AMA vs sanct round 2

[Elf]

I have all info on scraps of paper. I cast Greed spells from July 11th year 6 until Jan 18 year 7. Mods can check. pokesanc offered ceasefire on Feb 1 year 7. Mods can check, so can abs. I never interferred with their hostiles regarding Greed overlapping.

Haha!

[Elf]

I got dates incorrect. All my info is on scraps of paper as i am currently without laptop. My spells were from a long time ago. Odd saying i stole gcs is a lie and people saying i overlapped Greed spells are lies too.

:-)

In fact, i remember pokesanc going Fort AFTER my spells and then my own Kingdom went to Fort. I made a hit out of Fort into pokesanc War on Ho Oh and killed 124 troops. That was it. I was too busy fighting my own War after that. Then my Monarch appointed me Steward after my Kingdom lost our War, i rejected pokesancs cf after they had lost their War too. Shortly after that they started razing me out of their eowcf into my eowcf. Thats why i made the thread and put the thirty Greed spells on my score. I didnt intend it to seem like i had just cast the spells or had cast them into their War, The Emperors Kingdom can clarify that i was too busy Warring them.

abs are just plain liars.

[Ezzerland]

There is a lot of garbage in these threads and a lot of people commenting about fact checking. So, I took a little time to try and offer an unbiased honest overview of events as they happened this age, involving ONLY this conflict.

• Sanc noticed MA
• Sanc + MA went fort at some point
• Sanc claims fort is bugged and they got screwed because they under trained
• MA asks Sanc to prove they have in game cf's with other abs allies and are not gc farming after it's rumored there are abs banks with tons of gc and 0 thieves.
• Havoc breaks cf with sanc to prove this.
• Sanc steals a minimum (admitted) near 30 mil gc from havoc.
• Sanc and Havoc re-cf
• Couple of abs kds get taunts about their 0 thief banks with gazillions of gc
• No in-game communication or IRC communication is made between sanc and MA.
• Sanc makes a gripe about the 'abuse' of fort from MA in public forums and says they'd be willing to re-cf since they lost gobs of gc due to being under trained
• MA says it's not their fault sanc under trained
• MA waves sanc
• Sanc declares war
• There was still no actual diplomacy between either kd up to this point (this was complained about later, so mentioning again now)
• MA defeats sanc in war
• EoWCF ends
• Havoc notices MA
• Pew Pew notices Sanc
• Sanc robs gc from MA
• MA waves sanc citing robberies
• Havoc+Sanc Claim MA is dodging Havoc (This is and always will be a faulted assumption due to sanc robbing MA, period)
• To this point there is STILL no attempt from sanc to negotiate a CF with MA, not even publicly in the forums.
• Dragons and hits are exchanged between both kingdoms.
• MA states they will re-cf sanc AND agree to war Havoc if Havoc will reinstate CF for 1 week time to recoup the damage from Sanc.
• Havoc refuses to re-cf MA, citing having been "target shared" when it was requested to prove they were not inter-alliance farming.
• Sanc does not respond at all regarding CF offer.
• Sanc + MA hit fort
• Sanc sends an in-game CF without terms
• Havoc waves MA claiming Hostile with sanc is void (despite no resolve to the conflict).
• Sanc claims no hostility with MA (despite no resolve to the conflict).
• Pew Pew waves Sanc, double hostiling them.

The above 'facts' are what has been publicly presented taking both sides into account. Please feel free to review and question them if your side feels I have misspoken or forgotten 'facts'.


Now, for some of my own personal drama induced comments:

• ASF makes the claim that the hostile with MA and Sanc is one-sided, therefore pew pew is more wrong. I would like to note that Sanc is the one claiming they are not in a hostile.
• ASF asks 'Why cant AMA CF sanc and fight someone closer to their size?' -- I'd like to ask, why did sanc feel the need to entice a kingdom they just warred and lost to? Why can't sanc CF AMA and rob/notice/fight someone in their range?
• ASF claims Sanc robbed AMA per-emptively under the assumption that AMA was intending to wave Sanc. So why all the shock and horror when AMA waves Sanc after getting robbed?
• There were multiple claims that AMA could have CF'd Sanc prior to AMA getting robbed. Could Sanc not of also approached about a CF knowing that their ally was going to be noticing AMA?
• ASF made a comment that Sanc is in the more 'unfair' position because Sanc was waved by 2 kingdoms, where AMA was only waved by one. I will cite in response to this that Sanc claimed to no longer be hostile with AMA (Again, despite no resolve to conflict), while AMA rightfully claimed to be hostile with Sanc. Its fair to say Sanc did not want to be hostile with AMA, but they were in fact hostile with them.

My only point with the above comments is that all of them made from abs toward AMA are one sided 'position' statements. There are two sides here. Both sides made mistakes, so your position statements are void. Double hostile was instigated, in this case, by Havoc, and then again by pew pew. The end result appears to be 2 1v1, one-sided hostiles, where 2 kingdoms got screwed. The only reasonable claim was that Havoc was "target shared" and lost gc, even though they admittedly ALSO lost gc to their ally which assisted Sanc vs AMA conflict. Since they are relatively similar amounts of GC losses reported, I'd say this is a bit of a washout (imo).

The reality is, there will be no reprimand from a situation like this. So public opinion does not matter and this entire post was a waste of time, as was the ~30+ pages of this thread.


Edited a few things after (rightfully) being accused of some biased incidents above. The intent was to not be biased. Altered the intended area's.

[KuhaN]

So public opinion does not matter and this entire post was a waste of time

Well, at least you acknowledge that your essay was a waste of time, so not saD.

as was the ~30+ pages of this thread.

saD.

[Elldallan]

Ezzerland minor comment, MA claims sancts stealing happened before Havoc's notice.
Also dorje(the thief who did the stealing between Sanct and Havoc) claims that the 28M Havocs bank reported lost that hc wasn't all from him but that he "only" did 10 ops. But yes I would not trust his word considering he(or if it was ASF, I'm unsure) claimed that it was an unnamed sanct prov who did it without permission(hard to see how a leader can do anything and not have permission from himself). I think it's safe to assume that if sanct leader did stealing on havoc bank it's safe to assume that there will have been more stealing than that which was detected and spread to everyone.

Sanct obviously did the stealing because they knew MA would react as it did and because Abs realized that there was no way Havoc could win in a fair fight since Sanct got completely farmed out despite having the strongest war setup in Abs. So they decided to intervene and double hostile MA on a bull**** reason and it's safe to assume that had pewpew not intervened the double hostile would still be going on. I don't know how much of a chance MA still has to crown but it's safe to say it's worse than it would have been without sanct interfering and better than it would have been if pewpew had not stepped in to help.

[Ezzerland]

Ezzerland minor comment, MA claims sancts stealing happened before Havoc's notice.

This is false. AMA claims they cannot tell which came first because they happened on the same hour. Since Havoc warned AMA that they were going to notice, I posted it in the relevant order.

Also dorje(the thief who did the stealing between Sanct and Havoc) claims that the 28M Havocs bank reported lost that hc wasn't all from him but that he "only" did 10 ops. But yes I would not trust his word considering he(or if it was ASF, I'm unsure) claimed that it was an unnamed sanct prov who did it without permission(hard to see how a leader can do anything and not have permission from himself). I think it's safe to assume that if sanct leader did stealing on havoc bank it's safe to assume that there will have been more stealing than that which was detected and spread to everyone.

I trust dorje's word because he has a history of deserved respect. The event would not even be known if not for the admission from abs, so any non-abs can frankly piss off about the minor detail, as they would not have the integrity to admit the same. In both cases, trust is not relevant. The intra-alliance stealing was admitted, but only happened after the CF was broken upon request. The amount also does not matter. What does matter is that it affected this situation, and is factually presented by both sides.

Sanct obviously did the stealing because they knew MA would react as it did and because Abs realized that there was no way Havoc could win in a fair fight since Sanct got completely farmed out despite having the strongest war setup in Abs. So they decided to intervene and double hostile MA on a bull**** reason and it's safe to assume that had pewpew not intervened the double hostile would still be going on. I don't know how much of a chance MA still has to crown but it's safe to say it's worse than it would have been without sanct interfering and better than it would have been if pewpew had not stepped in to help.

I will not post based on assumptions. In every case you have the potential to be wrong. Therefore, it is not a fact. I am interested only in clarifying facts. Not some garbage propaganda. If I will stand up publicly to try and present a non-biased view knowing I have far more friends in abs than outside abs, what on earth makes you think I'd spread your faulted opinion?

[AquaSeaFoam]

Ezzerland,

You're obviously very biased in this situation and it's a pretty poor attempt at hiding it to try and claim that a very biased post is unbiased. Here are a few corrections of some of the inaccuracies and flaws and biases out of the numerous corrections that could be made.

Sanc claims fort is bugged and they got screwed because they under trained

Why act like this is some ridiculous made up claim? You could instead state this as, "Fort did not provide the protection from op success that was advertised in the previous changes and in the guide and Sanc did not know about this bug while Elit did. Sanctuary relied on Fort for success protection and intended to train up thieves later and got all their gc stocks robbed since Elit was aware of this bug and planned to rob through the double fortified. Sanc then pointed out the bug to Bishop and suggested it be fixed. It was decided that it would be easier to change the guide than recode the game mid age and so the guide was changed."

MA asks Sanc to prove they have in game cf's with other abs allies and are not gc farming after it's rumored there are abs banks with tons of gc and 0 thieves. Havoc breaks cf with sanc to prove this. Sanc steals a minimum (admitted) near 30 mil gc from havoc. Sanc and Havoc re-cf

Couple of abs kds get taunts about their 0 thief banks with gazillions of gc

First, you mention things out of order and "forget" to mention the actions of Elit. You left out the part about Elit personally target sharing Havocs 0 thief banks in the forum while throwing around his wrong accusations leading to Havoc's banks getting heavily robbed from those reading these popular threads (many of those paying close interest happen to be anti-abs.) Yes, after Elit repeatedly making false accusations publicly about Sanc, and MA requesting Havoc drop cf to prove that it was in place, one Sanc player did rob one Havoc player. The sanc player got about 25M gold and the Havoc player lost about 28M. Havoc was upset about this as were others in Sanc and Abs when they heard about this and this players robbing was made public by Havoc nearly immediately. The robbing wouldn't have happened without the repeated false accusations from Elit causing the cf drop as proof combined with the Sanc player being upset about the false accusations and making a stupid move in response that was widely condemned within his own kingdom, Havoc, and Absalom as a whole.

That robbing was minor in comparison to the success Elit had through fortified and also relatively insignificant when you consider other unmentioned things like lone players like "Elf" and "Meow" that focused ops on Sanc leading up to the hostile and during it. Meow alone robbed more from Sanc than the sanc player took from Havoc.

There was still no actual diplomacy between either kd up to this point (this was complained about later, so mentioning again now)

This seems to depend on your perspective. What is actual diplomacy? Some might consider asking for a cf and getting told, or only for 30k+ free acres, or flatly no, not without war as diplomacy attempts that were shot down. You apparently do not consider refused diplomacy attempts as actual diplomacy, but it's still misleading to act like there was nothing.

To this point there is STILL no attempt from sanc to negotiate a CF with MA, not even publicly in the forums.
Dragons and hits are exchanged between both kingdoms.
MA states they will re-cf sanc AND agree to war Havoc if Havoc will reinstate CF for 1 week time to recoup the damage from Sanc.
Havoc refuses to re-cf MA, citing having been "target shared" when it was requested to prove they were not inter-alliance farming.
Sanc does not respond at all regarding CF offer.

More biased slants here. Sanc was willing to cf and Elit was aware of this. Havoc was not willing to cf. You also forget to mention that PewPew was also not willing to cf sanc. Sanc tried to cf them directly and it was also asked of Elit to broker this cf as part of a deal but he refused. And yes, it is arguable both ways if Elit would have waved sanc had Sanc not robbed them. Certainly it was a good excuse to wave them either way. However, as a monarch in a situation like Elits, would it not be obvious that the smart move would be to CF sanc after the war? The only smart game reason not to in that situation is if you want to wave hem as a way to buy time and try and force a notice reset with havoc. Elit initially claimed that his deal with Havoc entitled him to one although he later realized he was mistaken. He managed to pull off an impressive wave on Sanc nearly immediately after being robbed. There was no need to think about it or prepare. I suggest that the reason he didn't cf sanc and didn't need to think twice about waving them after being noticed by Havoc is pretty obviously because that was his plan all along. Regardless, yes, sanc robbing them (due to expecting Elit planned to wave them) was a good excuse and looks nice posting over and over in the forums.

Sanc + MA hit fort
Sanc sends an in-game CF without terms
Havoc waves MA claiming Hostile with sanc is void (despite no resolve to the conflict)
Sanc claims no hostility with MA (despite no resolve to the conflict) to justify Havoc double hostiling.
Pew Pew waves Sanc
I will personally cite that Sanc claimed to no longer be hostile with MA (Again, despite no resolve to conflict).

You could also say this as, "After Elit waving a kingdom 60% their size as a means to escape the one 90% of their size that noticed them, Sanc tried to CF them. Elit refused and said he'd stay hostile with them until the age ends or the meters max and they get war or until Sanc gives them 30k acres and havoc gives them a 1 week cf deal. Despite PewPew again reiterating that they wanted to vulture sanc as soon as the hostile was done and wouldn't cf either, Sanc was willing to straight CF Elit but Elit refused. Sanc offered ingame cf anyway and Havoc waved after no hits were exchanged for 12h with Sanc sitting in fort." One must question where the line is drawn on such notice/fight dodging. If there is a kingdom your size that you don't want to fight, what is the proper way to avoid them? Is waving a kingdom 60% of your size and saying you'll never cf them unless you get a longer cf with the kingdom you're afraid of a good way? Is waving the smallest ghetto on the server and again saying you'll never cf them even as they cower in fort and offer ingame cf a good way to avoid another hostile? Where is the line? I've always just fought the kingdom that was after me and not tried to run through waving another kingdom. Others play differently but where is the line on "acceptable hostile dodging" vs "unacceptable hostile dodging?"

ASF makes the claim that the hostile with MA and Sanc is one-sided, therefore pew pew is more wrong. I would like to note that Sanc is the one claiming they are not in a hostile.

Sanc was offering cf to Elit and trying to end the fight and sitting in fortified with no hits for 12h. Elit therefore had no need to fear being "doubled" since he could cf sanc at any time. He did have his "out of war range hostile" interupted though by havoc and he did get vultured. But he was never under threat of being "doubled" unless he choose himself to be since he could cf sanc at any time. Sanc on the other hadn could not get a cf with either elit or with pew pew despite trying with both. They were at real risk of being doubled since they couldn't get a cf with either. They were not doubled though since Elit chose to fight havoc when they waved and Sanc has not complaiend abotu being doubled and my comment were only made to point out how sanc was in the same situation as elit all along. Also don't forget, it was Elit that waved sanc after the notices were given creating that hostile and then refusing to end it and stating he'd never cf so havoc could never fight him.

ASF asks 'Why cant AMA CF sanc and fight someone closer to their size?' -- I'd like to ask, why did sanc feel the need to entice a kingdom they just warred and lost to? Why can't sanc CF AMA and rob/notice/fight someone in their range?

Again, it was pretty clear that AMA planned to wave Sanc all along if they got notice from Havoc and sanc felt it better to take some gc from a kd running 0 thief cows (that earlier target shared other 0 thief cows). I guess they figured if Elit was going to wave them to dodge Havoc, it's better to take the money before they use it all. I'm not saying this was smart of Sanc as it made it easy for elit to give a reason for waving them after a few provinces stole some gc, but if you're going to get waved, and the kingdom about to wave you has gc sitting around, do you wait for them to use it and wave, or just rob it first?

ASF claims Sanc robbed AMA per-emptively under the assumption that AMA was intending to wave Sanc. So why all the shock and horror when AMA waves Sanc after getting robbed?

There wasn't any. The shock and horror came from Elit when he was mad that he couldn't use waving Sanc to secure a 1 week cf extension with Havoc. I was jsut responding to that "shock and horror".

There were multiple claims that AMA could have CF'd Sanc prior to AMA getting robbed. Could Sanc not of also approached about a CF knowing that their ally was going to be noticing AMA?

Sanc made it known to elit many times that they were interested in cf's. Every time Elit came back with what Sanc considered were ridiculous demands like giving up 30k free acres and also getting elit new deals with other kingdoms.

My only point with the above comments is that all of them made from abs toward AMA are one sided 'position' statements. There are two sides here. Both sides made mistakes, so your position statements are void. Double hostile was instigated, in this case, by Havoc.

I agree there are two sides and I'm not trying to say my side is "right", but I also don't think havoc is any more "wrong" than pew pew and I think Elit played poorly trying to dodge havoc. Yes havoc was "vulturing" Elit after their war, but Elit also vultured Rage after our Beastblood war earlier this age so again, I don't think either is more wrong there, it's just Utopia. I am just providing obvious biased rebuttals to your obviously biased statements here, but I do think that people like yourself tend to be blinded by the tag and have double standards of what is ok for others to do to a kingdom in Absalom vs what a kingdom in Absalom is allowed to do to another.

[Soul_Hunter]

good post Ezzerland :)! Sad thing is, even if we pull that crappy situation with Havoc now, I am 101% sure HoH will come knocking on our doors :)

[Humanoize]

no they are playing with us :D

[Agrippa]

as always ASF doesn't let facts get in the way of a good propaganda campaign

[Soul_Hunter]

to ASF. Yes man Absalom are victims here, NOT a single wrong thing has been done by them, only other kds did despicable things to you... And please don't try to use that "there were no attacks for 12 hours = no hostile". Of course there were not attacks cause all armies were out for 13+ hours. Omg what an excuse.

[AquaSeaFoam]

Did you even read what I said or was it TLDR?

[Elit]

AquaSeaFoam, sanctuary didunt contact us or offer any deal from few weeks. Ingame propose cf is not deal. About 12h no hits, our attack time is 13h. stop talk nonsenses. 2 ABS kds teamed up vs us and we got double hostile. they will get same in return incoming ages.

[Avalanche]

lol at ASF. Impressive. *applauds*
You should be in local politics of some lower socio-economic, under-educated town where people might actually buy your BS.

Ezzerland's post was a pretty objective summary of events.

Abs realised their crap human setup is crap. And there was no way any of them were gonna crown in 1v1 fights vs AMA, hence cheap play

[Ezzerland]

I'll say only the following:
a) My post was based on what information was made available to the public. Therefore, if any of my information is wrong, you have yourselves to blame (yourselves being both sides). This was stated IN my post.
b) I clearly posted, and I quote myself:

The above 'facts' are what has been publicly presented taking both sides into account. Please feel free to review and question them if your side feels I have misspoken or forgotten 'facts'.

This is completely ignored. Notice the context of the term facts. I state them as 'facts' meaning that they are only the accurate summation of what is visible, and not necessarily reality.
c) Pew pew doubled just the same as Havoc did. There is no better/worse. There is only the order of which they came.