Author Topic: The Annexation of Ismirala  (Read 17193 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Thovex

  • Marshall
  • ********
  • Renown: 851
  • Infamy: 210
  • cRPG Player Sir Black Knight A Gentleman and a Scholar
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Vanguard
  • Game nicks: Thovex
Re: The Annexation of Ismirala
« Reply #90 on: September 30, 2012, 04:55:24 pm »
-3
Ah yes, Nords, can you plz gag this guy? My vessel filled to the brim with respect for the Nords keeps getting emptier every time this troll gets his say. And he gets about 50% of all your says. Shouldn't let a 16 year old with hormones bouncing in all directions be the spokesperson for your clan.

And read it, it is neutral.

Haha, I'm talking as a neutral for myself, not as a clan, so please fuck off.

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

Offline Mike_of_Kingswell

  • Count
  • *****
  • Renown: 258
  • Infamy: 87
  • cRPG Player
  • If a guy looks dangerous he probably is.
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Fallen Brigade
  • Game nicks: Fallen_Mike_of_Kingswell
  • IRC nick: MikeOfKingswell
Re: The Annexation of Ismirala
« Reply #91 on: September 30, 2012, 04:58:33 pm »
+1
Haha, I'm talking as a neutral for myself, not as a clan, so please fuck off.
so as a neutral person you choose to insult ppl and totaly go off topic just to insult some more? nice move

Braeden: You made my day with that one :)
In memory of Fallen_Mike_of_Kingswell, member of The Coalition of Fallen and HRE, ruler of Ismirala Castle
visitors can't see pics , please register or login

Offline Thovex

  • Marshall
  • ********
  • Renown: 851
  • Infamy: 210
  • cRPG Player Sir Black Knight A Gentleman and a Scholar
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Vanguard
  • Game nicks: Thovex
Re: The Annexation of Ismirala
« Reply #92 on: September 30, 2012, 04:58:46 pm »
-1
so as a neutral person you choose to insult ppl and totaly go off topic just to insult some more? nice move :)

Yes. Now keep derailing.
visitors can't see pics , please register or login

Offline Pejlaen

  • Count
  • *****
  • Renown: 297
  • Infamy: 74
  • cRPG Player
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Mercenaries
  • Game nicks: Merc_Pejlaen
Re: The Annexation of Ismirala
« Reply #93 on: September 30, 2012, 04:59:00 pm »
-1
visitors can't see pics , please register or login


Classy

Andswaru: Comes to Merc ts - "We're breaking all connections with Mercs" - leaves Merc ts.
1 minute later - Cooties appears with a shiny army at Ismirala castle doorstep.

That's also classy.
skilled individuals, putting them together can create a very deadly and effective team.

The bow, it represents, that a skilled archer can pick a mighty man at arms off from a distance.

Offline Knitler

  • Earl
  • ******
  • Renown: 456
  • Infamy: 91
  • cRPG Player Sir Black Knight A Gentleman and a Scholar
  • Worlds Cutest Dictator
    • View Profile
Re: The Annexation of Ismirala
« Reply #94 on: September 30, 2012, 04:59:54 pm »
+1
« Last Edit: September 30, 2012, 05:03:36 pm by Knitler »
(click to show/hide)

Offline Nessaj

  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1399
  • Infamy: 176
  • cRPG Player Madam Black Queen A Gentleman and a Scholar
  • ▃ ▅ ▅ ▅ ▄ ▅ ▇ ▅ ▄ ▅ ▇
    • View Profile
    • Vanguard
  • Faction: Vanguard
  • Game nicks: Vanguard_Cooties
  • IRC nick: Nessaj
Re: The Annexation of Ismirala
« Reply #95 on: September 30, 2012, 05:04:28 pm »
+5
Wall of text to the rescue!

Lol - whether it was me or rogue is irrelevant but why would either of us lie about this?  What would it achieve?  Surely it is is much more likely that you simply misunderstood something that we may or may not have explained badly.

Now that everyone hopefully had a good nights sleep (yes I went to sleep again after 10AM battle :P) let's discuss with some saner heads.

I'm quite sure there have been misunderstandings regarding this whole ordeal. Perhaps the night time wasn't a ploy and if so then I am personally sorry for making that assumption with my posts (nothing worse than wrong assumptions  :().
There is however no way to check the night time of someone who is INSIDE a fief, so postulating that we should have checked it first before attacking is quite silly.

We never wanted total war (or bloc war), and we never wanted to be pushed into one side or another, but to stay in the middle as much as possible (as we did in the last Strategus until we got wiped), deal whatever is best for our faction with minor consideration for the two major blocs, which so far have made us butt heads with both who've been umad about our defending/helping or trading with various minor neutral factions. We've been threatened with war from both sides.

Quote
[29-09-2012 17:31:03] hey
[29-09-2012 17:31:08] gimme the nord marker thingy
[29-09-2012 17:31:11] the logo
[29-09-2012 17:31:12] with transparent
[29-09-2012 17:34:31] *** Opkald til Thovex besvares ikke. *** ((translated: Call to Thovex was not responded))
[29-09-2012 17:41:34] WAKIIIIIIIIIIE
[29-09-2012 17:41:37] stop eating

Regarding Ismirala, I was going to post this thread almost an hour (40 minutes or so) before Nocti -- it took 3 hours for the army to travel the distance from Tehlrog to Ismirala with Quick March.
We have felt since the beginning that Ismirala needed to be ours, in order to secure our Eastern Border, because that is where 90% of the S&D terrorism we've experienced come through from, people use the forests as to avoid detection. This attack is more about defence than initiating any sort of war, we simply want the castle, nothing more have been arranged for, and we do not wish to expand our Kingdom further than what have been already been posted.

Andswaru made clear from the get-go that we wanted Ismirala -- though I believe I personally told someone on TS that we didn't "care" in the beginning, not sure if that was carried further by the person but no matter what it was a mistake on my part due to our lack of an organized command structure in the beginning (which we're still trying to build).
That Merc's trade the fief 10 minutes before our Army arrives, if it's a coincidence or planned, I don't know, but as far as I understood Merc's likewise made it clear in the beginning that they needed Ismirala for protection (we did also loosely talk about a deal in regards to free passage past the lands surrounding it), so that they suddenly trade it with Templars, why? Why not deal it with us then who've made clear several times we needed it. What do Templars need a castle for so far away from their lands? :(

I do not see an issue with the attack being carried out. It would originally have been at 19:00 (7PM) but we waited an hour where Andswaru discussed it diplomatically with everyone, which ran into the sand, hence the attack was carried out. It was offered to us to cancel the attack and try 1 hour later (would put it at ~21:00 / 8PM) but we both weren't sure whether it was to too late to cancel, and what would happen if we did, 1 hour immunity on the castle, would we lose gear/troops and what not - it was deemed too big a risk with the uncertainty of losing everything. We were also told that the only way we could gain the castle would be through an Alliance with Anti UIF.

Also Dave, stop try and make it sound like we don't actually talk to our members and vote on issues, we do, you all tried to make the same argument in the last Strategus where I personally went out to prove that it was a complete fabricated lie on your end, by posting the ACTUAL VOTING POLLS from our forum. You want the discussions too? How about our private documents as well? Seriously, stop that crap...

This isn't about more than the battle for the Ismirala area, no matter how much everyone else want to make it out to be (and there's plenty of people playing who want to make it sound like they're saints trying to save Strategus for all of mankind).

Whether people disagree on carrying out the attack on Ismirala or not, a 10 minute window isn't much time to decide upon, and if an alliance is the only answer to gaining the castle diplomatically, then we don't see an issue with it being carried out, someone wrote that we should have cancelled the NAP and waited 7 days, yeah, we could have, but honestly that wasn't something we thought about when it was all playing out.

Now let's all try to diminish the hate and bickering. The care level in regards to losing or winning in Strategus is definitely too high. Obviously tensions fly when there's bullshit moves (such as morning or night attacks, or blatant lying via voice chats) - and yes, attacking the Ismirala (when Mercs had it) was not a grand move of good will - obviously - but a move made based on this being a war game...
Things don't exist simply because you believe in them, thus sayeth the almighty creature in the sky!

Offline Gurnisson

  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1750
  • Infamy: 362
  • cRPG Player Sir Black Bishop A Gentleman and a Scholar
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Nordmen
  • Game nicks: SeaRaider_Gurnisson
Re: The Annexation of Ismirala
« Reply #96 on: September 30, 2012, 05:09:28 pm »
+2
Its not as if you wouldnt have merced for DRZ, Grey Order and Occitan all this time in strategus?
Oh wait: YOU DID. In all more or less big battles so far.

^
Talk about stuff you have any knowledge of, please? We've been mercing for whatever we wanted, against UIF factions and for them like a neutral faction does. I guess you only remember the battles you want to, right? :wink:
I voted Gurnisson cause of his fucking bendy pike, I swear noone can roflcopter stab like he can.

Offline Mike_of_Kingswell

  • Count
  • *****
  • Renown: 258
  • Infamy: 87
  • cRPG Player
  • If a guy looks dangerous he probably is.
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Fallen Brigade
  • Game nicks: Fallen_Mike_of_Kingswell
  • IRC nick: MikeOfKingswell
Re: The Annexation of Ismirala
« Reply #97 on: September 30, 2012, 05:12:02 pm »
0
I guess you only remember the battles you want to, right? :wink:
Mostly the ones i took part in ;)

I like cootie's post but have to say that it still doesnt explain this damn 3.paragraph to me  :(!
In memory of Fallen_Mike_of_Kingswell, member of The Coalition of Fallen and HRE, ruler of Ismirala Castle
visitors can't see pics , please register or login

Offline Andswaru

  • Duke
  • *******
  • Renown: 554
  • Infamy: 130
  • cRPG Player Sir White Bishop A Gentleman and a Scholar
  • SeaRaider_
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Nordmen of Fenada / SeaRaiders
  • Game nicks: SeaRaider_Andswaru
Re: The Annexation of Ismirala
« Reply #98 on: September 30, 2012, 05:15:49 pm »
0
^
Talk about stuff you have any knowledge of, please? We've been mercing for whatever we wanted, against UIF factions and for them like a neutral faction does. I guess you only remember the battles you want to, right? :wink:

This to the merc quote, the only guys my guys had to fight for and not against were Templars, there was NO other Order out to them.
Okay i once made them fight for Autobus, but the bus is kickass and it was against Kapikuli i think.
Smooth is the admin NA deserves. Not being that much better, EU deserves Thomek.
[18:25] <@chadz> soon(tm)

Offline Bjord

  • Amateur heretic
  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1328
  • Infamy: 1109
  • cRPG Player A Gentleman and a Scholar
  • salty turks
    • View Profile
Re: The Annexation of Ismirala
« Reply #99 on: September 30, 2012, 05:16:57 pm »
+7
Personally, with a neutral perspective, I think Nordmen could have handled all of this better. Poor diplomacy.

Just look at the way Andswaru declared Mercs as enemies pretty much. Joins TS wit that rude attitude and leaves before anyone can say anything. At least he could have asked to speak with Muffin or Tyr.

I know this is a "war game" but come on, behave like people.
When you stare into the abyss, the abyss stares back.

Offline Thovex

  • Marshall
  • ********
  • Renown: 851
  • Infamy: 210
  • cRPG Player Sir Black Knight A Gentleman and a Scholar
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Vanguard
  • Game nicks: Thovex
Re: The Annexation of Ismirala
« Reply #100 on: September 30, 2012, 05:21:14 pm »
+2
I'll have one question then I'm outta here:

What is it with the new fashion of "Neutral Perspective" when you are in one of the 2 conflicting "Sides"?
You're always biased even if you say you're in a "Neutral Perspective"... how does this even work?
visitors can't see pics , please register or login

Offline Andswaru

  • Duke
  • *******
  • Renown: 554
  • Infamy: 130
  • cRPG Player Sir White Bishop A Gentleman and a Scholar
  • SeaRaider_
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Nordmen of Fenada / SeaRaiders
  • Game nicks: SeaRaider_Andswaru
Re: The Annexation of Ismirala
« Reply #101 on: September 30, 2012, 05:25:09 pm »
+1
Just look at the way Andswaru declared Mercs as enemies pretty much. Joins TS wit that rude attitude and leaves before anyone can say anything. At least he could have asked to speak with Muffin or Tyr.

I joined the Merc TS? Wow, ive gotta stop drinking so much tea dont remember that.
Smooth is the admin NA deserves. Not being that much better, EU deserves Thomek.
[18:25] <@chadz> soon(tm)

Offline Nessaj

  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1399
  • Infamy: 176
  • cRPG Player Madam Black Queen A Gentleman and a Scholar
  • ▃ ▅ ▅ ▅ ▄ ▅ ▇ ▅ ▄ ▅ ▇
    • View Profile
    • Vanguard
  • Faction: Vanguard
  • Game nicks: Vanguard_Cooties
  • IRC nick: Nessaj
Re: The Annexation of Ismirala
« Reply #102 on: September 30, 2012, 05:26:45 pm »
0
I like cootie's post but have to say that it still doesnt explain this damn 3.paragraph to me  :(!

The third paragraph in the declaration?

Try CTRL + F5, I redid some of it. The third paragraph did sound way off.
Most of the text is though just C/P from historical speeches regarding Annexation. Nothing to "understand" really :wink:


Also Thovex shaddup and go play with some Lego!
Things don't exist simply because you believe in them, thus sayeth the almighty creature in the sky!

Offline Gnjus

  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1831
  • Infamy: 397
  • cRPG Player Sir White Rook A Gentleman and a Scholar
  • Siktir git, pislik okçu.
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Turklings
Re: The Annexation of Ismirala
« Reply #103 on: September 30, 2012, 05:29:27 pm »
+1
I think Nordmen could have handled all of this better. Poor diplomacy.

Probably due to their best diplomat okiN resigning from his post.


oh wait.....
Do you honestly think you have any sort of moral authority, Reyiz? Go genocide some more armenians and deny it ever happened, please, and stay in the middle east.
visitors can't see pics , please register or login

Offline dodnet

  • Duke
  • *******
  • Renown: 595
  • Infamy: 149
  • cRPG Player A Gentleman and a Scholar
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Wolpertinger
  • Game nicks: DoD, DoD_Wolper
Re: The Annexation of Ismirala
« Reply #104 on: September 30, 2012, 05:29:43 pm »
+3
Talk about stuff you have any knowledge of, please? We've been mercing for whatever we wanted, against UIF factions and for them like a neutral faction does. I guess you only remember the battles you want to, right? :wink:

Well... I haven't watched much of Strat 3 diplomacy and I'm not much involved into diplomacy in Strat 4 either, but EVEN I saw that on almost every battle DRZ, T, STR, V, Grey, Nord are on the same team. Call be dumb, call me an idiot, call me whatever but I'm not blind.

Edit: Missed they Grey, blame me! BTW: I know that on the Wolper battles you fought on our side, I call that an exception because of history ;)
« Last Edit: September 30, 2012, 05:34:09 pm by dodnet »
The logic of war seems to be that if a belligerent can fight he will fight.

(click to show/hide)