Org Mobile Site
Originally Posted by Tonno:
By you not being able to say anything smart just supports everything I said. Your play was just like the famous Desly was playing in TWC.
Come on guy, I don't think there is anything wrong with the famous Desley. XDBy you not being able to say anything smart just supports everything I said. Your play was just like the famous Desly was playing in TWC.
I wish I were good at English, so I would explain you why attacking HRE is a smartest choice I have. But, my English is bad, so I would say you are fake and greedy, that's all. :P
Originally Posted by Tonno:
I could simply make deals with England and TO to destroy you, that's simple. To understand what are you thinking isn't simple.
In your message, you said that you seek to unite Scandinavia, and proposed a NAP. So somehow from that I am to understand you wanted two danish citys? lol
Later you asked for Stettin and I specially said do you seek to unite Scandinavia?, both of does times you said yes and nothing more, nothing at all. The NAP didn't came up with a condition, nothing. I would say you, at that moment, didn't know you'll had a chance in attacking me with a huge gank from other players, so you just made a deal for anything you could scrach, since you where the weakest one.
Why not ask cities from me if we are going to make deals?
France asked for a city and we made a deal, Hungary was realy clear about his moves, Venic was shady from the start, with no real message. I am not here to THINK for you guys, and I don't plan to do that.
So now you are trying to mingle your self out of a obvious cowardice and irresponsible diplomacy.
PS
I don't need stronger navy when I have players that now how to make diplo deals. Should have went with TO and England on takeing you down from the start. (angry talk from me)
That was my idea that you never knew i want those cities.I could simply make deals with England and TO to destroy you, that's simple. To understand what are you thinking isn't simple.
In your message, you said that you seek to unite Scandinavia, and proposed a NAP. So somehow from that I am to understand you wanted two danish citys? lol
Later you asked for Stettin and I specially said do you seek to unite Scandinavia?, both of does times you said yes and nothing more, nothing at all. The NAP didn't came up with a condition, nothing. I would say you, at that moment, didn't know you'll had a chance in attacking me with a huge gank from other players, so you just made a deal for anything you could scrach, since you where the weakest one.
Why not ask cities from me if we are going to make deals?
France asked for a city and we made a deal, Hungary was realy clear about his moves, Venic was shady from the start, with no real message. I am not here to THINK for you guys, and I don't plan to do that.
So now you are trying to mingle your self out of a obvious cowardice and irresponsible diplomacy.
PS
I don't need stronger navy when I have players that now how to make diplo deals. Should have went with TO and England on takeing you down from the start. (angry talk from me)
And if i asked for those regions you could ve made deals to destroy me so i didnt risk it.
Look, i dont even have to explain myself, we ll see if i made the right move here. Now it seems i do but you ll never know.
War has been declared to Egypt!.
Due to divergences about the destiny of some Greek settlement as also the lack of help in supporting the Moors as promised by the Fatimid's Caliph, the relations between the Turks and the Mamluks quickly deteriorated.
The Caliph so started to change his plans to invade Greece with his 3 stacks, and instead intended to attack the Sultanate.
We couldn't let him have the chance of attacking first, and so we broke the NAP, to save our kingdom.
Rhodes and Acre have been captured. This is not a war of expansion, and the Sultan plans to replace the Fatimids with another dynasty.
https://www.mediafire.com/?ss17d0shh607axo
SS asap.
@dur3x : pictures added
Due to divergences about the destiny of some Greek settlement as also the lack of help in supporting the Moors as promised by the Fatimid's Caliph, the relations between the Turks and the Mamluks quickly deteriorated.
The Caliph so started to change his plans to invade Greece with his 3 stacks, and instead intended to attack the Sultanate.
We couldn't let him have the chance of attacking first, and so we broke the NAP, to save our kingdom.
Rhodes and Acre have been captured. This is not a war of expansion, and the Sultan plans to replace the Fatimids with another dynasty.
https://www.mediafire.com/?ss17d0shh607axo
SS asap.
@dur3x : pictures added
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
O dude I needed that Muslim army :/
PS
Don't forget to blacklist your self.
PS
Don't forget to blacklist your self.
The Venetian Doge is so glad about this, he would like to give the Turkish Sultan some tributes. 
Originally Posted by sonnet:
War has been declared to Egypt!.
Due to divergences about the destiny of some Greek settlement as also the lack of help in supporting the Moors as promised by the Fatimid's Caliph, the relations between the Turks and the Mamluks quickly deteriorated.
The Caliph so started to change his plans to invade Greece with his 3 stacks, and instead intended to attack the Sultanate.
We couldn't let him have the chance of attacking first, and so we broke the NAP, to save our kingdom.
Rhodes and Acre have been captured. This is not a war of expansion, and the Sultan plans to replace the Fatimids with another dynasty.
https://www.mediafire.com/?ss17d0shh607axo
SS asap.
@dur3x : pictures added
War has been declared to Egypt!.
Due to divergences about the destiny of some Greek settlement as also the lack of help in supporting the Moors as promised by the Fatimid's Caliph, the relations between the Turks and the Mamluks quickly deteriorated.
The Caliph so started to change his plans to invade Greece with his 3 stacks, and instead intended to attack the Sultanate.
We couldn't let him have the chance of attacking first, and so we broke the NAP, to save our kingdom.
Rhodes and Acre have been captured. This is not a war of expansion, and the Sultan plans to replace the Fatimids with another dynasty.
https://www.mediafire.com/?ss17d0shh607axo
SS asap.
@dur3x : pictures added
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
You are a just a liar, We didn't intend to attack you, we spoke after my turn so you are just a
with eyes because I didn't want to attack Castile and your job with Moors against Castile was terrible, you want to save them now, but they won't be saved and will be destroyed like me. You always want to command other players by your rules, to be the king of HS. You demonstrate today about your honestly and your personal character. I will never do what you say, never. And now other factoins are looking and waiting for Turks to destroy me and then to be commanded by the Mighty Sultan, lol.what?
PS
A quick question. I've been playing this crusader kings game, to short up the story, I got the Byz crown and then I got the Constantinople county. It says that the vanguard, unit you can build in some mods of MTW2, are Norse people?
Is that historically accurate?
PS
A quick question. I've been playing this crusader kings game, to short up the story, I got the Byz crown and then I got the Constantinople county. It says that the vanguard, unit you can build in some mods of MTW2, are Norse people?
Is that historically accurate?
Originally Posted by dur3x:
You are a just a liar, We didn't intend to attack you, we spoke after my turn so you are just a shit with eyes because I didn't want to attack Castile and your job with Moors against Castile was terrible, you want to save them now, but they won't be saved and will be destroyed like me. You always want to command other players by your rules, to be the king of HS. You demonstrate today about your honestly and your personal character. I will never do what you say, never. And now other factoins are looking and waiting for Turks to destroy me and then to be commanded by the Mighty Sultan, lol.
Give up already? Poor Sultan. You are a just a liar, We didn't intend to attack you, we spoke after my turn so you are just a shit with eyes because I didn't want to attack Castile and your job with Moors against Castile was terrible, you want to save them now, but they won't be saved and will be destroyed like me. You always want to command other players by your rules, to be the king of HS. You demonstrate today about your honestly and your personal character. I will never do what you say, never. And now other factoins are looking and waiting for Turks to destroy me and then to be commanded by the Mighty Sultan, lol.
You're always welcome in Venice. When you lost your homeland, don't forget there is a slummy place in Venice for you Sultan.
Originally Posted by dur3x:
You are a just a liar, We didn't intend to attack you, we spoke after my turn so you are just a shit with eyes because I didn't want to attack Castile and your job with Moors against Castile was terrible, you want to save them now, but they won't be saved and will be destroyed like me. You always want to command other players by your rules, to be the king of HS. You demonstrate today about your honestly and your personal character. I will never do what you say, never. And now other factoins are looking and waiting for Turks to destroy me and then to be commanded by the Mighty Sultan, lol.
I will answer once, and that's all I have to say in the matter.You are a just a liar, We didn't intend to attack you, we spoke after my turn so you are just a shit with eyes because I didn't want to attack Castile and your job with Moors against Castile was terrible, you want to save them now, but they won't be saved and will be destroyed like me. You always want to command other players by your rules, to be the king of HS. You demonstrate today about your honestly and your personal character. I will never do what you say, never. And now other factoins are looking and waiting for Turks to destroy me and then to be commanded by the Mighty Sultan, lol.
At the start of the campaign, you were the one asking me about my intentions with the Moors. You said you wanted to help them.
And I replied to you that I didn't care, as they could do well by themselves and the situation was balanced enough. Fact is, as later it was revealed, that you never really intended to help the Moors. Actually you were working in the back with Castille, telling him what I was telling you .
Since you're talking about lies.. you should tell the truth.
I don't care who you ally with, but if you tells me one thing, and do another, and if you tells to my enemy what I'm telling you, you should understand that my trust towards you will dramatically decrease
And being neighbors, I need to trust you 100% (something I was willing to give you at the start of the campaign, and ironically I was giving you 100% trust even if I didn't know you, although from your post you think you know me well even if we didn't ever play together..?
). And In the first 3 turns I disbanded many units (including the jihad armies, the upkeep cost of my armies went down by 75%, yes you it got it righ! I had as this turn started only 25% of the upkeep cost I would have had when I started including my jihad armies).
So obviously I trusted you so much that I demilitarized completely. And the main forces left were in Mosul and Constantinople (they were already there and since I thought I'd be at peace with everyone I didn't find necessary to move them) far from you regions.
After Castille attacked the Moors, you started twisting your own words, basically revealing your true intentions: you never intended to help the Moors, you just wanted to take advantage of the war between Moors and Castille to capture the Greek and Italian settlements, knowing that you'd be safe in any case: if Castille wins, you had already your secret alliance with him. If Moors win, you're safe either way as you pretended to help him. And that's fine, as long as you were honest from the start.(or at least keep your mouth shut)
But again, if you start making false claims and playing the double-agent trick, there are risks involved with it. And those risks bring consequences. Other players are not stupid and thinking they would not see through your intentions revealed to be your worst mistake.
So, then as you backed off from your (and twisting them) own words about helping the Moors, manipulating the meaning of what you said.
I backed from mine (although I didn't say it clearly , I implied I wouldn't capture any Greek settlement, and indeed I had no such intention until you started lying to me) to not interfere in Greece. All in all I never said I wouldn't capture the Greek settlements. I told you you can expand as much as you like there..and when I did the same trick you used against me, then suddenly this trick was not nice..and you didn't like it at all.
You didn't like it so much that you heavily offended me (I won't repeat the word here). So forgive me if I didn't trust you will respect the NAP after you get so much angered in your last pm's and insulted me.
So on this turn, I had 2 choices: being nice and trustworthy in other player's chivalry like I have been when subbing the Moors (it was not true I put a siege weapon in sight of Toledo, the siege weapon was all there, and in 20 minutes I had to make the diplomacy Ebs didn't make, leaving to me to decide everything. As such I made movements to capture Silves -imagin moving a stack in a single ship..yeah that's really a move someone willing to wage war would do, offering peace trusting Yuonyuon won't take advantage of what happened to Ebs and accept the nap. You mocked that..but now that a similar situation -being attacked without expecting it or being prepared for it..- happened to you,you're not laughing anymore and you don't mock yourself like you mocked me for being naive..don't you?) revealed to be indeed to be a poor choice.
And if I had trusted you to not attack me (after you get angered in your posts and insulted me, it didn't seem that likely that you'd remain peaceful considering that you had more and less widespread armies than me, and that if I let you the initiative I'd be in a situation 10 times worse than you're now), I'd be the one dead now and you'd be mocking me for being naive..dictating worse terms then the ones I gave to you,bragging all around about which good player you are saying some sentences like "no mercy to the weak" and so on.
About doing what I tell you to do: I offered you deals. That's it. Funny how, you didn't get shocked by it when the same was done by you buddy the Castillian King Yuonyuon. Now you're seeing the other side of the medal: and as you see, it's not that fun when you're on the other side of it. And that's why I won't mock you for your naivety or mistakes like you did. Now you can keep being angered or being honest with yourself and see that you played your part in what happened to you.
And one last thing about my subbing the Moors: you either mock me because I'm a bad player (and in that case you won't have problem in the war between the turks and your faction, since you're obviously much better) or if you think I'm a good player, then Castille took an unfair advantage of the contingency the Moors found themselves in (as subbing in 20 minutes a faction which din't make any diplomacy and many other things, was not a task that could be done well by any player)
But you can't have it both ways..
There are also few other things that I could say, but they don't really need to be mentioned.
Originally Posted by Tonno:
what?
PS
A quick question. I've been playing this crusader kings game, to short up the story, I got the Byz crown and then I got the Constantinople county. It says that the vanguard, unit you can build in some mods of MTW2, are Norse people?
Is that historically accurate?
@Tonno Yes. Varangians was the name that greeks gave to vikings. They first settled in Russia ( Novrogod and Kievan Rus), after they moved to Greece and formed the byzantine varangian guards.what?
PS
A quick question. I've been playing this crusader kings game, to short up the story, I got the Byz crown and then I got the Constantinople county. It says that the vanguard, unit you can build in some mods of MTW2, are Norse people?
Is that historically accurate?
@sonnet welcome to the b-list :)
LOL LOL.... what a betrayal i could write a book right before it happens , but i didn t, now nobody will believe be . but i did send some PM to egypt about this and he didn t listen.
and from what i heard i know that Egypt give you money to help your economy ,,,geez what kind of leader you are ???you should be in the top of blacklist now.
when i attacked moors at least i had a good reason, now i m forced to break my NAP with Moors to save mongols from the greedy sultan Loose.:)))))
and from what i heard i know that Egypt give you money to help your economy ,,,geez what kind of leader you are ???you should be in the top of blacklist now.
when i attacked moors at least i had a good reason, now i m forced to break my NAP with Moors to save mongols from the greedy sultan Loose.:)))))
i can wait to play my turn , you guys we going to assist to a the most honest betrayal ever .:))) who needs NAP ..right!:)))
Originally Posted by yuonyuon:
LOL LOL.... what a betrayal i could write a book right before it happens , but i didn t now nobody will believe be . but i did send some PM to egypt about this and he didn t listen.
and from what i heard i know that Egypt give you money to help your economy ,,,geez what kind of leader you are ???you should be in the top of blacklist now.
when i attacked moors at least i had a good reason, now i m forced to break my NAP with Moors to save mongols from the greedy sultan Loose.:)))))
LOL LOL.... what a betrayal i could write a book right before it happens , but i didn t now nobody will believe be . but i did send some PM to egypt about this and he didn t listen.
and from what i heard i know that Egypt give you money to help your economy ,,,geez what kind of leader you are ???you should be in the top of blacklist now.
when i attacked moors at least i had a good reason, now i m forced to break my NAP with Moors to save mongols from the greedy sultan Loose.:)))))
Originally Posted by yuonyuon:
i can wait to play my turn , you guys we going to assist to a the most honest betrayal ever .:))) who needs NAP ..right!:)))
1-Thanks for taking Egypt's side. By doing that you just confirmed (as also it is confirmed by the infos you provided) that everything I said was indeed correct i can wait to play my turn , you guys we going to assist to a the most honest betrayal ever .:))) who needs NAP ..right!:)))
@yuonyuon
2-Breaking you NAP with the Moors will be over borderline: I was subbing the Moors turn on Monday, and you complained that If I attacked your army rather than accepting your 5 NAP turns, would be against Moors best interest. After you made us lose a day because you kept insisting that the Moors attacking your armies was not in its best interest. You imposed this NAP or else I'd be accused of subbing the Moors serving my own interest. Your posts are all here in the thread.
And now you even dare suggest you want to attack the Moors?
I'll call the admin and ask appropriate action if you dare to break the NAP.
Originally Posted by yuonyuon:
nahhhh ! they are muslims !:)))))))))))))
i just wonder who are going to subb ebs and in what interest . i think vipman should play with some advices from ebs . that's not going to happen
and this was your pm confirmation:nahhhh ! they are muslims !:)))))))))))))
i just wonder who are going to subb ebs and in what interest . i think vipman should play with some advices from ebs . that's not going to happen
Originally Posted by yuonyuon:
if you will attack ,then next turn moors will be very damaged and when ebs will come back i think he will quit . i don t want to see that .
i know you can t defeat my stack, so peace is a must .
Plus your other posts in this thread which you edited (but the moderators should be able to see what you edited), in which you clearly said that as subber I wanted to keep the war to damage your settlements.Originally Posted by sonnet:
I sent a message Ebs this morning about playing his turn.
He didn't reply yet. Due to its issues with the pc, it might be possible that he mightnot be able to connect tonight, let alone play his turn.
If that happens, would you confirm that you'll honor the 5 turns NAP?
This should solve all the issues so that Ebs has the time to come back and manage his faction for at least few turns.
that was the point. to give him a fair chance .I sent a message Ebs this morning about playing his turn.
He didn't reply yet. Due to its issues with the pc, it might be possible that he mightnot be able to connect tonight, let alone play his turn.
If that happens, would you confirm that you'll honor the 5 turns NAP?
This should solve all the issues so that Ebs has the time to come back and manage his faction for at least few turns.
if you will attack ,then next turn moors will be very damaged and when ebs will come back i think he will quit . i don t want to see that .
i know you can t defeat my stack, so peace is a must .
And about the money..just another false claim: Dur3x proposed to share equally the Crusades lands. He mentioned 4 settlements, and although I could take 3 of them (Antioch, Nicosia and Tortosa) before him, I agreed to share 2 -2.
Fact is that Dur3x tricked me, since Crusades had 5 regions, not 4 (I didn't check and I trusted his words).
Nonetheless even if tricked, I didn't get angry at him, and I said that 5k compensation would reduce the feeling of being tricked.
Originally Posted by sonnet:
1-Thanks for taking Egypt's side. By doing that (as also it is confirmed by the infos you provided) that everything I said was indeed correct
@yuonyuon
2-Breaking you NAP with the Moors will be over borderline: I was subbing the Moors turn on Monday, and you complained that If I attacked your army rather than accepting your 5 NAP turns, would be against Moors best interest. After you made us lose a day because you kept insisting that the Moors attacking your armies was not in its best interest. You imposed this NAP or else I'd be accused of subbing the Moors serving my own interest. Your posts are all here in the thread.
And now you even dare suggest you want to attack the Moors?
I'll call the admin and ask appropriate action if you dare to break the NAP.
and this was your pm confirmation:
Plus your other posts in this thread which you edited (but the moderators should be able to see what you edited), in which you clearly said that as subber I wanted to keep the war to damage your settlements.
And about the money..just another false claim: Dur3x proposed to share equally the Crusades lands. He mentioned 4, and although I could take 3 of them (Antioch, Nicosia and Tortosa) before him, I agreed to share 2 -2.
Fact is that Dur3x tricked me, since Crusades had 5 regions, not 4 (I didn't check and I trusted his words).
Nonetheless even if tricked, I didn't get angry at him, and I said that 5k compensation would reduce the feeling of being tricked.
hmm wired when i played with Egypt first turn (turn 44) i could take all regions from the first turn . also why you split equal when you can expand in all directions . how can i make 50-50 Iberia with moors when they can take Sicily too ...? 1-Thanks for taking Egypt's side. By doing that (as also it is confirmed by the infos you provided) that everything I said was indeed correct
@yuonyuon
2-Breaking you NAP with the Moors will be over borderline: I was subbing the Moors turn on Monday, and you complained that If I attacked your army rather than accepting your 5 NAP turns, would be against Moors best interest. After you made us lose a day because you kept insisting that the Moors attacking your armies was not in its best interest. You imposed this NAP or else I'd be accused of subbing the Moors serving my own interest. Your posts are all here in the thread.
And now you even dare suggest you want to attack the Moors?
I'll call the admin and ask appropriate action if you dare to break the NAP.
and this was your pm confirmation:
Plus your other posts in this thread which you edited (but the moderators should be able to see what you edited), in which you clearly said that as subber I wanted to keep the war to damage your settlements.
And about the money..just another false claim: Dur3x proposed to share equally the Crusades lands. He mentioned 4, and although I could take 3 of them (Antioch, Nicosia and Tortosa) before him, I agreed to share 2 -2.
Fact is that Dur3x tricked me, since Crusades had 5 regions, not 4 (I didn't check and I trusted his words).
Nonetheless even if tricked, I didn't get angry at him, and I said that 5k compensation would reduce the feeling of being tricked.
i told to egypt that you going to attack him and he told me that he give you some money for economy and everything is ok ... poor guy :)))
and i can t side with you doing that , of course i will side with Egypt Persia or others.... i don see how you see a connection between us , other that i have his password and i can see exactly what is going on. i m castile in the western side i don t need deals with the east maybe later.
and yeah moors was subbed by a good player no need to complain about that , and admin can t stop me , only if i cheat or break some rules , and after 1 hour i think is my turn ,
Originally Posted by yuonyuon:
and yeah moors was subbed by a good player no need to complain about that , and admin can t stop me , only if i cheat or break some rules , and after 1 hour i think is my turn ,
Like I said you wanted the NAP. You attacked the Moors, and when the Moorish turn came, and could attack your armies you said that it wasn't in the best Moorish interest to do so .You accused (as subber of the Moors) me of keeping the war going on (a war you started) to serve my own interests, because I wanted to see your settlements damaged. We wasted a day waiting for Ebs to come back and to settle the quarrel I kept you happy and accepted the NAP you insisted upon.and yeah moors was subbed by a good player no need to complain about that , and admin can t stop me , only if i cheat or break some rules , and after 1 hour i think is my turn ,
Ebs couldn't watch his turn, and had to rely on my and your words. And I told you you need to provide correct infos to the player giving that he can't judge with his own eyes.
You want to be kicked out this way fine, because you are not capable of winning without dur3x fine.
I ask everybody's opinion in that @Makrell @Vipman @Tonno @Gaius Octavius Caesar @Jiub @Emproment @LooseCannon1 @Lord Luka @Core-i7-inside
pls read this post first:
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showt...post2053603236
it might be evil and bad, but it aint againist the rules. he shouldnt do it, but he can.
So a masochist, a pyromaniac, a necrophile, a sadist, a pedophile, and a zoophile are all standing in a jail cell.
The zoophile says, "You know what I could really go for right now? Sex with a cat."
The pedophile says, "Even better: Sex with a kitten."
The sadist asks, "How about we beat the kitten up, and THEN have sex with it?"
The necrophile adds, "Alright let's beat a kitten to death, and then have sex with it."
Then the pyromaniac says, "Okay, how about we beat a kitten to death, light it on fire, and then have sex with it?"
After all of this the little masochist finally speaks up and says, "Meow."
The zoophile says, "You know what I could really go for right now? Sex with a cat."
The pedophile says, "Even better: Sex with a kitten."
The sadist asks, "How about we beat the kitten up, and THEN have sex with it?"
The necrophile adds, "Alright let's beat a kitten to death, and then have sex with it."
Then the pyromaniac says, "Okay, how about we beat a kitten to death, light it on fire, and then have sex with it?"
After all of this the little masochist finally speaks up and says, "Meow."
Without Ebs here to participate Castiles moves do look like a pure exploit of the situation.
If yuonyuon breaks this NAP I will not object to the admins decision.
If yuonyuon breaks this NAP I will not object to the admins decision.
Originally Posted by Makrell:
it might be evil and bad, but it aint againist the rules. he shouldnt do it, but he can.
@Makrellit might be evil and bad, but it aint againist the rules. he shouldnt do it, but he can.
The problem lies with the fact that he accused me of not playing the Moors serving its own interests, as the player EBS couldn't see his turn.
I wanted to attack Castille's armies but to not be accused of serving my own interests I accepted the NAP Yuonyuon wanted and I (as subber ) didn't
i feel like i made a mistake playing with you . i always wanted a good challenge and respected you skils (and your management skils too) but this is way to wrong and is not because i my actions . i looked at the turns and it looks like you may be kick off by durex . your attack is too light .
and from Castile perspective i did exactly what a normal player do , i defend my land by counterattacking his armies . i know i m average now but in 2 turns i will become a threat to everybody , and you know that too . but you can t kick me for that .
even if you will attack me ,the situation was worst for the moors .in other HS i fight with moors agains aragon portugal and sicily and still winning . i don t know but castile and moors are pretty even match (was) in this HS
and can you explain exactly what is about me and durex. i don t see no clue and how i can help Egypt or vice versa.
what will going to happen if durex PC gets broken you going to stop the attack or continue to get egypt s land??
I wanted NAp but ebs didn t bother to answer . what did i tell you to not put this players here . i was telling from the binning that castile and moors dont agree each other and now i have to wait for nothing . players that cant play on time they must be skiped or played in a deffensive way witch you didn t .
if ebs will just bother a little for us and say that he accept or not my deal will be fine otherwise he lost the war already is not my fault that i m a little better .
i really wanted to play fair but i guess until now i did well and i didn t use the "knock out " strategy , or in other words "the coward strategy" or maybe the "the paranoia strategy"
you really should put a fine for those that break the NAP .
and from Castile perspective i did exactly what a normal player do , i defend my land by counterattacking his armies . i know i m average now but in 2 turns i will become a threat to everybody , and you know that too . but you can t kick me for that .
even if you will attack me ,the situation was worst for the moors .in other HS i fight with moors agains aragon portugal and sicily and still winning . i don t know but castile and moors are pretty even match (was) in this HS
and can you explain exactly what is about me and durex. i don t see no clue and how i can help Egypt or vice versa.
what will going to happen if durex PC gets broken you going to stop the attack or continue to get egypt s land??
I wanted NAp but ebs didn t bother to answer . what did i tell you to not put this players here . i was telling from the binning that castile and moors dont agree each other and now i have to wait for nothing . players that cant play on time they must be skiped or played in a deffensive way witch you didn t .
if ebs will just bother a little for us and say that he accept or not my deal will be fine otherwise he lost the war already is not my fault that i m a little better .
i really wanted to play fair but i guess until now i did well and i didn t use the "knock out " strategy , or in other words "the coward strategy" or maybe the "the paranoia strategy"
you really should put a fine for those that break the NAP .
Originally Posted by Mithridate:
So a masochist, a pyromaniac, a necrophile, a sadist, a pedophile, and a zoophile are all standing in a jail cell.
The zoophile says, "You know what I could really go for right now? Sex with a cat."
The pedophile says, "Even better: Sex with a kitten."
The sadist asks, "How about we beat the kitten up, and THEN have sex with it?"
The necrophile adds, "Alright let's beat a kitten to death, and then have sex with it."
Then the pyromaniac says, "Okay, how about we beat a kitten to death, light it on fire, and then have sex with it?"
After all of this the little masochist finally speaks up and says, "Meow."
there is no "Meow" in here , so we going to keep talking!So a masochist, a pyromaniac, a necrophile, a sadist, a pedophile, and a zoophile are all standing in a jail cell.
The zoophile says, "You know what I could really go for right now? Sex with a cat."
The pedophile says, "Even better: Sex with a kitten."
The sadist asks, "How about we beat the kitten up, and THEN have sex with it?"
The necrophile adds, "Alright let's beat a kitten to death, and then have sex with it."
Then the pyromaniac says, "Okay, how about we beat a kitten to death, light it on fire, and then have sex with it?"
After all of this the little masochist finally speaks up and says, "Meow."
Originally Posted by yuonyuon:
i looked at the turns and it looks like you may be kick off by durex . your attack is too light .
@yuonyuoni looked at the turns and it looks like you may be kick off by durex . your attack is too light .
You are not allowed to see Egypt's turn unless the player specifically asked you to sub him. Otherwise (like in this case) it's cheating! (because you gather more infos than you're supposed to)
I trust everyone to not do that.
@yuonyuon @Vipman @Tonno @Jiub @dur3x @Emproment @Makrell @Core-i7-inside @LooseCannon1 @ebs @Gaius Octavius Caesar
Pls respect that.
Im sorry for the moors but is not enough to kick him, ppl lie all the time in hotseats. This is a really lame move from castille..
From what i understand yuon is trying to get back at invicta by atacking the moors, but you re playing the turks so i dont really get what he wants to prove.
From what i understand yuon is trying to get back at invicta by atacking the moors, but you re playing the turks so i dont really get what he wants to prove.
Originally Posted by Gaius Octavius Caesar:
Im sorry for the moors but is not enough to kick him, ppl lie all the time in hotseats. This is a really lame move from castille..
From what i understand yuon is trying to get back at invicta by atacking the moors, but you re playing the turks so i dont really get what he wants to prove.
@Gaius Octavius CaesarIm sorry for the moors but is not enough to kick him, ppl lie all the time in hotseats. This is a really lame move from castille..
From what i understand yuon is trying to get back at invicta by atacking the moors, but you re playing the turks so i dont really get what he wants to prove.
This is not about lying or betrayal, as i explained here
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showt...post2053603252
Originally Posted by sonnet:
@Gaius Octavius Caesar
This is not about lying or betrayal, as i explained here
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showt...post2053603252
when a player is not available he should be subbed by his subber in the time limit , but when his time expired should be skipped or played quick in a defensive way. that should be a rule .@Gaius Octavius Caesar
This is not about lying or betrayal, as i explained here
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showt...post2053603252
you subbed in aggressive way , and was turn 3 you could take cities . does an t mater if that catapult was there from turn 1 the rule is clear about those 2 turns of NAP.
Originally Posted by yuonyuon:
when a player is not available he should be subbed by his subber in the time limit , but when his time expired should be skipped or played quick in a defensive way. that should be a rule .
you subbed in aggressive way , and was turn 3 you could take cities . does an t mater if that catapult was there from turn 1 the rule is clear about those 2 turns of NAP.
You asked for the NAP of 5 turns on turn 4, after you attacked.when a player is not available he should be subbed by his subber in the time limit , but when his time expired should be skipped or played quick in a defensive way. that should be a rule .
you subbed in aggressive way , and was turn 3 you could take cities . does an t mater if that catapult was there from turn 1 the rule is clear about those 2 turns of NAP.
Ebs asked me to sub him and Vipman wasn't around,and ironically you just asked more time for Dur3x now.
there is no sign of Durex , i will play both turn s right now .
Too many words in bad english are trying to explain a tough situation. I don't understand in the least.
- If no rules were broken, then no punishment should be delivered.
- If @yuonyuon acted poorly and @sonnet wanted to change the rules while everyone else agrees with Sonnet, then yuonyuon should face a retroactive, in-game punishment, along with everyone else who broke the newly added rules.
- Should yuonyuon be kicked? No.
If Sonnet has a problem with shady dealings and actings to take advantage of a situation, he should not be angry on just yuonyuon because many players in this HS have broken their word; which is not against the rules.
But if Sonnet wanted to add a new rule to this HS, he should declare the rule, we should all vote on the rule's implementation, and punishment should be dealt out accordingly.
This is my opinion.
EDIT: I think yuon's idea for a fine to those who break NAP is a good addition to the rules.
- If no rules were broken, then no punishment should be delivered.
- If @yuonyuon acted poorly and @sonnet wanted to change the rules while everyone else agrees with Sonnet, then yuonyuon should face a retroactive, in-game punishment, along with everyone else who broke the newly added rules.
- Should yuonyuon be kicked? No.
If Sonnet has a problem with shady dealings and actings to take advantage of a situation, he should not be angry on just yuonyuon because many players in this HS have broken their word; which is not against the rules.
But if Sonnet wanted to add a new rule to this HS, he should declare the rule, we should all vote on the rule's implementation, and punishment should be dealt out accordingly.
This is my opinion.
EDIT: I think yuon's idea for a fine to those who break NAP is a good addition to the rules.
Originally Posted by Emproment:
If Sonnet has a problem with shady dealings and actings to take advantage of a situation, he should not be angry on just yuonyuon because many players in this HS have broken their word; which is not against the rules.
@Emproment : the issue is not shady dealings or lying.If Sonnet has a problem with shady dealings and actings to take advantage of a situation, he should not be angry on just yuonyuon because many players in this HS have broken their word; which is not against the rules.
The issue is that when I was subbing Moors (after Castille already attacked the Moors), he complained that I (as Moors subber) would counter-attack Castillian armies rather than accepting his 5 turns NAP, only to damage Castille's faction.
To not have him complaining, and questioning my integrity, I -on behalf of the Moors- accepted the NAP he requested.
Now after I played the Moorish turn (and not having attacked the Castille's armies), he intends to break the NAP he imposed. If he didn't question my integrity, I'd would have just attacked the Castille's armies.
@sonnet: All I read is "blah blah blah I'm not happy."
No rules were broken were they? Then what is there to complain about? Yuon did an awfully, lawfully turn move.
But if you want to change the rules, then do so, so punishment can be dealt.
EDIT: And this is coming from someone who is rooting for the Moors, to be sure. I want to see yuon punished, too, but the fact is he did nothing wrong but lie. Lying is not against the rules.
No rules were broken were they? Then what is there to complain about? Yuon did an awfully, lawfully turn move.
But if you want to change the rules, then do so, so punishment can be dealt.
EDIT: And this is coming from someone who is rooting for the Moors, to be sure. I want to see yuon punished, too, but the fact is he did nothing wrong but lie. Lying is not against the rules.
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO