DeletedUser53964
Guest
Can Tikehound please pm me his battle reports, as I have asked but he replied that he refuses to talk to others he does not know, and proceeds to insult me (I am not going to lie when I say that aside from his insults, this goes against what I know about him).
If this is the case then I regret Neily1 not informing us of this when this was discussed this in game, but ronthorn disclosed to us that this was not the case, and so you can see why we thought otherwise. Action may be taken if ronthorn is shown to be lying, but he did admit that he may have been attacked once before, which does not count as farming, but if another can send me another report in game then we action may be taken.
If you have nothing else to say then I will see this thread as a success for showing the world your attitude to diplomacy, it may seem a tactical advantage to break a pact or Nap, and attack without warning, but once the information reaches other potential pact alliances, then they will know of this, and may not wish to have dealings with you that may result only in a surprise attack.
I am also surprised at how you accept players who actively admit to disobeying diplomatic relations, to quote
"Ok, you have a NAP,but I will attack anyway", and
"Am I bad? I do hope so".
If these are the sorts of players you allow and the attitudes you teach then this is more reason for potential pacts to choose against any sort of relations with you.
If this is the case then I regret Neily1 not informing us of this when this was discussed this in game, but ronthorn disclosed to us that this was not the case, and so you can see why we thought otherwise. Action may be taken if ronthorn is shown to be lying, but he did admit that he may have been attacked once before, which does not count as farming, but if another can send me another report in game then we action may be taken.
If you have nothing else to say then I will see this thread as a success for showing the world your attitude to diplomacy, it may seem a tactical advantage to break a pact or Nap, and attack without warning, but once the information reaches other potential pact alliances, then they will know of this, and may not wish to have dealings with you that may result only in a surprise attack.
I am also surprised at how you accept players who actively admit to disobeying diplomatic relations, to quote
"Ok, you have a NAP,but I will attack anyway", and
"Am I bad? I do hope so".
If these are the sorts of players you allow and the attitudes you teach then this is more reason for potential pacts to choose against any sort of relations with you.
Last edited by a moderator: