Debauchery...

rofl, fake war. hahahahahahaahahahahahahaahahaahahahahaa
*GASP*
hahahahahaahahahaahahahahahahahaahha

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yamibone

Bishop don't you think this is a fake war? A kd double the size bullying a kd half the size into war and then getting auto win. Although, no deal was made.. the outcome was 99.9% certain when war started..

---

it's not fake. it's bottomfeeding. same brand of evil tho.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LameBeaver

it's not fake. it's bottomfeeding. same brand of evil tho.

---

Maybe they should get more defense... that will prevent them from having their land taken.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yamibone

Bishop don't you think this is a fake war? A kd double the size bullying a kd half the size into war and then getting auto win. Although, no deal was made.. the outcome was 99.9% certain when war started..

---

LOL. no.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flutterby

Are both sides actively hitting? Yes. Did they come to a mutually beneficial agreement? No. It's not a fake war, by any definition. Stop grasping at straws.

---

Not to pick on anyone especially not picking on my friend flutterby, but this whole coming to a "mutually beneficial agreement" as some sort of evidence for a fake war is just a fallacy. If I write to someone and say, "Hey I have a proposal that is mutually benefitting". and they write back and say "ohh yeah what is that?" and I write again and say, "I suggest we have a war?" and they could ask (like everyone else might ask) "how is that "mutually beneficial"", I would answer by saying, "Wars are fun and if we war, we might both have fun, and I find that mutually beneficial!"

TLDR: Because Wars are fun, they are "mutually beneficial"!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flutterby

Maybe they should get more defense... that will prevent them from having their land taken.

---

Your land will always be taken by someone larger than you, no logical amount of defense can prevent that.

However, if their defense is way below that of which was stated and recommended by the game guide, categorizing them into a semisuicide-strat, then land taken from them is merely collateral damage and they have no right to complain.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LameBeaver

However, if their defense is way below that of which was stated and recommended by the game guide...

---

The queen is really land fat. Have you seen her?



Edit: She is not. I had not seen well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LameBeaver

Your land will always be taken by someone larger than you, no logical amount of defense can prevent that.

However, if their defense is way below that of which was stated and recommended by the game guide, categorizing them into a semisuicide-strat, then land taken from them is merely collateral damage and they have no right to complain.

---

The only logical argument here is: Don't demand respect. Earn it. They seem to think they can treat anyone they want however they want. In turn, they get treated poorly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alazne

The queen is really land fat. Have you seen her?
Edit: She is not. I had not seen well.

---

He came oop with 6k defense. We were kind enough to not just raze kill him on the spot, and let him train up/gave him gbp and let him explore. We focused nistead on the possibility they may war us, and just ruined their offense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by khronosschoty

Not to pick on anyone especially not picking on my friend flutterby, but this whole coming to a "mutually beneficial agreement" as some sort of evidence for a fake war is just a fallacy. If I write to someone and say, "Hey I have a proposal that is mutually benefitting". and they write back and say "ohh yeah what is that?" and I write again and say, "I suggest we have a war?" and they could ask (like everyone else might ask) "how is that "mutually beneficial"", I would answer by saying, "Wars are fun and if we war, we might both have fun, and I find that mutually beneficial!"

TLDR: Because Wars are fun, they are "mutually beneficial"!

---

Their actual war agreement is posted in this thread. You can see what "mutually beneficial" is. Everything is circumstantial. The evidence against them was enough to convince the game development team (who do not play, do not directly interact with the lpayer base, and only have an administrative standpoint) to strip them of their war wins.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LameBeaver

Your land will always be taken by someone larger than you, no logical amount of defense can prevent that.

However, if their defense is way below that of which was stated and recommended by the game guide, categorizing them into a semisuicide-strat, then land taken from them is merely collateral damage and they have no right to complain.

---

I'm being a smart ass... you know, don't want your money stolen get a higher TPA. Same thing goes with land in my book.

We even had the courtesy of taking their land in the open, instead of waiting for them to be in war. A respect they just don't seem to understand.

I am still trying to figure out what our plan is.........

Plan? I do not understand this word. Please explain!

thats the problem, I can't! I don't know.

Can I get an Ezzerland recap please?