mindful said:
"There was a beacon NAP (Non Aggression pact) between Bilks & GoA/KoC. As part of this they agreed a swap of beacons with GoA/KoC and territory boundaries.
When the beacon spawn didn't go their way Bilks chose to step over the agreed boundaries. "
Okey thank you for this information. Agreement of territory boundaries. Then the beacon drop and it did not fall to Bilskirners favor. So they decided to step over the agreed boundaries and not ask first.
The beacon drop was in favor of both leagues. The map had 200 beacons, and it spawned another 100 beacons (50% increase) for a total of three rows in the north above both BILSK and GoA. They both had the same opportunity for Northern growth from where their areas were.
There was a written agreement with a picture addendum that had a very clear verticle line drawn to show who could go where. GoA was to stick to the West side of the line, and BILSK was supposed to stick the East. Instead, BILSK went west srtaight above GoA beacons (the West side) and took a couple beacons, and followed it up with league wides to stack and defend them. A very blatent breach of the NaP which we all signed and agreed to just a few days before (maybe it had been a week by this point) (strike 1)
Then after Jezebel did a ton of work and got the league to reverse SILVER's decison and then worked a ton of diplo with us to explain why we should give them another chance, that was sorted for the time being. BILSK beacons sorted on the correct side of the NaP agreement and we were back to another attempt at a fresh start. And a week or 2 later, they took yet another beacon, on the wrong side of the line from German Raiders. (strike 2)
Then about a month went by and SILVER told me in our group chat that he was about to secure a swap with German Raiders edge beacon which was once again, on the wrong side of the line. I reminded him that this is the third time he has broken the NaP we all agreed to and that I wanted nothing more to do with any attempts at beacon diplomacy. (strike 3)
After repeated, blatent disregard for the agreement he made, enough was enough, and we decided to fight with him for territory instead of attempting any further negotiations for a peaceful arragment, since time and time again his actions showed he had no desire to keep his promises.
And as DJ had mentioned above, this is on top of the previous 6 months of issues that had gone on. And to top it off, nearly their entire leadership had quit the league (which should be a huge warning sign for anyone). Take a moment and think about your own league, if nearly all of your current captains either quit or are booted, what kind of statement does that make?
Was it everyone else causing the issues, or is it possible that there might be an issue at the top that all the subordinates could no longer work with?
Hope that makes a bit more sense as to why the issues are there with BILSK.