Peter Ebbesen said:
Prussia didn't say that - Hive did. There's a difference. Besides, I'm done already.
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Prussia didn't say that - Hive did. There's a difference. Besides, I'm done already.
You certainly should not thank me - I fully acknowledge that your situation, until you got into a new alliance, was worse than before, and that you did not ask for it. That goes for the Dutch, the Prussians, and the Spanish, and seen in that light, it is perhaps not strange that that turned out to be the new alliance block.Hive said:
Slargos said:
Actually, I didn't really stabhit... I only had 43% warscore alone, and demanded 2 provs. That's hardly stabhitting, I was merely giving him a chance to get me out of the war.
Btw, it really annoyed me that Wyvern kept claiming that I demanded 3 provs from him. I sent him a peace 2 times, and it was for Sachsen-Anhalt both times...
And another thing that annoys me: how come this thread has grown 2 pages bigger every time I get home from work? Spammers...
FAL said:
Spanish local recruiting in the americas should be enough to withstand and repel a portuguese invasion. And without their home provinces, where in hell is gonna Portugal to recruit? Standing armies in a long war always need to be reinforced.
PJL said:Well, I'm flattered to think that people consider Portugal to be one of the most powerful countries, but really it's only a paper tiger (or more accurately, a tiger made out of $100 bills, or whatever the Portugese equivalent was back then
Ah, but poderoso caballero es don dinero. A tiger made out of $100 bills is quite powerful. Although clearly the analysis of FAL is nuts
Wrong. You demanded 3 provinces at the start, and two towards the end when I'd knocked your WS down a bit. I'll grant in the confusion of the war I wasn't paying attention to some of the subsequent offers. Perhaps you did reduce some to two provinces.Hive said:Actually, I didn't really stabhit... I only had 43% warscore alone, and demanded 2 provs. That's hardly stabhitting, I was merely giving him a chance to get me out of the war.
Btw, it really annoyed me that Wyvern kept claiming that I demanded 3 provs from him. I sent him a peace 2 times, and it was for Sachsen-Anhalt both times...
And another thing that annoys me: how come this thread has grown 2 pages bigger every time I get home from work? Spammers...
I'll not deny that. The difference is Sweden + Austria vs Prussia never happenedHive said:/me rubs halo
Anyway, my point was that what comes around goes around. You didn't succeed with your sinister plans regarding poor Prussia, but you would have. And Sweden+Austria against Prussia is, at best, just as fair as Spain+Prussia+Netherlands against Austria.
(though being honest not for lack of wishful thinking on my part). [edit] - anyway being jumped by the three of you was never an issue (only propoganda ) - the peace demands from a single war is all I've been raising issue with. I _hope_ people will take note and not pursue such ridiculous demands in the future.
Last edited:
Wyvern said:
No, I never demanded more than those 2 provs. You must have seen wrong in the heat of the moment then. 3 provs would have been way too harsh, I didn't want that.
Oh I agree with this, it was a harsh peace. I don't like harsh peaces like that, and I won't issue them myself. But after what you and Slargos did to Venice, I couldn't care less whether someone does the same to you guys.
I don't remember demanding 22 provinces off Venice in a single peace dealHive said:Oh I agree with this, it was a harsh peace. I don't like harsh peaces like that, and I won't issue them myself. But after what you and Slargos did to Venice, I couldn't care less whether someone does the same to you guys.
- not to say we weren't harsh with Venice on occasion.
Wyvern said:I don't remember demanding 22 provinces off Venice in a single peace deal
Yeah I know it wasn't exactly the same. And to be honest, when discussing the attack plans with Slargos on icq, and talking about me getting something in Germany and him getting something in SA - I never thought he intended that "something" to be everything... :rofl:
Slargos said:
Mmmmm, if my memory serves me correct the Hapsburgs have, throughout the entire game, waged wars of aggression while giving no fore-warning and then taking every last morsel that they possibly could from their opponent. Austria greatly benefited from this policy, until last session. I'm simply stating that Wyvern should NOT be suprised at the peace demanded of him- its merely the same policy, that you've consistently followed applied, to him.
In addition the statement "astreixed" was not meant as a "barb" or insult; I was merely stating that I've noticed that your style of play is that of the "harsh" peace- you take as much as you posisbly can when you win; as a result I'll be matching that style if I face you again.
However if you don't want to in one of your games again because of my "ineptness" then thats your choice, all I can say is that I did the best I could for my first time around.
EDIT: Forgot to add a word in a sentance.
BlkbrryTheGreat said:
Bullshit.
First war against France featured a totally overrun France. I didn't claim a single province*
You took every opportunity you could to cross me, and then you wonder why I treated you so harshly in peace.
"Venice. Don't colonize there. I repeat *do not* colonize there."
"What? I didn't hear you. You're unfair anyway. I'm going to put my cock in this here shiny hole and see what happens. Strange sort of blade suspended there. Nevermind. I'm just a happy-go-lucky newbie who hasn't played EU before in MP. I can't be expected to posess rudimentary skills of negotiation or common sense."
* For which Peter has repaid me most gracefully :rofl:
Last edited:
Actually I think you blew it as venice...BlkbrryTheGreat said:
Playing venice demands good diplomatic skills, not to forget good economic skills. Always listen and talk to all players, especially your allies and possible enemies, try and get to know what think, what they want to do. Sweet talk them.
Always make your benefactors/protectors feel its worth it, if they are happy venice survives, and most likely they give you more and more. Prove you are worth their trust.
Ofcourse there is allways the option to do a 180 degree turn, but the consequences really need to be evaluated from all angles. And the offer is really Good
You alienated venice the worst way possible, hence you got raped and killed. Which was expected and quite fair, following such a major diplomatic defeat.
Translation: "How dare you accuse me of this behavior, look at this single exception!"
Either way, lets look at what happened in closer detail. It began when you (or Wyvern, I forget which) messaged me as Venice, and stated "Austria and I are going to attack France, care to join in?". Since it was obvious that you were going to attack France, regardless of my participation, I said sure, but my war goal was going to be Lombardia. The fact that you didn't claim a province is irrelevent- your goal was to hurt France early on, and you managed to do that while deflecting French passions towards another target.
An admirable achievement, and one that I don't really have a problem with. Regardless an exception to a pattern does not mean that a general rule cannot be formed from your behavior.
Translation: Spanish harshness towards Venice was entirely due to the "crossing" of Spain.
This is nothing more then propoganda to make your greed* seem more reasonable in hind-sight. Spain immediately siezed the Tps sent to SA (via ToT) so it had no particular reason to be vindictive about such an action; however what REALLY contradicts this statement is the fact that Spanish greed long preceeded any "crossing" that Venice did to Spain. I point out that Spain and Austria were more then willing to bisect Venice** when it was in the middle of a war with Portugal AND England, long before it even had maps of America or had even done anything to provoke Spain. Furthermore, I even thought that I had the blessings of Austria and Spain to wage the war, I did, after all, give up two provinces to Austria to wage it, if need be. (In hindsight, I really should have had the treaty worded much more preciscely when I decided on that course of action.) Regardless, the fact that you were more then willing to attack a current ally, who met your pre-war demands (make peace with Portugal immediately), and take all that you possibly could, while they were exhausted from a war that cost you nothing speaks volumes; it certainly answers the question as to whether you took half of Venician Italy, in one war, out of greed or spite.
Anyway, the facts remain. This is but one example of your (and Wyvern's) behavior, namely that of using suprise attacks and the enforcement of harsh peaces. Now, its certainly not a "nice and friendly" way to play the game, but no one said that you had to play that way, and I certainly don't have a problem with it... assuming that you don't mind if people deal with you in the same fashion.
What I don't understand is why your going apeshit for stating that in future games (assuming we play again) I'll have, in my list of options, the option to deal with you in exactly the same fashion that you've dealt with me.
*I have no problem with greed in EU2. I do, however, have a problem with people minimizing/rationalizing their greed through propoganda. If you took something because it benefited you have the decency to be honest about it (unless your role playing).
**And they would have too, had it not been for the threatened intervention by the OE.
Red Herring and a gross misrepresentation- I survived quite late into the game, and I probably would have survived even longer had I not made a major diplomatic error, one that Hive, a seasoned player, repeated in the very next session.
Edit: Forgot an end quote bracket.
Let's just let it rest guys. I think the major point has been made, no point raking the mud over this and past events any more.
BlkbrryTheGreat said:
Wrong. The act of attacking portugal put you squarely in my cross-hairs. That was what, 2nd session? You'll note that I gave both Poland and Austria rights to colonize in Spanish spheres of influence.
You tried, dispite warnings and several setbacks, to colonize provinces that were in the middle of the spanish new world. This behaviour is *certain* to alienate *any* Spain player, not just big bad Slargos.
I told you that I did *not* accept an attack on Portugal but you abused the military access given to you and attacked anyway. That *Austria* had given you leeway is irrelevant. You attacked *my* neighbour and should have asked *Spain* for permission.
You stopped being an ally the moment you attacked Portugal. That you were still code-ally is a failing of the engine.
Granted, taking italian provinces gave me a pittance in extra income, and more importantly a fair boost to manpower. However, was personal gain my goal I would've taken Lombardia for my own instead of giving it to you. Yes, it was entirely out of spite. Yet instead of learning from the experience, you went out of your way for the rest of the game as Venice to piss me off.
There have been several instances of harsh peaces against Venice and frankly, given your playing style, I feel very satisfied in making them.
Your lack of ability to learn from your mistakes and adapt to the game is what's the problem.
The *only* reason you survived that long was that France and OE are played by guys who won't just let Venice be partitioned by Austria and Spain. Peter only abandoned you when you made a *gross* error in judgement.
BlkbrryTheGreat, you should wait a bit and play with other players before making final evaluations regarding player behaviours . There are many, many interesting features you will notice and have the possibility to respond appropriatelly in the future games. But do bare in mind one thing: it is generally frowned upon carrying an attitude from one game to another, for those are in the end two different histories we are talking about.
Let me just say that if you are trying to claim Wyvern and Slargos are the most threcherous players one could possible meet in EU2MP you are very, VERY wrong, there is one measured to whom we all are like a little children in a kindergarten :rofl: . Not that it's bad, it certainly is interesting to play with him.
How players behave in the games very much depends on the nature of the campaign. In fact, I should have better said that it SHOULD depend on it, and the players that DO adapt their playing methods to the campaign, for the better and more interested game for all the participants, are "good" players. Wyvern and Slargos are such players.
. There are many, many interesting features you will notice and have the possibility to respond appropriatelly in the future games. But do bare in mind one thing: it is generally frowned upon carrying an attitude from one game to another, for those are in the end two different histories we are talking about.Let me just say that if you are trying to claim Wyvern and Slargos are the most threcherous players one could possible meet in EU2MP you are very, VERY wrong, there is one measured to whom we all are like a little children in a kindergarten :rofl: . Not that it's bad, it certainly is interesting to play with him.
How players behave in the games very much depends on the nature of the campaign. In fact, I should have better said that it SHOULD depend on it, and the players that DO adapt their playing methods to the campaign, for the better and more interested game for all the participants, are "good" players. Wyvern and Slargos are such players.
As long as you guys keep it at this level of civility(is this a word?) its ok, if you start to hurl personal attacks and insults at eachother actions will be taken.
) its ok, if you start to hurl personal attacks and insults at eachother actions will be taken.