Jump to content

Explanation of empy/camelot skirmish


The Royalist
 Share

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Epi said:

If they call you an ally and ask to merge. Expect to be poached, hit, log dumped (with fake logs) and lied to in an attempt to escape shit they started.

Didn't you guys request Empyrea to sign a super sekrit treaty?

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

this is why people shouldnt sign protectorates

stop hiding behind your treaties and show us how you really feel

if you were to, then it'd all show that @Vexz is hiding behind her men gorge and filip to influence orbis politics ?

Edited by hope
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

4 hours ago, Epi said:

images-8.jpg

 

We peaced out at Emps request. We didn't have to, in fact the only reason we did was on the condition they publicly buried the hatchet as they assured us in private.

Keep in mind we declined their merge offer because we weren't as obsessed with the forums.

Empyrea's true colours are on display here.

If they call you an ally and ask to merge. Expect to be poached, hit, log dumped (with fake logs) and lied to in an attempt to escape shit they started.

I'm sure this whole event reflects on protectorates since you 100% weren't trying to use a third party to bait a hit on us without allied intervention.

Congrats :). On low gov shadow. Tho it must royally piss you off.

The irony of a complaint over paperless friends (goonsquad) is not lost on us when it's coming from paperless.

Not sure what the merger had to do with a ‘forum obession’. That’s not exactly why you declined, if you want I can show you a part of the convo. 

Not sure on the part where I called you allies, you’re the one who offered us a secret treaty. 

  • Upvote 2

aka Filip, The Royalist or Tremor

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, KillzBob said:

I'm sorry to regret but we the golden horde hereby give you knights of Templar 69 hour notice of the cancellation of our treaty we wish you luck on your journey forward have a good day

Still leaves us with 4 treaties, you'll need to cancel each one in sequence ?

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, KillzBob said:

I'm sorry to regret but we the golden horde hereby give you knights of Templar 69 hour notice of the cancellation of our treaty we wish you luck on your journey forward have a good day

Only 4 more to go.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

[11:52 PM] Prefontaine: But Keegoz is actually bad. [11:52 PM] Prefontaine: He's my favorite bad leader though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, KillzBob said:

I'm sorry to regret but we the golden horde hereby give you knights of Templar 69 hour notice of the cancellation of our treaty we wish you luck on your journey forward have a good day

Empyrea follows in the footsteps and sends it's 96 hour notification to KT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Parachotic said:

The problem is when Empyrea hits a Camelot protectorate unwarranted, so of course, Camelot justly counters them for it in defense of their protectorate. Empyrea does an offensive action against BK's protectorate by declaring on the counters because those CAM counters were warranted since they were merely defending their protectorate as is shown clearly on their treaty web. BK therefore has the right to defend their protectorate from Empyrea's unwarranted assault against warranted Camelot counters, although one could argue the premise of whether they're warranted or not, it doesn't matter though because it's BK's word against theirs and if Empyrea really wants to go to war over it, they have that option but they should also consider at what cost.

The way I see it, when an alliance sends counters to defend their protectorate they are making the offensive action. So in this case I see it as "Camelot took offensive action in defense of their protectorate". So if you respond to offensive action by meeting the attackers directly you are taking defensive action, no?

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

bw0643E.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Vack said:

The way I see it, when an alliance sends counters to defend their protectorate they are making the offensive action. So in this case I see it as "Camelot took offensive action in defense of their protectorate". So if you respond to offensive action by meeting the attackers directly you are taking defensive action, no?

Interesting viewpoint, I’ll keep this in mind in how to deal with things in the future.

libertyribbon.png

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Empyrea's allies have made clear before they don't consider poaching a real issue (Egyptian Empire War). So was kind of a foolish decision for them to attack on their own, knowing they had no allies who considered their CB worthwhile.

libertyribbon.png

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Epi said:

Keep in mind we declined their merge offer because we weren't as obsessed with the forums.

Empyrea's true colours are on display here.

If they call you an ally and ask to merge. Expect to be poached, hit, log dumped (with fake logs) and lied to in an attempt to escape shit they started.

[...]

The irony of a complaint over paperless friends (goonsquad) is not lost on us when it's coming from paperless.

As we've already said, the failed merge proposal really hasn't bothered us as much as you might like to think - whilst ultimately it would have been neat to see (especially considering ever since we initially protected you we've been under the impression we both had a similar outlook), it's not some sort of huge devastating blow. We're just amused at how it ended with Arthur just leaving the chat without a word after we asked a pretty harmless question regarding "unforseen opportunities" that meant they were no longer planning to head down the paperless alliance route. I guess we know what this was now - upgrading that protectorate agreement, so I'm not really sure why that was cause to immediately stop talking to us. On an aside: "[Camelot] weren't as obsessed with the forums"

Screenshot_132.jpg

Guess not really caring means we're obsessed...

As for the "paperless friends" comment, our issue is more how you went about it, not that it happened. Speaking from the perspective of someone who has been in paperless alliances in government and as a member for a large portion of their time in this game, getting involved in a fight that doesn't directly concern you often comes with a lot of consideration - if you decide to commit to, say, defending an alliance you're friends with, you take on the knowledge that you should fully expect to be countered. Roz Wei did this in 2016(?) against Rose for the 168-whatever day war knowing full well that by trying to help a friend (t$ in that case) we'd be countered (only we didn't expect everyone on the opposing side to take an opportunity to hit us :P).

In this instance, Goon Squad had no treaty with Camelot or their protectorate we hit until they sent a 'counter' attack (after wars with Camelot/their protectorate had already started) seemingly in order to make it look like they had a 'paper' treaty to legitimise attacking us. Our retaliation against Goon Squad resulted in BK stepping in to their defence which seemed rather odd. [EDIT: Hodor put this much more succinctly a couple of posts above]

Perhaps you misunderstand what "paperless friends" means, Epi? It certainly doesn't usually mean creating a physical treaty in game when you want to get involved in a war. Just do it as is and accept for the most part that it's generally going to be considered an aggressive action, and dealt with as such.

Edited by James XVI
  • Like 2
  • Upvote 2

THE Definitive James:

KastorCultist, Co-leading Roz Wei Empyrea The Wei, former TGH warrior, Assassin, and a few more. Player of this game for more time than I want to think about...

infernalsig.png.492fbaaf465234c6d9cf76f12f038d04.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Noctis said:

Empyrea's allies have made clear before they don't consider poaching a real issue (Egyptian Empire War). So was kind of a foolish decision for them to attack on their own, knowing they had no allies who considered their CB worthwhile.

The poaching thing isn't even the issue. BK signed off on them slotting the guy attempting to poach from Emp.

Edited by Keegoz
  • Like 1

[11:52 PM] Prefontaine: But Keegoz is actually bad. [11:52 PM] Prefontaine: He's my favorite bad leader though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Keegoz said:

The poaching thing isn't even the issue. BK signed off on them slotting the guy attempting to poach from Emp.

Screenshot_132.jpg

He had a point with all the shit posters making the forum toxic though, maybe that’s why.

libertyribbon.png

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, TheRebelMan said:

How does one relate with the other?

Gave the excuse to hit when they already wanted to I guess. Not sure who said BK wouldn’t counter or if they had the authority. Although this is over already?

(Although other than Ryan1, Empyrea doesn’t do it much, so kind of feel bad for them tied to TGH)

Edited by Noctis

libertyribbon.png

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Hodor said:

noctis1.png

noctis2.png

 

giphy.gif

I’m well aware you guys didn’t assist despite all those MDPs.

Also Hippo said before he doesn’t consider poaching an issue & are against Empyrea pushing it as a CB.

Edited by Noctis

libertyribbon.png

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Noctis said:

I’m well aware you guys didn’t assist despite all those MDPs.

Also Hippo said before he doesn’t consider poaching an issue & are against Empyrea pushing it as a CB.

Poaching isn't the issue here. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Noctis said:

I'm more inclined to think Camelot was in the right and just got raided; tough luck for those who got countered for it.

The majority of the game disagrees that poaching is okay, including BK who OKd the original attack on the poacher with the evidence provided here.

Go be mind numbingly stupid somewhere else please, it's getting ridiculous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Noctis said:

Also Hippo said before he doesn’t consider poaching an issue & are against Empyrea pushing it as a CB.

Empyrea are big boys, they can handle their own business.  Our only concern was the Protector protecting a Protector protecting a Protectorate then later having another Protectorate signing to join in as well.

In other words, the dumb shit.

The super sekrit treaty request from Camelot to Empyrea didn’t bother us much, the poaching we didn’t care, but the potential escalation due to dumb treaty chess with Protectorates is what caught our attention.

Edited by Buorhann
  • Upvote 6
  • Downvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.