.com.unity Forums

.com.unity Forums (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/index.php)
-   Multiplayer and AARs (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/forumdisplay.php?f=145)
-   -   Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (running) (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/showthread.php?t=41895)

Incabulos April 18th, 2009 05:44 PM

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (running)
 
In my book you are both forked tongued snakes and deserve whatever you wrought upon each other...


Messages from Caelum (to me as Pangaea)

Quote:

So you know - Zeldor and I -did- sign NAP, in direct violation of the word of your agreement.

I wish to secure full military alliance with Pangaea, dependent upon clear access into their interior, meaning that you would get the southern entrance, and I would take the northern.

Upon their eventual defeat, it would make sense for each party to claim 1 capital within TC's current borders. I would leave it to you to take first pick, and Caelum will take the other.

Let me know as soon as you can, so I can defuse my current situation with C'tis - TC is a far bigger threat.

Quote:

Unfortunately for the conniving Prime Minister of TC, he has grossly violated our own agreement, and thus needs no warning.

We do however need probably at least 2 turns to negotiate peace with C'tis - they do not seem to like to visit the forums, making communication excruciatingly slow. I did just devastate their first army last turn with minimal losses, and the Caelian war machine is in full swing, and ready to shame and abuse the misguided forces of TC - so as soon as we can, we will come on wings of freezing death for our treacherous foe.

Oh, and we forgive you for that early grab, it was bold and daring, and those are admirable traits indeed.

BTW- are you in need of any forgings? We'd be happy to trade a pair of Frost Brands for a Thistle Mace, for starters. Also, we could possibly be convinced to supply you with a Staff of Storms to shut down TC's archer-centric tactics, though that would work best if you could supply the Air gems for it, as our income will ultimately never be enough to satisfy our own rapacious demand for Air.
Quote:

I like your thinking here. I've been putting off submitting, hoping and praying that C'tis will actually check his PMs first - so I'm not sure what I can afford to send there this turn - however, I should have no problem claiming it, with a sufficient force to hold it against anything he could scrounge up to throw into it this turn.

If there is a good 5N site there, we will be overjoyed. In fact, perhaps we will send you the aforementioned Frost Brands as a token of friendship between our peoples, as that income will more than see to our minimal Nature needs.

Ahhh, that brings something else to mind - perhaps you can forge us some Earth Boots? We would value those quite highly, and welcome any request you might make of us in exchange.
The reults... you took TC territories captured by me at no cost to you, for nothing in return and never did attack TC.

Double talk and double dealing and taking advantage of trust/naivetee... Pot meet Kettle.

Glass houses and stones and all that....

JimMorrison April 18th, 2009 08:24 PM

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (running)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Incabulos (Post 686603)
The reults... you took TC territories captured by me at no cost to you, for nothing in return and never did attack TC.

Double talk and double dealing and taking advantage of trust/naivetee... Pot meet Kettle.

Glass houses and stones and all that....


I am pretty sure that I directly implied to you that an actual declaration of war was contingent on pacifying C'tis, something that Zeldor insured was impossible. Multiple times I told him to name his price, giving an open ended offer, and yet he ignored that, so what could I do, attack TC with split forces, not sure of success against either foe? When C'tis made it apparent that he would not accept peace, I finally relented and began to fight him directly - it was all I could do.

Did I take advantage of you, Incabulos? I offered to make gear for your Gorgon. I did want to trade, but I also told you I had plenty of Water, and there were a few useful things I could just send you, if you liked.

Did I intend to attack Zeldor? Certainly, only a fool would not. I grit my teeth as he committed gross acts of war in violation of our NAP, and said nothing. The province in question means little. As far as relations between TC and Caelum go, we took it from a third party, placed minimal PD, and offered no real resistance when TC came to reclaim it. Zeldor then directly violated the NAP again, by attacking a Caelian province that was neutral at the time of NAP, and had never been discussed.

Incabulos April 18th, 2009 09:28 PM

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (running)
 
Well I walked away with the impression Caelum used me to grab some free provinces while maintaining their NAP with TC. Communication did seem to get strangely quiet and since you didn't ever say "I couln't get peace with Cti's so you are on your own..." I just assumed the worst, which is of course partly my fault for not asking.

But I also see it is part of the game which is why I use the nation titles instead of the player's behind them.

I am just stoking the fire since I am finished :D fleas in ears and all that :angel: .

JimMorrison April 18th, 2009 10:12 PM

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (running)
 
Well to be fair, it was 1 province, that would have been of direct strategic importance, and that you didn't imagine you'd hold for more than another turn or two anyways. ;)

Honestly, it took so long to wring a final answer out of C'tis (final, meaning a couple of turns of silence, I had to assume he was just ignoring me), that Pan was already half dead. It was about the same turn (can't remember for sure) that I saw TC had airdropped several thugs on you, and I first noticed that someone had finished clearing you out of the caves. Regrettably, that war was all but over, and Caelum was not going to have the chance to contribute to it.

Full disclosure, of the outcomes including going straight to war with TC, or going straight to war with C'tis, or going to war with C'tis and having a buzzard come to pluck my juicy eyes out - I most wanted the first, thought I was stuck with the second, but ended up getting the third. :p

Incabulos April 18th, 2009 10:16 PM

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (running)
 
Yes I was truly outclassed hehe. But each defeat brings me a little more experience.

Zeldor April 19th, 2009 04:20 AM

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (running)
 
Didn't you say that C'tis is no match for you and killing him will take just a while? :) Most of your armies were sitting next to me all the time, later in the port city too, without any movement or real attacks on C'tis. You were wasting your armies :)

And well, you decided to take 2 provinces of mine with semi-smart idea to not break NAP in that way. But I think that you should rethinkg that plan for future games. You won't convince anyone that it's not breaking NAP :) You either wanted to attack me directly [but why didn't you really? I had no armies nearby, and was surprised by Pan attack] or tried to get me to attack you and try to blame me for breaking the NAP [which wouldn't be true].

Did you expect me to live that matter like that? You kept my provs for a long time, sucking gem income from them, without saying sorry or offering to repay that gems, so we could live in peace. It was you who wanted war, so you should have been prepared for it.

JimMorrison April 19th, 2009 05:34 AM

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (running)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Zeldor (Post 686663)
Didn't you say that C'tis is no match for you and killing him will take just a while? :) Most of your armies were sitting next to me all the time, later in the port city too, without any movement or real attacks on C'tis. You were wasting your armies :)

The "army" sitting at the port city? 80 or so troops with a small handful of mages is a garrison, not an army. It was originally waiting to see what you were doing, before the attrition of war with C'tis made it essentially unthinkable that Caelum could handle both fronts at all. After a couple of Leprosy castings on that province, they weren't worth much anyways. As far as C'tis is concerned, I didn't realize at first that Leprosy was lowered to 5D gems in this incarnation of CBM. This has allowed a never-ending torrent of disease pouring down on my troops in and out of the Miasma. The entire was has been excurciatingly painful, due to these things - and the incredible rate that C'tis is producing Sirrush. He either has a really nice Conj site hidden somewhere, or someone is feeding him Pearls.


Quote:

Originally Posted by Zeldor (Post 686663)
And well, you decided to take 2 provinces of mine with semi-smart idea to not break NAP in that way. But I think that you should rethinkg that plan for future games. You won't convince anyone that it's not breaking NAP :)

I took 1 province from Pangaea. I made no attempts to repel your attackers. Most reasonable people would consider that a mistake at best, not a violation of NAP. The other province was independent, and was never mentioned in our messages - you simply decided you wanted it, and claimed it after I defeated the garrison. Something I allowed at the time, because I've seen what it's like to try to negotiate with you when you think (or know) you have the upper hand - it's like talking to a brick wall.


Quote:

Originally Posted by Zeldor (Post 686663)
Did you expect me to live that matter like that? You kept my provs for a long time, sucking gem income from them, without saying sorry or offering to repay that gems, so we could live in peace. It was you who wanted war, so you should have been prepared for it.

I kept the -one- province for as long as it took you to send a force capable of breaking 10 Caelum PD, which I had installed before you messaged me.

I just think that if YOU wanted war, you could have been something less of a coward about it, and at least given proper NAP cancellation. I'm sorry that you're afraid to ever engage in a conflict that could possibly slow you down or set you back in the slightest bit. While you were walking totally unhindered through all of the cave garrisons, some of us were fighting in Miasma with 9HP troops.....

archaeolept April 21st, 2009 10:25 AM

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (running)
 
MA Caelum did go AI, further making this game a pile of s***. I vote for starting a new game - I know, when I had been down to 8 troops and managed to finally have my crippled nation to break siege, Zeldor expended a fair degree of work to find a sub willing to fight to keep me down. Strangely, he does not seem to have found anyone to take Caelum's position. As such, this game demonstrates nothing like an adequate degree of fairness.

There is no way that I personally would count a game win in such a situation as valid.


sorry zeldor. It was a fairly cool idea for a game, and an interesting map, but I would think of it as a beta test.

oh, for anyone interested, midgard lost an earth king and a king of elemental fire this turn :)

DonCorazon April 21st, 2009 10:45 AM

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (running)
 
I'd like to move on honestly - happy to concede to whoever. Each turn of this game is more painful than the last. Its my own fault for jumping in without checking the settings when Zeldor said he needed someone for LA Pyth on IRC but I had no idea about all these special sites etc til I started getting hit with Troll Kings and Aesimir (sp?).

So if it balances things out, I am happy to go AI :) or find a sub or admit defeat.

Dragar April 21st, 2009 10:47 AM

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (running)
 
grr... accidental stale, was sure I'd sent it in. Anyways, no big loss, I'm about to die anyways.

This game was a nice idea but I have to say I don't think the map is conducive to a good game, way too much isolation, and map knowledge a definite advantage


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:10 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1999 - 2025, Shrapnel Games, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.