Rage of Absalom: Dealbreakers

[Palem]

I didn't articulate that very...

There's a lot of flamebait sitting around. I appreciate civil discussions and derailing this into a massive flame thread will not be good for the posters.

[octobrev]

Don't fall for palms flamebait troll king. Stand strong and know we are behind you.

[Syntico]

What is going on here? There is no breach of an essential term AFAIK.

[sexual harassment panda]

Abs double talk is nothing surprising. They've played games like this for years. You have to explicitly spell out every little detail in CF negotations with them, or they'll bend rules.

It's clear that rage is scared of BiO to the point that they'd risk tied up in antoher hostile which will slow growth down, just to avoid the bird kd. I hope inzzo can give 'em hell. If not I can almost guarantee someone will be waiting for them after their hostile wiht inzzo concludes.

Very very risky/ballsy move by rage. Wonder how it will play out.

[flogger]

Very very risky/ballsy move by rage. Wonder how it will play out.

Last age Sanctuary was set to win the age and then noticed two kingdoms at once and ended up 138k behind. At no point has running from one kingdom ever really worked, yet kingdoms still do it. Its always better to just ceasefire and close relations.

Closing relations is probably the weakest part of Proteus's game, however.

[sexual harassment panda]

Closing relations is probably the weakest part of Proteus's game, however.

from the forum posts and all the drunken irc rantings i would have never guessed :P

[Drixx]

Last age Sanctuary was set to win the age and then noticed two kingdoms at once and ended up 138k behind. At no point has running from one kingdom ever really worked, yet kingdoms still do it. Its always better to just ceasefire and close relations.

Closing relations is probably the weakest part of Proteus's game, however.

BiO and Rage don't have open relations do they? They had a hostile and then a war and then BiO withdrew. Doesn't withdrawing end a hostile/war?

[flogger]

BiO and Rage don't have open relations do they? They had a hostile and then a war and then BiO withdrew. Doesn't withdrawing end a hostile/war?

In this sense I was referring to relations being bad blood, or getting a ceasefire from the kingdom you just warred.

[Meeni]

BiO and Rage don't have open relations do they? They had a hostile and then a war and then BiO withdrew. Doesn't withdrawing end a hostile/war?

Rage can do whatever they want within their inzo agreement, except come back later and cry about a situation they knew was coming well in advance of their notice. If they want to take on multiple kds its a valid choice just not one that's conducive to winning as flogger pointed out.

[Drixx]

Rage can do whatever they want within their inzo agreement, except come back later and cry about a situation they knew was coming well in advance of their notice. If they want to take on multiple kds its a valid choice just not one that's conducive to winning as flogger pointed out.

So BiO's contention is that they can "call dibs" on a kd and that kd is not allowed to fight someone else and if that kd fights someone else, BiO will interfere? Interesting. Of course, after what happened 2 eoa's back, it should be no surprise that BiO isn't interested in playing 1v1, but only in taking advantage and 2v1 when they can. How silly of me to assume that BiO would behave honorably.

You had your war. You withdrew. That closed the book on that hostile situation. If Rage opens up a new hostile situation with someone else, you interfering would be against the generally agreed upon conventions of the game. Sure, there's nothing stopping you from 2v1 someone. But you claim the moral high ground while taking the moral low road. Hypocrisy doesn't really suit you Meeni.

[Drixx]

It seems to me that the example in question (having to do with BiO and HoH?) was that someone wanted to serve notice into an eowcf. What's wrong with serving notice out of one? The whole point of those kinds of clauses was to protect kd's from being vultured coming out of a conflict. If a kd wants to enter into a new conflict after finishing another one, and they don't mind having less time to prep, what's the problem exactly?

Just looks to me like people trying to sling mud on Proteus and abs by misapplying an old quote.

[flogger]

It seems to me that the example in question (having to do with BiO and HoH?) was that someone wanted to serve notice into an eowcf. What's wrong with serving notice out of one? The whole point of those kinds of clauses was to protect kd's from being vultured coming out of a conflict. If a kd wants to enter into a new conflict after finishing another one, and they don't mind having less time to prep, what's the problem exactly?

Just looks to me like people trying to sling mud on Proteus and abs by misapplying an old quote.

KD #1 is in war and gives 48h notice right at the end of the war. They can then come out at any time from hour 48 and 96 and hit the kingdom they noticed, while the kd they noticed cannot hit them first through their EoW protection.

A simple solution to do this is as I said, Rage comes OOW and they they have all the right in the world to give notice.

[Sheister]

well yeah...unless you use the special top 10 KD bookmark that lets you say, this kingdom is mine so stop it!

[DDodge]

Its funny how for 2 days straight UtopiaNub has been making dumb posts and then gets proved wrong by anyone and everyone. But here it continues...

[fuzzy|]

if you dont have "notice cannot be given during EoW cf / war / hostile period" then you're stupid lol