02 Jun 06
Originally posted by dylDefine "stab in the back". To me that means attacking another realm which you were previously allied with. Under that definition (the most reasonable one), I don't need to "stab anybody in the back" to defeat the motley coalition that is presently fighting, and losing to, the Alliance.
You asked which possibility was more plausible, didn't you? Unless you're willing to stab Sweden in the back, the other option wins by default.
Edit: I presume the answer to the question "Would you consider betraying your nephew?" is no.
02 Jun 06
Originally posted by no1marauderYour proposal makes about as much sense as scuttling a fleet.
Why would Russia ally with another major power (putting it in the same situation vis-a-vis victory conditions) when the Ottomans have about 1/2 the Gold value of Prussia and a much smaller army and fleet? Their chances of victory are far higher maintaining their present alliance; between the two of us we need only 132 more Gold province value, while wit ...[text shortened]... the Ottomans they would need 288. Your proposal makes about as much sense as scuttling a fleet.
I'm about to lose most of my territories. Ships give a 1/3 gold return and I lose a bit of weight with the running costs. It might seem ludicrous to you, but why keep a massive fleet anchored in the harbour (and pay a hefty upkeep) where an even larger fleet waits outside with rich Prussian aristocracy who can't resist "ship of the line" at half price bargains.
02 Jun 06
Originally posted by no1marauderWe care a lot that we could possible drive a rift between the northern alliance. 😛
Which is a more plausible winning coalition:
A) Ottomans and Russia: OR
B) Prussia and Russia
?????
And why do Naples and Spain suddenly care soooooooooooo much?
Has Sweden been informed that even though they fought faithfully alongside Prussia, they won't be considered a friend when the winning declaration is made?
02 Jun 06
Originally posted by HalitoseSweden is No1's 2nd account in the game. He's running both realms, or he may as well be.
We care a lot that we could possible drive a rift between the northern alliance. 😛
Has Sweden been informed that even though they fought faithfully alongside Prussia, they won't be considered a friend when the winning declaration is made?
Oops, did I say that? 😳
02 Jun 06
Originally posted by buffalobillI wonder if the Swedish King gets to do anything without clearing it first with uncle Prussia. King David probably runs the drafts of his proclamations by him for approval as well.
Well, it's kind of like a marriage and we know who's wearing the pants in the house.
02 Jun 06
1 edit
Originally posted by rwingettUnlike you, Rob, I don't cheat and/or benefit from cheating. Puffito1 is certainly not my second account (we both played in the New York State Open OTB last month). Nor has he done anything in this game but closely coordinate his movements with his allies (as I do with Russia as well where we both have forces). He has not transferred a single piece of gold nor has he turned over any provinces to me (as Spain as done to both you and Naples). Stop your crying and cheap shot accusations and make up the map like a good deposed Emperor.
Sweden is No1's 2nd account in the game. He's running both realms, or he may as well be.
Oops, did I say that? 😳
02 Jun 06
Originally posted by HalitoseSweden is aware of the victory conditions. There is nothing to prevent Sweden from being part of a winning coalition with Prussia or Russia. Whenever two of the Alliance have enough to declare, they can do so. I personally would not attempt to block such a declaration. However, we still have quite a way to go before we reach that point though I suspect Sweden's gold province value is going to increase significantly in the near future (it went up 26 last season alone).
We care a lot that we could possible drive a rift between the northern alliance. 😛
Has Sweden been informed that even though they fought faithfully alongside Prussia, they won't be considered a friend when the winning declaration is made?
03 Jun 06
Originally posted by no1marauderYou seem to be missing the gravity of this catch 22: I don't think Prussia or Russia is going to be overjoyed when Sweden declares victory with the other. Why be part of an alliance when you're gonna be sidelined when victory is being declared?
Sweden is aware of the victory conditions. There is nothing to prevent Sweden from being part of a winning coalition with Prussia or Russia. Whenever two of the Alliance have enough to declare, they can do so. I personally would not attempt to block such a declaration. However, we still have quite a way to go before we reach that point though I suspect S ...[text shortened]... value is going to increase significantly in the near future (it went up 26 last season alone).
My prediction: the Northern alliance will soon turn on itself.
03 Jun 06
Originally posted by no1marauderWouldn't it be pleasant if we could just play the game without all of us constantly accusing each other of cheating? Alas, it doesn't appear to be possible.
Unlike you, Rob, I don't cheat and/or benefit from cheating. Puffito1 is certainly not my second account (we both played in the New York State Open OTB last month). Nor has he done anything in this game but closely coordinate his movements with his allies (as I do with Russia as well where we both have forces). He has not transferred a single piece of go ...[text shortened]... ). Stop your crying and cheap shot accusations and make up the map like a good deposed Emperor.
Maps are done, by the way.
03 Jun 06
Originally posted by HalitoseThere is no solution for your supposed "catch-22"; any single member of the Alliance who changed sides would have the same problem. Your side has the same problem, but as you are losing you don't seem to be too concerned about it.
You seem to be missing the gravity of this catch 22: I don't think Prussia or Russia is going to be overjoyed when Sweden declares victory with the other. Why be part of an alliance when you're gonna be sidelined when victory is being declared?
My prediction: the Northern alliance will soon turn on itself.
I predict that your prediction is wrong as no member of the Alliance can logically benefit from turning on any of the others.
03 Jun 06
Originally posted by rwingettSince you were the one accusing me of using a second account, this post is the height of hypocrisy.
Wouldn't it be pleasant if we could just play the game without all of us constantly accusing each other of cheating? Alas, it doesn't appear to be possible.
Maps are done, by the way.
03 Jun 06
Originally posted by HalitoseFar be it for me to criticize your "strategy", but if you felt your fleet was a liability you could have at least sent your warships into battle and inflicted some losses on your enemies.
[b]Your proposal makes about as much sense as scuttling a fleet.
I'm about to lose most of my territories. Ships give a 1/3 gold return and I lose a bit of weight with the running costs. It might seem ludicrous to you, but why keep a massive fleet anchored in the harbour (and pay a hefty upkeep) where an even larger fleet waits outside with rich Prussian aristocracy who can't resist "ship of the line" at half price bargains.[/b]
03 Jun 06
I've been lax and my internet access has been a bit limited lately, so I haven't posted the Power Ratings for the last two turns. here they are first for the prior season:
1. Prussia 1
2. Spain 4
3. Naples 2
4. Russia 3
5. Ottomans 5
6. Austria 6
7. Sweden 7
8. France 8
9. Algeria 9
Eliminated: Bavaria, England
And now the up to date Power Ratings:
1. Prussia 1
2. Naples 3
3. Russia 4
4. Ottomans 5
5. Spain 2
6. Sweden 7
7. Austria 6
8. France 8
9. Algeria 9
Eliminated: Bavaria, England