CR vs AMA

[Palem]

That's like saying someone who got killed by a drunk driver was the cars fault.

Really terrible analogy. It's like you're not even trying. Drunk drivers don't aim to kill people and random pedestrians don't provoke drunk drivers into hitting them.

[Nick_mi]

Ok, in palem metaphorolagy.

That's like shooting someone for saying "Hey lets fight" and blaming the gun.

[Nightmare_]

CJ/Nesta made really big mistake take part from GB. If GB was good solution on problems why last age AMA/BB/EJ accepted deal what no one from us wanted to accept?
GB only bring problems in long term.

Agreed.

Pyro only helped when they were allowed to TM into the war and gain acres. When they were told they were to Raze AMA's banks they swiftly backed out the GB.

The first statement might be true, and I will leave that to cJ/Nesta to address because it's not my business. However, this is not really relevant at this point, because that was the agreement made between Havoc and Pyros. We're not squeaky clean either, but it is already assumed that all parties are guilty of some form of wrong-doing or shady play.

Your second one is misleading. It is not because we were told to raze AMA's banks that we opted out of GB. More likely is the idea that enough is enough, and there was no longer a need to do so.

[Greaser]

this is the same bs **** play you try to impose on ghettos (guess it is all part of your fair play initiative) telling them they are unbalanced kd and you are doing them a favor take down their big provs so they can find wars... who the f*** are you to find anyone a war find yourself a F******* war you coward.. you have no idea what ghetto goal is the strat or what are playing for..

+1 (This forum really needs a +1 or "Like" ticker.)

Truer words haven't been said. This thing where CR imposes tax or dictates who people can war, why they can war and how they can war needs to stop. This is partially what started this mess. This takes power playing to a completely different level and unbalances the game. Why do you think this is even good for the game Maximouse? This makes it no fun for others no more then AMA deal breaking. You act like a dictator bullying with these types of demands.

Here's to Age 61 A Cold War Ensues!

Until CR actually has a few "real" wars against top notch waring kingdoms and a few "win" notches on their belt they cannot possibly dictate how kingdoms go about their wars. They have absolutely NO experience to justify it. Anyone can sit on their provinces fat asses all age exploring, farming ghettos and pumping science all age. That doesn't make you a good kingdom with a wealth of knowledge that demands respect. A good kingdom is defending themselves from an alliance of aggressors in back-2-back wars all age (and winning) without more then a few days to pump and STILL growing to the same size as a kingdom who sat in CF for 3/4 of the age safely whoring and pumping.

In either case no kingdom good, bad, large or small, sk or ghetto should be conducting business the way CR is with war manipulation.

[Minty]

"Why we need banks acres razed" what? What is that gonna achieve? What is your endgame here? So that AMA can't ****play someone in the last second of age and hand crown from one kd to another? You create a situation when they will do just that in the next age, and the next.

[Pendel1]

I think it is time all the razes to stop and some cf deal to be put in place, what is going on now sux and it is way over all limits of punishment. I have had business with CR leadership and I believe that they should also be punished, and not to be given a chance to win the age. Also do all kingdoms involved believe that will end this age? If you guys continue like this many people will actually quit the game after their kingdoms get bashed every age, I can name atleast 4-5 of the kingdoms that atm raze AMA that will disband after next age, cause knowing Elit and AMA this will not end. So again word of advice cf the freaking top and stop it I think AMA got punished enough.

[topsy's revenge]

The issue is that when you agree to something like a gb you aren't the one who get's to say when enough is enough, it's the other kd(in this case ama). You may have discussed a deal with them but you certainly didn't finalize it. Yesterday we discussed a deal with them that even people who are opposed to the GB thought was reasonable(wouldn't even need to raze cows). They rejected it because they demanded that Rage WD so as to give them a free WW.

[Nightmare_]

The issue is that when you agree to something like a gb you aren't the one who get's to say when enough is enough, it's the other kd(in this case ama). You may have discussed a deal with them but you certainly didn't finalize it. Yesterday we discussed a deal with them that even people who are opposed to the GB thought was reasonable(wouldn't even need to raze cows). They rejected it because they demanded that Rage WD so as to give them a free WW.

That's also true. It's pretty much catch 22, no matter how people go about it. However, it would have been preferable if all parties involved had thrown away notions of distrust. Let's say elit had, in fact, dealbroken again afterward. That would make all KDs involved justified in GBing him again, and it would've been fine. There would be no opposition to a 2nd gb because it would be his fault. I fail to understand why that wasn't realized, unless it was already understood and people just wanted to make sure they got their proper KD/province crowns and prevent AMA from having any opportunity to steal it away (which is laughable).

[Nick_mi]

Wouldn't that be considered a fake war and get thier monarch deleted and thier war wins reset like it happened to strippers a couple of ages ago?

[KuhaN]

Those people that read through entire thread and are keeping this going deserve a reward imo.

[topsy's revenge]

It was understood nightmare, and it is why cf proposals were offered. If there was 0 ability for any of us to trust elit then a cf of any kind wouldn't be offered. The problem isn't us offering cf proposals or being willing to, it's Elit being unwilling to accept them.

[Nightmare_]

It was understood nightmare, and it is why cf proposals were offered. If there was 0 ability for any of us to trust elit then a cf of any kind wouldn't be offered. The problem isn't us offering cf proposals or being willing to, it's Elit being unwilling to accept them.

Topsy, from what I've been shown, elit had already agreed to certain terms (EoA CF with all KDs, won't go for crown, etc.) before declaring war on Rage. The only thing he disagreed to was razing his banks down to 10k. Tell me, if this was understood, then why did "Fair Play" Alliance decide not to take this deal? It really was as easy as that. He's now being more stubborn because more of his provs are being razed down. The opportunity for resolution was certainly there, but it wasn't taken because of these notions of "distrust," and all for the protection of the crown or something of that sort.

[vendetta]

man, 117 pages. lots of hate in this past couple of age - and I bet you when you guys all meet in person, you'll be all laughing and getting drunk. :)

[topsy's revenge]

He wanted to be #3, with 3 of the largest banks, with about 20+k acres in whoring provs due to war, with a cf with all but legacy and any other kd he thought he could still rape in war with the guarantee that he would never raze any acres. And this of course is only if it was a deal he actually wanted and not just something he'd entertain to nesta/cj while a deal much different was being offered at the same time. 1 day later no more provs had been pk'd but he was sufficiently small where a deal was offered that would still have clauses in it to not go over a certain size but wouldn't require the razing of acres. He rejected this one because he demanded that the deal not end with a mp between rage and ama but a WW for ama. Agreeing to a deal that gives a WW to 1 kd is clearly against game rules and so his proposal was rejected.

[Nightmare_]

He wanted to be #3, with 3 of the largest banks, with about 20+k acres in whoring provs due to war, with a cf with all but legacy and any other kd he thought he could still rape in war with the guarantee that he would never raze any acres. And this of course is only if it was a deal he actually wanted and not just something he'd entertain to nesta/cj while a deal much different was being offered at the same time. 1 day later no more provs had been pk'd but he was sufficiently small where a deal was offered that would still have clauses in it to not go over a certain size but wouldn't require the razing of acres. He rejected this one because he demanded that the deal not end with a mp between rage and ama but a WW for ama. Agreeing to a deal that gives a WW to 1 kd is clearly against game rules and so his proposal was rejected.

I won't contest the rejection of the WW condition, because I wouldn't agree to it either. However, what I'm alluding to here is the proposal that was offered before the war with Rage. Even if AMA did war Legacy (which would be unlikely given Legacy vs. Pewpew was looming) and had ended up choosing acres as reward instead of honor, that would've been clear reason to raze AMA down again to appropriate size in EoWCF. That's what I'm saying. There were checks and balances in place that would ensure AMA wouldn't crown. From my perspective, the original proposal that elit agreed to before declaring Rage was reasonable, and people didn't want to take it because it would hurt their crowning chances if AMA dealbroke again.

My main motivation for even making these posts is to show that attempts at resolution were made, and opportunities to resolve this conflict were there, yet no one gives a damn and keeps parroting "oh, we tried real hard"