I went overseas for a while to visit my uncle Sam. Since he wasn't too thrilled to see me i decided a short stay was more then enough for the both of us and it was better for me to return to my trusted st Kitts.
I was a man on a mission. Needed to show how happy I was to return to my beloved nation. They send me to see some peops around the globe to ruffle their feathers and make known I was back at Kitts doing what a Kitts does.
Whilst showing my friendship to a Tokelau dude my nation turned hostile and threw me of their island. It seems that although they send me on a mission to spread the word their diplomacy punished me for "talking" to the man.
So now I is a pirate sad and confused wondering how the heck they really expected me to act.

It was pointed out (in the Nation Hostility thread) that nation missions could be given to a player which targetted nations with which your nation had a peace treaty, thus, to complete the mission means gaining hostility with your own nation and, as you discovered, doing the mission too well results in no nation at all : a bit weird but, seemingly from CJ's response : it was not considered an issue.

SKN has an alliance with Tokelau. You likely violated the Hostility Penalty Law that was implemented and gained Hostility for your actions. 5 actions against Tokelau without reducing hostility with your own nation would cause you to reach the hostility limit. Thus Pirate.

So my nation sends me on a mission. Attack this country and then punishes me if i do. But that is not an error in the mission. It is an error of the attacker? And somehow this sounds logical to some of us?

Raghnan wrote:So my nation sends me on a mission. Attack this country and then punishes me if i do. But that is not an error in the mission. It is an error of the attacker? And somehow this sounds logical to some of us?

Just make sure you check your countries Peace Treaties first. You will avoid this mistake again.

Or have Pulpop cast Diplomats on you.

how many countries do you know that tell their forces to attack first and then punish them for doing so?
the order should not have been given
soldiers do not think they act

Raghnan wrote:how many countries do you know that tell their forces to attack first and then punish them for doing so?
the order should not have been given
soldiers do not think they act

Regardless of whether you were conducting Nation Missions or were directed by the Council to attack. It is still your responsibility to watch and manager your hostility with your own nation. Failure to do so is no one's fault other than your own.

who is giving these missions?
the countries ruler? or was i on a mission from god.
if the last is the case then you are right
with the first the ruler should be punished for breaking his treaties
why give targets if they are not allowed (by the same nation) to be attacked?

again who is giving these orders?

Raghnan wrote:who is giving these missions?
the countries ruler? or was i on a mission from god.
if the last is the case then you are right
with the first the ruler should be punished for breaking his treaties
why give targets if they are not allowed (by the same nation) to be attacked?

again who is giving these orders?

God ie the developers and game mechanics.

can they be mistaking?
it is a promotion mission
supposed to do good for the nation
and the mission is telling you to do harm to the nations diplomacy?
shouldn't missions be in line with nations goals and strategies?