Author Topic: Summer Lovin  (Read 24368 times)

0 Members and 10 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Artyem

  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1218
  • Infamy: 264
  • cRPG Player Sir Black Knight
  • SODOM Shaman
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Dracul / Raven / SODOMY
  • Game nicks: Artyem
Re: Summer Lovin
« Reply #105 on: June 28, 2013, 04:19:44 am »
-2
Well the treaty almost held until July 1... Almost.
http://c-rpg.net/index.php?page=battlesupcoming#!?page=battledetail&id=4205

Yes, and Occitan attacked your #1 vassal so this must mean war, right?

heh.

edit:  it was a joke ya nerds
« Last Edit: June 28, 2013, 06:05:42 am by Artyem »
visitors can't see pics , please register or login

Sordida asinum latronibus sumus

Offline Gristle

  • Duke
  • *******
  • Renown: 560
  • Infamy: 130
  • cRPG Player A Gentleman and a Scholar
    • View Profile
  • Faction: BRD
  • Game nicks: Gristle_BRD
Re: Summer Lovin
« Reply #106 on: June 28, 2013, 04:26:54 am »
0
LOVE IS OVER

Offline Duster

  • Marshall
  • ********
  • Renown: 730
  • Infamy: 89
  • cRPG Player Sir White Knight A Gentleman and a Scholar
    • View Profile
  • Game nicks: Mr_Pibb, Mellow_Yellowtf
Re: Summer Lovin
« Reply #107 on: June 28, 2013, 05:28:04 am »
+10
Well the treaty almost held until July 1... Almost.
http://c-rpg.net/index.php?page=battlesupcoming#!?page=battledetail&id=4205

Hmm, let's analyze this a bit.



After Fraichedan griefed our castle out from under us (with ten cav robes and about 12 weapons), Smoothrich left Ahmerrad  with 100 troops and a shit ton of +3 plate and weapons, flying the banner of a new faction, "The New Semenstorm". We quickly intercepted him and sent him to EU.

From this information, we can safely draw the conclusion that this griefing was planned and acted out by Smoothrich and Badplayer(Fraiche).

There are currently 2 theories floating around about how exactly Semenstorm's defense roster was erased.

The first theory, the one offered by the perpetrators Badplayer and Smoothrich, and their cohorts, is that SS's roster was erased by someone within our own faction that has rank 5 or above. It was suggested by Badplayer and Smooth that they know about/convinced/whatever somebody within semenstorm that is dissatisfied with my and oilcan's leadership and wants Smoothbaby to be the leader of SS. I have not once heard of anyone upset with the way I run things or suggest someone else do it, in fact there has admittedly been very little activity within SS. This, per my analysis, is just propaganda manufactured by Smoothrich to try and send me on a witch hunt or something, destabilizing SS at least enough to grief it.

The second, and most believable, is that either Badplayer once again hacked the roster of the defenders abusing whatever glitch it is that allows him to do this. Badplayer, interestingly enough, already has a history of pulling this exact stunt.I've also been told about a glitch with the roster page that allows someone to edit the roster after it should have been disabled simply by keeping the page up. So even though I kicked Smoothrich and Badplayer out of the faction immediately after the castle attack was initiated, they would still be able to edit Semenstorm's roster.

Semenstorm's castle was essentially stolen/griefed/glitched/whatever from them. No matter what theory you subscribe to, I believe everyone can conclude that it wasn't taken legitimately. (Fraichedan is currently banned.)

Shortly after we intercepted Smoothrich, Badplayer joined the FCC faction on strategus. I brought this up to Matey, and he responded that this was "news to him", and that he also changed to the FCC color without actually being accepted. If it's true that Badplayer is not truly in FCC, then no truce was broken, it would only appear that way because of Strategus bugs.

If Badplayer IS legitimately in FCC, then it gets interesting. That means, at the very least, FCC supports glitching, greifing and treachery, for their own gain. Which is probably the most hypocritical thing they could do at this point in the game, considering the HUGE stink they made after the Ahmerrad Debacle, the Duped Goods Scandal, and more recently, the  Saxton Incident.

Balls's in your court, FCC.
visitors can't see pics , please register or login

Offline Matey

  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1327
  • Infamy: 372
  • cRPG Player
  • A Pirate
    • View Profile
  • Game nicks: Matey_BRD
Re: Summer Lovin
« Reply #108 on: June 28, 2013, 05:58:33 am »
-4
Well since we all like drama...

I told you that despite my misgivings about the situation I decided to let badplayer in as rank 1 (though he had been under the banner since he applied to the faction even though it was a long time before I decided to let him in) so he could be sheltered under the NAP (hopefully) long enough to find out of it was a bug or treachery. I guess I could have made this point more clearly but I am pretty conflicted about the situation overall and maybe I didn't communicate very well. I really do like Pibb and the SS guys and I don't really want to piss them off but it has also been made very clear to me through talks with various people among the Occitan/SS/Astralis ranks (and some forum messages I've been shown) that you guys are all gearing up for a big attack on us once the NAP is done since we have been so busy putting our armies through the dhirim grinder.

At any rate... pretty much within an hour of this NAP being made all Hospitaller fiefs and the Sparvico fief were all put into the Occitan faction to protect them from us for an entire month; I figured you guys could at least grin and bear it for a few days.

It's an ugly situation but ultimately you broke your word (or Arowaine's word I guess?) and I don't appreciate that. I may be being a bit of a prick in this situation too and Occitan doing it to us might not make it any less sketchy when we do it, but we didn't kick up a fit when they did and we didn't attack hosp or sparvico under the Occitan banner... It would have been nice if you had waited out the NAP.


P.S. I guess this means NAPs with Occitan/SS are only honoured as long as they are convenient to Occitan/SS.
« Last Edit: June 28, 2013, 06:07:03 am by Matey »

Offline Penguin

  • Duke
  • *******
  • Renown: 670
  • Infamy: 121
  • cRPG Player
  • JesusChrist
    • View Profile
  • Faction: [A]rrows Incoming!
  • Game nicks: [Y]Retreat!
Re: Summer Lovin
« Reply #109 on: June 28, 2013, 06:02:16 am »
+2
If Badplayer IS legitimately in FCC, then it gets interesting. That means, at the very least, FCC supports glitching, greifing and treachery, for their own gain. Which is probably the most hypocritical thing they could do at this point in the game, considering the HUGE stink they made after the Ahmerrad Debacle, the Duped Goods Scandal, and more recently, the  Saxton Incident.

Is this really news to you? Glitching and treachery is fine and funny until it happens to them. Though even Saxton's treachery wasn't near this level, I can't help but feel like this was inevitable with someone like smooth and badplayer (surprised they weren't banned permanently for the first incident) in your faction.
"As you gaze upon the cross, and long for conformity to him, be not weary or fearful because you cannot express in words what you seek. Ask him to plant the cross in your heart. Believe in him, the crucified and now living one, to dwell within you, and breathe his own mind there."

Offline Lt_Anders

  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1049
  • Infamy: 651
  • cRPG Player Sir Black Pawn A Gentleman and a Scholar
  • Man, I still play this shit?
    • View Profile
    • Drowtales
  • Faction: Astralis
  • Game nicks: Anders_Astralis
Re: Summer Lovin
« Reply #110 on: June 28, 2013, 06:08:02 am »
+6
(click to show/hide)

NOTHING against you matey, your faction or ANY deals you got, you should legitimately get rid of SAMARRA castle. BADPLAYER was banned for this(permanently), so that should be enough proof there that it was done Illegally. Also, I'm fairly sure they aren't going to attack you, but I'm not a diplo guy, I just sell more troops for the grinders.

[13:43] <cmp> oh, by the way, that guy was permabanned
[13:44] <cmp> that account was banned by Tydeus this morning

SO even if you DO keep it, it's going to get gear bugged eventually with no fief owner.
visitors can't see pics , please register or login

Offline Duster

  • Marshall
  • ********
  • Renown: 730
  • Infamy: 89
  • cRPG Player Sir White Knight A Gentleman and a Scholar
    • View Profile
  • Game nicks: Mr_Pibb, Mellow_Yellowtf
Re: Summer Lovin
« Reply #111 on: June 28, 2013, 06:08:14 am »
+3
It would have been nice if you had waited out the NAP.


P.S. I guess this means NAPs with Occitan/SS are only honoured as long as they are convenient.

And I suppose self-righteousness and underhanded tactic-shaming is reserved for when it's convenient for FCC.
visitors can't see pics , please register or login

Offline Matey

  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1327
  • Infamy: 372
  • cRPG Player
  • A Pirate
    • View Profile
  • Game nicks: Matey_BRD
Re: Summer Lovin
« Reply #112 on: June 28, 2013, 06:09:44 am »
-1
And I suppose self-righteousness and underhanded tactic-shaming is reserved for when it's convenient for FCC.

Except that as I mentioned, Occitan did it the day we made the NAP and sheltered every Hospitaller/Sparvico fief in the steppes and have had them under their banner to keep them safe with the NAP for the entirety of the treaty. So really, we are doing to you as you did unto us. That doesn't make it a non-shitty thing to do, but since it is just one fief and for less than a week I would say it is less shitty.

Offline Gristle

  • Duke
  • *******
  • Renown: 560
  • Infamy: 130
  • cRPG Player A Gentleman and a Scholar
    • View Profile
  • Faction: BRD
  • Game nicks: Gristle_BRD
Re: Summer Lovin
« Reply #113 on: June 28, 2013, 06:14:35 am »
0
Love is... back? Maybe? It's complicated.

Offline Matey

  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1327
  • Infamy: 372
  • cRPG Player
  • A Pirate
    • View Profile
  • Game nicks: Matey_BRD
Re: Summer Lovin
« Reply #114 on: June 28, 2013, 06:26:50 am »
-1
So FCC is going to continue BADPLAYER's troll?

To capitalize on it after all the losses at Dhirim?

Taking advantage of retarded, nonsense-semantics to make the victims out to be the bad guys?

They can be victims and bad guys.

Offline Sparvico

  • Marshall
  • ********
  • Renown: 976
  • Infamy: 174
  • cRPG Player Sir Black Bishop A Gentleman and a Scholar
  • Steam ID: Sparvico
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Mossbacks
  • Game nicks: Sparvico et al.
Re: Summer Lovin
« Reply #115 on: June 28, 2013, 06:32:14 am »
+2
Except that as I mentioned, Occitan did it the day we made the NAP and sheltered every Hospitaller/Sparvico fief in the steppes and have had them under their banner to keep them safe with the NAP for the entirety of the treaty. So really, we are doing to you as you did unto us. That doesn't make it a non-shitty thing to do, but since it is just one fief and for less than a week I would say it is less shitty.

The main difference between what Occitan did in the steppe and this Samarra business is that Samarra was lost due to a cheat that the perpetrator got banned for (as Andres has said) whereas Occitan sheltered weaker factions that (in my case anyhow) asked for shelter because of the worsening political climate.

FCC= Shelters cheaters (are we surprised?)
LCO= Shelters weaklings (I am one of them, before ya'll go getting uppity).

I would say that of the two the cheating business is much shittier. Only my opinion though, I am quite sure yours will differ.


Edit: also what havelle said.
Quote
Mossback_Westwood: "I swear 2 my semitic God if you give me this bundle of sticks's address I'll cut off his ear and eat it"

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

Offline arowaine

  • Duke
  • *******
  • Renown: 614
  • Infamy: 159
  • cRPG Player A Gentleman and a Scholar
    • View Profile
    • http://occitanclan.webs.com/
  • Faction: Occitan
  • Game nicks: Occitan_Arowaine
  • IRC nick: arowaine
Re: Summer Lovin
« Reply #116 on: June 28, 2013, 06:33:27 am »
+3
Right, but you guys don't have a claim to the castle. You accepted a known griefer to your faction, who later gets permabanned, and then say they broke the treaty.

You are literally not looking at this like an actual person.

+1 sir just +1
Desire: pls smite FCC 2.0 T.T

Offline Matey

  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1327
  • Infamy: 372
  • cRPG Player
  • A Pirate
    • View Profile
  • Game nicks: Matey_BRD
Re: Summer Lovin
« Reply #117 on: June 28, 2013, 06:39:47 am »
-2
The main difference between what Occitan did in the steppe and this Samarra business is that Samarra was lost due to a cheat that the perpetrator got banned for (as Andres has said) whereas Occitan sheltered weaker factions that (in my case anyhow) asked for shelter because of the worsening political climate.

FCC= Shelters cheaters (are we surprised?)
LCO= Shelters weaklings (I am one of them, before ya'll go getting uppity).

I would say that of the two the cheating business is much shittier. Only my opinion though, I am quite sure yours will differ.


Edit: also what havelle said.

I don't believe badplayer cheated. I believe he was gut reaction banned based on bias that results from his past history (which does include cheating). I don't pretend that this is a friendly happy nice move on my part but I had to make a decision on it and based on all the information I have I decided to do it. Also, I did think that Occ/SS would honour the NAP in this situation since we honoured it when it was them sheltering easy targets; one could also argue that Occitan made the peace deal with us entirely for the purpose of buying hosp and sparvico a month to rebuild. Arowaine was very convincing when talking peace with us in that he had no interest in fighting us this strat and that he liked us and that he didn't want to shelter hospitallers but was forced to and that he wanted us to wipe hospitallers out once the peace was up and that we could even extend the NAP after it expired and he would still kick hosp out so we could wipe them out for him... But call me crazy... I don't think he meant any of that. I guess I got a bit off topic there... but at any rate, I am still surprised that you guys wouldn't let us hide someone under our banner for a few days after you hid so many under yours for a month... granted it was Arowaine hiding people under his banner and not SS but since SS lets arowaine handle their diplomacy and the NAP was with Occ/SS combined, it seems fair to group them together.

Offline dynamike

  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1212
  • Infamy: 187
  • cRPG Player A Gentleman and a Scholar
  • Let's be friends again?
    • View Profile
    • The Remnants Clan Website
  • Faction: Stratia
  • Game nicks: Remnant_dynamike
Re: Summer Lovin
« Reply #118 on: June 28, 2013, 06:42:11 am »
+9
My open and honest opinion about this:

Experience shows that dealing with badplayer is bad business. Stay away from him like you would from the sun if it happens to shine into your basement window. Let's undo all dealings with him and go back to status quo.
For while the fire in the heart of a single Remnant still burns... can Stratia truly have fallen?

Offline Jack1

  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1029
  • Infamy: 231
  • cRPG Player
    • View Profile
  • Game nicks: Jack1_, Abbud_Amari, The_Doc, Gottlob_Kohlman
  • IRC nick: Risen_Jack
Re: Summer Lovin
« Reply #119 on: June 28, 2013, 06:42:50 am »
+5
I don't believe badplayer cheated. I believe he was gut reaction banned based on bias that results from his past history (which does include cheating). I don't pretend that this is a friendly happy nice move on my part but I had to make a decision on it and based on all the information I have I decided to do it. Also, I did think that Occ/SS would honour the NAP in this situation since we honoured it when it was them sheltering easy targets; one could also argue that Occitan made the peace deal with us entirely for the purpose of buying hosp and sparvico a month to rebuild. Arowaine was very convincing when talking peace with us in that he had no interest in fighting us this strat and that he liked us and that he didn't want to shelter hospitallers but was forced to and that he wanted us to wipe hospitallers out once the peace was up and that we could even extend the NAP after it expired and he would still kick hosp out so we could wipe them out for him... But call me crazy... I don't think he meant any of that. I guess I got a bit off topic there... but at any rate, I am still surprised that you guys wouldn't let us hide someone under our banner for a few days after you hid so many under yours for a month... granted it was Arowaine hiding people under his banner and not SS but since SS lets arowaine handle their diplomacy and the NAP was with Occ/SS combined, it seems fair to group them together.

Are

You

That

Thick

Headed
We're all nerds here, so it doesn't really matter.