True, it is fun to offer them that slight hope that Team Devin may be finished forever and then snatch it away with a haughty laugh.

CAVE BUDDIES 4 LIFE!

... what? I played you against each other? You give me too much credit. :tpg:

I never said "attack so-and-so". The only agreement I struck was, "don't attack me, and I won't attack you."

Course, I guess we'll never know for sure, since the Serious Business posts are gone for good.

The only time when I was actively guiding the strategy of others was in Risk Seven, with Yeldarb (well, after he finished off Plarom.)

Anyway, it would be interesting to see if Rockgamer can still win this game. On with the show!

Let's see, there's three of us left, you strike a deal with me not to attack you, you strike a deal with Tritoch not to attack you, so that doesn't leave much choice for us. I'd call that playing us against each other, especially since you never mentioned to me you had a deal with Tritoch, and vice versa. You essentially made it seem like it was you and me vs. Tritoch, while at the same time giving Tritoch the idea that it was you and him vs. me.

You can try and play subtle all you want, but when it comes down to it you played us, we found out, and we turned the tables on you and bested you (giving birth to the :zergrudge: :tpg:).

I've watched 18 seasons of Survivor, so I know when to call a spade a spade. :argh:

And don't worry about my chances of winning. I mean, it's not like I honestly care, especially after what happened in the last game (as Tritoch stated, I'm almost as much of a target as he was). I've honestly only gotten this far out of sheer luck anyway (that GOOD OL' ROCK defense), as I've never been much of a strategist (but hey, at least I don't have to create a :rockgrudge: after my plans go awry).

I'm not subtle at all. In that situation, I would've done... **Hidden Content**

Um, I'm pretty sure that was your plan, you just never got to enact it because we found out about your scheme and turned the tables on you before you could.

And sorry, but I still fail to see the irony, as the situations are hardly similar. You seem to be missing the point that you screwed me before I ever turned on you, so I hardly see how that makes me a bad person to ally with and thus ironic for me to say that about Tritoch.

You say I screwed you, but in what sense? Simply saying, "that's what you were planning anyway" or "that's what you would have done" is hardly sufficient evidence. I didn't touch you after striking the deal - you threw the first punch there, bud.

You were saying I didn't tell you about striking deals with each other - isn't that the same accusation you're leveling here at Tritoch? :)

Look at it from my perspective. I considered you and Tritoch as unreliable partners after that game. Here, you're saying Tritoch is an unreliable partner. Delicious irony! :D

Sorry, but if you strike a deal with me and then turn around and strike that same deal with someone else, you don't have my interests in mind (contrary to what you had me believe) and thus you're screwing me. You honestly think I would have made the deal with you if I knew you were gonna turn around and make it with Tritoch (or if you made it with him first, and then tried to make it with me)? Your problem is that you're asserting "throwing the first punch" as being a physical attack against your territories, but as I see it as soon as Tritoch and I figured out what you were doing it was still an attack against us in the sense that you went back on your word (call it whatever you want, but I still considered it an alliance).

As for the most recent game, the facts stand that Tritoch won and I took second place. No alliance, agreement, pact, or whatever you want to call it is so ironclad that it can change the nature of the game so that there is more than one winner, so in that sense I feel I still won. We made an alliance and we were the last two standing, so our alliance won, plain and simple. Though I may not have agreed with some of Tritoch's actions, it still doesn't change the fact that we won.

So basically, it's kind of silly to sit here and put words in my mouth, or at least not fully read what I said. You may have thought we were "unreliable partners", but nowhere did I say that he was. Sure I gave reasons why it would be harmful for me to ally with him, and I gave reasons why I felt he was untrustworthy, but neither of those things make him unreliable. He still held up his part of our alliance (he could make all the secret deals behind my back he wanted to, but as long as they weren't harmful to me (like yours was) then then he's still not breaking his word), so as far as I'm concerned he's still reliable. Why else would I say I'd still ally with him despite all that (right there in my second point)?

But all this back-and-forth is getting us nowhere, as we're both just gonna keep sticking to our own viewpoints. We've already cluttered the thread with enough talk of the past, so I'm through with the subject.

See Rock, I thought I was being unambiguous with the "non-aggression" pact thing. Having played some browser-based MMORPGs (cough, OGame and AstroEmpires), I tend to draw a distinction between:

1. Non-Aggression Pact (NAP) - we don't attack each other. That doesn't mean we can't attack each other's friends though.
2. Terms of Amity (TOA) - we don't do anything that undermines the other (such as attacking the other's friends, blocking each other's routes to prevent Warlord status...) This is rarely invoked since, if you love each other that much, why not just do an MDP or a full alliance?
3. Mutual Defense Pact (MDP) - I defend you if someone attacks you first, and vice versa. Useful if you love each other but want the freedom to pursue your own goals differently. It's kind of inapplicable in a game like Risk, but is usually invoked in other games where clan wars occur.
4. Alliance - we work together to further our mutual goals, for example Team Maryland, Only Love Donkey Kong, and Team Devin

That's probably more technical than you might have preferred, huh? The Internet is SERIOUS BUSINESS indeed!

The deal I struck with you was a non-aggression pact, which came after I had one with Tritoch (I don't remember if it was me or him who initiated it). My reason in doing so was to remain unmolested while I go after the leader at that point (Domino, I believe). This is the first time you've revealed your thought processes leading to that decision. My only conclusion is... you've watched 18 seasons of Survivor too many. You're way too paranoid :tpg:

Now, regarding the unreliable partner thing, you're right. You didn't explicitly use that word, and I should have used a more precise term. Oh, and for the record...
**Hidden Content**

We've probably mucked up this thread too much. May I request for a thread split starting at post no. 42, and excepting Dullenplain's post (no. 47)?

Why do we need a thread split? You're down to arguing semantics at this point, and as I said before, there's not really much point in keeping this going.

Also, lolling at seeing you try to define OLDK and the like, especially considering you didn't even get the name right. :tpg:

There's no need for a threadsplit. Nothing like some drama to keep things interesting.

Now it's time for me to make my move. I'll attack North Carolina x2, Pennsylvania, and Michigan. God these dice suck.

Well.

Rhode Island, Massachusetts, Vermont, and Wisconsin.

KrelEN's got about 6 hours to make a move.

Attacking Colorado.

Attacking Kansas.

Attacking Missouri.

Attacking Colorado again.

Buying an Energy Boost.

Using an Energy Boost.

Attacking Colorado.

Attacking Iowa.

I'll start with California.


.... this game is depressing.


tanks to Arizona after that, i guess.

Just to let everyone know, Tritoch and I are taking a little road trip starting tomorrow. I'll be around first thing in the morning and the evening, but I won't be able to update during the day. I'll be back to normal on Sunday.

Think there's a miscount with my gil in the spreadsheet. The way I count, I've got:

0 Start
+ 3 Annexed Gil
+ 3 Successful Attack Gil (+5 now)
+ 4 Defense Gil
+ 10 Turn Gil

Perhaps I'm missing something.

Attacking Rhode Island (won)
Attacking Connecticut (lost)
Attacking Connecticut (won)
Attacking New York (lost)

Another middle of the road round

You're totally right, I forgot to give out the daily 5 gil to each player at all this game, which technically means that everyone is owed 10 gil. Starting next round, I'll give it out. If I gave everyone the back money they're owed, we'd likely see a bloodbath.

First attack on Wyoming.

Next is Idaho.

Then comes Utah.

Eh, I still got what I needed, so time to get some tanks rolling into Utah, Wisconsin, Illinois, and Kentucky.

EDIT: Shit, I had to do a double take there, as I thought I was screwed. Nutty, you still have West Virginia listed under Dullenplain in the spreadsheet even though you used your tanks to take it over back during your first turn (which the map accurately reflects).

Sorry about that; I'll try to be more careful.

I'll begin by attacking New York x2, New Jersey, and Delaware. Then I shall use my Energy Boost to take out Indiana and Michigan. Finally my luck has turned; I don't even have to use my Tanks to finish off Plarom.

EDIT: I remembered to give everyone 5 gil as well, now that the next round has started.

It's shit-wrecking time.

Attacking Illinois.

Attacking Iowa.

Attacking Nebraska.

Attacking Nebraska.

My shit feels remarkably unwrecked.

That's because Rockgamer took it all.

Also, I updated KrelEN's gil since he's a Warlord.

He may have taken my states, but he'll never conquer my secret offshore outpost!

I know where you're hiding at.

**Hidden Content**

Curses! Now I'll have to find a new hidden lair to plot my dark revenge from. :(