Originally posted by SuzianneLMAO! The Sicilians aren't in this forum fawning about the "great diplomacy" of another player as you are. Sicily is also in possession of one of the provinces of Arles and will be ceded another as per agreement. This they gained without losing a single unit. Not a bad deal for them, eh? And not a good deal for Arles which decided to put their faith in Bavarian assistance.
Oh, yes, *your* diplomacy... you mean the boot-licking Sicilians, right? I'm thinking that was a gift, more than your "superior" diplomacy.
Originally posted by no1marauderYou can't blame the problems of Arles on Bavaria. Arles was completely incompetent. He was his own downfall.
LMAO! The Sicilians aren't in this forum fawning about the "great diplomacy" of another player as you are. Sicily is also in possession of one of the provinces of Arles and will be ceded another as per agreement. This they gained without losing a single unit. Not a bad deal for them, eh? And not a good deal for Arles which decided to put their faith in Bavarian assistance.
Originally posted by catfoodtimAre you sure it was the real Devil, not just some jumped-up imp out to impress you? The politics of Hell strongly resemble those of Mediaeval Diplomacy.
Actually, Arles made a pact with the devil. That was the cause of downfall.
Are the illiterate Alsatians keeping you in good cheer? I can send over a few books if you like.
As promised I received an e-mail from the GM regarding the occurrences of Turn 8. While I believe it gives somewhat of a false impression of what I actually said (undoubtedly due to someone's e-mail), it does clearly state that Poland and Bavaria are not "multitying" (not that I said they were). Here it is:
Hello,
This is a note by the GM, I received an email that there was a concern that the players of Poland and Bavaria were actually the same person. I have several methods that are used for checking whether this is occurring, that are quite effective. I have also examined the orders of each realms to see if there is possible collusion. I have found that nothing has triggered the anti-cheating indicators. I believe that these are 2 realms cooperating closely with each other, and controlled by separate people. It is common for close allies to work together towards joint goals, with an eye to being part of a victory coalition that will share the victory points. Also, in the future, these things should only be emailed to the GM, so that they can be investigated privately, to avoid possibly innocent persons from having reputations damaged. Please do not make allegations about these players to others.
Sincerely,
GM
Since I said that KW must have been a complete fool or a cheat to let a new player walk into his unprotected provinces and the GM has said he is not a cheat, I have drawn the obvious conclusion. I have sent an e-mail to blljarrell congratulating him on his cunning ruse that gained him access to Bavaria's homeland on his first turn.
Originally posted by no1marauderIs there some sort of future benefit involved? A league or something?
It is common for close allies to work together towards joint goals, with an eye to being part of a victory coalition that will share the victory points.
Time will tell whose head the foolscap fits best.
Originally posted by Bosse de Nagedid I hear somebody say "devil"?
Are you sure it was the real Devil, not just some jumped-up imp out to impress you? The politics of Hell strongly resemble those of Mediaeval Diplomacy.
Are the illiterate Alsatians keeping you in good cheer? I can send over a few books if you like.