You did drag it. You won as a result but you dragged the war. It cost us time and we are reclaiming that time. If you need to make that seem sinister that is on you.
You did drag it. You won as a result but you dragged the war. It cost us time and we are reclaiming that time. If you need to make that seem sinister that is on you.
"having fun warring when you have whoring and number 1 as a goal is totally pointless..." - Korp
"while I heart shiester when we both play serious and are in the same kingdom, I hate shiester on the forums and pretty much disagree with everything he says. Even he knows this." - Flogger asking me out on a date
The devs have made a decision to kill competitive utopia and have thereby killed my interest with it.
So why was it okey for FS to harass ED for a war when ED didnt want to (and not okey for ED to payback the age after)?
Claiming hostile protection against a kingdom that hasn't and won't attack or op you back (with CF offer on the table) while using the time to buy more time before you go into a "real conflict".Originally Posted by Sheister
Sounds like you are using this hostile to get all the benefits that fake wars were actioned on to get rid of. A protected time that you could pump to gain time and an advantage over a kingdom bigger than you (spartans).
At the very least FS should be able to make a binding statement or "agreement" on the forums to the people of utopia stating they have not and will not do any offensive actions against pyro. I don't see why another kingdom wouldn't be allowed to hit into Pyro's fake hostile, and if FS then were to make any offensive actions against pyro it would be considered a deal break and actionable.
This idea of one sided hostiles (where one kingdom makes zero offensive actions to the other) being protected under claims of hostile is nonsense.
lol, i hope jmiedema dont play in FS. :) That whole post is so hilarious consider FS past history. :)
There is a difference between a hostile where a kingdom has hit back, and both sides are participating, than one where one kingdom is 150% their size and just manhandling them without any aggressive actions being returned to them.
It is also different when 2 kingdoms enter hostilities at an even footing with an agreement that it goes to war, then one kingdom doesnt like how hostile has gone and desides they don't want to war.
Why does everyone compare hostiles in our past where the other kingdom has actively hit back (often times at a 1 to 1, or more ratio), and compare it to a hostile where one kingdom hits the other with no retaliation, and no CF terms offered, accepted, or allowed by the aggressor kingdom.
Cause you people dont seem to be self aware for one bit. You seem to believe that you are entitled to ****play but when other kingdoms do it towards you its "Oh no you cant do that its not okey!" Hypocrites I believe.
I'm sorry but this is just dumb. You're punishing them for having the patience to win a war they could win because it inconvenienced you? lol
Oh man, this...
Yes Palem, this basically sums up their entire entitlement rationale.
It isn't nice to insult sheister in a thread dedicated to him.
Why is it not on FS to protect themselves through force or diplo? You champion the idea that goals are user defined so what is all this winning talk. Maybe Pyro doesn't think it's over yet. I really can't get on the Pyro is evil train on this one. FS did a good job and got their win. Now it looks like there is a price for how they accomplished it, big deal. If I wave someone and get much booty, I know I need to diplo and or be prepared to watch out for said booty providers later in the age when they might want that booty back.
Please name one instance where FS did more than 1 wave against a kingdom that did not hit us back in the duration of the hostile.
Oh, I see how you people justify it now. "We didnt hit! So its okey for us to send Pyro at them" "They are hitting us back so its okey to harass them" etc. Well, I got an answer at least. :)
I believe I know atleast 2 jmiedema, one was last age when you smashed no.1 in honour just course they were smaller and you could, I do not believe they hit back and actually came to forum for help... They were shot down and told to grow or do same back next age.
I don't condone either FS play then or Pyros now, but as everyone says they are allowed and that's that. So take the hits from Pyro now, grow and come back at them.
You are claiming noone is whining but it's turning into it more and more, Pyro whine about the war and the length you went to to get the win (fair and very good win in my personal view), and now FS starting to whine about Pyro coming back at you after saying it didn't matter (yes they are razing and maybe don't have a real goal with it other then prep for Spartans), that doesn't matter though, fact is they are allowed to hit and wishes to deal you some damage.
Last edited by Aranfein; 01-03-2016 at 17:58.
War is what happens when language fails.
I assume you are referring to Markers kingdom (SS). We waved them for honour, they retaliated fully, we continued to attack. Not the same situation.
We did hit some kingdoms last age that didnt retaliate. We did 1 wave on all of them. They said they didnt want to fight and offered CF. We accepted CF after 1 wave (sometimes accepted it without even finishing the wave). Not the same situation.
Please name another situation where a kingdom did not retaliate against us and we relentlessly pummelled them into the ground. If you are going to say FS v ED, we were in an active hostile, then they wanted to back out of it, so we took more resources at the end. Not the same situation.
We have never done more than 1 wave against a kingdom that refused to retaliate against us. Period.
Last edited by jmiedema; 01-03-2016 at 18:08. Reason: Markers kingdom, not Goodwitch
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote