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

[silverfox]

I am so tired of this arguin i stoped posting, ill make one more rant, mostly cause I dont like how things between our 2 kd's have played out these last 2 ages and i would rly like to put an end to all this bs.

<cut for size>

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.

Changing the timeline puts things in a different perspective and makes it look better/worse.

The extra time wouldn't have done anything for em if it meant giving up a button. Your setup is better for a quick declare. I understand why they declined. I think 2 days with a guaranteed declare by them witthin 24h of button and no fort staring may have gotten you a war.

I didn't say honor isn't relevant, I said from whom they got it is. And it isnt :p everyone gets part of their honor in uneven fights, is it worth less?

Your key point doesn't really make a lot of sense tho. You reset a prov it has 1800 honor. Getting a knight/peasant killed actually boosts your kingdom honor.

The problem is that there was (again afaik) no counter offers. We can guess at what would have gotten a war and what each KD might have found fair, but all we know is that FS didn't offer up any alternative options.

I could bring up other very weak links to events happening around the same time, but I'm not really wanting to go into full tinfoil hat mode.

As above I'll agree that it's not very accurate to paint FS as having done no work at all for their honour, so probably doesn't have much bearing on the situation.

Pyro's was a full wave of maybe 3-4k acres!

I think Pyro took just shy of 9k acres from ED (maybe a few hundred acres +/-) since most provs had to send out a lot of elites to break elves with everything home so ended up getting hit 2-3 times.


============

Since everyone seems to be losing their s**t over things and no-one has told me to shutup so far (along with me doing best to find out what is/isn't considered info which shouldn't be public) I'm just going to YOLO:

<There's some chat where it seems Pyro tried to find out about last age and Parth gets blamed for everything, then we get:>

BB - Parth got what he deserved last age
BB - A long hostile after not accepting any kind of terms
Pyro - I have to go
BB - I did research on that situation last age before I suggested anyone do anything
BB - I found it was parths fault innitially for being too proud and it escalated from there
BB - You waste my time for 10 days or 2 weeks and I'm going to ask for something ridiculous too

Supposedly BB is a council member, names were removed but it's still in there with the part <WA name is typing a msg>.

I think the main issue here is who is enforcing what exactly? There's been an alliance war because ABS (just a random player in KD or were they leadership?) advised to raze to get a CF and then had their offers to repair the situation refused? Fast forward a few weeks and we've got someone who Pyro claims is BB council quite clearly saying they "suggested" someone does something (ie. double hostile ED for FS).

Now people are bringing in "rules" for what an active hostile is which appear to be years old, so I'm personally very confused as to what game mechanics we're all being forced to play by now and a bit perplexed at the seeming double standards/mixed messages coming from this fair play alliance?

Maybe I'm being a bit thick but the message I'm getting right now from reading this is that anytime ED doesn't want to war a KD they can sit and empty all troops and resources into them then say "oh btw we're not going to war here's a CF" and from that second the other KD [I assume regardless of when the message would be read] has 12(?) hours to lube up their rings for another KD to wave them...