Messages - vDiplomacy

Chat archive

16 Sep 13 UTC	Autumn, 1941: Damn :[ Sorry all for the missed phase, it's very rare of me to do that!
17 Sep 13 UTC	Autumn, 1941: GameMaster: DaemonKael was banned: Alt account. The time until the next phase has been extended by one phase length to give an opportunity to replace the player. Remember to finalize your orders if you don't want to wait, so the game isn't held up unnecessarily!
17 Sep 13 UTC	Autumn, 1941: GameMaster: Someone has taken over Germany replacing "DaemonKael". Reconsider your alliances.
17 Sep 13 UTC	Autumn, 1941: daaaaaaaang.
17 Sep 13 UTC	Autumn, 1941: What?
17 Sep 13 UTC	Autumn, 1941: Hmmm...
17 Sep 13 UTC	Autumn, 1941: Yeah, I've seen 2-3 replacements in nearly every game I'm in --- there must have been a few players with a lot of alt accounts.
05 Oct 13 UTC	Autumn, 1944: And that's the way the cookie crumbles... Good luck stopping Japan, I think he has a huge advantage now with access to my remaining centers.
05 Oct 13 UTC	Autumn, 1944: Who said anything about stopping Japan?
05 Oct 13 UTC	Autumn, 1944: If you guys decide to draw with four players, I would have to say that would be a very disappointing outcome in a 6 player game that is not yet stalemated. Thus, it would be logical to assume another would be eliminated, most likely Italy. Realistically Japan, with all my South Eastern centers, would be able to come very close to a solo if he were to reach Italy very quickly and get started in taking his centers.
05 Oct 13 UTC	Autumn, 1944: I didn't think treating allies who follow the rules of their treaties as such was bad..
05 Oct 13 UTC	Autumn, 1944: Britain is arguing that Japan may solo. Even if someone has been the best ally, you.don't let them solo...
05 Oct 13 UTC	Autumn, 1944: Or there could be an agreement already on the table that has yet made fruition as Germany implied... ;)
06 Oct 13 UTC	Spring, 1945: There very well could be, but like I was saying, after Japan captures my remaining centers (that would make the most sense), he would be in a strong position to make a play for a solo. Not saying it has to happen, but it is just a thought :P
06 Oct 13 UTC	Spring, 1945: Well you see Britain, when Japan makes an agreement, he doesn't break it.
06 Oct 13 UTC	Spring, 1945: I enjoy your subtlety in trying to hint at me breaking agreements. I did not make any agreement with you that I broke. You can read back through our communications and I did not do anything I did not commit myself to.
06 Oct 13 UTC	Spring, 1945: You made an agreement with France. You broke it on the same turn. I simply decided to exact justice.
06 Oct 13 UTC	Spring, 1945: "I would appreciate help with reclaiming London, so if you can get him to agree to give me London back without incident, I will stop attacking him." France moved out of London, and I gave him Belgium. You then began to attack his Asian colonies. How very honourable.
06 Oct 13 UTC	Spring, 1945: I think you should go back and look at the maps and years. I told France I would stop attacking him if I received London without incident. In Spring 1942, he moved out of London and I moved out of EC. That year I supported Gulf of Thailand to one of his centers I knew would be supported. It bounced, just as I expected it to. That year, there was no guarantee that I would be receiving London back without incident, only his word to go on. The following year, after I had seen he had left London and I could move in, I SUPPORTED HIS UNIT IN SE ASIA. I made an agreement to stop attacking IF I received London without incident. When I had seen that i would, I STOPPED ATTACKING. I followed through with what I agreed to do. I did not break my agreement.
06 Oct 13 UTC	Spring, 1945: And for your reference, in regards to stopping to attack France, I told him "I am okay with that as long as I receive London back without incident." I did not say "I'll stop attacking now and then you give me back London." That would be a stupid thing to do with an enemy.