D.N. VS the world

Rychemaster

Guest
Lol... im enjoying reading dalmasio's posts... lucid and well written... and the content rocks.. :D :D
 

Scullionus

Guest
At what point in any of the messages was it made clear that he was a founder? As I am not all-knowing I did not know, simple. With regards to him not being "not high enough to speak to" yeah, you're correct. But as I was unaware he was not a founder and I just figured he was an uncooperative diplo - my bad :)

However, if the founder of your own alliance refuses to acknowledge players as refugees then I have no idea where the problem is with regards to us dropping the pact I think you will find on all worlds the refugee policy is consistent and any other alliance would do the same.

As it all comes out - we see that The Enlightened did not back-stab anyone.
Now see thats the kind of thing i was looking for a very good very clear statement of what happened, if you'd simply talked about DN taking in refugees to begin with we could have all seen exactly what was going on.

Taking in refugees like WoE is one thing, they were allies and their enemies aren't really worthy of note. But taking in refugees from an unfriendly alliance which is also at war with one of your pact members really is a bad idea.

Thanks for clearing that up for me dalmasio ;)
 

darkpsyd

Phrourach
Why can't everyone just get along? :(
Because it's entertaining for everyone, the posts got you reading :) The more fighting, the merrier.

I mean, that's what propaganda is all about. The more issues, the more war in-game and more the posts & replies.

This world and its thread have probably better content than most worlds have out there. And why, simply because of the high flying propaganda and the 'healthy' in-game wars which have led to Threads & posts here never ending.

Oops, I said the same thing in 3 paragraphs :p

:pro:
 

Scullionus

Guest
gotta say i love how much attention this thread has gotten :D

Shame no-one is talking about my fun picture though :p
 

jaserx

Guest
gotta say i love how much attention this thread has gotten :D

Shame no-one is talking about my fun picture though :p
I like the picture Honestly What the link to that site.. I must know so I can color my allaince as one not attacking the great D.N.
 

hamster360

Guest
Now see thats the kind of thing i was looking for a very good very clear statement of what happened, if you'd simply talked about DN taking in refugees to begin with we could have all seen exactly what was going on.

Taking in refugees like WoE is one thing, they were allies and their enemies aren't really worthy of note. But taking in refugees from an unfriendly alliance which is also at war with one of your pact members really is a bad idea.

Thanks for clearing that up for me dalmasio ;)

Clearing this up? Scully, if all you wanted was Dalmasios side of the story, why didn't you just mail him in game? I think it's hilarious that you listen to one thing he says, and you're satisfied.

Also, Dalmasio, can you explain to me your definition of a refugee please?

My personal definition of a refugee is a player who is being farmed by an alliance or player or a player who is losing multiple cities in a short time and are taking no cities themselves.

Now, the members you are referring to as "refugees" are Riverjon, and Bunny9.

According to grepostats, Riverjon lost 1 city to BW on 7/27, then he took a city from BW on 8/08, another on 8/21, THEN, he joined DN on 8/23, and then he took an enlightened city on 8/25 (which is in ocean 34, that we have no agreement on) So he took 2 cities from BW and lost one to BW. So, by my definition, he is not a refugee to any alliance, ESPECIALLY TE.

As for Bunny9, he took a BW city on 8/16, THEN on 8/23 he joined DN. So, he took a BW city, and lost none to BW, and had no conquers for or against TE.

Combined Bunny and Riverjon took 3 cities from BW and lost 1 city to BW. They took 0 cities from TE and lost 0 cities to TE, before joining DN.

As far as battle reports go, show them to me since you claim you have them.

If these 2 players were actual refugees I believe that TE and BW with a combined 1000+ cities could have taken more than one city from them.

ALSO, when you provide these reports, can you make sure that this time they are of TE attacks, and not BW reports. You are after all claiming that Riverjon and Bunny are refugees of TE. Unless you are the puppetmaster of BW?
 

Dalmasio

Guest
Firstly Apologies for my late and slow replies - I am not a native speaker, however I try to make posts as accurate as possible and easy to read as possible. This takes time and often have to write messages offline then reply otherwise time taken to write messages it logs me out and I have to start again

Now I begin.....again.....:)

Clearing this up? Scully, if all you wanted was Dalmasios side of the story, why didn't you just mail him in game? I think it's hilarious that you listen to one thing he says, and you're satisfied.
If he messaged me ingame - I would more than likely not have replied. If I did reply I would have given him my side and once again he would have only that to go on. Now as this thread has evolved himself and others can see we did not back-stab as he was originally lead to believe.

For that I should thank Scullinous for not messaging me ingame as it allowed me to publicly put what happened out. so thank you Sculionous.

Also, Dalmasio, can you explain to me your definition of a refugee please?
Are we using personal definitions? Okay. My definition is simply a player that is in alliance that is in a war with another alliance (esp an alliance you had a pact with). Those players you recruited were in an alliance that we were at war with therefore should be regarded as refugees.

According to grepostats, Riverjon lost 1 city to BW on 7/27, then he took a city from BW on 8/08, another on 8/21, THEN, he joined DN on 8/23, and then he took an enlightened city on 8/25 (which is in ocean 34, that we have no agreement on) So he took 2 cities from BW and lost one to BW. So, by my definition, he is not a refugee to any alliance, ESPECIALLY TE.
You are trying to use semantics and statistics with regards to who could be classed as a refugee. I do not. I am a simple player with regards to how I deal with things. Once again for clarity - a refugee is ANY player that is recruited from an enemy alliance, i am sure many other players would agree with me on this as I always perceived it to be an unwritten Grepolis rule in all worlds.

As far as battle reports go, show them to me since you claim you have them.
I am sure I said I have the messages to back up the fact that we did not back stab. Also - Star Charlie did show Jomango the attack reports on Riverjon and Bunny - but he decided to to share those with the rest of the alliance - I have that message still I believe - infact I think I forwarded it to HellyBelly herself. Once again - as you seem to like me repeating myself- Jomango refused to acknowledge the reports.


hamster360;449815I said:
f these 2 players were actual refugees I believe that TE and BW with a combined 1000+ cities could have taken more than one city from them.
Well seeing as The Enlightened and Black Watch are at war with D.N. I'm guessing we believed them to be refugees after all. It's a great strategy D.N. have, do what you want then complain about it when things do not go your way.

ALSO, when you provide these reports, can you make sure that this time they are of TE attacks, and not BW reports.
This quote is priceless - you have openly admitted that you have seen the reports from Black Watch attacking that player, and thus still state the player as a non-refugee by using your own very specific definition. You should keep posting - the more you post the more you show the brilliance of DN diplomacy.

You are after all claiming that Riverjon and Bunny are refugees of TE. Unless you are the puppetmaster of BW?
I claimed he was a refugee. Not simply a TE refugee - which once again is simply being picky because you know you are wrong and your statement once again implies you agree he could be seen as a Black Watch refugee - and before you try to double-talk your way out of this the underlined part of the quote implies you agree he was a BW refugee. I am sure others who are objective would also agree.


Unless you are the puppetmaster of BW?
This will bring me slightly off topic - I apologise for this but I feel something needs some clarification as things like this have been raised up before and I feel it is not fair on Black Watch unless I reply.

The relationship with Black Watch and The Enlightened is very close, we have worked together since the pretty much the formation of the Mad Tea Party. This was a long time ago, and since then we have worked together as pact alliances to become stronger together. As many of you can see in the the sigma map - TE and BW share many islands together - we are intermingled and to a certain degree this has come with it's share of problems. If I am being honest myself and Star Charlie (founder of BW) have lots of problems - I don't like the way she deals with her players in BW (I personally think she's too soft on them) - but it is HER alliance and I have to respect that and with all our arguments we will still back each other up and support each other ON ALL MATTERS. This is simply because we had pacted with them very early on and it had given our alliances time to work together effectively - which was not very easy and came with it's own set of teething problems esp with regards to ghosts, inactives etc.

Many people will go on to state that Black Watch is infact an academy alliance of The Enlightened and on the surface it would seem so. I personally take this as an immense compliment because it gives validation that having a pact with them was good idea Black Watch is not a sister alliance to The Enlightened nor is it a academy alliance. - they are simply pact with us and because of the length of time and trust we share - we believe we have become the definition of what a pact alliance should be like - two alliances with very different leadership styles are able to work together as a cohesive unit whilst still being independent and separate entities We share info, intel and opinions on things - we go to war with the same people if needs be and try to talk each other out of stupid decisions at times. I believe the way in which we work with Black Watch is the manner in which pact alliances should work and for that - I will never apologise. I am no puppet master
regarding Black Watch - we just try to work and respect pact alliances.



- It should also not be forgotten that D.N. asked Black Watch to join them in a war against The Enlightened and when they said no D.N. got slightly upset and Mass Mailed all members of B.W in an attempt to worry the BW players by blaming the war on the BW leadership.......as you can see D.N.......yeah that's classy to do that. - This has no relevance but it's true and made me laugh a little when I was forwarded the messages from Black Watch - and it goes to show you another reason why D.N. dislike the closeness of BW and TE.

Back on topic - Sure you can stat out and ask for every report but the fact of the matter is you took 2 players from an alliance we were at war with which is wrong. D.N. showed total disregard to our views on the matter and then complain that we stabbed them in the back and started the war.


This entire post is about refugee policy from what I can make out. Hamster360 likes to use grepo-stats to back up his views as they are strong and solid method of city conquests - but I have never used grepostats to try a validate of disprove whether or not someone was refugee or not. I prefer to use open and good honest common sense. After speaking to to other leaders in other alliances I made sure what I was saying was correct and I was in the right about it as It's easy to get caught up in this game and make rash decisions. So obviously using a second, third opinion could have done no harm. All parties I spoke to came back with the same thing - what D.N. did with regards to taking on a player from an alliance we were at war with is still wrong with regards to how to treat a pact member and worse still they carried on after my protests had been made.

Before anyone comes in saying I asked biased parties - they would be wrong as I asked members that DN were pacted with at the time also - just so I received a true objective view point

So - even if you view Hamster360 refugee policy to be correct then surely it should not be how you treat a pact member?? If it is okay to treat a pact member like that then it should make no odd to simply drop the pact as easy it is to invite someone into your alliance.



When boiled down and through all " he said-she said talk" the fact of the matter is - you thought you would get 2 players with multiple cities and try to use the fact that The Enlightened would not go to war over this because of our positioning and the fact that we had a great chance of entering the hero worlds as one the stronger alliances and therefore would not risk going to war with the Number One alliance over 2 players. You also counted on BW not going to war with you over this if we did not. It did not work out how D.N. planned. We put principles over rankings not being taken as push overs to being able to sit comfortably waiting for the end of sigma therefore.......

.............We went to war,

Look at the map, and then ask yourself was it was it worth the two players? Look back on all your choices and ask yourself - were they really the right ones?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Mrs.Sativa

Guest
:D
Someone has a little to much time :p
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Jomango

Guest
Cute thread. /pokes it with a stick...

I see the odd lie from Dalmasio, and incorrect information from both sides.

I think I'll pass on touching most of these subjects.

I will confirm refugee status was denied because I did not accept -BW- battle reports as proof that riverjon/bunny9 are refugees of TE. They where passed on to the leadership, who also noted that. Stating that they where "a" refugee, and not a refugee of TE, is a thinly veiled excuse.

I find the statement that we asked -BW- to fight with us against TE laughable.

This whole thread looks like propaganda and ego stroking.

Edit: No one other then Dalmasio approached us on refugee status of those two, and he produced no proof from his alliance. Any alliance I know wouldn't accept reports not of the petitioning alliance.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

darkpsyd

Phrourach
A whole lotta grouchy fellas here. In-Game, I like the way Ryche came in and poked a D.N member, straight in the eye the day before yesterday and chased him away. And the lollipop's name was- LittleBigHorn.

I'm like in the next city with a siege on and in came rychemaster beside me and reprimanded him like a lil child.

I kept telling him to move off the island cause he was gonna lose the city within 2 days and that too informing him in advance... poor fella didn't listen. Typical ex-WoE death! Hahaha!
 

Scullionus

Guest
christ my views do keep changing on this subject hahaha, yes i can see that reports of BW attacks on the two members would not show those two members are refugees from TE. So on that one i have to return to the DN corner of this boxing ring.

Then again the fact these two players were recruited from an unfriendly alliance towards both DN and TE would suggest a bad move, especially as i know at least one of them remains in constant contact with his friends in TTT ;)

I truly can't decide who was in the wrong from whats been written here, I'd like to take DNs side as i've had more dealings with them, unfortunately our dealings weren't allways friendly and i did see too much pride from DN diplomat Hamster at the time :p

Oh and since my previous post about the map of DN vs the world it has changed, or so i'm told with Guardians Of Asguard been made targets by DN.



Though this one looks very bad for DN there is another version which makes it look better, so here it is.



and in response to an earlier request for making the maps this is the site you need to go to, http://en18.grepolismaps.org/88f4c7e1527923241b991c74439dd124 To make a map in the way i did it simply add your alliance and use zoom 2. You can do a close view of your own alliance by using the co-ordinates of your local area zoom 4 or 8 is best for this.
 

HellyBelly

Guest
Hey Scully, just wondering what the various parameters (alliances, etc) were for the maps you showed to get such different pictures?

The bottom one definitely looks better to me!
 

Scullionus

Guest
the last alliance you put into the map shows up over the top of the alliances above, so the first picture has DN as the first alliance in the list, while the second picture has DN as the last alliance on the list.
 

SakmonKi

Guest
From what I've read, I see Hamster posting actual stats as evidence to back up his claims and Dalmasio using a lot of words to say pretty much nothing at all with no evidence whatsoever. Just a lot of denials and conclusions that those denials must count as proof.

So in reality it looks like this:
Two good players were in an unfriendly ocean
They wanted out of the fighting
They left their alliance and joined another one (that was actually pacted with their former alliance's enemies)
They surrendered their cities over to their former alliance's enemies and moved into a completely different ocean

So... TE and BW went to war with the number one alliance over 2 players who actually helped them out by giving them cities they used to be warring against.

Diplomacy!
 

Jomango

Guest
:eek: -BW- didn't go to war with D.N.. Although it probably would of happened, as TE went to war with D.N.. D.N. initiated the conflict with -BW- based on that fact I just stated, in addition to two weeks of silence from their leaders.
 

bunny9

Guest
Can I speak as the "Refugee" Dalmasio Speaks of. First.. I had never had conflict with TE. I took over this account and was thrust into BM because that was the tag on the account and a friend brought me into the server that was in BM. I didn't enjoy BM and decided to move on for my own Reasons. I left BM after growing the Account from 12 Cities to 23 in 3 weeks.. :) . I had Taken a City from BW and hadn't had any conflict with TE.. I had never had 1 City Cleared by either alliance.. So I ask you.. HOW the Bleep Bleep.. can you accuse me of being a refugee.. Dalmasio? I clear 4-5 TE cities a day Right now even.. SO shut-up with the Refugee BS.

We joined D.N. Riverjon and myself because we didn't enjoy BM. I moved out 23 Cities in under 10days. That was plenty fast. If you had an issue you should have personally mailed me. You didn't have the Ballz to Mail me. I told Starcharlie to hit the road when she was telling me I had 48hrs. I moved pretty damn fast and can prove it with my city number on Grepo stats. I offered all my leftover cities to BM/TE/BW when I had 11 cities outside O44. You guys called a truce in O44 and made it hard to swap out cities because you were working with BW/BM and nobody was authorized to swap.

I'm tired of your BS Dalmasio. You and Starcharlie are the only people on the server I actually Can't stand. You just used the Refugee issue as an Excuse to Bond with BM/BA/TE/BW or (BM/22) now because you knew D.N. was going to own ya.

Get over yourself.. Only reason BM/BA allianced/napped etc. was because they needed you guys and they had just lost 2 of there top players.

I don't go on these boards but heard you called me a refugee again.. Well.. Dmonti, Fbebiano, Firinue have all been cleared this week by me.. Aren't they some of your best?

And yes.. I took over the account legally.. by mailing the Admins of the game etc.. logging out and deleting my old account etc. FYI.

V/r Bunny9
 
Last edited by a moderator: