It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
avatar
Vitek: Messenger? We were at war and I don't remember you said it was messenger. May I send messengers into your territory? Tell me, if I am so evil, how many of your units have I killed and many my units have you killed? And if I remember it right humans armies abused their peace with Frostlings and stole some of their buildings, forcing them into war.
Hear hear. As I do not wish to over-repeat myself (any longer) I will simply state my mind: I think Senteria is upset with his display of unethical conduct earlier in this game. His intolerance has been met with force, yes, but of a mutually destructive nature to me as his units were more qualified for battle. He acknowledged his relentless aggression (or rather: opportunistic robbery) but refused my offered peace even when acceptable terms were presented, before negotiations could effectively take place. Thus, we can but conclude he lusts for war and has-after a succession of victories-not yet lost his taste for it. It is unfortunately for him he stands in awe of just war theory and cannot justify his prolonged aggression in a game which can only end in complete victory over others (which in itself is tyrannical). There too, refuse is sought in fiction and fantasy.

We hail our Halfling brothers! Who are our sole hope of survival. Yet we rightly fear the alliance of Dwarves and Humans has grown too strong.

We sadly take note of the gallant and noble end of the Undead, who we now admire. Inspired by their attempt the remaining Frostlings amass to fight to their end.

---
- Stacks of Human archers and 4 elephants attack our 2hex city, we won't hold.
- Human elite forces scrape the surface of our lands.
- Highman forces teleported with siege weapons our island (also a 2hex city).
- We wonder if the Humans had the level 10 independent hero join his cause...
Nice Guys, Day 45

We are sorry undead are gone. We always thought they are cool bones, although we never met then. They almost did us great service.

Turn sent.

avatar
Senteria: Instead you invaded our land together with the Frostlings. The constant pressure of the Frostlings on my realm served your interests well. You could focus on other things, keeping my realm small, making you able to grow in prosperity and rise above others.
This is just evil propaganda. We were just visiting your realm with my eagle. He saw your capital and went to greet you. To his horror, the city was without garrison and his inhabitants told us that their leader took it's troops and left to spread his vast empire in dirty underground places. They were completely abandoned to thier fate and would probably fall prey to some evil race skulking this land. Our eagle sincerely offered his help and helped them to train new defense.
Unfortunately evil human rebel couldn't stand to see his people happy and quickly summoned infernal frost beast and slaughtered newly trained defense and we can only dread what he did to his people afterwards.

avatar
Senteria: It's also true I captured the dark elven capital and other towns because they were stupid enough to leave it barely defended, just like I was stupid to leave my island undefended. Anyway, you are called a halfling Jerk and I am called a human rebel. You have blood on your hands too. Elven blood to be precise.

Oh and you already sent the messenger. At least I do not enslave halfling races as you did with our humans.
As I said, Human leader was too concerned with enslaving undeground elven population instead of protecting they own people.
We only fought Elves because they attacked us and we suspected they are secretly funded by Targ the Rebel. Alos we heard reports they own chemical and biological weapons.
You should complain to my parents about my name. I already did.
Post edited April 27, 2013 by Vitek
OOC (Out Of Character): Just a friendly reminder to all that the rules are in place to help us get along. I believe that we all like each other (mostly) and would like to keep it that way. Remember that it is explicitly stated in the rules that you may not attack anyone on the same turn that you end a peace with them for a reason. It may make little tactical sense, but it is there to promote fair play and understanding among players. Yes, it is possible to abuse a peace, but that is part of strategic play. Sometimes you have to ask yourself if the price of war is worth it.

P.S. I love all of the propaganda and trash talk between factions, but in order to avoid confusion put OOC in front of a post when you are speaking out of character. That way no one takes it personally if it isn't intended as such.
Dwarves, Day 45

My opponent and I would have locked eyes if he had any. We stood facing each other, the last of our armies, to see who would walk away from this field of bones. Our audience of corpses looked on expectantly, waiting for a victor. They would have wondered if their sacrifice would be made in vain, if they could worry. No words were needed, we both understood what had to be done. We fought valiantly blow for blow. In the end my adversary fell, his bones crushed beneath my mace. With his final death rattle he uttered "Give them hell". And I shall.

turn sent
Very well, I will declare war on you next time and then make a formal warning, rather than simply making a formal warning. I believe they call them "treaties" in real life.
Post edited April 27, 2013 by BlaneckW
OOC: I am ok with a formal warning as long as it gives the recipient time to comply or refute demands, The intent of the rule is mainly to prevent surprise backstabbings. It seems like a design oversight that if a peace can be so easily broken with no consequences in-game then why bother to have peace at all. That is why the house rule came into effect among the community. Right alongside no Free Movement or Wind Walking on boats.
OOC

avatar
greyhuntr: OOC (Out Of Character): Just a friendly reminder to all that the rules are in place to help us get along. I believe that we all like each other (mostly) and would like to keep it that way.
Senteria and I need not get out of character as we are now engaged in a real life war in which real Frostlings and replicated Humans lay siege to each other, spreading decease, famine, and the most awful gossip and Goblin poetry.

I think the fun in playing against humans (the species, not race) is not in eagerly anticipated automated combat, but in diplomacy and tactical manoeuvring.
Humans, Day 46

The halflings decided to join the Frostlings into the war. We made a strategic withdrawal from the surface.
Meanwhile we took the free 4 hex undead town and waved at the goblins who were all there to watch. We don't think we'll even be able to hold the 4 hex town as the troops are insufficient.

We fought to take back our 2 hex dark elven town and it paid off. No casualties. Just our golden elephant came out of the battle quite wounded.

Turn sent.
You already stated that the capital was our border, and that I could "enjoy" it.
Post edited April 28, 2013 by BlaneckW
Goblins, Day 46
We believe that the Undead capital is ours by right of their extended war against us and the humans already having two capitals. The humans have enough territory without encroaching on ours. The undead capital will be ours next turn, unless they can move three stacks there immediately. We aren't particularly worried about Dwarves. We aren't particularly worried about humans either, but we don't intend an extended war. Our lands are sufficient, they can have peace if they ask it.
Post edited April 28, 2013 by BlaneckW
Frostlings, Day 46

Our kill-ratio appears to be at rock bottom, but we yet have some units to throw away.

Turn sent.
Halflings, Day 45

We are moving everywhere. It makes my head dizzy.
Let's make a poll. Shall I kill Highmen leader? :-)

Turn sent.


avatar
greyhuntr: OOC (Out Of Character): Just a friendly reminder to all that the rules are in place to help us get along. I believe that we all like each other (mostly) and would like to keep it that way. Remember that it is explicitly stated in the rules that you may not attack anyone on the same turn that you end a peace with them for a reason. It may make little tactical sense, but it is there to promote fair play and understanding among players. Yes, it is possible to abuse a peace, but that is part of strategic play. Sometimes you have to ask yourself if the price of war is worth it.

P.S. I love all of the propaganda and trash talk between factions, but in order to avoid confusion put OOC in front of a post when you are speaking out of character. That way no one takes it personally if it isn't intended as such.
What? You got it wrong. I never speak in-character. This all is me. I actually stole eagle from local zoo, trained it, sent it to Netherlands to Senteria's home and when he found it empty, the eagle started to train local inhabitants to better defend themselves. Then some of Senteria's goons appeared and murdered the local militia. Right now I am growing leprechaun in my garden and breeding bunch of penguins in my freezer. I had to eat all ice cream to fit them all in. And I can assure you, my turtle wasn't happy with the catapult I mounted on her back.

Btw. when I speak OOC, I am usually using itallics.

avatar
greyhuntr: OOC: I am ok with a formal warning as long as it gives the recipient time to comply or refute demands, The intent of the rule is mainly to prevent surprise backstabbings. It seems like a design oversight that if a peace can be so easily broken with no consequences in-game then why bother to have peace at all. That is why the house rule came into effect among the community. Right alongside no Free Movement or Wind Walking on boats.
Well, I don't think it was much of backstabbing. It was all heading towards it. Mostly I think we are putting too much wieght to it and should be long forgotten. It was Nick's first game so it is quite understandable he made minor oversight. Senteria did this to me last game as well and he is seasoned player and it was no big deal.
avatar
Vitek: Halflings, Day 45

We are moving everywhere. It makes my head dizzy.
Let's make a poll. Shall I kill Highmen leader? :-)

Turn sent.

avatar
greyhuntr: OOC (Out Of Character): Just a friendly reminder to all that the rules are in place to help us get along. I believe that we all like each other (mostly) and would like to keep it that way. Remember that it is explicitly stated in the rules that you may not attack anyone on the same turn that you end a peace with them for a reason. It may make little tactical sense, but it is there to promote fair play and understanding among players. Yes, it is possible to abuse a peace, but that is part of strategic play. Sometimes you have to ask yourself if the price of war is worth it.

P.S. I love all of the propaganda and trash talk between factions, but in order to avoid confusion put OOC in front of a post when you are speaking out of character. That way no one takes it personally if it isn't intended as such.
avatar
Vitek: What? You got it wrong. I never speak in-character. This all is me. I actually stole eagle from local zoo, trained it, sent it to Netherlands to Senteria's home and when he found it empty, the eagle started to train local inhabitants to better defend themselves. Then some of Senteria's goons appeared and murdered the local militia. Right now I am growing leprechaun in my garden and breeding bunch of penguins in my freezer. I had to eat all ice cream to fit them all in. And I can assure you, my turtle wasn't happy with the catapult I mounted on her back.

Btw. when I speak OOC, I am usually using itallics.

avatar
greyhuntr: OOC: I am ok with a formal warning as long as it gives the recipient time to comply or refute demands, The intent of the rule is mainly to prevent surprise backstabbings. It seems like a design oversight that if a peace can be so easily broken with no consequences in-game then why bother to have peace at all. That is why the house rule came into effect among the community. Right alongside no Free Movement or Wind Walking on boats.
avatar
Vitek: Well, I don't think it was much of backstabbing. It was all heading towards it. Mostly I think we are putting too much wieght to it and should be long forgotten. It was Nick's first game so it is quite understandable he made minor oversight. Senteria did this to me last game as well and he is seasoned player and it was no big deal.
We don't care too much about the highmen. They seem to be out on fighting Nick, on the other hand they could easily attack me. So I am neutral about it. They do me more of a favour than hindering me.

Also about last game I was unaware of the gentleman's agreement last game. Though I think in the end it would not have mattered the outcome that much.
Post edited April 28, 2013 by Senteria
avatar
Senteria: We don't care too much about the highmen. They seem to be out on fighting Nick, on the other hand they could easily attack me. So I am neutral about it. They do me more of a favour than hindering me.
That's the problem. I don't care either and they do not bother me nor I gain much from removing them.

avatar
Senteria: Also about last game I was unaware of the gentleman's agreement last game. Though I think in the end it would not have mattered the outcome that much.
1. Do you think Nick was aware of it here and he remembered?
2. Do you think it mattered here?
3. Why should it be important in honouring it if it affects the otcome or not?
avatar
Senteria: We don't care too much about the highmen. They seem to be out on fighting Nick, on the other hand they could easily attack me. So I am neutral about it. They do me more of a favour than hindering me.
avatar
Vitek: That's the problem. I don't care either and they do not bother me nor I gain much from removing them.

avatar
Senteria: Also about last game I was unaware of the gentleman's agreement last game. Though I think in the end it would not have mattered the outcome that much.
avatar
Vitek: 1. Do you think Nick was aware of it here and he remembered?
2. Do you think it mattered here?
3. Why should it be important in honouring it if it affects the otcome or not?
1. I don't think so
2. When he attacked, I countered by killing more of his troops on that turn than the units he had killed. I doubt the outcome would have been much different.
3. I just think it's not really nice to attack in a Blitzkrieg like I did. I am aware of it and I didn't know any better about those extra rules.