1 edit
Originally posted by AThousandYoungLMFAO!! Poland been great to your ally and your ally's realllllllllllly had his back! Idiot.
No; being good to people means people will get your back when you need them. Being bad to people means they will give you hell while you're already at war on two fronts. I'm not stupid.
Originally posted by no1marauderPoland did not look out for himself. Bavaria hasn't done anything to Poland; Poland did it all to himself. This all assumes that Poland isn't going to get Savoy and/or other territory once you've been squashed.
LMFAO!! Poland been great to your ally and your ally's realllllllllllly had his back! Idiot.
I don't intend to do anything for anyone else that will make me vulnerable to a fourth party.
Originally posted by AThousandYoungNeither has Bavaria by letting other realms roam through their most valuable provinces which were undefended. Lithuania did that with the Horde and paid with immediate defeat. Bavaria's lucky he has chumps like you and Poland.
Poland did not look out for himself. Bavaria hasn't done anything to Poland; Poland did it all to himself. This all assumes that Poland isn't going to get Savoy and/or other territory once you've been squashed.
I don't intend to do anything for anyone else that will make me vulnerable to a fourth party.
You haven't done anything since turn 7 to win the game for yourself so you probably won't now either. You're in for quite a surprise in a few turns I'll wager; it will be most interesting to read your posts then.
1 edit
Originally posted by rwingettYou're the lame one, Ozbeg. You're always sitting on your butt. Walk No Evil leading See No Evil and Resist No Evil Food around Eastern Europe...I see why you mentioned a chariot a while back. It's your medieval wheelchair.
He's pretty deadly on good ol' terra firma, though. I cracked up when I saw the name they game him. Denisov the Corpulent. So now I've got a blind commander and an obese one. I'm going to hire another commander this turn just to see what infirmity they give him. It would be cool if he was lame or something. Or bald.
Originally posted by AThousandYoungAt the Golden Horde we're equal opportunity employers. Providing meaningful employment for the physically disadvantaged is one of our many 'good neighbor' policies. Taking the mentally disadvantaged under our permanent care is another.
You're the lame one, Ozbeg. You're always sitting on your butt. Walk No Evil leading See No Evil and Resist No Evil Food around Eastern Europe...I see why you mentioned a chariot a while back. It's your medieval wheelchair.
Originally posted by no1marauderYes, I sent several messages to the Mamlukes. However, since I wasn't receiving game email from the GMs, I had the wrong email address for the Mamlukes. By the time I got the correct email address, it was far too late for diplomacy. So now I get to kick his ass without ever talking to him. 🙂
You're such a moron. Did you EVER try to ally with the Mamulukes and/or Morocco??? Who doesn't GET the Diplomacy part, retard??
Again, he moved his ships and troops against you before I even knew he was in the game. When I saw a new player was in, I e-mailed him which I have done with all new players since early in the game. He asked for assist ...[text shortened]... ns). So you thought you were being clever, but you were just being dimwitted. Tough break.
You are dense as a brick. I was ALLIED with the Mamlukes, so no, I was not going to attack him. Yes, I was going to attack Italy, but my fleet of Arab War Galleys was no match for Sicily's RGs AND yours too. When you broke our alliance, I bailed on the plan. Regardless of your wildest dreams, I am NOT stupid.
As far as inept diplomacy, ask yourself who/where/what are your allies now.
Originally posted by no1marauderOk, I'll play your game of avoiding the issue...
The issue YOU are making is claiming that I somehow got the Mamulukes to attack you and then betrayed them. That is BS. He WAS going to attack you. I saw that him attacking you was likely and figured it was in my interest to help him do so. So I did. That's the WHOLE thing of it in a nutshell. I didn't help him because you're a woman or because of anythi ...[text shortened]... guarantee I'll go down bloodier for whichever group of nations finally can finish me off.
I really doubt you'd have the balls to even stay in this game if you had been decimated as I have been. It's typical of you to say that I'm responsible for my own downfall. I am completely convinced that when you finally draw your last breath in this game, you will still never admit it was your own fault. Of course not, Mr. Diplomacy.
And I'm not dead yet. And I'll come back.
Back ON topic.
Who contacted whom first?
I saw that him attacking you was likely and figured it was in my interest to help him do so. So I did. That's the WHOLE thing of it in a nutshell.
Likely? You mean your dearest dream. Of COURSE it was in your best interest to "help" him. Even to the point of pointing him in the "correct" direction. Even to the point of figuring how you would dispose of his remnants after he had served your purposes. THAT is the "whole" thing in a nutshell. Again with the misleading comments, telling only half the story. Typical.
And you don't have to point out why you helped him. We all know why.
And Morocco attacking him had no bearing on him not achieving "total victory" over me. His ineptitude in letting me slip past him does. Why did he go to Armenia anyways? Because he wanted a province to link him to Tarsus, and didn't trust you to give it to him. Again, who cares about Morocco... what Morocco did STILL doesn't enter into it. The Mamlukes had practically all his forces concentrated to attack me, because he NEEDED them, due to bad advice from his "ally"... oh, not to mention all the "help" you gave him. If you had directly helped him, instead of raping the rest of Roum for yourself, denying him the spoils, he wouldn't have had to move ALL his troops up to attack me.
Yeah, as I said, with friends like you, who needs enemies?
Originally posted by nook7Uhhhh, has someone hit you with a baseball bat?
Hi there, Suzianne,
No1 had no idea l was going to attack the Mamlukes - truthfully -
He has always been honest in his dealing with Morocco.
As l have been with him (that's why l was not happy when he declared war on me!
I KNOW he had no idea you would do that... I doubt anyone did... my point (which no1 deftly avoided by talking about what he didn't know, something completely unrelated to my point) is that whether he knew or not does not matter in the least, and has absolutely no bearing on the fact that he used and is continuing to use the Mamlukes, like a puppet on a string.
So you were not happy when he declared war on you... so I suppose he was honest by declaring war on you? Sorry, I missed something there...
Originally posted by orfeoYou want a fact? How about the fact that the Mamlukes are no longer in control of ANY of their starting land? NOR is there any "chain" of provinces on the way to where they are, belonging to them. Is that a good enough fact for you?
Fine. List the provinces you have, list the provinces the Mamlukes have, and we'll see if we can possibly draw any kind of analogy with the Poles who have managed to migrate from their native land to Northern Italy without holding on to ANY bits of their starting point, and indeed without leaving any kind of chain of provinces on their way there.
Fact. Seeing as how you're so fond of 'em.
Originally posted by no1marauderRescuing the fair maiden? I don't need any help seeing through your crap!
I said that didn't I? You posted but didn't move. If you can spend time posting, you should be able to spend a couple minutes moving. If I cared about ratings, I'd be annoyed that soooooooo many others timed you out and I'm actually risking a bunch of rating points due to your artificially low rating. But since it's a matter of indifference to me, it's n ...[text shortened]... he knight in shining armor rescuing the fair maiden; it's not even good for a laugh.
Hmmm, another entry in the no1 to english dictionary...
truthful = misleading... ok, got it.
Originally posted by KnightWulfeIt does in no1's head... he's all about misleading statements and evasion. Oh, and never, never, never, never, never, EVER making a mistake. Or losing, whether it be a battle OR the war...
*clap* *clap* *clap* *clap* *clap* *clap* *clap* *clap* *clap* *clap* *clap* *clap* *clap* *clap* *clap* *clap* *clap* *clap* *clap* *clap* *clap* *clap* *clap* *clap*
One of the points to this game that I have been trying to make since about turn 4, I believe.
A victorious battle does not mean a victorious war.
I see.... an abdication in his future... that way he CAN'T lose!
Originally posted by no1marauderGet this, KW?
Yes, they've been given such an overwhelming advantage as have you. All Italy can do is continue to defeat them for as long as possible in battle after battle. Sooner or later, Bavaria will win since it's been decided by the other players that Bavaria will win. The fact that he's had such a large advantage for many turns and still manages to lose battles is a measure of his extreme incompetence.
they've been given such an overwhelming advantage
The propaganda machine cranks on!