Late Era - Started

[WSzaboPeter]

Kojusoki, that's wise. I will attack and take only those 2 offending territories and then if T'ien Ch'i wishes peace I will grant him peace.

[Kojusoki]

If they ARE INDEPENDENT - sure.
If something is not "not-allowed", it means that it is allowed.

[Methel]

Hmm, I think the diplomacy rules are a bit constraining, how about we use sheps rules of diplomacy instead, makes for a more interesting game imho.

Also I would considert taking a province bordering my capital a hostile move, about as hostile as when you attacked me koju

[WSzaboPeter]

Well I agreed a NON AGGRESSION pact. If I consider this as an aggression, then you violated the pact, since it was not specified what can be considered aggression.

[Jazzepi]

WSzaboPeter said:
Well I agreed a NON AGGRESSION pact. If I consider this as an aggression, then you violated the pact, since it was not specified what can be considered aggression.

Non aggression means that you don't invade each other territories. That's the only meaning to it. Otherwise I should be able to invade your fortress because it's right on my border. That's fairly aggressive, building up an army directly on an allies' border.

Jazzepi

[Methel]

Jazzepi said:


. Otherwise I should be able to invade your fortress because it's right on my border. That's fairly aggressive, building up an army directly on an allies' border.

Jazzepi

Think your kinda shooting your own cause in the foot here jazzepi


How about you strike a fair bargain, he gets the province bordering his capital and you get some compensation, either in territory or otherwise.

[Jazzepi]

My point is that "I get to arbitrarily decide what is aggressive" is ridiculous, and not the meaning of a NAP (Non-Aggression Pact). If he gets to just randomly decide that my expansion into neutral territory nearby his capital (lets make this clear, I don't even know where his capital is, I can't even see it on my map even with the conquered provinces). Then I should be able to be equally random/arbitrary in what I decide to be aggressive.

If he doesn't like what happened after he signed a pact, that's just *too bad*. This is a competitive game. I had to lose troops, and spend time/effort expanding into those territories. It's unfortunate for him that they happened to be nearby (not even adjacent) to his capital, which I can't see on the minimap. Honestly, there is plenty of territory west of me I *could* have expanded into just as easily. I simply picked east because if was a convenience to shore up my territory along a mountain range.

Now he suddenly wants a free ride into those territories just because of the fact that they're two spaces away from his capital? How many proviences are two spaces away from *my* capital? I counted, just to make my point: 15 provinces surround my capital 2 movements out. I think it's ludicrous to purport that somehow during a NAP I can lay claim to all of those territories without specifically stating it.

I would also like for Kojusoki to push back the turn hosting another 24 hours, or at least until this gets decided. I'm 99% positive if the turn hosts I'm going to come back to find the territory I had invaded.

Jazzepi

[Jazzepi]

WSzaboPeter said:
Kojusoki, that's wise. I will attack and take only those 2 offending territories and then if T'ien Ch'i wishes peace I will grant him peace.

Hey, hey. This isn't fair to me. I signed a non-aggression pact. I didn't invade *any* territories that weren't neutral. I would like to ask Kojusoki to step in and explain that WSzaboPeter isn't allowed to invade those two territories just because he thinks they're too close.

He built a fortress on my border, does that mean I can invade it because *I* think that's an aggressive move on his part?

If WSzaboPeter is allowed to flaunt the rules of the game, and attack my territories even though we have a year long NAP, you'll have to find a replacement for me because I think that's completely unfair.

Jazzepi