BB hitting into hostile

[13nesta13]

Im saying that 4:19 had no intention to fight 2:9 as their ingame messages to Binar on the 22nd showed, and that Sleepy making 3 hits on 2:9 on the 22nd (an hour after the wave started, not "the next minute" and they had troops home and an hour to retal so we didnt prevent them from anything) didnt change anything.

You on the other hand seem to be saying that Sleepy hitting 3 provinces in Emeriti on the 22nd caused 4:19 to go from "lets retal the **** out of these mofos" to sending an ingame CF on the 22nd and hitting 3 other kds (2:1 on the 22nd 1:5 on the 23rd and 7:15 on the 1st).

Now that is just silly

So they have in game confirmation they don't want to fight. Perhaps that has something to do with them being already hostile elsewhere? And despite that emeriti refused to accept an open c.f. offer sent by 4 19 while 4 19 was clearly hostile with 2 1? I don't know about you but if I hit into an active hostile I'll be first to admit mistake and offer reparations asap and stop damage, rather than leaving the c.f. unaccepted there and continue hitting.

[Judge]

Defining a hostile definitely seem like the biggest challange for top kds these days. Smart move not to try and define one last age!

Get back on topic please. This is not a double post!

[Meep]

Meep, refresh my memory here if I'm wrong.... Barco noticed you into what they deemed 'non hostile' and you broke CF and waved them.

Exactly what definition of hostile did you think we backed here ? Pretty sure we backed a 'don't deal break' stance rather than trying to define what a hostile is ?

Flogger and nesta both agreed that barco was noticing into a hostile and endorsed our immediate cf drop and wave only to later backtrack on that stance and say that barco didnt notice into our hostile and we dealbroke barco.

Barco clearly stated their definition of hostile in justifying their notice, and every gb participant who joined in agreed by association.

Clearly your move last age was just to avoid getting farmed by us and better position yourselves to crown.

That doesnt mean youre off the hook and get to wave into hostiles to crowm this age.

I suggest giving emeriti back their acres.

[Shai]

They were hitting 2:1 before 2:9 were hitting them. 8 hits from 4:19 towards 2:1 before 2:9 jumped in. Ofc they werent planning on intention of fighting 2:9 cause they were already in a hostile with 2:1.

Yes my whole point was that 4:19 didnt have any intention to fight 2:9, which became very obvious on the 22nd, so our 3 hits on Emeriti on the 22nd didnt limit or affect anything. There is several things that support that, including the ingame messages from 4:19 to 2:9 (Binar) on the 22nd.

[Shockwave]

There is no deal breaking like cr did last age. There is no cheating like cr did last age. I'm not sure why cr is even coming up in this conversation?

[Judge]

So they have in game confirmation they don't want to fight. Perhaps that has something to do with them being already hostile elsewhere? And despite that emeriti refused to accept an open c.f. offer sent by 4 19 while 4 19 was clearly hostile with 2 1? I don't know about you but if I hit into an active hostile I'll be first to admit mistake and offer reparations asap and stop damage, rather than leaving the c.f. unaccepted there and continue hitting.

2:1 got waved by 4:19 who got waved by 2:19 who got waved by 7:8. So is 7:6 going to wave 7:8 now?

[Judge]

Flogger and nesta both agreed that barco was noticing into a hostile and endorsed our immediate cf drop and wave only to later backtrack on that stance and say that barco didnt notice into our hostile and we dealbroke barco.

Barco clearly stated their definition of hostile in justifying their notice, and every gb participant who joined in agreed by association.

Clearly your move last age was just to avoid getting farmed by us and better position yourselves to crown.

That doesnt mean youre off the hook and get to wave into hostiles to crowm this age.

I suggest giving emeriti back their acres.

I suggest CR first take their GC back from Sparta who they funded to war PI. Do it first and then come and talk here!

[Meep]

You hitting 3 hours after last hits implies that the instant a kd says they dont want to fight a hostile is over, cf agreed or not.

That the hostile definition you wanna go with now? In which case, emeriti doesnt want to fight you, so youre not hostile, so I can raze you with my ghettos now right?

[Shai]

So they have in game confirmation they don't want to fight. Perhaps that has something to do with them being already hostile elsewhere? And despite that emeriti refused to accept an open c.f. offer sent by 4 19 while 4 19 was clearly hostile with 2 1? I don't know about you but if I hit into an active hostile I'll be first to admit mistake and offer reparations asap and stop damage, rather than leaving the c.f. unaccepted there and continue hitting.

So what do anything of what you just wrote have to do with my post, that you quoted, and your statement that Sleepy was influencing the hostile and limiting 4:19s options? If anything you just supported my claim that Sleepys hits on 4:19 didnt change anything.

[Meep]

I suggest CR first take their GC back from Sparta who they funded to war PI. Do it first and then come and talk here!

I tried to collect on that but nobody would let me and now bart is banned :(

[Meep]

There is no deal breaking like cr did last age. There is no cheating like cr did last age. I'm not sure why cr is even coming up in this conversation?

Unless you accept barcos definition of hostile, (which means youre currently waving into a hostile) then they dealbroke us and were properly policed last age.

Bit of a quandry eh?

[13nesta13]

Flogger and nesta both agreed that barco was noticing into a hostile and endorsed our immediate cf drop and wave only to later backtrack on that stance and say that barco didnt notice into our hostile and we dealbroke barco.

Barco clearly stated their definition of hostile in justifying their notice, and every gb participant who joined in agreed by association.

Clearly your move last age was just to avoid getting farmed by us and better position yourselves to crown.

That doesnt mean youre off the hook and get to wave into hostiles to crowm this age.

I suggest giving emeriti back their acres.

Bull**** lol. I told dubai clearly to wait and he told me this couldn't wait. I then said well then so be it. If you want a c.f. with us you got one. Giving you a c.f. does not equate to endorsement. It equates to us ceasing a conflict.

[Korp]

Yes my whole point was that 4:19 didnt have any intention to fight 2:9, which became very obvious on the 22nd, so our 3 hits on Emeriti on the 22nd didnt limit or affect anything. There is several things that support that, including the ingame messages from 4:19 to 2:9 (Binar) on the 22nd.

But the whole drama consist of BB hitting Emeriti and Emeriti getting upset cause they hit into an active hostile while Emeriti themselves did it yesterday. Cant have the cake and eat it!

There is no deal breaking like cr did last age. There is no cheating like cr did last age. I'm not sure why cr is even coming up in this conversation?

No cheating like CR? lul, you ever played utopia bro?

[Meep]

Bull**** lol. I told dubai clearly to wait and he told me this couldn't wait. I then said well then so be it. If you want a c.f. with us you got one. Giving you a c.f. does not equate to endorsement. It equates to us ceasing a conflict.

Cfing someone to let them do something you claim to disagree with and then waiting two weeks to come to barcos aid when you needed acres to fight div.is a pretty suspect excuse to me.

[protector]

Im saying that 4:19 had no intention to fight 2:9 as their ingame messages to Binar on the 22nd showed

WTF do the messages on 22nd matter? 4:19 and 2:1 where hostile before Emeriti hit into 4:19. Wahatever they said ingame doesn't ****ing matter, it just shows Emeriti doesnt give a rats ass about 'ghetto' hostiles.