We've moved, ! Update your bookmarks to https://thesouthpacific.org! These forums are being archived.

Dismiss this notice
See LegComm's announcement to make sure you're still a legislator on the new forums!

Article 7 Review
#11

With the SPSF as having no ideology, there is no way to word 3 or 4 and in the military side of gameplay, there will always be a chance that there will be someone on the other side that is treatied or friendly. Try this:

(4) groups that have or have , successful or otherwise, attempted to sabotage The South Pacific's military operations in misrepresenting themselves when participating in operations for the sake of sabatoge or
(5) may reasonably be considered as likely to engage in any of the actions set out in points (1) to (4) of this section in the future.

The only thing another region can do in harm to the SPSF is to take knowldge gain before an operation and leak it to others. IE, the SPSF is planing a raid and a nation or region leaks it before hand to any defender group or the SPSF is planning a liberation that gets tipped off to the raiding group.

Personally, both of those are the SPSF's fault any why for not watching what is being said. Don't see anything in Military game play contributing to making a region "prohibited". It's just how it is.


Messages In This Thread
Article 7 Review - by Aramanchovia - 04-14-2015, 06:52 PM



Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)





Theme © iAndrew 2018 Forum software by © MyBB .