Originally posted by SuzianneNice lederhosen you got there, Princess.
Rats. Now the secret is out of just what my palace staff does for entertainment on the weekends... now I suppose everyone will want to be dropping by...
Oh, wait... that already happened.
Princess Suzianne
http://home.online.no/~khgott/suzianne.jpg
Originally posted by buffalobillLMAO!! You lied to him AND in the thread! Who cares if you "made up" over it; it's still established that you're a liar. "We made up over it" - how lame can you get??? You guys really do make this sound like a pathetic imitiation of Heathers.
I deceived him, but I did not lie. Aragon and I have made up over that one. You must be carrying a lot of chips. Does it give you a permanent list?
Originally posted by no1marauderI think what I find most interesting about your posts is that every action you have taken you claim that YOU have done something, or YOU have been victorious. YOU have not done a single thing by yourself. You did not even sink my fleet at the beginning of the game alone, you had Sicilian help. Every single battle you have fought, you have made sure to have superior numbers with others helping you. I do not deny that I have made allies and have taken you down a piece at a time with help from those allies. As a matter of fact, it is at the core of this game to make alliances and unite against a common enemy. I thank you for your mouth and making yourself that enemy.
Don't be ridiculous; you've left your provinces near the Horde completely unprotected except when a couple hundred CS of Italians went through your territories. Using the threat of the Horde, who have been allied with you since very early on and have been sheltering your pathetic fleet, is a very lame excuse.
I really don't care that I'm losing ...[text shortened]... Italy, you've failed to gain an inch of ground in 12 turns. I'd say that's pretty sad.
And all of this BS about lies and treachery.... When dealing with an enemy, there is no such thing as treachery....It is called misdirection and subterfuge. You keep trying to pin this crap on myself and Saxony, in particular. At the time, Aragon was our enemy and our tactic was to mislead him...it worked.
If you could, please explain to me how you can be treacherous and backstabbing to an enemy.
The definition of treachery is: Willful betrayal of fidelity, confidence, or trust.
The defiition of backstab: To attack (someone) unfairly, especially in an underhand, deceitful manner
Tell me, what is unfair in dealing with an enemy? What betrayal of trust or confidence occurs with an enemy?
1 edit
Originally posted by KnightWulfeA) I did not have Sicilian help in sinking your fleet. Nor did I have Sicilian aid when I just destroyed your 10 Archers, did I? Nor did have the assistance of ANYBODY when I was defeating you and Arles early in the game. Get your facts straight.
I think what I find most interesting about your posts is that every action you have taken you claim that YOU have done something, or YOU have been victorious. YOU have not done a single thing by yourself. You did not even sink my fleet at the beginning of the game alone, you had Sicilian help. Every single battle you have fought, you have made sure to ha ...[text shortened]... t is unfair in dealing with an enemy? What betrayal of trust or confidence occurs with an enemy?
Of course, I attempt to manuever so that the individual battles are ones where I and my allies have superior force. That is only common sense. What I don't do is what you and the Hungarians do: be so terrified of losing a single battle that I fear to take legitimate risks. That is why Hungary, despite having all the advantages, has failed to expand since Turn 7. That is why you, despite having a large advantage, took 11 moves to take Venice.
If people REALLY became my enemy because of what I wrote in this forum, they are being childish. I have no control over the immaturity of other persons. That you think such a circumstance would be a legitimate reason to base your "strategy" in an internet war game shows your own ridiculous state of mind. Pitiful.
Saxony deceiving Aragon was treacherous; pretending you are going to ally with someone and then going into combat against them is acting in an "underhanded, deceitful manner". Look up the terms "underhanded" and "deceit". You make a lousy lawyer; don't quit your day job (if you have one). What's worse is that BB decided to lie about it in the forum; that's really pathetic.
Basically, countries trying to make alliances is a big part of the game. But the purpose of the alliances should be to benefit EACH MEMBER of the alliance. Your "alliances" seem to benefit YOU and the Saxons and no one else. What did Poland gain from its "alliance" with you? Or Arles? Even Hungary. That is mostly their fault and it makes sense that they got screwed if they made their decisions based on irrational reasons.
Originally posted by no1marauderno1 - there was no treachery on Saxony's part....you imply that they were allies, when in fact, they were at war. You cannot be treacherous to an enemy. If you want to think that way then every province you have taken has been taken treacherously. Arles dug his own grave and you know it - trying to blame it on me is laughable.
A) I did not have Sicilian help in sinking your fleet. Nor did I have Sicilian aid when I just destroyed your 10 Archers, did I? Nor did have the assistance of ANYBODY when I was defeating you and Arles early in the game. Get your facts straight.
Of course, I attempt to manuever so that the individual battles are ones where I and my allies have ...[text shortened]... that they got screwed if they made their decisions based on irrational reasons.
Now...You come back into insulting my person, yet again. I did not make any insult to you. I did not insult your "day job." So piss off. Try to actually keep this on topic next time.
As to assitance - Believe what you wish, every step and battle you have fought, you had help...whether it was directly or indirectly. You would not have been able to attack Arles if Sicily had not been protecting your back. And Rhaetia was not a victory on your part, you did nothing but sit there....it was a miss on my part. I made an assumption that you would act logically and move to defend yourself in your own fortress and at least try to do more damge to me as you went out. I guessed wrong. So in that battle, you had my help in the form of a wrong decision. So get over yourself. You are not all that and a bag of chips.
Originally posted by KnightWulfeLMAO!!! Why bother to bring along a dictionary IF you're going to ignore the definitions and make up your own?? And you have a new definition of "help" which includes when someone does nothing; I wasn't even allied with Sicily until AFTER Hungary and Roum joined you and Arles in their war against me. Of course, it has "helped" me that you're a blundering fool, but your assumption on what was "logical" last turn is flawed for the reasons I already gave. You made exactly the same mistake in the prior turn when you "assumed" that Sicily would leave Tuscany unguarded and sent an army of archers to their doom there while inflicting few losses. Some people learn from their mistakes, but apparently you don't. I tell you what; you have 8 more Archers and a couple of Siege Machines in Alsace; send them alone into Rhaetia and see what happens.
no1 - there was no treachery on Saxony's part....you imply that they were allies, when in fact, they were at war. You cannot be treacherous to an enemy. If you want to think that way then every province you have taken has been taken treacherously. Arles dug his own grave and you know it - trying to blame it on me is laughable.
Now...You come back into ...[text shortened]... the form of a wrong decision. So get over yourself. You are not all that and a bag of chips.
Originally posted by no1marauderOk.
LMAO!!! Why bother to bring along a dictionary IF you're going to ignore the definitions and make up your own?? And you have a new definition of "help" which includes when someone does nothing; I wasn't even allied with Sicily until AFTER Hungary and Roum joined you and Arles in their war against me. Of course, it has "helped" me that you're a blundering ...[text shortened]... uple of Siege Machines in Alsace; send them alone into Rhaetia and see what happens.
Technically, one can only attack enemies (those they are at war with). One can not attack friends (those they are friendly with -- war being the supreme absence of friendliness). Sometimes we lose sight of this.
This might help some of us better understand the whole treachery and backstab thing. When someone attacks me and I am not prepared, it is a backstab. When I attack someone and the target is not prepared, I am crafty or bold.
What I found most intriguing about this group, Red Hot Pawn, when I first started reading this thread, was the lively and entertaining banter. Well, it has become not so very much fun.
Venom has replaced wit. Repetition has replaced repartee. When no1 called his enemies "the Heathers" it was a beautiful Dennis Miller-esque cultural reference. Where has the comment of that quality gone? The reference to the medieval smack talk link was golden, too.
Let the smack roll on, my friends, but let us try to elevate it a bit beyond the level to which it has descended. Group hug?
Originally posted by GottschalkIt has been interesting, but nothing is changed from the start of this thread. You were not reading it right.
Technically, one can only attack enemies (those they are at war with). One can not attack friends (those they are friendly with -- war being the supreme absence of friendliness). Sometimes we lose sight of this.
This might help some of us better understand the whole treachery and backstab thing. When someone attacks me and I am not prepared, it is a ...[text shortened]... ds, but let us try to elevate it a bit beyond the level to which it has descended. Group hug?
These very same conversations can be found in all threads at RHP. The Doge is abrasive, and people had it out for him perhaps before this thread ever started.
That's why I came on-board with the Doge. I knew Doge was the underdog, I love the roll too... I expected a quick intro to this game and get out quick with a few battles. I figured we could go 6 turns perhaps with the number of regions going against the Doge, and how beat up he already was.
Yet, Italy has stood against ALL ODDS! Treachory was and still is all around us at every turn! Our enemies try sooooo hard to knock us out of the game, but have so far failed miserably! Victory will not be ours, but much sleep will be lost by our enemies!
King Phil!