Originally posted by nook7When you keep repeating false claims that you know are false, you are lying. You have done so several times regarding the NE game.
No1 there are numerous posts made by yourself where you accuse me and others of lying.
What you fail to understand (which surprise me as you are usually so astute) is that just because you dont agree with someone or does not mean they are lying.
Let me repeat that to make sure you are clear - just because you dont agree with someone does not mean they a ...[text shortened]... ave absolutely no need to lie about my actions in this or any other game l have played with you.
Originally posted by eagles54Say what you have to say, jerk. You only broke alliance a few turns ago, when your master told you to. And you would have done so no matter what I did. Tell the truth for a change.
You don't read well for comprehension do you? Go back and try again. I'll wait, the popcorn's good!
Originally posted by no1marauderWell l could be wrong about NE - wouldnt be the first time , but l dont remember any large army.
I never had any dealings in NE to turn against Russia. I briefly considered getting Naples in a victory coalition, but decided against it. That would not have involved any hostile action against you, however.
Your memory is terrible. I sent a rather large land army with a bunch of siege artillery to assist you and it helped you take several f ...[text shortened]... er games; everybody in those seems to want to win them, not merely help someone else do so.
If Kyushu was friendly e.g vassals then there is no ned to attack.
You wanted me to attack the Uesugi - this was not in my interests at all - so l didnt.There is no falsehoods. You need to get of your Machiavellian high horse for a moment. When l was involved in wars against 3 nations plus a bot why would l entertain one with you as well.
You place too much emphasis on your own worth in this game. You are just another realm to the Ikko Ikki - though now you need to be knocked a few rungs lower.
Originally posted by no1marauderThe truth of the matter is that I encouraged Hosokawa to attack Otomo because Otomo Sourin was rude and didn't respond to my messages--the base-born cur!--and Lord H was in need of someone to test himself against. Hosokawa got himself into trouble, so I had to intervene.
No, the Hokosawa chose to attack the Otomo on Shikoku. As soon as he could, Uesugi sided with the Hokosawa. And as soon as you could, you indicated you would back the Uesugi.
Tell the truth.
Originally posted by Bosse de NageThe biggest truth is that you and the Ikko Ikki have been closely allied since turn 1. Given that you weren't going to fight each other and all the remaining clans on Honshu are one of your vassals, it was a foregone conclusion that eventually all of you were going to move against Kyushu. And nothing I said or did would have mattered, so all this sudden preening about my "diplomacy" is disingenous.
The truth of the matter is that I encouraged Hosokawa to attack Otomo because Otomo Sourin was rude and didn't respond to my messages--the base-born cur!--and Lord H was in need of someone to test himself against. Hosokawa got himself into trouble, so I had to intervene.
Originally posted by no1marauderPuss
The biggest truth is that you and the Ikko Ikki have been closely allied since turn 1. Given that you weren't going to fight each other and all the remaining clans on Honshu are one of your vassals, it was a foregone conclusion that eventually all of you were going to move against Kyushu. And nothing I said or did would have mattered, so all this sudden preening about my "diplomacy" is disingenous.