Shu Han declares war on the infamous Crusader Alliance

[Butan]

Nihtgenga, what faction are you from and why do you think BASNAK have no clue ? He's right in the middle of the big boo-boo

Coalition / Apostates / CFA = they are part of the Eastern Block which a member of it (Crusader Alliance) was attacked. We are just highly monitoring what they are going to do and adapt our stance ?


What I know:


Coalition : no official declaration at all + heavy movement around Veluca + they stopped sieging Uxkhal + heavily inviting ALL factions they have influence with to attack Shu Han
CFA : officially hostile + busy with ottomans + but a lot of CFA vassals/allies around the south and they arent all caravans
Apostates : some leaders declared their personal neutrality but we dont know a lot more

I guess Shu Han surprise attack on Templars forces Eastern to do the same : mobilize armies and then declare war only when the first attack is launched. It is only fair.

I'm not going to pull a Noctidamus on this one but I could say:

blahblah

So I also expect

Neutral Coalition/CFA/Apostates who were trying to be at war with everyone will help Crusader Alliance with the excuse of :

-We have to defend ourselves to some of the UIF-like factions (Such as Shu Han)
-Templars will have a chance to recover themselves

 

[Zlisch_The_Butcher]

Black Fists attacked Shu Han caravans.

Shu Han themselves have stated that they don't consider attacking a 100ish man army with several thousand crates a real hostile act. And seeing as you include Mercs for reinforcing the templols then Druzhina is in the Chinese Empire as it reinforced Shu Han, you seem a bit biased in your map making, sorry to say. Slit information was incorrect, I deeply apologize for stating false shit.

[BASNAK]

Well, let's just all hope I'm wrong and Coalition and Apostates don't get involved. They must have changed their minds then, because what I heard in TS the day they tried to make me attack Shu Han was something completely different.

And as I said, quick summary, mistakes happen.

[Zlisch_The_Butcher]

either way i guess your the victims of the evil empire! I mean its not like your allies the UIF were mass banned for cheating (couldnt resist) yes we are oh so evil and so we shall crusade you into the dust knave!

Pretty sure all current UIF strat players (unless they bought new keys) weren't banned for cheating, Mustikki once banned a grey player midbattle who had managed to attach himself to an Eastern spawningtent thing, pretty sure one Kapikulu got banned for multiaccounting this strat (pretty sure DRZ lost no players and Greys lost like 8 accounts and Union got like 100% wiped), last strat most of the Kapikulus were banned for applying and not showing up to an AI battle against them, DaveUKR admitted to once using some program to control another merc members pc for strategus, gingerpussy plays strategus on his kid and his wifes account, shitload of people including templars apparently abused some item duplication glitch in a past strategus, templars got known ex autoblockers in their clan, so don't call UIF mass cheaters, you're not really better yourself. And I was banned for one month for accidently triggering a bug in a battle vs wataga after which I fully payed them back and apologized, so I guess WPB is an infamous cheating clan of cheating bastards due to their main leader getting banned for triggering something by accident.

Well, let's just all hope I'm wrong and Coalition and Apostates don't get involved. They must have changed their minds then, because what I heard in TS the day they tried to make me attack Shu Han was something completely different.

And as I said, quick summary, mistakes happen.

Odds are they (don't know about Apostates, have a hard time seeing Coalition not doing this) are trying to bribe people to attack Shu Han and funding smaller clans attacking you, which is a legitimate reason, however claiming that reinforcing a caravan (while drz also reinforced a Chinese caravan is a legitimate reason while not treating Druzhina as Shu Hans allies is somewhat hypocritical.

[Osiris]

templars got known ex autoblockers in their clan, <-- who would that be? and hell even mercs got ex auto blockers

I was just loling at the fact that we are now the evil guys and the UIF and co are the poor oppressed free loving peoples ^^

[Lt_Anders]

templars got known ex autoblockers in their clan, <-- who would that be? and hell even mercs got ex auto blockers

I was just loling at the fact that we are now the evil guys and the UIF and co are the poor oppressed free loving peoples ^^

Honestly, you guys should "stop wiping" UIF and just go ahead and flipping fight each other. SPILL BLOOD! BRING XP. Stop being pansies and just do what NA does, HAVE FUN, WITH DRAMA!

And it's also interesting, NA is still a 3 block strat. FCC, VE+FImb(if still allied) other wise make those two seperate, and then a loose Coalition of HP, Hosp, LCO. Then you have the smaller, TAMDA coalition and Chaos.

What's EU got: Chinese, UIF, East....and one has "stopped playing" relgiously, so it's really just Chinese and East now. EU can never get over the 2 faction divide like NA can. Probably all the cheating that goes on over there.(NA isn't better, but at least the NA cheating is more limited and less common, usually it's primarly game glitchs and bugs)

[Osiris]

not my diplomatic policy im just a peon i dislike how many allies we have but i guess at the start of strat it was needed to fight the uif

[Zlisch_The_Butcher]

I was just loling at the fact that we are now the evil guys and the UIF and co are the poor oppressed free loving peoples ^^

Eh, my general dislike of UIF isn't that smaller than my dislike of Eastern, however all of UIF has mainly stopped playing, and all of UIF isn't currently ganking a much smaller group of people instead of one part of UIF fighting the equally sized enemy (not claiming UIF haven't done it (did it with us and Vataga, also on some other occasions this strat, a shitload of other times in the previous rounds from what I hear as well)), Eastern is no better in any way than UIF, besides the off caravan by Druzhina (only seen one with 3k tradegoods in their terretory) and the off reinforcements UIF has also completely stopped playing, yet you feel the need to gank all who oppose you until you have taken all UIF fiefs, and after that until you've wiped every UIF player, UIF is dead, as it stands now Templars fighting someone else while everyone else in Eastern fights Druzhina and the greys wouldn't suddenly resurrect all UIF activity and have random 1mil UIF armies spawn all over the place.

[Osiris]

Eh, my general dislike of UIF isn't that smaller than my dislike of Eastern, however all of UIF has mainly stopped playing, and all of UIF isn't currently ganking a much smaller group of people instead of one part of UIF fighting the equally sized enemy (not claiming UIF haven't done it (did it with us and Vataga, also on some other occasions this strat, a shitload of other times in the previous rounds from what I hear as well)), Eastern is no better in any way than UIF, besides the off caravan by Druzhina (only seen one with 3k tradegoods in their terretory) and the off reinforcements UIF has also completely stopped playing, yet you feel the need to gank all who oppose you until you have taken all UIF fiefs, and after that until you've wiped every UIF player, UIF is dead, as it stands now Templars fighting someone else while everyone else in Eastern fights Druzhina and the greys wouldn't suddenly resurrect all UIF activity and have random 1mil UIF armies spawn all over the place.

We didn't start this war afaik i dont see much ganking from the battle list unless im mistaken as i dont really pay that much attention

[kinngrimm]

...
but a lot of CFA vassals/allies around the south and they arent all caravans
...

as you would know ^^, atm we have only trade business down there, if a Vassal or alliance partner would attack ShuHan/Califat/Rice Eaters or resupply Crusaders it wouldn't be in a general consensus within the CFA.

That may change in the future, but you would know by a statement from me here in the diplomacy forum ahead of it.

If you want to you can but try and proof otherwise, i would be interested myself.

[BASNAK]

Odds are they (don't know about Apostates, have a hard time seeing Coalition not doing this) are trying to bribe people to attack Shu Han and funding smaller clans attacking you, which is a legitimate reason, however claiming that reinforcing a caravan (while drz also reinforced a Chinese caravan is a legitimate reason while not treating Druzhina as Shu Hans allies is somewhat hypocritical.

I never mentioned Apostates reinforcing any caravans, which they never did.

Secondly, I didn't really go into reading much about the Black Fist conflict, all I saw was them attacking Shu Han and assuming they were with CFA. But I went through it all again and I was wrong. Ill wait a couple of days and will update the map after what happens.

[Zlisch_The_Butcher]

We didn't start this war afaik i dont see much ganking from the battle list unless im mistaken as i dont really pay that much attention

So? Just because you didn't start the war does that mean your 70%+ of the strat playerbase allies should join you? In my opinion whenever you're attacked if you never attacked the guys who attacked you before you should have an option to press a button and permaban your attackers from strategus then. Coalition has been paying clans and directly founding attacks on Shu Han (giving 1k troops to someone and in return asking those someone to attack someone else with those 1k troops is pretty much the same as attacking yourself), don't claim this isn't going on 100%, this is a gank and there is absolutely no need for this my old friendging out, like it or not.

I never mentioned Apostates reinforcing any caravans, which they never did.

Sorry then, thought this was a reference to them (guess it was actually someone else then) reinforcing that caravan you were attacking, nevermind then.

Secondly Apostates reinforced the templars with 1.5k troops.

[BASNAK]

So? Just because you didn't start the war does that mean your 70%+ of the strat playerbase allies should join you? In my opinion whenever you're attacked if you never attacked the guys who attacked you before you should have an option to press a button and permaban your attackers from strategus then. Coalition has been paying clans and directly founding attacks on Shu Han (giving 1k troops to someone and in return asking those someone to attack someone else with those 1k troops is pretty much the same as attacking yourself), don't claim this isn't going on 100%, this is a gank and there is absolutely no need for this my old friendging out, like it or not.
Sorry then, thought this was a reference to them (guess it was actually someone else then) reinforcing that caravan you were attacking, nevermind then.

No that was the Templars who reinforced themselves. Apostates helped out reinforcing the northern castles in our area. Halting our advance.

[Casimir]

derplomacy.

[Butan]

as you would know ^^, atm we have only trade business down there, if a Vassal or alliance partner would attack ShuHan/Califat/Rice Eaters or resupply Crusaders it wouldn't be in a general consensus within the CFA.

That may change in the future, but you would know by a statement from me here in the diplomacy forum ahead of it.

If you want to you can but try and proof otherwise, i would be interested myself.

I believe you kinngrimm, and if I see something that surprises me I'll tell you