12-02-2014, 08:29 PM
My 2 cents on the GI attack ratio:
A group with more or less giants/ogres as a % of the combat points will fight very differently.
Also groups with higher morale and leaders seem to do better than groups with more brigades in my experience. They experience lower losses relative to a group with equal attack value and less morale. May have been a factor here.
There are some random factors with combat and I have seen surprise failures with attack ratios similar to yours in the past.
A group with more or less giants/ogres as a % of the combat points will fight very differently.
Also groups with higher morale and leaders seem to do better than groups with more brigades in my experience. They experience lower losses relative to a group with equal attack value and less morale. May have been a factor here.
There are some random factors with combat and I have seen surprise failures with attack ratios similar to yours in the past.
OK, thats pretty funny. Not the no gain part....the na na na na part. No arguing the no gain part. And no comment on the composition of 1GI. And yes, I did find out about 1RD being there. But not about UR. Interesting. As i said, a region 10 free for all develops. And in SOs defense, as far as I know, he is not actively involved with attacks on you at all. He is just my ally which would have occurred whether we went to war or not. As for your intentions I only know what you say, not what you intend or perceive as a threat. A four turn NAP is nothing, especially on turn 1. But maybe that is me. As I said, I am a NooB and only have non Alamaze game experience to draw from. It is why I am so loquacious on the forums. I seek education. As for the diplomacy style, I did not actually intend to find your capital or to force you to cooperate at a point of a gun. Only use the opportunity provided by the leverage to bring up the offer of an alliance. As you pointed out in our email, my original force was not even a threat to you (and a larger force obviously was not either) and you do so again here, so you had no intention of allying anyway. You did offer to mentor which I actually put the heaviest weight in all this discussion and I genuinely appreciate. So, really, as I said, for my part I bear you no ill will at all outside of the game. 
No one else has chimed in about what one can say or what one cannot say so, setting aside your self serving advice but rather focusing on your continued behavior, I am left with the conclusion that one can say or reveal anything. I have no need to right now since, as you point out, your capital location was already revealed, but I am intrigued by the non response of other vets or site admins - even as an admonition to your obvious reference to the order used and the exact info yielded.......this indeed seems to be a gray area available for exploitation (albeit at a cost of reputation and credibility). Very interesting, indeed. Thanks for the implicit lesson! Very important for NooBs to understand......failure to do so could very well turn one off on the citizens of the site. For example, if I were not so keenly insightful (joking) and transparent in my reasoning, I would simply get disgusted at your clear double standard and the lack of forum response and leave. In individual PMs I have heard similar complaints from NooBs (ok actually one NooB) who said something very similar to this. I don't think it is a good idea to leave house rules (forum rules) undefined because in the 40+ years of gaming I have behind me, the number one reason for angry arguments is the lack of house rules on what can be said and done outside of the written rules of the game. So, I am taking considerable pains to define it clearly and ask someone with no dog in the fight to say (or not say - which is still an answer) something - yea or nay. Right now, the answer is "all table talk is allowed and encouraged" and "anything goes" on what table talk is (cap locations, spell results, everything).