AMA vs sanct round 2

[Zauper]

It seems to me that there are a few fundamental questions in this thread. I'll give my thoughts on them one by one.

Was the notice legitimate?

The terms of the deal between goodz and elit state that notice cannot be given during eowcf, or when hostile with another kingdom. It seems to me that given they knew that the notice was to be given immediately oow, and the notice was sent ingame at the hc turn, that the notice would be legitimate even if Sanc had waved Elit (though this would have been incredibly lame), because when notice was given there were no hostilities.

In my mind, there is no question that the notice was legitimate.

The random stuff about stealing

I think Elit is in a bad place here, actually. If stealing creates a hostile situation, then Elit's targetsharing Havoc's 0 thief cows in these forums created a multi-declare situation against Havoc. If stealing does not create a hostile situation, then Elit chose to wave Sanc to run from Havoc's notice.

I don't see anything wrong with Sanc stealing money from AMA. Plenty of kds have stolen money from eachother in the top to help themselves. There's no difference when it's Sanc doing it to AMA as opposed to SPGC doing it a Havoc.

Is it a hostile?

From what I've seen in the forums, I would say probably. That said, while no one has the same definition, at some point if kds stop retalling/etc, things generally stop being considered a hostile. I'd have to see a full CE to say more definitively.

That said; Elit's demands for a CF are pretty substantial, and require the involvement of more than just Sanc. I wonder about the legitimacy of someone using one kd as a shield to get a deal with a second kd, while claiming they're hostile with the first so the second can't do anything to them.

Goodz did offer to reset notice with Elit if they CF'd Sanc, based on posts earlier in the thread.

I would agree with Elit that Jdorje probably put Havoc in a bad place. I would also say that Elit put AMA in a bad place with his actions as well.

[AquaSeaFoam]

ASF, stop accusing Elit of hacking, you're just lowering your credibility. I was the one who authorized the logging in of your ex player's accounts and Elit has no knowledge of it. Bishop can verify this as admin, and I'm positive you know the real story behind it. There's no need to smear Elit to drive your propaganda here.

No matter what anyone says, Elit will never hear the end of it. ASF brings it up every time he's involved in a discussion with Elit over something.

The issue is that Elit keeps bringing up that age when the reality is that there was much more involved than he wants to discuss. I am not blaming Elit specifically for the unauthorized logins, however Elit did defend them and deny them with all his efforts. Regardless, he keeps bringing up that age as a means to attack Rage but as we all know there were a lot of other factors involved there that he doesn't want to admit to. I'm not the one bringing up that age here, that is Elit.

[Elldallan]

No, I think you had every right to wave them, just as they had every right to steal from you, and Havoc had every right to give notice.

Of course sanct had the right to steal, people are not disputing that. But a lot of people think that it qualifies as a hostile action which would make Havoc's notice null and void, the fact that sanct are allied with Havoc makes this argument stronger because it's clearly intended to hurt MA in their upcoming war. It is not double standards and I would think it's just as dirty a move if it was any other 2 allied kingdoms vs any one Abs kd.

I think what sanct did is clearly a hostile act and if there is a no notice during hostilities etc then Havoc's notice is null and void. The key point is whether such a clause exists because while it may not be hostile in absolute game terms it is certainly a hostile act in the spirit intended in the cf agreement as well as any other comparable situation involving actual people.

[DHaran]

Our terms for send/get notice include re-cf (all hostile actions to end). Propose on it is to keep 1 hostile same time and you wont get waved instant after hostile end. Not CF with Sanctuary alone wont matter much if they didn't start hostile ops vs us. Its activated again active relation and Havoc send us notice in active relation. So notice breack spirit on deal for sure dont matter how you define it. there was posted logs (page 13) early with Goodz about our deal terms. You can see too how havoc agree to give us free hits for extend CF and we give up it. My comment was: <Elit> so hope you wont act in rturn lame too :P

Hostile ending and re-CFing are not the same thing. Your relations status with Sanc ended when you came out of war. I guess it depends on how you worded it at the time of the deal (I didn't read it), but I would never take a deal that said I can't even notice you unless you re-CF a previous hostile opponent even when you're in normal relations.

Anyone who thinks stealing gc is a hostile action is out of their minds. It can be ****ty when done at bad times yes, like during a notice period between top kingdoms. But hostile? Not a chance. If we start saying stealing gc is hostile then I will just be considered hostile for the rest of my life, lol.

[Zauper]

Of course sanct had the right to steal, people are not disputing that. But a lot of people think that it qualifies as a hostile action which would make Havoc's notice null and void, the fact that sanct are allied with Havoc makes this argument stronger because it's clearly intended to hurt MA in their upcoming war. It is not double standards and I would think it's just as dirty a move if it was any other 2 allied kingdoms vs any one Abs kd.

I think what sanct did is clearly a hostile act and if there is a no notice during hostilities etc then Havoc's notice is null and void. The key point is whether such a clause exists because while it may not be hostile in absolute game terms it is certainly a hostile act in the spirit intended in the cf agreement as well as any other comparable situation involving actual people.

Is there evidence that the notice from Havoc came after ops from Sanc? Especially considering that Havoc gave you notice they were going to notice you during your EOWCF....If stealing creates hostilities, then how do you defend targetsharing Havoc?

[Elit]

The issue is that Elit keeps bringing up that age when the reality is that there was much more involved than he wants to discuss. I am not blaming Elit specifically for the unauthorized logins, however Elit did defend them and deny them with all his efforts. Regardless, he keeps bringing up that age as a means to attack Rage but as we all know there were a lot of other factors involved there that he doesn't want to admit to. I'm not the one bringing up that age here, that is Elit.

Its not me, tell proteus to stop talk for it every time when there is any discussion.
About defend them: They was my kd mates and i trusted them. They was buled very bad from your propose. Its not serious to ask to kick 1/3 from kd or you will GB us. I don't agree and support what they did but you have your guilt in all this story. If you didn't notice us 2h before our war with Fury and prepare GB most like they wont make something so extreme and wrong.

Is there evidence that the notice from Havoc came after ops from Sanc? Especially considering that Havoc gave you notice they were going to notice you during your EOWCF....If stealing creates hostilities, then how do you defend targetsharing Havoc?

its not target share. We had serious reason to suspect Sanctuary farming gold, and asked for it. Goodz droped cf and Dorje robed with his province 28 mill gold from havoc. How you defend intra alliance farming?

I would agree with Elit that Jdorje probably put Havoc in a bad place. I would also say that Elit put AMA in a bad place with his actions as well.

Why i put AMA in bad situation. Sanctuary robed from us we waved them. Its very logic and natural. Legit actions from both kds. Or you think we shold let Sanctuary rob us and "prepare" for havoc same time.

[Elit]

delete it

[AquaSeaFoam]

Proteus brought up a different past age, you brought up the above referenced past age all on your own.

[DHaran]

Why i put AMA in bad situation. Sanctuary robed from us we waved them. Its very logic and natural. Legit actions from both kds. Or you think we shold let Sanctuary rob us and "prepare" for havoc same time.

It's a bad situation because you've now lost all protection from Havoc. They can wave you immediately after you close with Sanc, assuming the 48 hours have passed.

[Elit]

It's a bad situation because you've now lost all protection from Havoc. They can wave you immediately after you close with Sanc, assuming the 48 hours have passed.

Actualy they just double us:

April 2 of YR8 Sanctuary of Absalom () has proposed a formal ceasefire with our kingdom.
April 2 of YR8 Havoc of Absalom () has broken their ceasefire agreement with us!
April 2 of YR8 Havoc of Absalom () has begun a Ruby Dragon project against us!
April 2 of YR8 We have rejected a ceasefire offer from Sanctuary of Absalom ().
April 2 of YR8 A Ruby Dragon from Havoc of Absalom () has begun ravaging our lands!

[guard14n]

As i said before - Abs proved that they are frickin dishonest cowards. I say every one that reads the forum - just pwn them and lets help AMA !

[Soul_Hunter]

It is not a double Elit, last attack from Sanctuary was like 12 hours ago? No way you can call that double :) huh...

[Elldallan]

Is there evidence that the notice from Havoc came after ops from Sanc? Especially considering that Havoc gave you notice they were going to notice you during your EOWCF....If stealing creates hostilities, then how do you defend targetsharing Havoc?

I am not affiliated with MA tho I've played with Elit before but MA seems to claim there is such evidence but obviously the only source for that evidence would be coming from MA which Abs is never going to accept as a credible source.
Yes if Elit's post on the forum targetsharing Havoc was first then that is certainly a lame action I would agree but Elit and others claimed the taunt banner was first in which case it was just mentioning something that can be considered common knowledge, again the only evidence to the contrary comes from Havoc which MA is never going to accept as a credible source.

[Zauper]

its not target share. We had serious reason to suspect Sanctuary farming gold, and asked for it. Goodz droped cf and Dorje robed with his province 28 mill gold from havoc. How you defend intra alliance farming?

You said:

Havoc have 2 from his cows with 0 thives. Make sure sanctuary and havoc have in game CF or its not hard to accuse you in intra alliance farming gold...

The first sentence (that Havoc has 2 cows with 0 thieves) is targetsharing. I'm not sure how that could be any less clear. You could have just had the second clause to make the same point. I don't defend the intra-alliance farming (which was done by jodrje, apparently), and that's something they should address with you. My understanding is Havoc didn't approve of it.

Why i put AMA in bad situation. Sanctuary robed from us we waved them. Its very logic and natural. Legit actions from both kds. Or you think we shold let Sanctuary rob us and "prepare" for havoc same time.

Because you targetshared Havoc's cows, causing them to lose 50+M GC, and then used getting robbed as a shield to create a hostile to prevent Havoc from hitting you

edit: or not preventing them, apparently

Elldallan:
I've played with Elit before as well. How can there be evidence that the ops occured prior to the notice when notice of the notice was given prior to the end of EOWCF? Ops couldn't have occurred until after EOWCF. I guess they could have broken CF or something to timestamp it, but it seems silly to need a timestamp.

Elit's post occured 2-3 hours beforehand, if my recollection is correct. Plenty of folks knew about the 0 thieves, but there was a substantial uptick in gold losses after the post, even compared to earlier in the age when there was a taunt banner. It would be easy enough to prove with logs, though. Especially since Taunt shows up in the kingdom news.

[Pendel1]

Ok result is sanctuary keep us busy massive ops and hits, now come lame havoc and double us....