Dip 50, Imp3 Summer RETREATS and Fall 1868 DEADLINE

[Victor Galis]

I see everyone preffers a CSA solo. Fine by me, but I see no point in dragging it out then.

"I think the reason that's it's boring is that France and Holland tried (too early) to take on the world."

-Umm... I didn't attack you. I didn't attack Mexico, I didn't attack Austria, etc. The world decided to take us on too early, and in the process overlooked the growing CSA-Mexico block, which is far more stable. I mean, you people can basically steamroll the world while they're too busy trying to shut me down.

I have neither the will nor the time to argue with people about the inevitable. I have about a snowball's chance in hell to convince Defiant to work together to stop you before it's too late.

Don't give me crap, your position is infinitely stronger and you know it.

I will propose and vote for a concession to the CSA.

[Victor Galis]

The only reason I haven't quit yet is because I actually care about the ADC points penalty for doing so. My leadership is an obvious liability to the French position. Not all the tactical ability in the world can save a country when the world has decided it should no longer exist, and there is no diplomacy left to be done.

[MDR]

Well, you should all be getting messages about a draw proposal in your email boxes by now. Personally, I don't think the game's gone far enough. Anyway, terms were included with the message. I'm waiting for replies. If the draw proposal fails, I do hope El Awrence will take up the game so we can continue.

[Defiant]

This should help MDR, I am voting "NO" to a seven way draw, this game has lots of life to it, mine could be ending maybe but the game needs to go on in my opinion.

[Victor Galis]

The game doesn't really have life to it, and you have a more stable position than I do, anyway, I don't think you should be complaining about your own.

[Dr. Nick]

I'll take over the position if no one minds, just give me a week/week and half to give the map a good look over and do some dipping.

[MDR]

It's yours. Just waiting to see how this draw proposal goes first...

[Dr. Nick]

Well, Defiant is yelling "No!" all over the place like an old hag, so I'd better take a look at that map.

[Gerwald]

Time for my two cents. I vote "NO" to the draw. I find it admirable that Victor won't abandon his position. He and I did talk for some time. He basically employed the "CSA will stab you" scare tactic. I rolled the dice and seem to be okay. No stab. I have even tried to diplomacy with Holland. Yes, he really does exist. That was fruitless. Look, I am on vacation from NOV 30 until DEC 10. I can not do anything anyhow. I suggest that we either have a realistic draw proposal or keep on fighting.

[Scott F]

Of course I never talked to the CSA. What's the point of it? I talked to almost everyone else at one time or another, but Ruffhaus has never been trustworthy, so I saw (and still see) no reason to bother.

[RUFFHAUS 8]

Originally posted by Scott F
Of course I never talked to the CSA. What's the point of it? I talked to almost everyone else at one time or another, but Ruffhaus has never been trustworthy, so I saw (and still see) no reason to bother.

So, not only are you beaten, bored, and lazy, but now you are crossgaming as well? As for me not being not being trustworthy, I beg to differ. It all depends on what's in it for me to be trustworthy. Stabs are part of the game. With me they only come against nations that are functioning contrary to my objectives.
Unfortunately for us, our past history is poor, but every game is a new one with me. Now if you openly admit that you won't trust me in this game because I attacked you in Domination and 20th Century Dip, then what other course do I have than to be at odds with you? And I might add that I was completely honest with you in 1600 Dip, even if we were not allies.

[Scott F]

At first Holland had no reason to negotiate with the CSA, as interests did not conflict and there were no shared fronts or borders. Given that I am always short on time, I didn't bother to discuss anything with you. And of course when interests did conflict, even slightly, it was obvious that you were unlikely to listen or make any deal whatsoever, so again there was no point in bothering. I don't have a lot of time to conduct diplomatic discussions with people and since I am frequently online at erratic hours (at least on when I have time to discuss things), it was a matter of priorities. Why waste time with someone that is very unlikely to listen when that time can be better spent in other more important things, be they outside the game or in discussions to coordinate actions with other players?

And of course you can condemn crossgaming and claim that you never do it, but the simple fact is that everyone that I have seen does it to at least some small degree, no matter how much they like to deny it.

Argue it however you like. I don't have time to get into a pointless discussion about how Holland just never talked, when certain people were never willing to listen anyway. It can hardly be called crossgaming when since the start of this game Ruffhaus has stabbed one nation after another (many of which I had good relations and even alliances with as Holland). And has supported certain of his allies (read: inevitable future victims) against other of Holland's general friends. Those alone create a certain perception within a game.

[Scott F]

Let's also not forget that France talked to you every single turn for quite a long time, with the same result from the CSA every single time. Not a lot of hope for discussions generated there either.

[Defiant]

Well I don't crossgame.

[Scott F]

*says Defiant as he schemes of how to stab Victor in yet another game*