Both of your language skills are fine >.>

There is no difference between a backstab and a war. A backstab results in a war.




That ^^

Why fight about this? Whats done is done...

Lol. TellerOfBadEnglish

Lol xeruofmyfirstrelic

Hello this is the lamest excuse I've heard this entire week. Yes, I do realize it's Monday. But I think that it'll be the lamest excuse I'll hear this entire week.

Alright people.

First on this new English/Language thing. As someone who lives in the U.S. (home of bad English btw ) Allen, the last paragraph of your msg, and the way it was written (regardless of if it was your intent or not) would be taken as a threat a very large percent of the time. Especially in a game such as this.

That coupled with the fact that you say prior to that, that you "don't take to being back stabbed very well" ensures that it is taken as a threat when you say "If it does happen I hope it does not affect any other eras"


It's a very (seemingly) polite way of phrasing this....
"I don't like being backstabbed, it pisses me off, if this happens here I will take it to other eras in order to get revenge."
That may not have been the msg you wanted to send, but that's what Teller got.


As for all the other crap...

When initial talks of attacking frnd came up. Alisa was not even online, she came on later.

After looking at the screenshots here it does seem as though we had a full era agreement with Frnd, however for whatever reason I know, I and several other members were under the impression that we had a NAP. And more over one that ended tick 500.

Upon seeing the Frnd OP's appear near us around tick 490. It seemed clear that Frnd was preparing to attack us at the end of the NAP.

Some of us had units in the south already. From our last war... with oddly enough those who have changed their name to Frd2... hmmm. Anyway.

So it was thought to be better, cheaper, safer, and, faster to just attack from down there as opposed to returning home, defending ourselves and then marching down the entire map.

IF we decided to do so. It was then that a vote was had.

The "attacks" won the vote.

At this point someone (I dunno who) suggested something like let's give them a 50 or 100 tick warning.

However this was decided against.

I know I personally said "It makes no sense why give your opponents a heads up?" "Why give them time to prepare?" "If you're going to attack, and you are ready, who cares if they're not?"

Now bear in mind that I thought we had a nap that was expiring, not that we we're voiding an agreement.

My words spurred the back stab on and for that I apologize.

But with the information I had at that time I still feel it was the right call, and I would say the same thing again if given in the same position again.

Although I'd make sure the treaty was "expiring" not being "torn up" first.

Yes that's what I meant.

Now as for some of you not knowing there was a NAP or not etc, it shows a clear intent to miscommunicate things, OR maybe the communication within the alliance is just plain bad. Secondly, this could have been communicated, yet you might have chosen to backstab us.

Now like I said, its not the "backstab" ingame or the loss that pisses me off, because If I was serious and looking for a win, Id completely take it as a strategic move and most importantly, I wouldn't lose. But here, my trust in the alliance was betrayed, for no other reason, other than a single person's grudge (MAYBE a few others as well). In such cases, Ill tell my member, if I was leader, to go pick a fight in another server and will stand by my word. But obviously that didn't happen here. We were betrayed, and disrespected. We dont expect anyone to worship us, but atleast show us enough respect and stick to YOUR word for gods sakes. That's the reason for the anger.