Originally posted by PalynkaNow I've read your post. Thank you.
I noticed that. I actually find it unsportsmanlike and yes, I'm surprised Bosse would do it. Bad Bosse! Bad!
That said, my intentions for this game were never to win, that would be only be a great bonus (deserved for what I've done, obviously 😛). Why?
Well, it's the first time I played such a game and I was territorially between Ikko and Uesugi, not t ...[text shortened]... urgical strikes and only needed sweeping afterwards. I'm hoping it's different there.
You're not going to learn much in the south except that 9 clans (including the two strongest) beats 3.
Originally posted by drakkarLord Otomo only recently, though.... as he has been too busy dying on Hosokawa swordtips
So much friendly conversation...
A few corrections about the turn just played, and about our game in general...
1/ The attack from Kotto by Ryuzoji and Ito was no "feint"... as he attempts to spin it. The Amako comprehensively defeated them. Brave lord Ryuzoji saw one solitary Amako ronin standing all by himself and therefore felt that it was probably ...[text shortened]... ver lord Ryuzoji hasn't achieved much to justify doing nothing to assist Lord Otomo, has he?
You're giving the credit to Hosokawa for killing me? That's quite a stretch.
Originally posted by drakkarIf you actually knew anything about the period of history, you'd know that there were rebellions by samurai against their lords all the time.
I have an intense interest in this period of history.
Since I was a complete diploware novice I thought I should accept a junior position to another player, so I adopted the persona of daimyo who was sworn to a greater daimyo.
The oath of fealty in sengoku Japan was literally the willingness to throw one's life away for one's lord. I've just played out t ...[text shortened]... t points than you and I'm gonna kill you all blah blah blah" stuff. So I chose Bosse.
Originally posted by no1marauderJeez, l dont check the forum for a few days and miss all this!!!
If you actually knew anything about the period of history, you'd know that there were rebellions by samurai against their lords all the time.
No1 you are definetly not going to win a Japanese history contest with Drakkar believe me.
Wow were do l start...
Bosse and l fresh from our recent MW victory said we would keep a look out for each other in this one. Given our starting locations it made sense to work together. Allying quickly with Palnyka and he of the tireless Katana Cadwah it began to expand. Getting rbmorris and eagles on board further strengthened central honshu.
By this time there was squarking by the Hatano and Mogami and Shikoku ws no playground for the rich and famous. Outside help was needed to turn back the kyushu lords.
Lines in the sand were drawm, rubbed out and drawn again.
So here wee are. No1 and his allys are choosing the samurai way to die and respect for that.
And to echo the thoughts of Treetalk amongst others - the in game in character bantering is fun, the rest is un-necessary.
Cheers
Originally posted by AThousandYoungHis troops have done most of the killing, haven't they?
[b]Lord Otomo only recently, though.... as he has been too busy dying on Hosokawa swordtips
You're giving the credit to Hosokawa for killing me? That's quite a stretch.[/b]
I must admit Hosokawa was in deep water at one stage, having given you an empty coastal province on a platter. Why do people do that?!
3 edits
Originally posted by nook7Quite frankly, I am considering resigning the game as it is pointless to continue this farce. And I can get into a game where most people are actually trying to win rather than spending all their time helping someone else do so, which I find unsporting and against the spirit of any competitive game.
Jeez, l dont check the forum for a few days and miss all this!!!
No1 you are definetly not going to win a Japanese history contest with Drakkar believe me.
Wow were do l start...
Bosse and l fresh from our recent MW victory said we would keep a look out for each other in this one. Given our starting locations it made sense to work together. Allying qu ...[text shortened]... amongst others - the in game in character bantering is fun, the rest is un-necessary.
Cheers
And since my point about vassals rebelling against their lords is unquestionably historically true (you didn't deny it), I think Drakkar's knowledge of Japanese history is suspect if he says it isn't.
EDIT: I offer this academic article as proof of my assertion: http://ccbs.ntu.edu.tw/FULLTEXT/JR-PHIL/ew26464.htm
In fact, one of the most troubling problems of the premodern era is the apparent discrepancy between the numerous house laws and codes exhorting the samurai to practice loyalty and the all-too-common incidents of disloyalty which racked medieval Japanese warrior life. It would not be an exaggeration to say that most crucial battles in medieval Japan were decided by the defection -- that is, the disloyalty -- of one or more of the major vassals of the losing general. In other words, Takauji, twice disloyal for having first turned against his feudal lord and then his sovereign, was far closer to the prototype of the medieval Japanese warrior than was Masashige. Ironically, this behavior explains the great lengths to which moralists in premodern and modern times have gone to praise Masashige and vilify Takauji. In fact, one of the most troubling problems of the premodern era is the apparent discrepancy between the numerous house laws and codes exhorting the samurai to practice loyalty and the all-too-common incidents of disloyalty which racked medieval Japanese warrior life. It would not be an exaggeration to say that most crucial battles in medieval Japan were decided by the defection -- that is, the disloyalty -- of one or more of the major vassals of the losing general. In other words, Takauji, twice disloyal for having first turned against his feudal lord and then his sovereign, was far closer to the prototype of the medieval Japanese warrior than was Masashige. Ironically, this behavior explains the great lengths to which moralists in premodern and modern times have gone to praise Masashige and vilify Takauji.
Originally posted by no1marauderNo1 l would love to have another game where there were many different people fighting to win. It is a shame that this game has deteriorated like this over the past 2-3 weeks.
Quite frankly, I am considering resigning the game as it is pointless to continue this farce. And I can get into a game where most people are actually trying to win rather than spending all their time helping someone else do so, which I find unsporting and against the spirit of any competitive game.
And since my point about vassals rebelli ...[text shortened]... ich moralists in premodern and modern times have gone to praise Masashige and vilify Takauji.
re: your history comment: l agree that many battles were decided this way, it was something that happened many times in Japanese history; however, this type of action does go against the true teachings of bushido and as such Drakkars comments are correct. A true samurai (anyone who has lived in Japan for any length of time laughs at these type of comments as the Japanese have so many contradictions) would not involve themselves in this type of action. Case 1 (the most famous battles in Japanese hsitory) Sekigahara was mostly decided by a switch (betrayal) in sides - though dishonourable (of couerse Samurai dont do this) the lord in question were not punished as he helped the victor.
l think you mis-interpreted Drakkars comments - anyhow. Onward and upward.
Cheers
Originally posted by nook7I spent 7 years over there and assiduously used bush-i-do in my dealings with saucy women. 😉
No1 l would love to have another game where there were many different people fighting to win. It is a shame that this game has deteriorated like this over the past 2-3 weeks.
re: your history comment: l agree that many battles were decided this way, it was something that happened many times in Japanese history; however, this type of action does go against t ...[text shortened]... victor.
l think you mis-interpreted Drakkars comments - anyhow. Onward and upward.
Cheers
Originally posted by no1marauderYou are 100% correct in that.
And since my point about vassals rebelling against their lords is unquestionably historically true (you didn't deny it), I think Drakkar's knowledge of Japanese history is suspect if he says it isn't.
EDIT: I offer this academic article as proof of my assertion: http://ccbs.ntu.edu.tw/FULLTEXT/JR-PHIL/ew26464.htm
In fact, one of ...[text shortened]... ich moralists in premodern and modern times have gone to praise Masashige and vilify Takauji.[/b]
Daimyo often swapped allegiances.
It's a very instructive point to make to the Otomo and the Ito…
By the way, the other reason that Masashige is held in high esteem is that he died for the emperor - or who he perceived was the legitimate emperor. The Taiiheiki has details on all that.
I've read it.
In Japanese.
Some of the Kamikaze operations of the late second world war drew their inspiration from him for the imperial cult
This example actually describes allegiances to a non-samurai Imperial house, not other samurai.
And it's a different period. Our game represents the sengoku period.
But thanks for that source. It's interesting.
Originally posted by drakkarWhy on earth would that be instructive for Otomo and I?
You are 100% correct in that.
Daimyo often swapped allegiances.
It's a very instructive point to make to the Otomo and the Ito…
9-3 odds now - the only way this game would become interesting would be if one of you guys came over to our side!
LOL - I have more than a passing knowledge of Japanese history, as well, my friend. 🙂