Call the ambulance, I just got burned
Printable View
Call the ambulance, I just got burned
Every part of our deal was made before yours and was due before yours. Every part of your deal was made after ours. Your deal to quick bypass your notice deal and your later scheduled dates directly caused a deal break on us, directly screwed us out of the target we were scheduled for first and that we noticed first, and cost us our chances int he crown race. Not only all that, but you also caused us to break pump and sit trained up for a week using all our resources by not even letting us know of your **** play until the last minute.Quote:
Originally Posted by protector
It's a frequent tactic in the top these days for a kingdom to threaten to farm out to a more friendly kingdom to dodge another. It's also considered a major **** play to accept such a thing and this is exactly what you did. Despite this, did you see us whining about it in public to have you gb'd for it or deal breaking you for it? We did nothing. You didn't and still won't even apologize for it let alone give any reparations or accept any "punishments".
Post war cf where you were mass exploring attackers up into his range and ingored their cf requests (4 read messages without any reply). Then after Bour razed he immediately offered all land and extra back for a cf again before you even had to ask. All you had to do was give him a cf and you would have came out of it with extra cow land and no harm. But no, you wouldn't do that would you? Instead you'll lie and deal break and gb into real war (not post war which is just vulturing since it can't affect the outcome of any ongoing conflict.) It's clear that you only wanted any excuse you could find to continue your **** play and you rejected all offers to put BB in a stronger position than they would have been without Bour even playing.Quote:
Originally Posted by protector
"Ignored" Can we all assume, that if Emeriti hasnt responded within a timeframe of 4 hours they also ignoring and Emeriti refuses all deals?Quote:
Post war cf where you were mass exploring attackers up into his range and ingored their cf requests (4 read messages without any reply). Then after Bour razed he immediately offered all land and extra back for a cf again before you even had to ask.
Your deal was made after flogger had deal broke Emeriti into their war and others had joined on both sides to help. Your kingdom said they would not join the awar as part of the premise of the deal. So what you say here is wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by AMP
In the sn on Meep, they had approximately 60 razes on Pyro and one trad march outside the awar. They had more razes before this also and their meter on Pyro was maxed. The one outside hit was a mistake and had already been apologized for to the kingdom they hit. This one hit among 60+ razes is a bs excuse and you know it. Why do you need to try and make up false reasons for what your kingdom did?Quote:
Originally Posted by AMP
At the time we worked out the Meep deal you assured us that you would keep all of your cf deals and that you waved them and not Emeriti because you had a cf deal with Emeriti. This lie you told about keeping all deals was central to you being able to trick us into you getting two free waves on Meep to cf them and then stay out of the awar. Instead you just fort pumped the new land and jumped right back in.
New developments my ass. Prior to making the meep deal you assured us you kept all deals and you had a YR6+notice deal with Emeriti. Once you collected all the land ont he meep deal, you then changed your tune. You threatened to void the deal because a province in Meep's kingdom made an ambush (even though the land was obviously offered back to you). You also started saying you didn't agree to stay out of the awar anymore and wouldn't even confirm anymore that you'd keep your deals despite the whole premise of Meeps deal being based on your word of keeping all deals.Quote:
Originally Posted by AMP
Pandas leadership have proven themselves to be deal breakers and liars.
Sure, just as long as you offer extra free land and more back for the same deal after and that it's not into any active conflicts.Quote:
Originally Posted by Korp
But you just said you refused _all_ deals. :(Quote:
Originally Posted by AquaSeaFoam
Is not an EoWCF period still part of an active conflict? The game mechanics treat it as such.......
yet another basis on which to object to the conspiracy.
In this case I presume ASF wants people to honor a presumably implicit deal... as opposed to every other instance where they deny the validity of any implied deal.....Quote:
Originally Posted by Korp
You can try and twist words into something else, but this is not what happened with Bour. Bour had 4 people in Bb read and ignore his messages that he made clear were urgent. He then hit and again offered them more new deals. BB did start talking to him after he got their attention by razing. At this time they directly rejected his offers of giving all land back plus extra for a cf. They then also directly rejected his offer of all land plus extra plus gc plus fake hostile for a cf.Quote:
Originally Posted by Korp
The hardest part of debating in the Utopian community:
Even if you're absolutely correct in the matter, the moment you say "I'm done debating" the other side immediately says "Then we win!" ;)
That's why nobody will ever withdraw from the debate... on and on and on... until someone just lets the other side claim victory by withdrawing from the discussion.
Does it now? So, that enforced CF between the kd is what? :))Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheister
No, the active conflict is clearly over when a kd wd's from war. It says right in the paper that the conflict has ended when that happens. Post war is a recovery period to minimize damage from getting vultured. Before there was post war, kingdoms would often get waved the hour they left a live war by "vultures". For example, this was Brute force's normal tactic when they were on the battlefields (main) server. They would wait for Rage to exit a war with no post war protection and then immediately wave them and force a cf. You can bet that Rage didn't like those tactics of vulturing to force a cf, but it was considered a cowardly but valid way to play and there was never any issue made of it despite them doing it 3 separate times to Rage alone that I remember (and Rage never having done it to them.)Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheister
Quote:
Originally Posted by AquaSeaFoam
A four hour delay is a basis for determining ingored. Is it not reasonable to not hit reply until after being able to consult with leadership? Lets say hypothetically that Emeriti does not want every core member engaging in diplomacy. They receive a diplomatic message ingame. They try to get in touch with Leshrak who is notoriously AFK. It takes them four hours or more to get in touch with Leshrak and in the intervening time they do not respond to the sender.....
So the sender is justified in hitting into Emeriti's EoWCF.
Interesting. So the argument boils down to, centralized control of diplomacy is worthy of ignoring the generally accepted rules of conduct.... Ergo, it is appropriate now for Emeriti and crew to de facto enforce a form of governance on other kingdoms.
**edit**
or I suppose to enforce a response that is diplomatic in nature contrary to the directives of the leadership of the other kingdom.....?
And what is that you are doing? You claim that they refused any deals and ignored Bour just cause they didnt respond to a message right away giving them a 4 hour window. You trying to so hard to justify Bours actions which was encouraged by your kingdom, (Which at first was denied by your kingdom) I am surprised that you failed to see the backlash of that as well, its like you're a newbie. :(Quote:
Originally Posted by AquaSeaFoam
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheister
Everyone including Emeriti and bour have already agreed that Bour should have given more time. Dorje said this himself in the leadership channel where the selective logs were from. You can try and nitpick on such things like if 4h is too short but 24h is ok, but everyone has already agreed that 4h was not enough time despite the urgency of his messages. Even without sending any initial messages at all, hitting straight away and then offering all land back plus extra free land for a cf still would have left Bb in a good position if they would have just accepted it. Bour didn't want Bb to just stall until they could train up because every hour they stalled on responding to him they got more prepared to train up and once they were trained up they could have farmed him with nothing he could do about it besides intra raze down.
Yet you keep coming with the argument "Ignored" "refused deals"Quote:
Everyone including Emeriti and bour have already agreed that Bour should have given more time. You can try and nitpick on such things like if 4h is too short but 24h is ok, but everyone has already agreed that 4h was not enough time despite the urgency of his messages
Do you have some magic ability in Utopia where you can train up superfast? In the span of fours hours?Quote:
Bour didn't want Bb to just stall until they could train up because every hour they stalled on responding to him they got more prepared to train up and once they were trained up they could have farmed him with nothing he could do about it besides intra raze down.
Yet to the rest of the server it displays that the kingdom is at war with X:X. So the kingdom is treated with respect to the rest of the server as still being in conflict. Does your subjective view of this now hold more weight that the express game mechanics?Quote:
Originally Posted by AquaSeaFoam
OH! So you are saying that what Bour did is a permissable vulture according to Age 28 codes of conduct..... So we are going back to age 28 now? I eagerly await the thousands of players that are going to join. Or have we evolved beyond this point through several ages where: 1)the game is nothing like that and it is generally accepted that you don't hit into EoWCF's; 2) Emeriti's conduct in encouraging the practice is still wrong; 3) Bour did not have any justification; 4) and this four hour window and messaging to non-diplomacy engaged core members is a smokescreen of burning feces?Quote:
Post war is a recovery period to minimize damage from getting vultured. Before there was post war, kingdoms would often get waved the hour they left a live war by "vultures". For example, this was Brute force's normal tactic when they were on the battlefields (main) server. They would wait for Rage to exit a war with no post war protection and then immediately wave them and force a cf. You can bet that Rage didn't like those tactics of vulturing to force a cf, but it was considered a cowardly but valid way to play and there was never any issue made of it despite them doing it 3 separate times to Rage alone that I remember (and Rage never having done it to them.)
No, they initially ignored his cf requests by having 4 people read his messages and none reply even to say "we'll talk about it and get back to you."Quote:
Originally Posted by Korp
After that, bour razed. Once he razed they no longer ignored him. Then they told him that they refused to give him a cf for his offer of all land back plus extra. they also told him they refused to cf him for his offer of all land plus extra plus gc plus a fake hostile. This has been posted a double digit number of times, I had thought you'd have understood it by now.
It was a favorable tactic by Absalom as well, I can count several times when my kd exiting wars would be vultured by another Absalom kingdom. "Coindence" sure..Quote:
Originally Posted by AquaSeaFoam
It's obvious common sense that once a kingdom has withdrawn from war and the war has ended that no actions after that can affect who won the war. I'm not even debating if vulturing a kingdom into post war is a valid tactic, I'm just saying it's not hitting into an active war nor an active fight. It's vulturing. Hitting into an active fight is worse in my opinion because you can affect the outcome of an active fight by your hits. You can't affect the outcome of a fight that has already finished though and hitting a kingdom who is weak after a fight has always been called vulturing in utopia.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheister
Thats poor logic and really grasping for straws, not responding straight away isnt ignoring.Quote:
Originally Posted by AquaSeaFoam
Even disregarding the fact that it was suggested as a tactic by emeriti leadership, the whole "bour didn't want to get farmed and needed to protect himself desperately" argument seems quite poor. The reasoning suggests that any time you're contemplating losing land upon someone exiting war, then it's okay to raze into eowcf as long as you've sent an urgent message beforehand.
Four hours? the timestamps that Bourreau posted implies he hit 15 minutes after sending them to some of our non-leader types. Complete copies of our logs show that no one in our kd even discussed some guy trying to reach us.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheister
Quote:
Originally Posted by Korp
You keep "ignoring" that BB directly refused (not ignored) Bours offers of all land plus extra back (and plus gc and other stuff too.) By Bour offering BB a cf deal and BB directly rejecting his offer, that is indeed refusing and there is no reasonable debate on this issue. And yes, I think that 4 people reading messages that requested urgent responses but none of them responding could also fairly be called ignored. I'm not saying that BB doesn't have a right to ignore cf requests from farms if they want to.
In utopia, when you are on big acres and have near 0 military, you need two things to be able to train up. First you need gc and second you need soldiers. It can also help to have armories in such situations. Every tick that bour waited, BB got more resources bring them closer to being trained up.
Bour's whole leverage was based on being able to do adequate damage to Bb that by the time they finally got trained up it was no longer profitable for them to farm Bour. Bour didn't just need to ask for cf deal a few ticks before Bb was fully trained to farm him -- by this point it would be too late. He needed to get it as soon as possible so that BB could not train up soon enough to farm him before he could do enough damage to make it unprofitable for BB. Only by having this leverage would BB have true incentive to cf him.
Are you really bad at utopia and don't understand this, or are you just trying to play with rhetoric?
Correct, only your steward read the message earlier and the core members who were online read it only ~15 min before. Still you also said you probably wouldn't have bothered responding anyway until your post war was up. You don't have any comments though on how you called bour a liar and claimed the messages never happened and then Bour posted the screen shots showing exactly what he said all along (and you denied)?Quote:
Originally Posted by flogger
Also, considering Bour offered all land back plus extra for a cf immediately once he did raze, you still had a fine offer sitting there -- you were just forced to talk to him before waiting for your pwcf to end.
good job getting your ghetto friend to do your dirty work... Only one solution kill all abs and abs sympathizer
As far as I can tell this is how the awar started. The kid is bour/emeriti, the cat is BB
http://a.fod4.com/misc/Attack%20Cat%20Revenge.gif
He asked for a cf before hits (yes, only 4h before but his message was read and not responded to by the steward.) He then razed and offered all land that he razed back to BB plus extra land if they'd just cf him. They refused. He then offered all land, plus extra, plus free gc and a fake hostile to prep for Emeriti. They refused.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crunch
This is not doing anyone else's dirty work, nor is it any FSU. This is trying to get a cf for himself without harming BB.
While you ignore the fact that it was your kingdom that suggested that he should raze your enemy kingdom to force a CF deal? :D ... No, I didnt ignored that part, but what you been claiming initially that due to them not responding fast enough for your taste they ignored and refused all deals. I would also refuse a deal with someone that just razed one of my provs, especially someone that has pulled this kind of behaviour previously and is friends with my top contender.Quote:
Originally Posted by AquaSeaFoam
You must have some magical ability for sure, cause even with soldiers, gold coins and armouries it would take some time to train up.
The leverage lies in the threat of razing not actually razing. :) Or if the fact that you possed the training time of 5 hours which you seem to think is possible..
Im pretty nub yea :) It doesnt change the fact that you have repeated the same content for 21 pages now like a mantra.
It seems the general consensus is that binding deals matter, but everything else is fair game (farm wars, alliances, rogue provinces).
Absalom vs Bbsalom. Bring out the popcorn!
(Yes, it does seem like any logical, rational, diplomatic end to this conflict is impossible, and with that any decent competitive framework for the game.)
Not quite swagger although nice cat gif.Quote:
Originally Posted by Swagger
ASF - I'm sorry but please explain something to me I don't quite understand, it may sway my kingdom into action...
Question:
So are you saying it's ok from now on to hit into opponents EoWCF if they look to have gained a little too many acres for the kingdoms liking... and letting them train that acres up peacefully would put my kingdom at risk when they come out?
So can I start hitting into EoWCF at will, to protect my own kingdom? I think I'll start hitting all those landfat delicious targets just finishing their wars while their armies are depleted...
Emeriti's side is against deal breaking and has made offers to end this and directly return to a decent fair competitive framework. It's BB that initiated this and refuses such offers.Quote:
Originally Posted by Leonidas
Quote:
Originally Posted by AquaSeaFoam
It was made during the beginning of this, yes, but long before we joined. The premise of the deal was never us joining or not joining the awar, it was a statement of our position at the time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AquaSeaFoam
I leave the need and use of false reasons and excuses for others who thrive so well on them. But please do attempt to make all of utopia look retarded by saying that x:x Monarch hits into Sleepy, a kd we all thought was out of the awar too, by accident...
Also, how should we feel about Sleepy joining the awar, they were neutral from the beginning and from your logic, none can change their stance once they publicly state at least one time they wont join the awar. I'll be expecting (hopefully not in vain) for some coherence in behaviour and future replies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AquaSeaFoam
When we negotiated with you as the representative of all the kds in your side, we agreed on a deal with x:x and noone else, even though you asked several times for deals for the awar and emeriti. We made it clear that the deal was with x:x and no one else, but that we planned to stay neutral and honor our deals.
Again, when we dealt with the x:x situation, we had no plans to join the awar, inspite the invitations from both sides, as you should be aware. I think should we be interested in just gaining stuff or the age, we would take your offer promising to make us top 1, wouldn't we?Quote:
Originally Posted by AquaSeaFoam
We didnt change our tone, even though there were several threats made by Meep and even you when we didnt agree to join ABS side in war or were negotiating the deal with x:x, we just stated we would not tolerate 8:11 breaking the deal they agreed on just a few hours after the thing was made.
If the new information came out of your ass, I have no idea but I very much doubt it, but said information was key to our change of hearts, with our preference obviously pending towards the side that didnt threaten us, that didnt send allies to raze others kds start of age, etc.
The fact that before and after we decided to join, there was a big PR propaganda to change facts and lie with no shame about how things regarding Pandas developed, makes me realize a lot hasn't changed in the last years of Utopia.
Twisting words and changing their meaning, wont make a lie become true and wont gain my support.
http://i157.photobucket.com/albums/t...psezbcnwjt.gif
No, I'm not saying that. This is what was apologized for very early on by Emeriti for their role in suggesting it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aranfein
My own personal view though is that I am generally ok with accepting something done to me like that if the person/kingdom who did it is trying to protect themself by offering everything plus interest back for a cf. I am personally less understanding when it is done for offensive purposes like for profit or for FSU.
There is one thing I am struggling to understand at the end of this all. The word is proportionality.Quote:
Originally Posted by AquaSeaFoam
The BB response to this whole situation is DISproportionate to the extreme and has resulted in such a mess of a situation that could have simply been resolved diplomatically. After they made a CF deal with Emeriti with the intention of breaking it, future CF deals will always be in doubt.
Not to mention we are fresh off the blatant cheating done by pyro last age which was PROVEN.
As they say worse things happen at sea...
yeah this is exactly what i was asking.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aranfein
You joined 1-2 days after that deal was made by waving Meep. You waved a kingdom that was clearly involved in the alliance war and you then forced another free wave on them in order to "get out". You then fortified pumped on the land and immediately re-entered the war, this time deal breaking emeriti.Quote:
Originally Posted by AMP
AMP, why would you even come here to post about such dishonest play by your kingdom?
Yet you didn't. You instead pumped on the free land you were given in fortified and then deal broke emeriti.Quote:
Originally Posted by AMP
It almost seems that for Emeriti this solely started with the dealbreak, and that it's purely BB's fault that they didn't accept what they felt was a paltry offer of reparations (which is their right). Your point seems to imply that the offending party can unilaterally decide the reparations to be made. It also follows that if Emeriti had themselves waved into BB's EOWCF but had offered some repayment that Emeriti deemed acceptable, and BB didn't accept, that would have absolved Emeriti of any blame whatsoever as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by AquaSeaFoam
This doesn't seem to figure in any of the proposals / discussions / assessments that have come up, about who gets to determine what a proportionate response to transgressions are.
And because I know you'll state that Emeriti is being awfully charitable by covering for Bourreau's transgressions, I would state that whatever the case, it would set a bad precedent and create a highly anti-competitive situation where there are multiple kingdoms in the age there just to screw with the main competitors they don't like. Because, based on this age, we've establised that it's perfectly okay for a "friend" to mess with another competing kingdom.
all your cf are garbage .. abs players always try to get a cf though double talk, threats ans intimidation no different than when that maxi leading cr tried to threaten my kd with getting free suicide on my prov. i cxl that garbage cf and hit you right into fort. real cf might be worth something not the ****s you idiots pull
AMP, stop posting locs!