11p very large (TURN 69) - Page 15

WSzaboPeter · #**141** April 8th, 2007, 01:23 PM

Waiting for Shmonik (Arco) only.

Shmonk · #**142** April 8th, 2007, 01:37 PM

Dang, give me a few minutes and I will submit my turn. I would not mind getting another turn today also.

StrictlyRockers · #**143** April 8th, 2007, 05:05 PM

Nice post, Peter. I think you need to count again. It may have been five armies at one time, but it sure is four now. haha I just wiped one of those armies out down to the last man.

WSzaboPeter · #**144** April 11th, 2007, 06:26 AM

Everyone: I would like to buy any kind of magic gem. Mostly astral pears. I would pay in heavy GOLD.
Offers: ctdd(a)ctdd.ro

Caelum: Indeed, You are worthy foe, but the battle of Epernia (1) fought in last turn made clear the outcome of our little struggle.

DrPraetorious · #**145** April 12th, 2007, 11:29 AM

Power interruption during the storm last night - very brief, but the machine didn't reset for some reason.

Anyway it's back up now.

StrictlyRockers · #**146** April 13th, 2007, 04:17 PM

Wow, that was a huge battle, WSP. You are a worthy foe also. Thank you.

I bet that is the biggest battle this game has seen so far. We had 1000 units participating in that one. It was a very satisfying battle to win. I fear Caelum may yet still lose the war, however. Magic research is suffering.

Baalz · #**147** April 14th, 2007, 12:02 PM

Only a fool would continue a joint effort with someone who does not honor their agreements. Ulm considers the NAP signed with Man null and void as of the turn they chose not to honor their agreement with Caelum, we see how they will treat us once we present an undefended flank. The invasion of Man began this month, and their people are rising up against their treacherous rulers to aid our forces.

None who honor their own agreements have ever need to worry that Ulm will not uphold their end of bargains, but those who negotiate with no honor should expect to be treated in the same manner. Now we come for those nice lightly defended territories you thought were shielded by a NAP.

WSzaboPeter · #**148** April 14th, 2007, 01:09 PM

I beg your pardon Baalz, but I did honor only fulfilled agreements. With Caelum we had an agreement that I gave him 2 provinces and he will me AIR boost items. Since Caelum DID NOT sent me those items within 5 turns I wanted some other provinces from him. When he firmly denied my request I attacked.

Baalz I had an alliance and you attacked me with no reason (not counting that joke-of-a-reason that I I attack Caelum quit a few turns ago.

I think that we can gratulate to Folket (Patala) for winning the game. He has two very good globals up and leading most of the graphs. I don't know what about Marignon or Arco, but I would agree that they won.

DrPraetorious · #**149** April 14th, 2007, 01:54 PM

I'm hardly willing to concede victory to Patala.

He's very powerful, but can he stand against all of us at once? I think not. We should certainly finish our internal disputes quickly, however.

WSzaboPeter · #**150** April 14th, 2007, 02:25 PM

Well, those words echo wisdom DrPraetorious, but I was thinking I'm part of a 4 man anti-Patala alliance, but my way was blocked by Caelum, and now I'm stuck in a two front war that does not involves Patala. And this situation is all too familiar from other games. When someone reaches a point where he has a very good chance to win others instead of allying against him tie themselves down in local conflicts and the ruler wins. And he has very good magic gem income and very high research, by far the most provinces, etc... I think it's now or never.