Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Your nation was pretty darn cool when you were just a peaceful scandinavian, but with the whole anarchy-thing and (what seemd like) a zillion wars in only a couple of weeks, it sorta started to bug me. Not sure what everyone else things..


But look at this from another perspective: 'evil' nations are needed as well, and form the base for good role-playing (as long as there's no breaking the rp rules).

Link to comment

My country doesn't hate you, we just think your government is unstable and radical and your foreign relations are quite fickle. Not to mention that little ICBM thing... You never did anything bad to Miiros though, so they would probably still trade with the US and promote relations unless someone like Tagmatium twisted our arm against it. In that case, we would support you even greater in secret and hate Tagmatium or whoever twisted our arm. =P Sure, you probably wouldn't get military support, but money from trade or generous donations could turn the tide in any campaign if the opponent runs outta steam.


Also, OOC I think the anarchist government is pretty cool. It's a good contrast to all of the monarchies or totalitarian states in the region. Reshaping your nation just to fit in would make the region bland. I think less war and military buildup would ease the worries of a lot of neutral Europa, like Miiros.


(Used Tag as an example because they seem to be the most anti-US)

Edited by Miiros (see edit history)
Link to comment

I think you probably understand why Rekamgil is annoyed with US. I noticed your attempt to reconcile by offering aid to the Dacvi peacekeeping force (at least I assumed it was an attempt at some kind of reconciliation) but I have to continue in character in order to make the game fun and realistic. If any other nation treated Rekamgil the way US has, we would be pissed at them too. It is in our national interests to remain wary or US. US foreign policy has seemed rather schizophrenic, I've been unable to determine what your position will be on a day-to-day basis and that lack of consistency has made me want to keep US at arms length. It works well for you as far as having a direct democracy because I think such governance style would be somewhat fickle, so you are internally consistent. However, I think you'd experience IC improved relations with many nations if they could trust that your government (or people) would not be overthrown in the next little while or that a major policy you commit to will remain in place for a reasonable period of time. As it stands, it's like trying to normalize relations with several different nations all in a 2 week span. This is not criticism, I think your government is interesting, but if you choose to continue it this way (which again I think would be interesting) don't expect particularly close or normalized relations with Rekamgil...


You asked for suggestions so here it is: I think your govt could be more consistent and still remain an anarchy. If other nations felt like they could trust your government to stick to a policy and not reverse very frequently, they'd be more likely to trust US... Anyone agree or not?

Link to comment



I think I'm going to have to apologise to you, US. I did shoot about some accusations in a couple of threads and in some PMs which weren't justified at all, for which I'm sorry for.


Other than that, I've no beef other than IC. I also think the Anarchist government is funky and unique compared to the various totalitarian and monarchist regimes in the region, but I do agree with Rek in that you probably should be a bit more consistent in your actions.

Link to comment
  • Create New...