Jesters break war deal with FS

[Verminator]

Quote Originally Posted by Verminator
FS wanted things quite uneven before war even began; in the end, it cost them the war they were after.

jesters were bigger on both land & nw on cf drop

By your own calculations, it was:

Jesters - 75418 acres 14,4m nw
FS - 75159 acres 14,2m nw

However, upon CF drop, you bounce waved Jesters cow heavily and even got a massacre in, dropping networth by over 200k. So are you still going to use the starting networth stats to claim Jesters started with an advantage? Your math only holds water for about 15 minutes post-CF, which is hardly a good timespan to benefit from any advantage. ;)

[quote]and been sitting in full-effect fort for another 48h after cf drop, expecting us to give button into fort[quote]

Jesters sat in Fort because it helped against the expected onslaught of spells once they gave you Unfriendly. Not by accident, since we kept going, because they wanted to get to war, not meter-manage just below UF. Nothing to do with attacks and the button, and do you know why? Because Jesters fully expected an initial wave of bounces which are unaffected by Fort. So regarding giving the button into fort, you still had an easy opportunity to do so, but you meter-managed instead. Giving button into Fort with mostly bounces and a few good massacres would have been a simple and effective way to get the war you wanted.

Concerned for lack of incoming land on your attackers upon war start? Use your strategic brain for a second. Your faeries were the ones who needed to go down first. Why would Jesters bother dunking one or two mid range undead, or even your big fat undead, when the faeries were the obvious econ threat. So no, worrying about lack of incoming land and not giving a button as a result is barely a sound strategic concern, and you're much much smarter than that.

jesters' cow was already destroyed before end of fort, and they had already decided to break the deal rather than losing a war at that time..

Why would you assume that the entire war effort hinged on the cow? Why would you think Jesters expected to have that cow intact for war? Use your strategy brain again. And there was no decision to break any deals. Two terms of the "deal" were met early on, the third being the ongoing lack of interference, which was also maintained, so really no issues there. The deal was essentially fulfilled. And who says a loss was inevitable based on losing the cow? Hardly a sound assumption and certainly not the reason things fell apart.

I know you want to think the worst of the situation, but it's really nothing like what you hope it is.

[LoRD_SaMPuaN]

By your own calculations, it was:

Jesters - 75418 acres 14,4m nw
FS - 75159 acres 14,2m nw

However, upon CF drop, you bounce waved Jesters cow heavily and even got a massacre in, dropping networth by over 200k. So are you still going to use the starting networth stats to claim Jesters started with an advantage? Your math only holds water for about 15 minutes post-CF, which is hardly a good timespan to benefit from any advantage. ;)

Jesters sat in Fort because it helped against the expected onslaught of spells once they gave you Unfriendly. Not by accident, since we kept going, because they wanted to get to war, not meter-manage just below UF. Nothing to do with attacks and the button, and do you know why? Because Jesters fully expected an initial wave of bounces which are unaffected by Fort. So regarding giving the button into fort, you still had an easy opportunity to do so, but you meter-managed instead. Giving button into Fort with mostly bounces and a few good massacres would have been a simple and effective way to get the war you wanted.

Concerned for lack of incoming land on your attackers upon war start? Use your strategic brain for a second. Your faeries were the ones who needed to go down first. Why would Jesters bother dunking one or two mid range undead, or even your big fat undead, when the faeries were the obvious econ threat. So no, worrying about lack of incoming land and not giving a button as a result is barely a sound strategic concern, and you're much much smarter than that.



Why would you assume that the entire war effort hinged on the cow? Why would you think Jesters expected to have that cow intact for war? Use your strategy brain again. And there was no decision to break any deals. Two terms of the "deal" were met early on, the third being the ongoing lack of interference, which was also maintained, so really no issues there. The deal was essentially fulfilled. And who says a loss was inevitable based on losing the cow? Hardly a sound assumption and certainly not the reason things fell apart.

I know you want to think the worst of the situation, but it's really nothing like what you hope it is.

its funny that you claim your nw was your lower AFTER our hits, it goes both ways and the starting point matters for the even fight.. your inability to cover your ground is not our problem to care about..

i wont even argue about giving button into fort with no incoming and stuff, apparently strategic discussions arent your strong point..

we put some size caps, agreed on a cf drop date and the real argument i see in your post is that we didnt have a war agreement, right?

[Verminator]

In fact, since this is the court of public opinion, here is why things fell apart:

Step 1 - FS explores well beyond 75k acres; Jesters frowns at that tactic, assuming war was what FS wanted, not one of those forever-hostiles that exploring is a sign of
Step 2 - FS continues bouncing and meter managing past first wave, seemingly unnecessarily, instead of moving towards war; Jesters frowns at that tactic, is forced to respond in kind to avoid clear disadvantage at war start, but doesn't meter-manage, showing good faith that maybe war is on the horizon
Step 3 - FS bounces into day two of hostile, finally pushing the meter into UF and showing signs of life; Jesters is hopeful
Step 4 - FS meter-manages again and stays under Jesters all of day two; Jesters frowns at this revelation of continued stalling tactics instead of war
Step 5 - Jesters leadership starts to reconsider the intent of FS for a good fair fight, as FS is just intent on bounce-wrecking Jesters and forcing the same tactic in return from Jesters just to stay even, resulting in two bounce-battered kingdoms no better off than they were almost three days ago
Step 6 - Some Jesters players get discouraged, start to drift, real life grabs one Jesters leader suddenly, some others who intended on setting sitters instead wonder if it's worth it when war is no longer imminent
Step 7 - Jesters leaders are fully disgruntled and decide the situation has been turned into a one-sided war, both due to FS actions and several players in Jesters losing activity due to RL; Jesters leadership's only mistake was not doing diplo right away to let FS know that war was not going to happen anymore, causing FS to wonder why retals had stopped

Summary:

Freeakstyle is a lightning rod of controversy. After three days of nonsense, Jesters could not field a respectable active fighting force. Instead of going to war and being scrutinized as a farm war, as haters of FS are eager to do, Jesters leadership decided to back out of war. Willingly giving a farm war to a kingdom that is a lightning rod for suspicion was not something Jesters was interested in getting mixed up in, especially since the war was only based on intent and expectation, not deals or bonded words.

or so I gather. :)

[texn]

The simple truth is the following: the vikings of FS ( Jonmeister and Texn) plus other few uds (6) in kd managed to powerplay and nuke the whole kd of Jesters by bounce raze their whole kd and meanwhile managed not to give away button against 18 attackers.
Think what we could have done as DE:s Geez Bring THEM back asap!!

True story!

[LoRD_SaMPuaN]

In fact, since this is the court of public opinion, here is why things fell apart:

Step 1 - FS explores well beyond 75k acres; Jesters frowns at that tactic, assuming war was what FS wanted, not one of those forever-hostiles that exploring is a sign of
Step 2 - FS continues bouncing and meter managing past first wave, seemingly unnecessarily, instead of moving towards war; Jesters frowns at that tactic, is forced to respond in kind to avoid clear disadvantage at war start, but doesn't meter-manage, showing good faith that maybe war is on the horizon
Step 3 - FS bounces into day two of hostile, finally pushing the meter into UF and showing signs of life; Jesters is hopeful
Step 4 - FS meter-manages again and stays under Jesters all of day two; Jesters frowns at this revelation of continued stalling tactics instead of war
Step 5 - Jesters leadership starts to reconsider the intent of FS for a good fair fight, as FS is just intent on bounce-wrecking Jesters and forcing the same tactic in return from Jesters just to stay even, resulting in two bounce-battered kingdoms no better off than they were almost three days ago
Step 6 - Some Jesters players get discouraged, start to drift, real life grabs one Jesters leader suddenly, some others who intended on setting sitters instead wonder if it's worth it when war is no longer imminent
Step 7 - Jesters leaders are fully disgruntled and decide the situation has been turned into a one-sided war, both due to FS actions and several players in Jesters losing activity due to RL; Jesters leadership's only mistake was not doing diplo right away to let FS know that war was not going to happen anymore, causing FS to wonder why retals had stopped

Summary:

Freeakstyle is a lightning rod of controversy. After three days of nonsense, Jesters could not field a respectable active fighting force. Instead of going to war and being scrutinized as a farm war, as haters of FS are eager to do, Jesters leadership decided to back out of war. Willingly giving a farm war to a kingdom that is a lightning rod for suspicion was not something Jesters was interested in getting mixed up in, especially since the war was only based on intent and expectation, not deals or bonded words.

or so I gather. :)

thanks for summarizing the sequence of events, although they are totally irrelevant to why jesters broke their war deal, i will have some questions..

* if jesters didnt meter-manage, how did they stay on same meter points with fs who has 8 attackers vs. 18? of jesters?
* considering jesters wanted a fair fight, why did they sit in full-effect fort for 48h? OR is that their understanding of fair fight - being given button through fort by a same size kd with 8 attackers?
* is bouncing a cow's defense some sort of ****play? if not, why is this some sort of argument for dealbreaking?

and finally, i still dont understand how can you deny that we had a war agreement at all? i mean, why the heck there were some terms about land caps if we didnt have a war agreement?

[jmiedema]

I fail to see how the Onus for anything is on FS in this circumstance.. they were smaller land, smaller nw, they jumped out of their fort and into aggressive all at the agreed upon CF break.

Jesters stayed in Fort 2 days longer than the agreed upon CF break time.

So why would the kingdom hitting into fort from a nw and land disadvantage be forced to also give the advantage of button to a kingdom full of Human Warriors who get insane advantages when the conflict hits war. You would have to assume that FS is absolute idiots to do that (I understand that some/many do believe FS are idiots, but that's beside the point).

Really if Jesters just popped out of Fort after our initial bounce wave and full waved us we probably wouldnt have even been able to finish the job on their Calf, and they would have still had a calf for the war. They had all the advantages going into the conflict (they were already out of war and pumped when we were still in EOWCF). If anything the Onus would be on them to give the button. Especially since they were the ones Tagged "War Agreed (FS Loc)" forever.

I can understand their first wave not giving UF so we couldnt MS them etc, but after they mistakenly gave us ops they should have 100% just all in waved us and they would have had the war advantage (as far as I could tell) as at that time all of our provs were breakable by like at least 7 of their heavies, and we only had 1 province that could actually do any damage to their Calf (1 lone heavy attacker at the top is quick pickings at the onset of a war..)

Bottom line is Jesters agreed to a war.. both kingdoms dedicated time and resources to put themselves in position to make this war happen, and then because they messed up giving us UF and didnt correct their mistake by just full waving us, they decide that they just not do anything.

Those who think this is the same situation as FS vs ED are obviously just trolling, ED vulturing FS from a substantial size advantage when FS was just coming out out of EOWCF is not the same as a war agreement agreed by both kingdoms a week before the conflict date, and then broken at the first sign of trouble within the fully sanctioned hostile conflict. Absurd..

[Zauper]

How were there land caps if you explored as soon as CF ended? In my mind, even if that's potentially permissible (depending on the phrasing of the deal?) that's at least as lame as backing out of the war deal.

Let's be honest: the reason your kd runs 8 undead is so that you can give the button in one wave. The reason you only run 8 undead is because FS prefers to run high-def turtles with high WPA and FB the other kd and build UB to win conflicts. Without a guarantee that you would press the button, there's no reason for jesters to give you the button as you'd be likely to just MS blanket and spam FB instead of declaring, and if you're going to drag hostile until you just farm the other kd, there's no reason for them to take you to war.

For all the talk about how CR doesn't 'understand' the war tier (mostly because we think it's dumb and just hit for conflict), it's pretty clear that I understand this situation better than you seem to.

If you're going to make a war deal, you should spell out all of the terms.

e: to be clear, it's a perfectly legit strategy, it's just one that makes other kds not want to fight you. So it's hard to get upset when other kds decide to not fight you as a result. And after calling in your allies earlier this age when ED was pushing conflict on you, it's hard for you to defend continuing to hit if they don't want to fight you.

When you outclass other kds (and FS probably outclasses Jesters), you sometimes have to do things that aren't 100% in your favor to get war -- like give them the button through fort.

[jmiedema]

Hmm one situation a kingdom with no conflict terms and who is substantially bigger vultures another kingdom due to a grudge.

Other situation both kingdoms agree to a conflict leading to war 7+ days in advance.

Clearly similar situations.

[MyNameIsMatija]

If they didn't want to war FS why did they arrange a war with FS? Bunch of rubbish, every point made against FS so far can be dismissed as trolling or plain absurdity, get it together people, the lets blindly hate FS rutine is getting old.

[Korp]

For all the talk about how CR doesn't 'understand' the war tier (mostly because we think it's dumb and just hit for conflict), it's pretty clear that I understand this situation better than you seem to.

e: to be clear, it's a perfectly legit strategy, it's just one that makes other kds not want to fight you. So it's hard to get upset when other kds decide to not fight you as a result.

Yet CR pulled ****load of drama when kingdom decided not to fight. So, I dont think you quite grasp it as much as you believe you do.

If they didn't want to war FS why did they arrange a war with FS? Bunch of rubbish, every point made against FS so far can be dismissed as trolling or plain absurdity, get it together people, the lets blindly hate FS rutine is getting old.

But not the "Everything i disagree with it is either absurd or trolling" ? :)

Though it seems that Jester wanted a war, FS wanted what they usually do, scared ****less to push the button unless they have it setup just how they want it.

[LoRD_SaMPuaN]

How were there land caps if you explored as soon as CF ended? In my mind, even if that's potentially permissible (depending on the phrasing of the deal?) that's at least as lame as backing out of the war deal.

Let's be honest: the reason your kd runs 8 undead is so that you can give the button in one wave. The reason you only run 8 undead is because FS prefers to run high-def turtles with high WPA and FB the other kd and build UB to win conflicts. Without a guarantee that you would press the button, there's no reason for jesters to give you the button as you'd be likely to just MS blanket and spam FB instead of declaring, and if you're going to drag hostile until you just farm the other kd, there's no reason for them to take you to war.

For all the talk about how CR doesn't 'understand' the war tier (mostly because we think it's dumb and just hit for conflict), it's pretty clear that I understand this situation better than you seem to.

If you're going to make a war deal, you should spell out all of the terms.

e: to be clear, it's a perfectly legit strategy, it's just one that makes other kds not want to fight you. So it's hard to get upset when other kds decide to not fight you as a result. And after calling in your allies earlier this age when ED was pushing conflict on you, it's hard for you to defend continuing to hit if they don't want to fight you.

we didnt ask for jesters to give button or anything, and we were planning to do so in a short frame if they were in normal stance.. we just played to our best with circumstances determined by jesters..

i totally agree with your point about making others not want to fight, but why should we think about that when we have an agreed war?

p.s. i wont waste time writing about a thousand difference between this situation with ed stuff as i know your love for ed.. ill leave it at that we havent recieved any cf proposal from jesters..

[Zauper]

we didnt ask for jesters to give button or anything, and we were planning to do so in a short frame if they were in normal stance.. we just played to our best with circumstances determined by jesters..

i totally agree with your point about making others not want to fight, but why should we think about that when we have an agreed war?

p.s. i wont waste time writing about a thousand difference between this situation with ed stuff as i know your love for ed.. ill leave it at that we havent recieved any cf proposal from jesters..

So if they proposed that you just CF, you'd take it?

And, because even if you have an agreed war, someone still needs to push the button AND you (clearly) didn't have an agreed war. (As they've pointed out, no actual declare terms). So something was lacking, no? You could argue that it's their fault for not spelling out who gives button and when, but it's also your fault for not getting that commitment from them as well.

Korp -- The drama we created specifically was around how stupid the war tier doing things like trying to arrange wars instead of just waving for wars is. It's not that we didn't understand how they work, it's that we refused to participate :p.

[LoRD_SaMPuaN]

So if they proposed that you just CF, you'd take it?

And, because even if you have an agreed war, someone still needs to push the button AND you (clearly) didn't have an agreed war. (As they've pointed out, no actual declare terms). So something was lacking, no? You could argue that it's their fault for not spelling out who gives button and when, but it's also your fault for not getting that commitment from them as well.

Korp -- The drama we created specifically was around how stupid the war tier doing things like trying to arrange wars instead of just waving for wars is. It's not that we didn't understand how they work, it's that we refused to participate :p.

i dont think there needs to be declare terms for a war agreement - we have done many war agreements where the declaring side was determined via ingame fighting.. as for claiming we didnt have a war agreement;

23:33 aute(jesters monarch) i said jank(jesters steward) only told me that we had an agreement to war, with what terms or conditions i didnt know. yes i tagged up, as i was waiting fr a war

they have also been tagged 'war agreed with fs' for 72h - 24h before cf drop and 48h more hour before their fort ran out (perhaps they were only willing to war if they were given button into fort?).. i dont know how it can be argued there wasnt a war agreement when both sides knew it?

[Zauper]

i dont think there needs to be declare terms for a war agreement - we have done many war agreements where the declaring side was determined via ingame fighting.. as for claiming we didnt have a war agreement;

23:33 aute(jesters monarch) i said jank(jesters steward) only told me that we had an agreement to war, with what terms or conditions i didnt know. yes i tagged up, as i was waiting fr a war

they have also been tagged 'war agreed with fs' for 72h - 24h before cf drop and 48h more hour before their fort ran out (perhaps they were only willing to war if they were given button into fort?).. i dont know how it can be argued there wasnt a war agreement when both sides knew it?

Allow me to answer your question with a question:
How can people tag hostile when they aren't hostile?

Perhaps they assumed that the agreed CF drop would escalate to war?

[MyNameIsMatija]

Man should I even respond to this guy, oh well if Zauper bothered to I guess I can as well. Korp, I can see why my statement that you quoted would bother you, but it's in your job description as a certified troll that anyone of any importance can't take your meaningless disagreeing with everyone and everything seriously.