Login

**Lord Thanatos** · 05-22-2014, 06:29 AM

(05-22-2014, 04:50 AM)Jumpingfist Wrote: Substantial in Torvale, including the city in exchange for peace must seem like a pretty good deal now, I bet? [I am very much enjoying the Master & Apprentice format - for the record.] I hope you are still having a good time?

Sounds ok when written that way but not in context of the game. Still a terrible unbalanced deal that I would reject again. My mistake was after reading in the forums Of your exploits and seeing you fight the EL single handedly as the WA in game 124 I figured hey I am in for a good honorable fight me and my master vs LT and apprentice. I have come to learn that previous fight was the exception and not the norm. Also as I recall I was willing to concede the advantage to you guys but you still refused. One needs to look at what happens should talks fail. Looks like the 4 of you that decided best to fight this 4 on 2 battle are doing just great well on your way to victory. I am guessing now I will get some kind of turn rerun only to find out now I do not capture and kill the ranger king, prince, envoy and agent this turn. Would be nothing new with me and support.

There should be no re-run. I specifically said to Cipher, "A couple thousand trolls are not going to kill me."

I was not looking to have the turn re-run, I was indicating that I still remain disappointed with the changes to Chaos.

I also was not trying to taunt you. Simply light-hearted commentary with a player that I believed I had a pretty good rapport with. My apologies!

Finally, in almost EVERY regular Steel game the TR makes a deal with the AN to split the region. Since there was no AN in our game, I thought I would take the non-control portion of the deal that the AN and TR normally strike. Maybe I just don't know how to negotiate? But I would have allowed the RD Substantial in exchange for lengthy peace damn near 100% of the time when there is no AN taking a piece of the region.

I have not been involved in any of the negotiations between the teams as the Apprentices are doing that.

**Jumpingfist** · 05-22-2014, 07:12 AM

There was also no UN but that part should not be split up? Sour grapes now. It is fine really that is why we went to war we could not agree on what was fair to give up. Costing everyone involved the game. Both sides to blame on this one perhaps.

**DuPont** · 05-28-2014, 10:29 PM

I have to say that I was extremely put off by the RD/GN negotiating tactics. I assumed it that provocative on purpose and was actually a deliberate choice to start a war.

**Lord Thanatos** · (This post was last modified: 05-29-2014, 12:03 AM by Lord Thanatos.)

(05-28-2014, 10:29 PM)DuPont Wrote: I have to say that I was extremely put off by the RD/GN negotiating tactics. I assumed it that provocative on purpose and was actually a deliberate choice to start a war.

What is that phrase about assuming?

The intent was exactly what was said to you, "The RD wants only what the AN would normally get from the TR." In exchange you would have had lengthy peace. My "deliberate choice[s] to start a war" usually include ignoring all communication from you. If I am talking to you I am willing to work out a deal - Always!

The tripe about no UN present is a red herring. The EL/TR team was likely to start with two full regions. The GN/RD team would share one region (even with every UN pop center in 7). A friendly RD/GN team for the EL/TR team would also have locked up the western edge of the board with friendly nations allowing early build up for both teams.

The other consideration we shared with your team, "The RD has to have an enemy early on." Only once it became clear that our first choice of allies preferred war with us (or, at least, no agreement) did we seek peace with the other teams. Amazingly.... every one of them was happy to give up pop centers to avoid dragons in their realm.

Once our enemy was clear and our friends were in place, how difficult do you think it was to have a friend fight alongside the RD kingdom?

As to the comment earlier regarding two teams versus one... that amounts to four players versus two. Hell, I love being one against two. That is such a relief to me I would continue playing regular communication games if I could be assured I would only be outnumbered two to one. That is Alamaze Heaven! Bliss! Gorgeous blue skies! Nirvana! Utopia! Get the idea?

I am to the point where my games are all anonymous except one because I am tired of facing three or more opponents.... (I never quit! But it does make me weary playing the games, instead of having fun...)

Bottom line is you were my/our first option for an ally because I like you personally (the few times we have spoken in person have all been excellent!) and respect your great skill at Alamaze. When that didn't work out, all my/our plans changed.

I am sorry you were "extremely put off." Don't blame Jhereg. He is a wonderful new player! And don't worry about having to negotiate with me in the future if you don't want to as I am about fed up with regular communication games.

**kevindusi** · 05-29-2014, 03:23 AM

1) LT, I recently sent you an email regarding one of the games that we are both in. You didn't respond... should I assume we're not buddies in that game? Smile

2) I continue to be impressed by your use of multiple colors.
3) Let's go attack your natural enemy in 129!

**Lord Thanatos** · 05-29-2014, 05:46 AM

(05-29-2014, 03:23 AM)kevindusi Wrote: 1) LT, I recently sent you an email regarding one of the games that we are both in. You didn't respond... should I assume we're not buddies in that game?
2) I continue to be impressed by your use of multiple colors.
3) Let's go attack your natural enemy in 129!

Kevin,

I dropped that game before turn 1. Ry Vor took it over. That is when I decided that anonymous games were more my style.