Resolution

[p0ngkol]

Our leadership has negotiated with Divinity. We've brought up a few points.

1. We'd like to have clear quantifiable and explicit regulations governing deals and relationships between ALL kds. These regulations have to be transparent and will have to follow some sort of template. This template is to be distributed to all parties interested.
2. If according to these new regulations Spartans did a dealbreak on Divinity, Spartans will assume full responsibility and accept they dealbroke.
3. The land Emeriti took from us will be given to Divinity as compensation. We will then not further puruse any grudges towards both emeriti and divinity.

Basically we want that from now on ghetto's won't be ****played anymore by the top, and will have venues to issue their complaints, with all KDs (including the top) being bound to interfere if terms are breached.

Just FYI, last age more than half the KDs we agreed war with broke the terms of our war-agreements, overexploring, declaring later than they should etc. Did we ask for gangbangs then? Even just now when with the Green vs Warlords war, Warlords had agreed to declare war on date X, but did so on date X+1.
Gangbang? Point is the standards are all so subjective and situation-based. We either say **** standards we do whatever we like, OR we say we do apply standards and people stick to them.
I've seen it happen time and time again. Top-KD feeds on ghetto. Ghetto agrees CF. Top-KD leaves em alone 3-4 weeks. Breaks CF, feeds again, etc etc.

It seems the major reason the top is so upset, is because they are treated like normal humans rather than gods.

[Retailer]

Youre sort of wrong.

Ive been in a situation several times where being the "top" was a disadvantage. Since if u gave some ghetto UF/hostile and they decided to OP or fools gold your banks it hurt the kd FAR more than the few acres you took.

Or as what Coss kd did to me when I was the biggest fae around: They spent their entire kd recourses AWing and fireballing me down. Meaning i became a 7k acres shell. And that basically made me into a farm for other top kd's banks.

So no ghettos arent always in the weaker position.

[Folle]

"Basically we want that from now on ghetto's won't be ****played anymore by the top, and will have venues to issue their complaints, with all KDs (including the top) being bound to interfere if terms are breached."

This is exactly what just happened yes?

You dealbroke (Sh*tplayed) Divinity and the community is now punishing you for this.

Looks like the community is handling kingdoms who doesnt "play by the rules" just fine.

It seems the major reason you are so upset, is because you fail to treat others like humans instead of some lower life forms.

[sn0wballz]

I probably shouldn't be sticking my nose into this as I am not sure of the entire situation but if I understand the original post correctly, I think it's a pretty lame idea to have these negotiation rules floating around that you're proposing. I know the top already has something where they've somehow agreed on something that they can reference when it comes to deals or other general politics that come up.

While I understand it I still have an issue with those types of unwritten rules considering not every kingdom in this game are going to follow them or even know about them. I understand someone could opt in or out I guess or maybe it's a cant stand the heat get out of the kitchen type thing but still the only rules you can expect a player or a group of players to follow are the ones that are actually written in the rule book. And quite frankly if the game allows you do something then it is fair game. Choices may not always be the right ones (depending on your point of view) but in the end we're still talking about decisions that can be freely made by anyone and trying to regulate everyone to an unofficial politic handbook doesn't work.

Just my two cents on the topic. Again, I dont really know the situation and I'm just commenting on the original post and the idea of his regulations.

[protector]

Stop making war agreements which have fixed sizes or fixed declare dates.

Some setups favor quick and short hostiles, others favor longer ones. Just drop CF on day X and then let it begin.
If you favor a quick declare, you're likely to one to give up a button. Just instead of full waving, send 7 hits, wait for troops return, then hit once to give button. If enemy stalls, just send a few hits every few hours.

Basically we want that from now on ghetto's won't be ****played anymore by the top, and will have venues to issue their complaints, with all KDs (including the top) being bound to interfere if terms are breached.

The above kind of contradicts with the below:

Just FYI, last age more than half the KDs we agreed war with broke the terms of our war-agreements, overexploring, declaring later than they should etc. Did we ask for gangbangs then? Even just now when with the Green vs Warlords war, Warlords had agreed to declare war on date X, but did so on date X+1.

[beans]

Stop making war agreements which have fixed sizes or fixed declare dates.

Some setups favor quick and short hostiles, others favor longer ones. Just drop CF on day X and then let it begin.
If you favor a quick declare, you're likely to one to give up a button. Just instead of full waving, send 7 hits, wait for troops return, then hit once to give button. If enemy stalls, just send a few hits every few hours.


The above kind of contradicts with the below:

Long hostiles are super fun. I learned to avoid them because they often end up with one party backing out with out war or multiple hostile. The reason for short hostile is it makes for cleaner wars. We dont have short hostiles because of our kd set up, we have our kd set up because we want short hostiles for other reasons. If there was some sort of war countdown thing that allowed two KDs to long hostile/button play with out outside interference or backing out I would be a super happy guy.

[Retailer]

Well its about playstyle and setup.
FOr example an extremely T/m heavy kd would love a long hostile period in which they could have your kd full of MS and Grind down your t/m's while their own t/m's are less vulnerable towards your attacckers from GBP. Then they will declare on you when they think they got a shot at winning.

At that point if they dont declare fast enough and you feel you are eating too hard on ops and cant hit them hard enough your kd should enter fort for the protection whileyou keep hitting their t/m's just for the sake of the losses and weakening them. Entering fort to get some econ etc.

All this is like foreplay. DIfferent setups demand different kind of foreplay. You are naive if u think the only thing that goes is Instant fisting with no pre-lube.

L2Kiss

[beans]

Retailer, I'm aware of the complexities and fun to be had in a long hostile. They can be super great and are much more dynamic than war. However there is also a ton of BS that can happen in long hostiles that does not occur in "instant fisting" wars. Some kds prefer long hostiles and some prefer short. Most kds end up doing a mix of both in an effort to just find wars... Nothing wrong with either style of play, just people choosing to play the way that makes the game fun for them.

[Smitty87]

Retailer, I'm aware of the complexities and fun to be had in a long hostile. They can be super great and are much more dynamic than war. However there is also a ton of BS that can happen in long hostiles that does not occur in "instant fisting" wars. Some kds prefer long hostiles and some prefer short. Most kds end up doing a mix of both in an effort to just find wars... Nothing wrong with either style of play, just people choosing to play the way that makes the game fun for them.

It's mainly setups.

Ie. A kingdom of warriors would much prefer to Insta declare as opposed to a kingdom of merchants.
Or a kd of undeads would much prefer a long hostile as opposed to Asians.

Getting two kds to agree on a war with two conflicting setups is difficult.

[Darkz Azn]

I think Asians like myself prefer long hostile ... because that's mean more slack time =)

[beans]

It's mainly setups.

Ie. A kingdom of warriors would much prefer to Insta declare as opposed to a kingdom of merchants.
Or a kd of undeads would much prefer a long hostile as opposed to Asians.

Getting two kds to agree on a war with two conflicting setups is difficult.

super true. especially difficult because KDs tend to set up their builds according to what they prefer to play. A KD that prefers insta hostiles will roll warriors, a kd that prefers long will roll merchants. Not only is it trying to get one of the kds to play with conflicting set ups, but also with conflicting preferred play styles.

[Meep]

Our leadership has negotiated with Divinity. We've brought up a few points.

1. We'd like to have clear quantifiable and explicit regulations governing deals and relationships between ALL kds. These regulations have to be transparent and will have to follow some sort of template. This template is to be distributed to all parties interested.
2. If according to these new regulations Spartans did a dealbreak on Divinity, Spartans will assume full responsibility and accept they dealbroke.
3. The land Emeriti took from us will be given to Divinity as compensation. We will then not further puruse any grudges towards both emeriti and divinity.

Basically we want that from now on ghetto's won't be ****played anymore by the top, and will have venues to issue their complaints, with all KDs (including the top) being bound to interfere if terms are breached.

Just FYI, last age more than half the KDs we agreed war with broke the terms of our war-agreements, overexploring, declaring later than they should etc. Did we ask for gangbangs then? Even just now when with the Green vs Warlords war, Warlords had agreed to declare war on date X, but did so on date X+1.
Gangbang? Point is the standards are all so subjective and situation-based. We either say **** standards we do whatever we like, OR we say we do apply standards and people stick to them.
I've seen it happen time and time again. Top-KD feeds on ghetto. Ghetto agrees CF. Top-KD leaves em alone 3-4 weeks. Breaks CF, feeds again, etc etc.

It seems the major reason the top is so upset, is because they are treated like normal humans rather than gods.

So make terms instead of sending a blank CF and saying literally nothing?

I keep track of KDs that Actually engage in the behavior you point out (emphasis mine). Oddly no whoring KD has ever done that to me, just ****ty warring KDs.

I don't bother CFing them in the future.
I retal wave them while their armies are out.
I retal wave the tick their EOWCFs end.

People learn their lesson real quick and stop doing that, at least to me.

You deal with ****play by carrying a bigger stick and applying pressure at the right times.

But, I don't chase #1 on any chart except topping the 'did I and my kingdom have fun this age?' so if I have to waste a few days out of the age on chart-fruitless conflicts, I don't really care in the slightest.

--

Regarding you and divinity, you lack the common sense to see that there is zero functional impact whatsoever on your kingdom of divinity making all hits within the allowed time and accepting the CF 5 minutes later than you would have liked, and think that is worth dealbreaking over later after not objecting at the time.

[StratOcastle]

Setup and motive.

When I was with TFC we'd give the button to about anyone. We had the faettacker thing figured out so it was just war strategy etc that made it look bad time to time. No one would opt to war us from about any other position. Being a breakable fae had some great benefits like learning to fight with marginal offense. People are less frightened of breakable faeries.

Why does that matter?

It allowed me to see that tactically I could fight in about any build Utopia allows. I reserve this to my personal experience as not to muddy a kingdom strategy. It let me know I could war in nearly any diplomatic environment( Hostile was a given with 20 some fae.) For me it cuts out the clutter of complicated agreements. If I can fight in hostile and war I'm not to worried about the supposed leverage.

Wins? Diplomacy at it core is to secure some advantage with time and space. We shouldn't confuse diplo with friendly relations. Top kingdoms aren't guaranteed to enjoy a successful age of bottom feeding, it's just that they're good. Many ghettos still don't partake in the communication resources available.

Let's take a fantastic ride if you will: let's say the formidable war kingdoms agree to keep growth kingdoms down next age and they achieve this objective. I'm not saying that war kingdoms as ruling class is a bad thing, but that this same coalition that held down the tops would then be positioned to grant what they ask in return.

So before we make diplomatic stone tablets we should look upon ourselves in the highest position as fair insight.

[Flames73]

Just FYI, last age more than half the KDs we agreed war with broke the terms of our war-agreements, overexploring, declaring later than they should etc. Did we ask for gangbangs then? Even just now when with the Green vs Warlords war, Warlords had agreed to declare war on date X, but did so on date X+1.

That is 10% of the story. I am gonna keep it short, some details might be missed.

Basically Warlords were 700k nw larger and plundered into us during our fort. We took intel and stuff and they plunder more for full duration of fort. We start dragon, they start dragon. We asked for button as we were smaller, they said no terms but asked for hostile start date. We read it as start date = terms, and they dont do terms so didnt bother with it.

They went fort a bit after dragon started, not going to give button to them, bounced and plundered them. 14 v 10/12 pts. Angry mails ensued. No talks happened. Not one side gave button for about two days. It was intense and fin. And we used it as a way to close the gap slightly (barely, we were still 700k smaller)

On the third day somehow talks started and somehow we agreed to give button and they agreed to declare within same date. Yes, that didn't exactly happen, they declared 2nd minute into next day. Did they break agreement? If they waited longer we would have considered calling in help. But well they declared and we felt like we can beat them.

Also our kd is UD Warriors as attackers. We would obviously prefer insta-war. But we like to wave and hope for war. We usually wave larger kds too, and those prepped, cause they will more likely war us. Usually we sit on 14 points and see how the other side respond. Its more fun, less talking (I am bad with it).

And we avoid fixed declare date, it is last resort. I feel waving is best way to start a war. Next is set hostile start date and button discussion.

Less bickering, and hostile is fun. You can damage someone hard and pull a disadvantage to advantage, i.e. our war with Div where we were awesome in hostile (right Persain? =P) but then we died in war haha.

More wars! Less talks!

[Persain]

First we dont need 2 threads talking about the divinity v spartans "issues" so i'll limit my responses accordingly. Next,

Less bickering, and hostile is fun. You can damage someone hard and pull a disadvantage to advantage, i.e. our war with Div where we were awesome in hostile (right Persain? =P) but then we died in war haha.

yes Flames hostiles can be awesome because they require a different train of thought than is typical of war. When we agreed to war you and u completely crushed us during hostile i haven't been at such a loss for what to do for in 4+ ages. Took a lot of talk to even begin to work out a strategy other than "well lets declare and hope they suck."

And finally

1. We'd like to have clear quantifiable and explicit regulations governing deals and relationships between ALL kds. These regulations have to be transparent and will have to follow some sort of template. This template is to be distributed to all parties interested.

there already is, its called "don't be an asshole." Part of what is missed is that completely policing things is both 100% impossible and 0% desirable. Similarly the whole top v bottom thing will always exist because the game makes "being the biggest" a desireable goal.