Slitherine

13obo wrote: ↑Wed Aug 07, 2019 10:38 pm If it was Aetolia attacking others, that may (or may not) have been me. I surrendered the game as one player was idle and the turn limit was 3 days. The game was moving excruciatingly slow.

ledo wrote: ↑Wed Aug 07, 2019 9:52 pm I feel truly sympathetic to the Macedonians, your losses must have been truly staggering.

That Epirus did not attack aetolians immediately is clear. But that doesn't mean they did not have the intention to. Aetolia is likely to sit in its borders and defend. That Macedonia decided to attack immediately is it's choice. Had Macedonia discussed with Epirus the exact timing of the attack in detail or waited for Epirus to attack it's region first it would have been satisfied. As it stands two years in Macedonia declared war within twelve months of the agreement, because of one false move that was not even confirmed to be anything other than a misunderstanding. You can justify it all you want, but I see no cause for war nor reason to break the agreement. You still benefit from an ally on your border and one willing to deal with the dardarni which benefits you. A harsh word about lack of assistance and a tribute of gold could have settled the matter well in your favour. Meanwhile Epirus is the loser here either way because it does not get it's province. Indeed Epirus could just as easily be aggrieved by you moving too soon without notifying it and grabbing the territory you agreed to hand over to it (we're only two turns in!). Instead you want war. Myself I am starting to suspect that Macedonia was keen for allies while it was uncertain of the intention of the other diadochi, now however it sees no reason to avoid taking Epirus' lands.

MARVIN_THE_ARVN wrote: ↑Wed Aug 07, 2019 5:04 pm King Dodones of the Kingdom of Bactria calls upon his fellow Hellenics to stop this senseless death and warfare, if you want rid your nation of people send your citizens to Bactria where we can offer them a new start (I'm a Hellenic nation but only 2 of my 40 pops are Hellenic citizens).

Hail Hydra

pnoff wrote: ↑Wed Aug 07, 2019 11:17 pm

ledo wrote: ↑Wed Aug 07, 2019 9:52 pm I feel truly sympathetic to the Macedonians, your losses must have been truly staggering.

That Epirus did not attack aetolians immediately is clear. But that doesn't mean they did not have the intention to. Aetolia is likely to sit in its borders and defend. That Macedonia decided to attack immediately is it's choice. Had Macedonia discussed with Epirus the exact timing of the attack in detail or waited for Epirus to attack it's region first it would have been satisfied. As it stands two years in Macedonia declared war within twelve months of the agreement, because of one false move that was not even confirmed to be anything other than a misunderstanding. You can justify it all you want, but I see no cause for war nor reason to break the agreement. You still benefit from an ally on your border and one willing to deal with the dardarni which benefits you. A harsh word about lack of assistance and a tribute of gold could have settled the matter well in your favour. Meanwhile Epirus is the loser here either way because it does not get it's province. Indeed Epirus could just as easily be aggrieved by you moving too soon without notifying it and grabbing the territory you agreed to hand over to it (we're only two turns in!). Instead you want war. Myself I am starting to suspect that Macedonia was keen for allies while it was uncertain of the intention of the other diadochi, now however it sees no reason to avoid taking Epirus' lands.

Oh right, we were supposed to attack in the first century AD. We're sorry, we will disband our armies and surrender now.

Sure our armies had nothing to do than to guard a bunch of barbarians holed up in mountains for a decade or two.

More incompetent buffoonery by Carthage generals. We recommend you run a wargame by having Epirus attack immediately (hire 3 ranged units, appoint best general (not Carthaginian!)) and see how easy it is. Even attack on both provinces in one year is very likely to succeed. Also, whoever finds green barbarians on the map first wins a basket of dates.

Epiruses deception or total incompetence made the agreement void, and since it did not have non-aggression pact the attack is within the bounds of honor.

This arguments take too much papyrus and, more importantly, our king's time. Thus he withdraws from it until more interesting matter come up.

MARVIN_THE_ARVN wrote: ↑Wed Aug 07, 2019 5:04 pm King Dodones of the Kingdom of Bactria calls upon his fellow Hellenics to stop this senseless death and warfare, if you want rid your nation of people send your citizens to Bactria where we can offer them a new start (I'm a Hellenic nation but only 2 of my 40 pops are Hellenic citizens).

Hail Hydra

Unfortunately, the mobility of people in Kingdom of Macedon is temporary limited, since we are in dire need of workforce for Great Salt Mines of Macedon that were completed just this year.


- Pnoff of Macedon

edit. Checked if there is an actual Great Salt Mine building. There is none, severely disappointed. It should increase Legacy and unrest, just for memes.

ledo wrote: ↑Wed Aug 07, 2019 11:53 pm A decade or two is a bit of an exaggeration. Probably two turns is more accurate. The fact that their incompetence/deception makes the agreement void, particularly when it's not clear which it is, is your opinion, but not one I expect many will hold in high esteem. I would also wonder if you would so readily declare war on the Antigonids if they were not so eager, in their own interest mind you, to secure athens immediately. If the answer is no, I would suggest your attack is opportunism, if your answer is yes, I would suggest the Antigonids be very careful to clarify every comment you make in your agreement, lest they accidentally move to consolidate some territory or take some time to regroup their forces and you take it as a casus belli. I assume the latter, if it were to happen, would more likely happen once the Antigonids are not so comfortably at peace with the Seleucids and Ptolemies.

Also, in a game between human players using messaging, your argument that there is no non-aggression pact, considering the messages exchanged is less than solid. While you may have noted nothing down on paper, your statement that your word is meaningless, absent such a document, is telling.

As for Carthaginian generals we have a 2-2 and a 2-1, as well as two 1-1s, if Macedon considers this the bottom of the pile, I would dearly like to see what the gods have deemed fit to bestow upon other nations.

pnoff wrote: ↑Thu Aug 08, 2019 12:37 am

ledo wrote: ↑Wed Aug 07, 2019 11:53 pm A decade or two is a bit of an exaggeration. Probably two turns is more accurate. The fact that their incompetence/deception makes the agreement void, particularly when it's not clear which it is, is your opinion, but not one I expect many will hold in high esteem. I would also wonder if you would so readily declare war on the Antigonids if they were not so eager, in their own interest mind you, to secure athens immediately. If the answer is no, I would suggest your attack is opportunism, if your answer is yes, I would suggest the Antigonids be very careful to clarify every comment you make in your agreement, lest they accidentally move to consolidate some territory or take some time to regroup their forces and you take it as a casus belli. I assume the latter, if it were to happen, would more likely happen once the Antigonids are not so comfortably at peace with the Seleucids and Ptolemies.

Also, in a game between human players using messaging, your argument that there is no non-aggression pact, considering the messages exchanged is less than solid. While you may have noted nothing down on paper, your statement that your word is meaningless, absent such a document, is telling.

As for Carthaginian generals we have a 2-2 and a 2-1, as well as two 1-1s, if Macedon considers this the bottom of the pile, I would dearly like to see what the gods have deemed fit to bestow upon other nations.

Apparently, if you don't stick to agreements and act derpy you might get attacked by you neighbour. O tempora o mores!

- Pnoff of Macedon

ledo wrote: ↑Thu Aug 08, 2019 12:47 am ... In my view incompetence does not warrant dishonor. We wish your remaining allies well and hope they do not make even a single misstep, as the bonds of Macedonian friendship are clearly more string than iron.

Morbio wrote: ↑Thu Aug 08, 2019 7:39 am

pnoff wrote: ↑Thu Aug 08, 2019 9:04 am

Morbio wrote: ↑Thu Aug 08, 2019 7:39 am

Not sure how outcome of an attack can make anything clear, except who is the winner.

We are concerned that Lysimachos might be under influence of Carthaginian-Epirean propaganda and would like a public confirmation of Non-Aggressions Pact with 5 years warning between any hostilities. (Can negotiate details in private and then announce them)

Antigonids is our trusted ally and we unilaterally declare that at least 10 turns warning will be given before any hostilities from our side. This is just to be formal. We are commited to long term strategic partnership with them.


- Pnoff of Macedon

pnoff wrote: ↑Thu Aug 08, 2019 9:04 am

Morbio wrote: ↑Thu Aug 08, 2019 7:39 am

Not sure how outcome of an attack can make anything clear, except who is the winner.

We are concerned that Lysimachos might be under influence of Carthaginian-Epirean propaganda and would like a public confirmation of Non-Aggressions Pact with 5 years warning between any hostilities. (Can negotiate details in private and then announce them)

Antigonids is our trusted ally and we unilaterally declare that at least 10 turns warning will be given before any hostilities from our side. This is just to be formal. We are commited to long term strategic partnership with them.


- Pnoff of Macedon

ledo wrote: ↑Thu Aug 08, 2019 9:12 am

ledo wrote: ↑Thu Aug 08, 2019 9:35 am

pnoff wrote: ↑Thu Aug 08, 2019 9:51 am

ledo wrote: ↑Thu Aug 08, 2019 9:35 am

The oral negotiations left Macedon under impression that territorial division and attack on Aetolia at the start was in order, meaning that as long as both sides stick to it no hostilities are possible.

Since no treaty was officially annonced, we are entitled to our understanding.

Funny how Carthage tries to misrepresent the situation as we had a non-aggression pact (with specified warning period beflre hostilities) or even an alliance, haha

- Pnoff of Macedon


OOC I treat private messages as oral discussion and publicly announced things as written, since I believe it is the best way.

ledo wrote: ↑Thu Aug 08, 2019 9:53 am So then no year for the invasion was detailed and thus misunderstanding was not only possible but probable.

The fact you were left 'under the impression' by your mind is so ironclad it is justification for war but the conversation as a whole is so meaningless to you that a verbal agreement to peace means nothing. This is the doublespeak of an opportunist.

pnoff wrote: ↑Thu Aug 08, 2019 10:03 am

ledo wrote: ↑Thu Aug 08, 2019 9:53 am So then no year for the invasion was detailed and thus misunderstanding was not only possible but probable.

The fact you were left 'under the impression' by your mind is so ironclad it is justification for war but the conversation as a whole is so meaningless to you that a verbal agreement to peace means nothing. This is the doublespeak of an opportunist.

In our language at the start means at the start, especially since that is what any half competent commander would do anyway.

Macedon does not need a justification for war when no treaty is in effect, we congratulate Sherlokid Holmsonid on that amazing deduction.

- Pnoff of Macedon

ledo wrote: ↑Thu Aug 08, 2019 10:11 am Start is neither a turn or ayear, and can mean many things within a reasonable timeframe. I do not count the 'start' of my appointment to the leadership of Carthage only to the first day or minute or second of my rule. I would imagine we are still, three years in, at the start of the game. But I guess start has many meanings like 'peace' and 'honor' have many meanings for Macedonians if they are based purely on their word.