Noble to Prince - unbearable

[brandonjm8]

im not looking for sympathy, just understanding, i made alot of valid points. we both are at fault but til he mans up and apologizes, i wont either. if he wont say sorry to me then i wont either, he wouldnt deserve it then. i know you agree about his word usage, just trying to illustrate the extent of the debacle. as far as importance, its simple, i dont take chit (dont confuse chit with advice/insight, they are two different things) from anyone. im assuming even you wodan MIGHT say something if someone was twisting/forgetting (intentionally or unintentionally) what you were saying or attempting to make you look foolish. to be honest, i dont care what ming and a few others say, doesnt mean i wont defend my name/ideas/posts, the only thing i care about here is my word and the advice of others, advice given respectfully and politely.

[wodan11]

im not looking for sympathy, just understanding, i made alot of valid points.

Some advice: if your points are fraught with emotional content, then you will receive responses on an emotional basis. If you want "understanding" and for your points to be considered logically, then don't include huge emotional overtones in your posts.

There's a difference between:
Here are the facts, ma'am.
and
Here are the facts, you biotch.

we both are at fault but til he mans up and apologizes, i wont either.

So you require him to "man up" but you won't do it yourself?

If a requirement to "man up" is doing it first, then there can only be one "man" in the argument. So, wouldn't you want to be that person?

[rah]

I agree. If you had responded to Ming's criticisms with logic instead of insults, the results might actually have been educational. You may not like his attitude, but at least he never called you an idiot, and your attitude has been much worse because of it.

Argue the strategy.

[Ming]

I'm not asking for an apology... That was never my intent. But I am pointing out that Brandon should follow the rules of the site.
Discuss civ and not resort to personal insults. The number of personal insults he's made to me and others is against the rules of the site. It's OK to disagree and support your own POV, but calling somebody an idiot or other things simply because they don't agree with you is not acceptable here.

[brandonjm8]

it never wouldve escalated to that point if he hadn't used a descending demeanor in his responses/posts (and attempting to trump my own word by saying they are "below" him hence irrelevant (if he doesnt consider them relevant he should keep that to himself, irrelevancy is not the topic here, discussing strategies and stories are, if he finds them irrelevant to himself, then why is he getting involved in them then, they arent relevant to him?)) prior to me calling him an "idiot" (and they did get worse afterwards, he started to patronize me, even tho he stated rules all the time, he himself wasnt following them, he couldve led by example but chose not to), i only did after several attempts to clarify his misunderstandings but to no avail. i got frustrated and spoke bluntly, some of my points were yes emotional but that doesnt take any of the validity away from them. the main reason i shouldnt apologize to him is he still thinks his comments and the way he went about saying them prior to all this was acceptable (even afterwards once he started stating rules, he was breaking them too by patronizing me, thats something he shouldnt have done, it only added fuel to the fire), it appears he wont take any responsibility for what he said (i quoted his exact words too). when someone refuses to correct their own assumptions, what can you do? if you dont stand up for yourself, whats to stop them? my attitude suffered and i shouldnt have called him an "idiot", for that i will take the lead and be the bigger man here and say, im sorry. if he doesnt take his own responsibility now, then all of this will never be resolved and i wont say it again. i will continue to invalidate any of his posts which include me. fair?

[Ming]

it never wouldve escalated to that point if he hadn't used a descending demeanor in his responses/posts (and attempting to trump my own word by saying they are "below" him hence irrelevant

You are the one that went beyond disussion of Civ by starting with the personal insults.

(if he doesnt consider them relevant he should keep that to himself, irrelevancy is not the topic here, discussing strategies and stories are, if he finds them irrelevant to himself, then why is he getting involved in them then, they arent relevant to him?)) prior to me calling him an "idiot" (and they did get worse afterwards, he started to patronize me, even tho he stated rules all the time, he himself wasnt following them,

Again... read the rules. We can disagree about civ, but no personal insults. And you continue with personal insults.

he couldve led by example but chose not to), i only did after several attempts to clarify his misunderstandings but to no avail. i got frustrated and spoke bluntly, some of my points were yes emotional but that doesnt take any of the validity away from them.

There is no excuse for using personal insults here. Being frustrated is no excuse...

the main reason i shouldnt apologize to him is he still thinks his comments and the way he went about saying them prior to all this was acceptable (even afterwards once he started stating rules, he was breaking them too by patronizing me,

Again, I'm not asking for an apology... but I'm asking to your follow the site rules. I didn't break the rules of the site (Feel free to read the posting FAQ), you did.

thats something he shouldnt have done, it only added fuel to the fire), it appears he wont take any responsibility for what he said (i quoted his exact words too). when someone refuses to correct their own assumptions, what can you do?

There is no rule that says somebody has to change their assumptions... and I continue to disagree with your intrepretation. Those are opinions, on both sides, and doesn't excuse the use of personal insults.

if you dont stand up for yourself, whats to stop them? my attitude suffered and i shouldnt have called him an "idiot", for that i will take the lead and be the bigger man here and say, im sorry. if he doesnt take his own responsibility now, then all of this will never be resolved and i wont say it again. i will continue to invalidate any of his posts which include me. fair?

Again... just stop using personal insults, to me, and to others that disagree with you.
But that doesn't mean that I will stop disagreeing with you if I think you are wrong...

[brandonjm8]

i tried, as i said he still thinks he did nothing wrong, he doesnt deserve any apology, i take it back.

[rah]

i my attitude suffered and i shouldnt have called him an "idiot", for that i will take the lead and be the bigger man here and say, im sorry.

As long as you don't in the future, good enough for me. If you think I was making fun of your strats, that was not my intention. My intention was to point out that I don't agree with your strats so let's go back to that.

Earlier in the thread you posted

id say about 180 of my 213 infantry are used for D purposes with CG promos, while the others for attacking with drill and shock promos, im sending some of my D ones for defending cities that i capture,

That is what led me to think your D to O ratio was not consistent with what I do and was wasteful. Your ratio of siege units was also way lower than I maintain in EVERY game I play. So your comments that this one was game specific didn't satisfy me at all.

Now that you've read the entire thread would you do this type of ratio in the future or will you have a higher ratio of drill? (assuming you meant pinch vs shock since infantry really doesn't need shock against melee units )

[brandonjm8]

post #70 of "crossover" forum
Quote:
Actualy, your stats are kind of irrelevent.

never have i told someone their stats/info was irrelevant, if this doesnt have at least a bit of condescending attitude towards someone then i dont what that word means anymore, it wouldnt match the definition then. there was a more polite way of saying that, he chose not too.

then he says

Quote:
Limited early contact

just my last game i shared my continent with 4 other civs, another uncalled assumption from him, he didnt even ask.

then this

Quote:
Not polite... Bummer... But your idea of not polite is anybody that doesn't agree with you.

i guess since he assumes i dont like people that disagree and/or others that have given me advice/insight, another poor assumption. hes already judged me prior to asking enough questions/getting to know the person.

now this

Quote:
I don't speak for Sid... But at least I was a play tester for the civ series and even get credit in the manual... How about you?

if this isnt him patronizing me then yet again it wouldnt match the definition of the word.

this

Quote:
But if somebody comes here bragging how great they are while playing a rigged world on noob levels, I have no problem pointing out to them that maybe they need to rethink their high opinion of themself

he always assumes im bragging even after i apologized to all who thought i was, he wont let it go. he plays different settings all the time yet hes knocking mine down. he feels hes entitled to do as he pleases but reserves the right to talk down to people he wants to.

now this

Quote:
The only inaccuracy was I said noble instead of prince, which I then admited my mistake... You too have made FAR more mistakes, and even admitted a few of them. As far as your O vs D comments, you are still wrong, and are simply backpeddleing yet again. So your idea of "many" is simply a single one.

i provided ONE page worth of his inaccuracies, i could post alot more. he's chosing which of my posts to listen to, hes being very selective in the info he uses for his posts. he dismisses it based on that, well to tell you the truth i dont know. i listed on the dates of these posts and points i used and in order yet he refuses to accept what HE even said, you can find those on the "crossover" forum page 3, it also states when i called him an "idiot", there were 5 posts prior to that one of them from theben, all his posts prior to me calling him an idiot (cause he was acting like it) were in the condescending/patronizing attitude, he wont take responsibility for his selection of words and how he uses them.

and

Quote:
Now you are a big fan of drill, when before, you didn't even really understand it.

when you look at when i said i used drill, it is posted, you can see it in the above mentioned forum, it was many days prior to all of this starting.

and this

Quote:
They may be false assumptions, but only in your opinion.

now he says he "might've" been wrong, but then takes it back since i guess his opinion is better than others. i guess he wants me to respect him but he doesnt have to respect me, aint gonna happen. when you annoy/insult someone, its always the victim's opinion.

those were just in the "crossover" forum, there are many more examples of his attitude towards me. ive posted plenty examples to get my point across, you either agree ming can say whatever however even if hes assuming in a condescending manner or you agree he couldve and shouldve been more respectful of others and polite w/o the condescending attitude prior to this whole debacle. there will be others such as myself and senethro (just for example, hes not involved) who will voice their own distaste in ming and people like him if thats how they want to go about it.

[Ming]

i tried, as i said he still thinks he did nothing wrong, he doesnt deserve any apology, i take it back.

Please point out where I broke the forum rules...
Even if YOU thought I was making poor assumptions (which in my opinion I wasn't) that's not against the rules. If you didn't like my tone, that's just your interpretation/opinion... again, not against the rules... If you think I made a mistake, that too isn't against the rules. But, resorting to personal insults is against the rules. And it's very clear that you were doing that.

Just because you are "frustrated", or don't like that someone disagreed with you in a tone you didn't like, that doesn't give you the right to make personal attacks.

And again, I will continue to disagree with your strategies, and other civ related topics if I think they are wrong.

An again, I don't care about an apology, or whether you "take it back"... But I do care if you follow the rules of this site. So just stop with the personal insults, and don't automatically resort to them when somebody disagrees with you.

[brandonjm8]

As long as you don't in the future, good enough for me. If you think I was making fun of your strats, that was not my intention. My intention was to point out that I don't agree with your strats so let's go back to that.

Earlier in the thread you posted


That is what led me to think your D to O ratio was not consistent with what I do and was wasteful. Your ratio of siege units was also way lower than I maintain in EVERY game I play. So your comments that this one was game specific didn't satisfy me at all.

Now that you've read the entire thread would you do this type of ratio in the future or will you have a higher ratio of drill? (assuming you meant pinch vs shock since infantry really doesn't need shock against melee units )

those numbers were off, a good half did have CG tho (as it turned out didnt need em, but i did later use them for defending newly captured cities or forts/ports), i dont remember exact numbers. the ones with shock were my macemen, the ones with CG were my long and some crossbow, after the invasion never came i started giving them drill, i had some drill prior but did make quite a few CG units cuz i thought id be in a bloody war, my seige was weak had 10 or more not much at that time, once i got cannons or artillery dont remember i built them heavily, i did build alot of knights tho, 37 just in preparation and a good 30 more afterward (they became my gunships). if i had to guess-amate i had around 220 total infantry, a good 100 along my borders with various promos but mostly CG if i remember right, a good 50 so in the heartland for reserves and the rest maybe 60+ most of my drill ones to the front lines. i had a huge navy too, well over 100 total units by the time i won. i won the domination vassalizing 3 of the 5 AI's, i tried that game giving us each our own island to see howd i do, then i went to 8 civs, then 10, now 12, next map i play probably 14, just trying to find the optimum number while we all get at least kinda big.

for ratios, i like to have in each city one either drill or CG bow that never leaves, one or two melee units, one or two pikemen. if needed the attackers with attacking promos (melee, pikemen) will defend against an invading army or i'll send them out with my stack of mounted and siege. thats about it.

[brandonjm8]

Please point out where I broke the forum rules...
Even if YOU thought I was making poor assumptions (which in my opinion I wasn't) that's not against the rules. If you didn't like my tone, that's just your interpretation/opinion... again, not against the rules... If you think I made a mistake, that too isn't against the rules. But, resorting to personal insults is against the rules. And it's very clear that you were doing that.

Just because you are "frustrated", or don't like that someone disagreed with you in a tone you didn't like, that doesn't give you the right to make personal attacks.

And again, I will continue to disagree with your strategies, and other civ related topics if I think they are wrong.

An again, I don't care about an apology, or whether you "take it back"... But I do care if you follow the rules of this site. So just stop with the personal insults, and don't automatically resort to them when somebody disagrees with you.

as long as you continue to think my feeling/opinions dont matter and talk the way you do to others as i have noted, i'll do the same. when you stop, i stop.

[Ming]

But it's not the same... I'm discussing Civ and stating game related opinions... you are making personal insults.
If being disagreed with is disturbing, so be it. It's not against the rules to disagree with somebody. So what exactly am I supposed to stop? Tone, attitude... all matters of opinion. What are you supposed to stop... personal insults, which are clear and against the rules.

[brandonjm8]

But it's not the same... I'm discussing Civ and stating game related opinions... you are making personal insults.
If being disagreed with is disturbing, so be it. It's not against the rules to disagree with somebody. So what exactly am I supposed to stop? Tone, attitude... all matters of opinion. What are you supposed to stop... personal insults, which are clear and against the rules.

stop your condescending attitude towards me, if what i post aint relevant to you then you have no business/reason replying to it, stop patronizing me (you were bragging bout being a civ tester, dont deny that, i got your exact quote up there). and be polite and respectful in your replies, i'll do the same. if you insist on not complying then nor will i.

and stop assuming everything, you assume too much. your assumptions are in the quotes i provided. putting words in peoples mouth is annoying.

[rah]

those numbers were off, a good half did have CG tho (as it turned out didnt need em, but i did later use them for defending newly captured cities or forts/ports), i dont remember exact numbers. the ones with shock were my macemen, the ones with CG were my long and some crossbow, after the invasion never came i started giving them drill, i had some drill prior but did make quite a few CG units cuz i thought id be in a bloody war, my seige was weak had 10 or more not much at that time, once i got cannons or artillery dont remember i built them heavily, i did build alot of knights tho, 37 just in preparation and a good 30 more afterward (they became my gunships). if i had to guess-amate i had around 220 total infantry, a good 100 along my borders with various promos but mostly CG if i remember right, a good 50 so in the heartland for reserves and the rest maybe 60+ most of my drill ones to the front lines. i had a huge navy too, well over 100 total units by the time i won. i won the domination vassalizing 3 of the 5 AI's, i tried that game giving us each our own island to see howd i do, then i went to 8 civs, then 10, now 12, next map i play probably 14, just trying to find the optimum number while we all get at least kinda big.

for ratios, i like to have in each city one either drill or CG bow that never leaves, one or two melee units, one or two pikemen. if needed the attackers with attacking promos (melee, pikemen) will defend against an invading army or i'll send them out with my stack of mounted and siege. thats about it.

Obviously you didn't understand my question so I'll try again.
After reading this thread are you going to change some of your D to O ratios or are you going to continue to overbuild your defenses. This isn't a trick question. Every single person in this thread thought what you had was overkill. Has that changed your opinion or do you continue to hold to your original posts?