FS vs ED: FS brings in out of hostile help?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by silverfox

Sorry Nesta but right now you're coming over as either naive at best or fairly clueless at worst.

You've said that you didn't know the situation and had to ask about it while in a hurry, but by that point you'd already managed to either have decided off your own back that ED was "powerplaying" FS or you'd been asked by a 3rd party (FS/BB/??) to help and based on what you knew of the situation (sounds very little) then decided that request was valid.

.........................

To me it sounds like you're trying to implicate Pyro as being at fault and you made that call to go after ED. However your lack of knowledge around the situation and needing to ask questions about what was going on, combined with the way the convos are worded makes it very much seem like this wasn't just Pyro noticing something happened and making a move to stop it. Rather now it looks like you're trying to take blame and cover tracks (maybe that's not true but that's how I personally read it and I have no vested interest in trying to make any parties look worse than others).

---

I did not claim to know nothing before waving. Where'd you get that from? If by lacking "full facts and knowledge" you are referring to lack of full knowledge of happenings prior to this age, then perhaps I'm guilty.

I was aware what the CF offer was on the table, and that was crucial towards affecting the decision, since I've stated I felt it was a very unreasonable offer and I myself have just been recipient of a very unfair offer (in my opinion).

Then I was presented another opinion/perspective while talking to Parth, to which I asked for quick clarifications whether my interpretations were mistaken, without having to scroll back pages on a phone while waiting to board a plane. I even showed parth and dUK my check-in luggage and boarding pass if you're nitpicking for consistency.

I'm sorry my English standard isnt quite up to par to be able to gather those inferences you've made by reading between the lines of diplo and piecing contextual information together, because I'm still not seeing them after having read what I've posted a second and then third time. I can't see what I have contradicted myself with, nor can I see an attempt to hide anything nor direct blame to one party (in this case you're claiming I'm directing blame to myself, or did I misread/misunderstand again. lol?).

Everything seems pretty consistent as far as I'm concerned.

So everyone's allowed to wave into hostiles as long as there's a deal on the table and you think it's unreasonable.

Got it.

^

I just needed to know the definition we we're now going with moving forward

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Palem

So everyone's allowed to wave into hostiles as long as there's a deal on the table and you think it's unreasonable.

Got it.

---

Not everyone, only the one alliance that really exists in the game has that right. Also, hostilities includes into active wars.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 13nesta13

I did not claim to know nothing before waving. Where'd you get that from? If by lacking "full facts and knowledge" you are referring to lack of full knowledge of happenings prior to this age, then perhaps I'm guilty.

I was aware what the CF offer was on the table, and that was crucial towards affecting the decision, since I've stated I felt it was a very unreasonable offer and I myself have just been recipient of a very unfair offer (in my opinion).

---

So you were aware that FS was being offered an EOACF for free, and that was a crucial piece of why you decided to double?

Go on.

We don't need definitions, and I'm hardly in a position of power. Definitions are nice and moral players will do nice things anyway. Laws are for the....

Exactly. Those with no compass. I'd never give regard of any kind to agreement made with someone who acts in ways I find offensive in gameplay. Abide no rules for them other than the mercy bestowed by your conscience.

It's why CFs need no terms, or no CFs at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StratOcastle

We don't need definitions, and I'm hardly in a position of power. Definitions are nice and moral players will do nice things anyway. Laws are for the....

Exactly. Those with no compass. I'd never give regard of any kind to agreement made with someone who acts in ways I find offensive in gameplay. Abide no rules for them other than the mercy bestowed by your conscience.

It's why CFs need no terms, or no CFs at all.

---

You couldn't be more wrong. You see, dealbreak is seen as a very serious issue and agreements are the only thing keeping people's CF in place. Without it, we could all just break CF/NAP whenever it was advantageous to do so. As part of ED leadership we could never just in-game CF FS and move on without a former agreement/deal. Doing so would've just been met with reprisal later on when it would be most advantageous for FS to do so. We needed to establish terms. By the last hours of the conflict, near the end, I had become weary of our positioning (i've seen the FS stall tactic done before) I sent Ahlene (who was being sat by Yume) an ingame msg saying we'd accept the CF after they agree to an EoACF. After all, we didn't want to keep looking over our shoulder for the remaining month of the age and by that point you could smell the BS in the air.

a few times in my n00ber years I made the mistake of not getting agreements and the exact same BS play went down. Opponent KD sends CF in game and refuses to negotiate after refusing to war. We take CF and they break it weeks later and go "serves u right for waving us!"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flogger

oops, off to work. No time for the 37th straight day of Judge QQ. Mebbe tommorr

---

Keep running. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Judge

Keep running. ;)

---

"Running" You I still want answers to the questions, why you keep dodging?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Korp

"Running" You I still want answers to the questions, why you keep dodging?

---

And your question is?

Pff, you people need to talk less and war more.

That's actually what FS should have done...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by silverfox

I'm happy to concede that FS earned what they had at the time of ED waving, it was a fairly tenuous point and one I said I didn't know the figures for, I also don't know the history of who was likely to win/lose AWAR as I didn't follow it and most of what I know has been from skimming the threads on forums.

I've also said before that ED was in a far stronger position, I feel we have a much better setup and yes we had more troops etc. but at the same time it's not like we were coming along and raze killing a KD half our size just because we could.

If your refusal to CF was to "save face" then I don't really think there's grounds to ask for help & even assuming 18 hours attack time then ED took somewhere in the order of ~18 waves last age. So yes in a random conflict I would agree that asking for a large number of free waves would be wrong, but this wasn't just a random conflict. I also don't think there were any counter offers from FS (might be wrong)?

Lets say I agree that Parth caused all of last age issues, I don't see how refusing to war and refusing to CF with terms means you're "not acting stubbon". In the end people will care about this, it's already causing huge amounts of chat over what is and isn't acceptable, especially when your alliance seems to be bringing in old "rules" about what constitutes an active hostile and I'm wondering who brought that line of thinking up to try and cover everyones backs here.

I represent it as razekill because that's what I was told, words roughly to the effect when it started that "maybe we'll raze kill more provs", now maybe that was someone who was mistaken as I had chats with quite a few different people but that's what I have to go with.

You might not have a grudge vs. ED, but that's not really how these things work. Pounding a KD for 2 weeks gloating all the way through it and making threats about future ages and then totally flipping the rules on what is acceptable game play, calling in friends then saying "well ED took land and honour from FS so you should be happy". Even still you don't directly say that you asked for the double hostile, you skirt around it in a non-committal way which is left open to interpretation.

---

I said I wont bother to reply any more but thats quality post and you actually made an effort to be objective and see fault in both sides (or at least I read it that way) so I will reply in kind.

First i wouldnt say we were gloating and making threats through it at all ?
Feel free to correct me if iam wrong but I dont think either side made a beep on forums till I said something like "hugz and kisses from FS" in your vsFree thread and whole thing erupted into one huge forum ****storm. Conflict was allrdy long finished at that point and ensuing forum drama than caused both sides to talk a lot of crap and make a lot of threats and argue about lot of facts, all with bruised egos and feeling of buthurt from both sides.

And lets not kid ourself, we BOTH did what ppl allways do when they argue on forums, even the best end most moral of us will allways put emphasis on facts that make us look right, and we did our best to devalue other sides argument ... and ofc theres allways ppl who just plain lie or are just wrong and all that crap inevitably infuriates other side and whole thing eventually just spirals out of control.

back to this age and elephant in the rook aka Pyro.

I deliberatly didnt said anything about it cause I simply dont know. Who said what on wa group and what were Pyros motives I simply dont know so I choose to not say anything about it rather than to bull**** you or make a wild guess.
Iam sure there were lot of talks about vulturing our side's KD in general after awar ended though. Pandas faced lynch on these boards cause they dared to pump during awar ... guess they needed to present themself on sacrificial altar to please righteous forum posters, Pyro got waved and pushed arround into bad deal, and knowingly or not you guys jumped on that wagon by waving FS.

I'll grant you that you had every reason to wave us despite overly strong position in comparison, you had a big score to settle from last age and out of all KD's who took advantage of this awar you had best cause ... but its also the fact you took it waaay further than anyone else and were not looking to stop either from what we saw.

I rly dont wanna take liberties in such situations to speculate on other peoples motives, they can answer those questions themself if they feel like it.

I will say WE decided to "define" hostile as it suited us, not bb, not Pyro. We did it cause we wanted way out and you didnt seem interested in giving it to us. If you look at at my posts leading to that moment in another thread I literally posted few taunting msg's asking who will farm you first and stuff like that that were targeted at ppl above you in charts planting ideas that someone should wave you asap before someone else does.

Iam not proud of what we did, and I think it was lame as **** ... but I dont think it was wrong thing to do either, lame yes ... but nothing more that that. In light of circumstances I saw it as fight fire with fire type of action.

How is that rly any worse than what you did to us last age ? Didnt you too "defined" hostile and made a one sided ruling when you decided there was no going to be war cause we didnt give you guys button for 30hs or presseed yours and whatnot ... sure you defined another aspect ... but whats the difference between what we did and stunt we pulled ?
I assure you for our side that was just as much wtf moment as this was for you.
Its pretty much same **** imo, one sided wanted end to a conflict and made some stupid excuse to allrdy vague and undefined aspect of relations not governed by game mechanics.

You talk about context a lot, but I feel you only adress Pyro side of context pov.
How about context for your payback ?
You guys keep emphasizing how we pummeled you for 2 weeks and you only wailed on us for a few days. Cant say you are wrong about that, definitelly seems theres a huge discrepency there.

But how about context ? I mean last age we both started dead even and we had to literally grind your KD down ... that was long friggin fight between equal oponents, sure it ended as one side slugfest but thats not what it was for 2 weeks. This age it was one way slaughter from the start. Dont you think that means something ?
Also didnt we straight up offered free wave this age when you waved and before we started retaling. We were open to talks too, if you asked for 2 we would give it, not sure maybe we even offered 2 during negotiations ? It was said in our chat we would give 2 waves in exchange for cf if neccesary so id expect it was offered at some point.
2 maxgain waves on no1 honor KD by no2 honor KD ... thats a pretty good compensation for botched hostile in my books, lots of gains and zero losses.

But ok ... you decided not to take it and instead to make an offer you knew we wouldnt accept and we rolled with it, fully expecting to get farmed for a while and than we CF and you move on. If it was someone else we would scream bloody murder but since it was ED and in light of last age events we decided we were due asswhoopin.

But for how long ? Cause if all you do is talk on forums about how we farmed you for 2 weeks what do you think we expect ?
When we pulled that one side CF offer stunt you had over 20k land lead and 10k honor lead on us. Despite the fact we preemptivly explored land prior to your wave (personally I had 500 acres incomin when you waved).
Thats a LOT of stuff you taken from us, not to mention you knocked out direct competition for honor w/o risk of actually warring it. Good friggin deal you had at this point. Should we really provide you with 10 more days of same thing ? Cause that was prospect we were lookin at.

I dont think we should have, I felt you were compensated very nicelly. Id say if by this time you were not willing to move along it was pretty bad diplo call by you guys that lead us to look for another way out by proclaiming we were out of conflict.

Theres another bullet point id like to make, I think you (and some others) asked earlier if this wasnt alliance action why did flogger did diplo on our behalf ?
I asked Francis same thing when I heared hes doing it, his reply was something in the lines of "what kind of agreement do you think me and Parth could ever come to". It ceretainly shut me up on the topic.

dunno ... Iam rly trying to be open and objective here. I feel both of kd's did lot of both stupid and lame things to eacother during these 2 ages.
By no means do I think it was one sided on either occasion, ie even if you guys started it last age we escalated it readily with you, and that 750 honor request was stupid thing to do ... even if it was just way to say ***** you*.

I tend to belive what Zauper says so its kinda sad to think you were discussing giving 2 waves and whatnot deeper into the hostile when all we ever wanted was one friggin free wave and not just to get told to **** off. Srsly how idiotic it is that one side was willin to give more than twice what other would be satisfied with and still no solution was found ... communication meltdown of epic proportions imo and both sides are to blame.

Dunno ... like i said earlier if we gotta hold grudge on eachother and go thru game for long time lookin to stab eachother in the back so be it. We are stubborn mf's just as you are, I am sure we will deliver on grudge performance if situation develops in that direction.
But I rly hope we can both recognize our own mistake in this whole affair, and see other sides pov enough to burry the hatchet and treat eachother like just another random kd in future encounters.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lampost

You and bomdigie are 2 sides of the same coin. Both part of a dirty alliance that finds it difficult to win 1 on 1 and has to call in allies.

---

You sir lack the intellect for argumentation or polite conversation. Your attempt to alter the meaning of what I wrote through partial quotation illustrates not only that you are crude of thought, but crude of deed.


Stay away from adult conversation.

Please don't insult users, brutishly or not.