Quote Originally Posted by changeling View Post
In the scenario Sweetiepie mentioned, If two KDs are warring, but made a private agreement as to terms for the war, and other KD broke said terms, which I think there's general agreement amongst the community that breaking deals is considered bad form - is it appropriate for third parties (whether an alliance, or a friendly Kingdom, or the "Utopia Police") to impose punitive actions afterwards?

My personal opinion is that it is not. If two kingdoms privately agree to any terms for a war, I consider that a manner of internal dispute between those two kingdoms, and it should be resolved between them. (i.e. if an opposing KD violates a no-PK rule, an appropriate response is to PK back, but without any involvement from external forces). And external "justice" should be restricted only to a scenario involving "external" action. I.e. using an third-party to KD to intel or attack into a war, then it's justified requesting a third-party to attack that third-party, but not ok for a third party to intervene regarding an internal war dispute between two parties, even if one side engaged in actions the community considers to be bad.

Interested to hear everyone's thoughts though on appropriate and inappropriate times for a KD to ask for external support.
The problem with that would be that deal breaks don't necessarily have to be in war. So you could have a big KD deal breaking a small KD. If that happens, it's pretty hard to meaningfully deal with it yourself without damaging your own interests even more (eg you could do your best to attack one of their provs / mess up their plans, but ultimately you will probably end up having more of your provs razed or something.

But realistically, most of the time most KDs just have to hope that the KDs they make deals with will stick to them. If not, make a note and don't trust them next time. Some players are known to be fairly trustworthy with deals, some are less so. So think about who you are dealing with :)