Welcome, Guest -
(Log on)
- Spring, 1917, Finished| Autumn, 1902: THE PANTHER IS COMING | |
| Autumn, 1902: LIVE IN FEAR | |
| Autumn, 1905: Now that you're all against me I'll make an offer to the world. The first one of you that stabs another will gain complete immunity from me. | |
| Autumn, 1905: Interesting idea, but not my style; sorry. | |
| Autumn, 1905: We shall see if the others feel the same, this isn't winner take all so my partner in victory could easily gain over 100 points. | |
| Autumn, 1905: I think you put the offer from the wrong perspective, but it's ok for me... | |
| Autumn, 1905: Another thing... who decides to stab someone only to get your immunity, he would probably stab you as well later; have in mind that... | |
| Autumn, 1905: Not necessarily, it is possible for me to hit 18 while one other is at 11-14. | |
| Autumn, 1905: I am talking about an attitude; someone who is ready to stab one ally, will easier stab the other ally later. I just don't do that - ever, so my allies can sleep well. I mean, it's the matter of the stomach feeling; I think my stomach is the most important thing in the world, so I never do something which could make any unpleasant feeling in it; neither in the real life, not in the games. So, I am maximally fair towards my allies not because of them, but because my stomach. And I am really proud of my over thousand points made without single undeserved stab. :o) On the other side, someone who doesn't have sensitive stomach can stab anybody - including you, anytime including soon... |
|
| Autumn, 1905: I just don't understand why that makes it a worse proposition for them. Either they don't stab me and take an easy second or they do and maybe snag first. | |
| Autumn, 1905: Or are you just trying to convince them you're such a nice guy that they don't need to worry about you? And on the subject of undeserved stabs I always explained my intentions to you so I'm not sure what I've done to deserve your aggression. | |
| Autumn, 1905: It's not aggression; it's an explanation of my perspective. By the way, I don't complain about you at all; we cooperated pretty well; I even like your campaign - it is interesting idea to announce something like this on the global. So, it wasn't about you; it was about me, because I had an impression that you didn't understand what I told you.. |
|
| Autumn, 1905: I think I understand what you mean. By aggression I didn't mean your words, but your moves to Mid-Atlantic and Gascony. | |
| Autumn, 1905: Oh, that?... Aggression is maybe too strong word; it is more a careful move that could bring me some benefits in the case you want to attack me, and I definitely have reasons to think that you are going to. You insist on taking Tyrolia, don't answer to my questions regarding Turkey... you know, such little signals... | |
| Autumn, 1905: I had told you I was going to take Tyrolia a while ago. It is necesary to break the stalemate line with Austria. I didn't explain my interaction with Turkey because I assumed it was self evident. | |
| Autumn, 1905: And I told you that I didn't like the idea to have anybody in Tyrolia... | |
| Autumn, 1905: Just because you don't like it doesn't make it a violation of our agreement. I couldn't even attack Venice from Tyrolia with support. | |
| Autumn, 1905: How would you categorize your move there - after I told you that I would appreciate if you don't do that?... | |
| Autumn, 1905: We're not the same player. That's not how alliances work. In the same way, your move supported by Austria can only be taken as an alliance against me. Determining whether you are a backstabber is irrelevant though. I am talking to the group as a whole and ay of you can still join me (except England). | |
| Autumn, 1905: True. | |
| Autumn, 1905: Collaborating does not mean a marriage. I didn't directly help germany. Neither did he. But, when I survived against Austria, I helped him indirectly somehow. Does it mean I want Germany to hold 18 SC's? Not really. So, now, I want Italy to hold his positions, even though Italy seldom spoke to me and kept silent while I was trying to survive against austria. So, at the end of the day, it could be "categorized" as opportunistic, such as a backstab. I fail to recognize any difference. |
|
| Autumn, 1905: The difference is that I had an agreement with the previous Franz Joseph, so I couldn't have helped you, Sultan, could I? | |
| Autumn, 1905: Philosophing a bit more, I would say you had an agreement with him because it was opportune. So you did not talk to me. And now you do talk, because you worry about Germany. So it is not a big deal if anyone of us decide to attack each other when it becomes opportune. I don't see much difference. Besides, we never swore loyalty to each other, so I believe I can attack anyone I want here and my stomach will be ok with that. I am pretty much sure that what keeps me alive here is that my death is not convenient to my neighbours at the moment. And I will not attack your SCs because it is not convenient now. But I didnt and will not declare any immunity to you till the end. That would hurt my stomach. | |
| Autumn, 1905: Ok, everyone has the own stomach-principles. :o) By the way, I don't remember that I haven't communicated with you; actually I hold communication very important in this game (and wider; I'm linguist). Regarding opportunism, I really don't see what's opportune if somebody respect the word he has given to somebody. And, regarding loyalty, I think that everybody should keep his word, but of course that I am not too surprised when somebody stab me here. |
|
| Autumn, 1905: If anyone wants a screencap of Italy promising me he would leave only 2 Fleets out west, pm me your email and I will send it . | |
| Autumn, 1905: I'm not even mad, that's what the game is about, but he is lying through his teeth when he says he would never break his word. | |
| Autumn, 1905: And you know that based on?... | |
| Autumn, 1905: Chat logs that I will send to anyone that wants to see. | |
| Autumn, 1905: If you want I can send it to you too. :D | |
| Autumn, 1905: I have it and I can't see any lying... And I have to say that I see the "tag" you paste on me pretty offensive... You have a premise that I should be your ally even if you are not mine - what is pretty problematic as an idea. So, in the moment you decided to move to Tyrolia - knowing that I don't want that - you stopped to be my ally and I didn't have any obligation towards you. Where do you see my lying? |
|
| Autumn, 1905: Spring, 1904: Looks like England will be easy, if you want to get in on the Austria division you'll have to join soon. Me and Turkey should have him done in 2 years. Fri 10 PM Autumn, 1904: We haven't talked in a while and we need to arrange what we will leave out west. I am fine leaving just my two armies there as long as you leave a Fleet to defend Marseilles instead of an army. I hope you can understand my desire for that, especially because 2 of my armies wouldn't be able to attack past 2 fleets in Spain and Marseilles anyway. Fri 11 PM Autumn, 1904: You can take it as a deal. Sat 04 PM Autumn, 1904: Oh yeah, I am moving to Tyrolia but it is just to apply pressure to both Vienna and Trieste. |
|
| Autumn, 1905: And Italy said moving to TYR was to work Germany and I shouldnt be worried. I have no problem with that comment. Working perceptions is part of the game. If I didnt doubt and move to protect or have some reason to keep him in line then I am the one who deserves to die. While I am somewhat enjoying this convo, it does seem a little petty. I have gotten outright lied to, ignored and convinced to make bad moves. That is the game. I have learned to trust, but verify and that a commitment is only as good as the conditions stay the same...which in this game doesnt happen. :) Roll with it. | |
| Autumn, 1905: Yeah, like I said this is what the game is about, but when he says "I don't backstab" and I have evidence to the contrary I'm going to show all of you, because it is in my interest for your alliance of 4 to be broken. | |
| Autumn, 1905: So, you don't want to read and it's ok - you, of course - don't need to. | |
| Spring, 1906: I have to congratulate for this move, my dear Kaiser. Very nice move, indeed. | |
| Autumn, 1906: Thank you, you remain a gentleman even in the heat of battle. | |
| Autumn, 1906: I love this game because of itself, so it is always nice when ANYBODY makes a beautiful move. :o) | |
| Autumn, 1906: Everybody should respect the enemies, same as allies - if they deserve that. | |
| Autumn, 1906: Now that I think about it, posting screenshots of chat is probably against the rules on this site, do any of you know? | |
| Autumn, 1906: (Hellenic Riot): In a non-anon full press game, it's not against the rules. Just unsporting. | |
| Autumn, 1906: Thank you for the clarification. | |
| Autumn, 1908: Sorry, guys... I miss the move very rarely... Today my newborn baby went out from the hospital and the procedure lasted more than three hours, so I just couldn't come to computer earlier... It will cost me pretty much - here, but I couldn't do anything better... |
|
| Autumn, 1908: Luckily for you it doesn't really cost you anything. The three of you have already broken past my stalemate line. As long as Austria and Turkey don't realize that you winning is no different than me winning you should be fine. | |
| Autumn, 1908: Congrats on the kid!! | |
| Autumn, 1908: So if the purpose of your alliance is to prevent my solo victory we can draw right? I have voted draw because I understand I can't solo, but as you will see Italy will be unwilling to because he is positioned well to go for his solo. | |
| Autumn, 1908: Thank you. :o) | |
| Spring, 1911: At this point since I obviously can't defend against all three of you I'm just going to defend against Austria and Turkey. | |
| Good game everyone. Germany played very good until it became a problem to him. That is something interesting we can learn from. | |
| This game was a disgrace, the only reason it happened is that this site divides points evenly for a draw. In a serious diplomacy game the goal is to win. |
| Italy |
chass
(1540
)
Drawn. Bet: 50
, won: 156 14 supply-centers, 14 units | |||
| Austria |
sanfi
(1709
)
Drawn. Bet: 83
, won: 156 11 supply-centers, 10 units | |||
| Turkey |
jvper
(928
)
Drawn. Bet: 50
, won: 156 9 supply-centers, 9 units | |||
| Germany |
TheDealer
(153
)
Defeated. Bet: 50
| |||
| France |
timothee
(100
)
Defeated. Bet: 50
| |||
| England |
Liam IV
(100
)
Defeated. Bet: 36
| |||
| Russia |
TheGemmas
(100
)
Defeated. Bet: 50
|
| Liam IV (100 ) | England (Autumn, 1906) with 1 centres. |
| rm63 (100 ) | Austria (Autumn, 1904) with 6 centres. |
| timothee (100 ) | France (Autumn, 1903) with 2 centres. |
| Brofert (100 ) | England (Spring, 1902) with 3 centres. |
| TheGemmas (100 ) | Russia (Spring, 1903) with 2 centres. |