Forge of Godhood - started

[vfb]

Brother Leary preaches, "Should we build walls between us, that we cannot hear the preaching of the devout? Nay, let us not build walls. In fact, we would all be much better off if everyone just razed all their castles right now! So go forth and raze, peoples of the world. And ye shall receive our blessings." *

Thus spake Brother Leary.

(* Note: In order that our preaching might be better heard, unfortunately the brothers of Marignon need some sort of platform to stand on, so our own castle walls are exempt.)

[Micah]

Arch - First off, your accusation of me discussing attacking you with Pan is a flat-out lie, assuming you meant before you attacked ME, but I guess I can see how it makes you look better to claim otherwise.

All I did was ask if you were taking a province since you moved your forces away from it and you somehow translated that into stealing it out from under you? A simple "I'll be taking it with a scout" would have sufficed. I also didn't notice you fighting anything that wasn't a single point of PD during the whole fight with Pythium, so I'm not sure what exactly you were getting rewarded for, though I would have stuck to the agreement if you had just used your words.

As for attacking you instead of Pan...I told you I wasn't giving up Pythium when you attacked it, I'm living up to that promise. I also have a better shot against you than I do against Pan, so I don't see the point of cowering in my cap waiting for him to decide to kill me off instead of going after you.

Oh, and way to be an ******* with the gratuitous personal attack.

[archaeolept]

look, you're doing the classic meta-game suicide attack, as you said to me. I know what it is, how it is supposed to work.
I'm unmoved by it.

Your account of the provinces involved is incorrect.

The proper manner, in this game, to resolve such disagreements is through war. This is explicitly in the OP, and the special rules, such as the ban on trading, work to support this. I did not attack until Pyth was gone, as per my commitment, as I understood it.

You accused me of instigating the whole thing; I denied that and said, rather, you.

Also, "rewarded" - that's surely the attitude which made you so cavalier with the agreed disposition, which included Holburg. More like this war is the reward.

Anyways I do apologize for that last line in my previous post. It's more an internet meme than anything personal, but the tone is regrettable.

[Micah]

It's not really suicide when you're dead anyhow. I don't see how cowering in my cap would have accomplished anything to increase my long- or even mid-term survival. Watching Pan's army tear through my 58 PD this turn without taking a single loss that wasn't freespawn doesn't do much to make me think I was mistaken.

What is the correct account of the provinces involved then? I recall having my prophet die because I scripted him to retreat so you could take the province SW of Pyth if you wanted it, so I'm not sure how that equates to me being overly belligerent.

Your comment about being a friendly neighbor if I attacked Pyth was misleading, intentional or not. I had intended to ask if you would be a good neighbor once they were dead, but I suppose you did satisfy the letter of the question with your response. Perhaps it was simple miscommunication, perhaps not. Regardless, at the end of the day you attacked me because you didn't like my attitude about the conquered provinces, so I don't see why I don't get to do the same.

As to Holburg: If I am not mistaken I took it for war operations against Pyth, including having my priest preach out the last candle of Pyth's dominion, which I told you about. You never even mentioned wanting to take it after he dommed out before you attacked me. Plus I'm pretty sure the terms we agreed on had you taking the provs WEST of Pyth's cap, which doesn't even include Holburg.

And I realize that the game encourages NAP-breaking and backstabbing, I'm not accusing you of playing outside the rules, but I do object to you portraying my response to your attack on me as being somehow meta-gamey or unsportsmanlike. I tried to hold on to both of my VPs as long as I could, but your successful vanquishing of Kin-Breaker made me have to decide between Pyth and Agartha, and both of them result in a messy death. I'm not sure why you consider sitting around and waiting for it to happen less meta-gamey than just getting it over with.

[Jarkko]

Ooops, did I somehow stir the cauldron in a way I did not intend to? My previous post was intended as a funny remark on how Agartha snapped my prize in a clever way (fully supported by the game engine because these exact things, I believe).

Also, Pangaean losses in the assault on Agartha may have been freespawn, but they died in droves, just as anybody can witness by checking the graphs. Free spawn have feelings too, you know

[namad]

burning a lab would've counted as screwing pangaea? yet somehow burning the fort counts as suicide?


if you can't win a single battle you can hole up in your fort and repair the walls, oh wait nevermind pangaea's army is so massive it would've 1rounded the walls ANYWAYS...


razing the fort just COSTS pangaea 1700gold like micah said... i doubt micah's BATTLES could have caused 1700gold worth of troop loses against FREESPAWN...


of course I have no idea what you are arguing about... I'd just like to say I fully support fort burns, and now that I know they are possible I might use them in the future in a situation where I feel the cost of rebuilding my capital is greater than the damage I could deal in combat to that nation including the turns wasted sieging me.

[archaeolept]

I have to look with a wry eye at your new rationale about it being easier to defend the pythian cap, as to why you uprooted all of your forces. When the war first started you told me that if I did not withdraw you would suicide on me. Now you are doing so. I never claimed it was unsportsmanlike; merely that threatening to suicide against someone as a negotiating tactic is metagamey (as the value of such is generally to make others fear crossing you in future games), and that I am not moved by such threats.

"provinces west" was the original suggestion; when you were being more sorely pressed by pyth's armies, you had it that I would get those pythian territories you did not currently have; that included holburg. When suddenly Pythium was no threat, you certainly changed your tune on holburg, and started elbowing in on that other. Why was your scout prophet attacking a territory that even you agree was to have been mine?

As well to say my comment that I would be a friendly neighbour for your attack on pyth was "misleading" imputes a long pre-existing plan to attack you. There was none, and the decision to do so was only made the turn I attacked - due to your pushback on those scrawny lands that were to have been mine, due to privileged information as to your diplomatic activities, due to the war with pyth being over and so my being a free agent, and due to the one turn window whereby my dom extended over the pythian capital.

[Micah]

My threat to throw everything I had at you had nothing to do with metagaming. I was simply trying to break the double-team on me by threatening to go kamikaze on one of you, and I figured I had a much better chance of making a dent in you than I did in Pan, so you got the ultimatum. It didn't work, I was spread out and double teamed and eventually I lost a battle that effectively eliminated any chance I had at surviving more than a few more turns. At this point I'm just following through on what I said I'd do. I can see how you could frame me keeping my promises as metagaming, but some sort of reputation is unavoidable.

Let's just call this what it is. All of your supposed "reasons" for attacking me were fabrications, overreactions or very liberal interpretations of the truth. You decided you wanted to attack me and then went about looking for an excuse to do so, as opposed to the other way around. There's certainly nothing wrong with attacking someone in Dominions just because you feel like it, so why not just come out and say so? The aggrieved posturing is tiresome and dishonest.

Your assertion about my diplomacy is a complete fabrication. I never approached anyone about a joint attack against you. Pan approached ME with an offer to work together, but I had only indicated interest in it in a broad sense, and no targets had been chosen, and I told him that I would have to defer until I had Pythium in hand.

My prophet was attacking the territory in question because you didn't have any visible forces in range to take it and I didn't want to leave it uncontrolled since I didn't want a third party swooping in and taking it, as QM had already been asking after it. I sent you a message telling you that and letting you know I had set my commander to retreat so that I wouldn't take the province if you attacked it. You successfully took the territory in question with a scout that turn when my commander fled as ordered. I was also doing my diplo in a hurry since I didn't have a stable internet connection at the time and didn't get a response from you in time to get my turn in, hence the attack with retreat orders instead of not attacking at all.

Admittedly I would have happily taken some extra provinces if you had let me, (especially since you didn't do much fighting) but all you had to do was tell me that you were taking them per our agreement and I would have left them to you. I think skipping straight to a full-out attack because I asked who the province was going to is a bit of an extreme reaction, no?

I still have no idea what you're talking about with Holburg. As I said, I took it to preach there to kill Pythium, and you never asked about claiming it after that. I didn't build anything there or otherwise solidify my control of the province.

You were also not really a "free agent" when you attacked me, as we had agreed that I would get the Pythium capital as a result of the war, and I had yet to take it. Perhaps in some sense the letter of the agreement was fulfilled since I had control of the province, though not the fort, but it's clearly a mangling of the spirit of it. Additionally, I think most people would characterize an unannounced attack on someone you were working together with the turn before as at least somewhat underhanded.

Again, a sound tactic, but watching you try to cast me as the villain after you launched a sneak attack at me is quite irksome. You can trump up whatever pretexts you want, but at the end of the day you stabbed me in the back to try to get an advantage, which is fine. The farce of you pretending otherwise is what I take exception to.

[Lingchih]

Hey, umm, how is Shin doing?

[LDiCesare]

Shin? Do you mean Atlantis? I eventually breached the walls, although it took some time. Btw how did you lose your pretender? I had attacked Shinuyama because I saw hte dead pretender in the score graphs.