hostile, NAP-breaking action undertaken
after the pact was in place.
Anyways; we will run badplayer's roster for him this battle since he cannot do it himself but win or lose, he is on his own after.
In other words, not taking the NAP seriously and defending against a faction you're supposed to be in a ceasefire with for no apparent reason. After you do that, then you'll play ball, no problem!
I had to make a decision at 3am just before going to bed with no one else online to consult so I went for it but enough people are against it and LCO/SS spit on NAPs and badplayer is ban for unrelated reasons as far as I can tell (cpm locked the thread where BP asked for a reason), so there isn't much point in keeping it going longer.
Guess you can let the mistake go once you already got the fallout you wanted.
This post is playing devil's advocate, I obviously don't have much personally invested in this series of events. Don't let the strat forum wars die out!
