|
Post by deviousdevil on May 8, 2007 10:59:38 GMT -5
Why do I have a question mark?
Course I'm going to play!
Though I think Great Britain sounds better than United Kingdom...
|
|
|
Post by deviousdevil on Jun 5, 2007 18:45:02 GMT -5
Really enjoyed arguing with you, can't wait till the next controversy.
Though the poach attempts you've quoted are just wrong and not in context with other postings. KC_Grilla was nothing to do with me and suggested that independently so it hardly counts as me doing a call to arms. The second one was asking the Aussies if they'd like to merge and they chose to. No Aussie said they wanted to stay independent or make a going concern. I may be wrong, but in the event I think only one Aussie actually played in a teamer event. It'd have only been poaching if I was taking individuals away (like kidnapping one of them), this was a merger.
|
|
|
Post by deviousdevil on Jun 4, 2007 18:37:56 GMT -5
The fundamental difference was: 1. Common heritage - Canada/UK/Australia. Take one on in a War, take the lot of us on. 2. We did not steal from any other countries. You went and put Rokkit on your roster when he was from one of our countries. 3. Without a merger I doubt Oz or Canada would have competed, you had tonnes of players in the USA. 4. Most of our "additions" aren't top players, yours was making an all-star team. 1. The common heritage argument is weak. If we strictly apply the standards set against Team NATO. Your team should in no way, shape, or form have been able to compete as powerhouse team. This is the argument leveraged against team NATO. Not a country. The Commonwealth is not a country. Nuff said. 2. I did in no way, shape, or form, poach any players. Do you see any forum postings where I asked for recruits? No, I managed to see that a good portion of the Americans in RaY did not bother to register for the event, I asked why and managed to convince them to play with some caveats. You can take it up with Rokkit as to why he did not want to play with Team UK. That's between him and you. When I formed NATO, he jumped on board. As for Poly, he also had his reasons for not playing with Team Germany. I actually ASKED him to join Team NATO. Now, here we go with the double standard again. You poached two ENTIRE teams. I had two people. Again, I don't know whether you just put Rokkit on your roster without asking or what, but whatever transpired between him and team UK, is just that, it's between yourselves. 3. Team NATO - I did boost our roster, but if you look at the roster between Team CSA and Team NATO, you'll see who our active players really were on Team NATO. It came out to just over 10 people. We were going to have a go with a small team as well. So what? So it's ok for you to "break the spirit" of the Nation's Cup for your own purposes, yet when we follow your example you get to scream bloody murder? Double standard. 4. Now we get to the real reason. Ok, I'll give you this one. I'm sorry if you can't stand the competition. Maybe, practice? This is the lamest of all excuses and the one that I will acknowledge. However, again, the French put out two teams, it's not difficult to see which one is the better of two, by a huge margin. Double standard. When you complain about the French, I'll acknowledge you have a leg to stand on. However, you did not. It's lame way to compete in a competition, cripple your rivals, but trying to not allow them to play. Some tripe here. Worst the counter-poaching allegations, team Canada joined us without even asking for permission and we were hardly going to turn them away. Team Australia came to us after their captain was asked if he'd like to. There wasn't a "free" Australia or Canadian team trying to run independently, so what you're saying is nonsense as has become a theme. Notice also, no-one minded the Latinos, the Vikings or Commonwealth, but they recognised with NATO an attempt to totally ruin the event. As for this daft practice thing you're going on about, I won two events with the help of two partners, in fact I had a pretty good strike rate on winning events. Had I not played this cup, team Commonwealth would probably have not gone beyond 10 points, that is a fact, nor team Canada, UK or Australia had they been independent. I love how you think the Commonwealth angle is weak, given the Canada and Australia were founded by Britain. They were our colonies, that evolved to become self-Governing Dominons. Sure they aren't one country, but the precident was set by the Scandanvians and Latinos before our team emerged. Your nonsense goes further when you take the populations of the Commonwealth Nations that participated (Australia, Canada, UK and Singapore), we 'only' had 110 million people to draw from, still a 3rd of the US population and still you weren't content. Team NATO was your petulent response when America, a country with the most ladder players didn't get it together and you felt you were not going to win. In the end you took over the USA team within CSA, so no team USA in the CCC and the CSA lost to France, which you really don't like. As for the Rokkit thing, I'll quote the great man himself:
|
|
|
Post by deviousdevil on Jun 4, 2007 15:30:22 GMT -5
The fundamental difference was:
1. Common heritage - Canada/UK/Australia. Take one on in a War, take the lot of us on.
2. We did not steal from any other countries. You went and put Rokkit on your roster when he was from one of our countries.
3. Without a merger I doubt Oz or Canada would have competed, you had tonnes of players in the USA.
4. Most of our "additions" aren't top players, yours was making an all-star team.
|
|
|
Post by deviousdevil on May 5, 2007 22:02:00 GMT -5
Sounds Great DTA 1 thing wrong Not many Ukers do Civ but ill ask magzi to help find a team You're wrong Bantams, there are many British players and many of them are top-notch. I can think of just now... [GOD]DeviousDevil TheMightyBoosh Geforced Churchill1 Rokkit Krill [9]Iron That is already the foundation of a rather good team and I'm sure there are a few other excellent British players to be had that I don't know are British.
|
|
|
Post by deviousdevil on Nov 4, 2006 16:27:52 GMT -5
I"m here ktulu. Not sure what devious devil was trying to say... That he won't play any epic game? Because any map can give one player a better start... From my experience, islands are as fair or fairer than any map type, especially with high water/tropical, which forces rich equator starts to chop first, and makes less tundra/snow on the pole starts. Bigben34 It was really quite simple. I don't see the fun in letting the possibility of just poor land resulting in having to report in all likelihood losses more than 30 times for 1 game. Huge reward for winner, too damaging for losers given it is to a large result based on luck due to land. Should be one report per player lost to, like EBD did.
|
|
|
Post by deviousdevil on Oct 29, 2006 14:39:17 GMT -5
No-way I'd want to join a game where the land and resources will be in noway balanced and such a badstard can leave to a potential of some 50 losses easy. I can remember with C3PTW getting 22 wins for one such event and right from the start my land was so good there was 0 chance for anyone to outcompete me.
Far too much reward for luck, far too must punishment for the majority of players.
EBD had it spot on with the game being worth just 1 report in my opinion as it was fun and still a big reward for the winner as he/she would gain some 9 or so reports.
|
|
|
Post by deviousdevil on Sept 1, 2006 18:50:15 GMT -5
Progress report
The players: Novak, Tommynt, ..A..DeviousDevil, Churchill1, Everybodysdarling, [KC]Bantams, Cachola, Longhorn
Novak died first to Tommynt very early in the game.
Later on in the Renaissance period Everybodysdarling gave up leaving 6 players with Tommynt in a strong lead.
The game continues Saturday at 7 pm GMT.
|
|
|
Post by deviousdevil on Sept 1, 2006 7:30:50 GMT -5
I'll try to be there as well ;D
|
|
|
Post by deviousdevil on Sept 11, 2006 11:03:36 GMT -5
So who won it after I left to get a paltry 5 hours sleep before work (if that!)?
A good game, except for that oil fiasco that the map perpetrated and that uranium required fission (which cost me 5 million people and my GNP.)
..A..DeviousDevil the peaceful CND supporter.
|
|
|
Post by deviousdevil on Sept 15, 2006 11:03:38 GMT -5
I'm up for Epic and appreciate the earlier starttime for us europeans as it just isn't feasible playing past 10 pm on Sunday night.
I'd like to see the bulk of the game played out on Saturday and so Sunday if required is a finishing off affaire.
Indeed, if game not decided by 10 pm GMT Sunday it should be saved and resumed the following weekend.
|
|
|
Post by deviousdevil on Apr 13, 2007 17:40:05 GMT -5
Ah, the person who pretends to be Everybodysdarling to get a game. The reality of it is you didn't tell me who you were but pretended to be a player that I'd typically pillage a tile of and he'd give me a report As for MGT I've beaten him more times than he has beaten me, so I don't know what your deal is there as we're very comparable.
|
|
|
Post by deviousdevil on Apr 12, 2007 18:05:03 GMT -5
I'd be worried if MGT was being nice to you, he is after something ;D
I used to be an elite player, then this week happened where I couldn't defeat a deformed changling with no hands.
|
|
|
Post by deviousdevil on Jul 25, 2006 20:43:15 GMT -5
I still don't see any units that can kill a cossack effectively. Pikes, Muskets, knights and other Cavalry all lose. Triple upgraded grenadiers come close i guess. Have they changed the tech cost for replaceable parts and rifling to make it a choice between getting cavalry and rifles? Imperialistic is the best ancient/classical trait now. Getting a settler out that much quicker means you can get to the resource you want very early in a 1v1 and it saves more turns than spiritual does. Aggressive is the second best trait in anicent/classical times so gengis khan will be the new 1v1 king for sure. A strength 15 Cossack will be a piece of piss compared to the strength 18 god we had to put up with. Now at least riflemen will not find them tricky and formation upgraded grenadiers will own them, especially if I've got some lovely catapults to hand.
|
|
|
Post by deviousdevil on Aug 19, 2006 6:01:22 GMT -5
It's total fubar because people will move at 11 seconds, then u counter the move at 10 seconds and you are screwed next turn. I just hate when I'm moving a god-damned worker and get zapped by the 8 second delay where I can't even manage my cities. Sure, stop me moving military units, but why can't I manage other things.
|
|
|
Post by deviousdevil on Aug 16, 2006 3:08:41 GMT -5
. Also there is no stack attack off boats. There is stack attack out of boats if you ram that stack of boats against the city you want to attack. The change is to getting units to move off the boats as a group rather than doing the ram coast approach.
|
|
|
Post by deviousdevil on Jul 25, 2006 20:44:52 GMT -5
Hehe, I can't help but float the phrase 'fan boi' into this thread Nice review Fried. can't wait to use/abuse Impis.
|
|
|
Post by deviousdevil on Sept 27, 2006 11:47:12 GMT -5
One day you'll discover google. EVE has a great character generation and then goes downhill from there...rapidly. It is like boredom...but in space!
|
|
|
Post by deviousdevil on Aug 8, 2006 0:35:04 GMT -5
Well give him his 24hr leeway, and then file a non-report like you would with anyone else. He is allowed the same leeway and will be held to the same rules as any other ladder member despite his "celebrity" status you seem to have iven him CS Well, I deliberately haven't reported to him until he has reported to Patrick. Why report to him if he doesn't to the rest of us?
|
|
|
Post by deviousdevil on Aug 7, 2006 8:59:04 GMT -5
On topic, I was in a cton today with donny, now Silkk and he lost to Patrick someone or other.
I would have liked to have been the one, but I got Roosevelt and no horses, so mainly whinged and held my lands.
There are far better ladder players, but Silkk is a nice enough bloke and I say fair play to him as long as he reports.
|
|