MP Procyon - One age - Started! - Page 7

PsiSoldier · #61 March 31st, 2009, 10:10 PM

We would like to commend Arcoscephale on its casting of Gift of Natures bounty as that had been our plan to cast all along as we built up our temples. With 3 excellent globals in action the nation of Arcoscephale will likely prove to be a more challenging target than Ermor ever did. Although we have no doubt that the effectiveness of your Gift of natures bounty will be dropping fairly rapidly before long.

analytic_kernel · #62 April 1st, 2009, 06:10 PM

The proud people of Arcoscephale look forward to the challenges ahead. Far behind in provinces and thus [official] gem income due to our protracted war with Pythium, our struggle will be an uphill one. But, fight we shall.

We commend Sauromatia on their recent temple-building frenzy. The move was unexpected and only became manifestly obvious over the last few months. We will honor our NAP until its appointed end, even as we longingly finger our temple-smashing hammers.

May the true god ascend.

PsiSoldier · #63 April 1st, 2009, 09:41 PM

Yes the temple building move was both part offensive and defensive against Ermors population killing dominion. And while we could have surpassed you in research instead we thought the more subtle approach of Domination through Dominion may be more appropriate.

analytic_kernel · #64 April 4th, 2009, 10:21 AM

I'm not sure who the game admin is these days... but I am requesting that we move to 72 hour hosting intervals for this game. My RL commitments have increased recently, and I also need more time for micromanagement now that war with Sauromatia is about to bloom.

PsiSoldier · #65 April 4th, 2009, 05:32 PM

I dont know if we have an admin anymore lol.

analytic_kernel · #66 April 4th, 2009, 07:01 PM

Psi, would you be so kind as to PM Torin, and see if he will give you the game password - assuming you don't mind being the admin?

analytic_kernel · #67 April 5th, 2009, 08:56 AM

Hmmm.... Psi, you and I seem to have two different ways of counting down to the end of a NAP.

I announced the dissolution on turn 76, after you had already submitted your orders for that turn, and so I thought the counting would be 77...78...79. But, I see that I was attacked this turn (turn 79). I would've expected attack orders to be set this turn - not to be actually attacked.

PsiSoldier · #68 April 6th, 2009, 04:27 PM

Doh. Sorry about that I was thinking.. 76, 77, 78 with attack occuring on 79.

Otherwise it would seem to me more like a NAP 4

PsiSoldier · #69 April 6th, 2009, 04:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by analytic_kernel

Starting with the 79th month of these ascension wars, the non-agression pact between our nations will be considered dissolved.

The attack occurred on the 79th month.

Perhaps you can see how there may be a bit of confusion there.

analytic_kernel · #70 April 6th, 2009, 06:29 PM

No worries - I just wanted to clarify which way to count down the ends of NAPs, whether they are inclusive or exclusive of the last turn. Like I said, I would have expected the attack orders to be given starting with the 79th month. But, it seems you just launched a probing attack into one of my more worthless territories, so I'll let the issue slide. (Since we don't seem to have an admin anymore, there would've been a slim chance of getting a rollback anyway.)