Welcome Guest Search | Active Topics | Members | Log In

War of Norwegian Aggression Talks Options · View
Varyar
Posted: Monday, February 22, 2010 12:26:39 PM
 Centurion

One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

Joined: 7/4/2008
Posts: 868
The Professor wrote:
Issues to be discussed.

iv) significant resource reverses to be edited from Norway and Italy to Japan.

Italy will only accept these conditions if:
A) they are presented to Prime Minister Urquhart in Italianopolis
B) it is the recommended course of action by its allies
Varyar
Posted: Monday, February 22, 2010 12:40:09 PM
 Centurion

One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

Joined: 7/4/2008
Posts: 868
Foelsgaard wrote:
One thing that has been annoying me a great deal is the incessant whining about nukes since we began the HoI-segment and the incessant whining about "attitudes" and "balance of power" ever since I joined the game.

You're welcome Big Grin

Quote:
Making rules (written or not) against attitudes/styles of playing is IMHO not a path we want to go down. Making rules against nukes should have been done a looong time ago.

I raised the issue well before the HoI phase. That the other participants are either short-sighted or fanboys for overpowered newbie weapons is no fault of mine, so excuse me if I choose to pursue my anti-nuke crusade through in-game means.

Quote:
Also, while I don't have nukes and can't be a part of the upcoming nuclear exchange (except on the receiving end), this "Come on, don't use nukes if you lose" sounds very much like "Bend over and take it" in my ears.

So? Losing means bending over, what's the problem with that? Using nukes just because your nation gets eliminated is akin to walking up to the winner after [insert random major sports event] and blasting him with a shotgun. It's a textbook example of poor sportsmanship and reflects very poorly on the character of the player in question. For someone to enjoy victory someone else needs to suck up a defeat: if you can't handle that then don't play competitive games. I rather lose to Jakalo because he's a superb HoI player than to win against him because I can click-send a few missiles against him.

Seriously Foelsgaard, you're a brilliant HoI player, why would you prefer the use of nukes?
Gollevainen
Posted: Monday, February 22, 2010 1:49:43 PM
 Legatus legionis

One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership MedalAuthor of 50,000th Forum Post

Joined: 4/5/2008
Posts: 4,235
Location: "I need zoo love!"
Nukes are part of Hoi2. Period. Building all IC in one or two province is not. Period.

There is no "poor sportman ship" in using nukes, its war, it's a messy business. If you don't want to get nuked, then don't attack nuclear countries. Or nukem them before they can use their nukes. In these games and in the previous one, the concept of MAD works, if not as efficiently as in real life but it still does.

Then again, I'm just ranting for the sake of ranting....Holy

But as for giving up to the terms presented by The professor, I strongly advice Italy not to do it before he has got my full briefing.




Irsh Faq wrote:
I've noted with Golle a trend of stirring up as much drama publicly as he can whenever he's up to something shady in the background. Presumably its a smokescreen strategy.
Varyar
Posted: Monday, February 22, 2010 2:04:19 PM
 Centurion

One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

Joined: 7/4/2008
Posts: 868
Gollevainen wrote:
Nukes are part of Hoi2. Period. Building all IC in one or two province is not. Period.

So are mongols in CK, stab-hitting spy missions in EU3, and so on. Just because someone put it in the game it doesn't mean it's automatically well balanced and suitable for MP.

Quote:
There is no "poor sportman ship" in using nukes, its war, it's a messy business. If you don't want to get nuked, then don't attack nuclear countries. Or nukem them before they can use their nukes. In these games and in the previous one, the concept of MAD works, if not as efficiently as in real life but it still does.

A game allowing nukes doesn't automatically break down, no. It is however a poor substitution for real warfare. I mean look at the war so far, without nukes: it's grand strategy fun. That's how this game should be played.

Quote:
But as for giving up to the terms presented by The professor, I strongly advice Italy not to do it before he has got my full briefing.

Of course. Speaking of which, get your ass on MSN and brief me Mad One Tooth Grin
Gollevainen
Posted: Monday, February 22, 2010 2:10:57 PM
 Legatus legionis

One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership MedalAuthor of 50,000th Forum Post

Joined: 4/5/2008
Posts: 4,235
Location: "I need zoo love!"
Mongols are clear exploid, CK wasen't designed that it could be used as Fasq did it...Nukes however are different thing. Look at Quepec, it has been hit twice with nukes and I doupt he hardly even noticed it. Or Germany...Anyone knew that it got nuked as well in this game?

I understand that you fear the nukes hitting your massive IC concentrations but in last session, Italy got reduced twice to around 300 avaible ICs by rockets...and it survived...

Quote:
Of course. Speaking of which, get your ass on MSN and brief me


i will, I will, gotta earn some millions for Kuula for about 50 mins still...Wink



Irsh Faq wrote:
I've noted with Golle a trend of stirring up as much drama publicly as he can whenever he's up to something shady in the background. Presumably its a smokescreen strategy.
Anders
Posted: Monday, February 22, 2010 4:06:48 PM
 Generalfeldmarschall

Forum Supporter Medal 1st ClassOne Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal2012 Good Cause Support MedalBanned in ActionAuthor of 7000th post

Joined: 3/9/2007
Posts: 13,057
Location: Auf das der Adler wieder fliegt
Varyar wrote:
Just because someone put it in the game it doesn't mean it's automatically well balanced and suitable for MP.
In regards to nukes, they are inherently more suitable to MP than to SP as the AI never use them due to a missing (though modable) trigger code (unless 1.3 changed it).

"Hvor fattige var de ikke, disse fiskere som levde av havets nåde! De slet sig gjennom livet uten å se sig om til høire eller til venstre. Deres gleder var få, deres bekymringer mange. Men de hadde allikevel et gemyttlig smil til den fremmede, en munter vise og en lun historie. For sånn er de, disse Sørlandets barn."

King of Men wrote:
Anders is correct.

Fivoin wrote:
Yeah, Anders is right.

baronbowden wrote:
I would tend to agree with Anders.

Support Ederon.net via your Amazon purchases!

I joined Ederon.net before it became mainstream
Varyar
Posted: Monday, February 22, 2010 5:12:46 PM
 Centurion

One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

Joined: 7/4/2008
Posts: 868
Anders wrote:
In regards to nukes, they are inherently more suitable to MP than to SP as the AI never use them due to a missing (though modable) trigger code (unless 1.3 changed it).

Suitability is an absolute concept, not a relative one. Just because Stalin was a more suitable leader of Russia than Hitler would've been, it doesn't mean Stalin was a suitable leader in any real sense.
Anders
Posted: Monday, February 22, 2010 5:24:43 PM
 Generalfeldmarschall

Forum Supporter Medal 1st ClassOne Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal2012 Good Cause Support MedalBanned in ActionAuthor of 7000th post

Joined: 3/9/2007
Posts: 13,057
Location: Auf das der Adler wieder fliegt
Varyar wrote:
Suitability is an absolute concept, not a relative one. Just because Stalin was a more suitable leader of Russia than Hitler would've been, it doesn't mean Stalin was a suitable leader in any real sense.
In itself that comparison is worthless. You might as well say that even if democracy is a better from of government than theocratic feudalism, democracy isn't a good form of government in any real sense.

If your application of nuclear weaponry had been a bit more liberal, then perhaps the game would have progressed more fluidly.

"Hvor fattige var de ikke, disse fiskere som levde av havets nåde! De slet sig gjennom livet uten å se sig om til høire eller til venstre. Deres gleder var få, deres bekymringer mange. Men de hadde allikevel et gemyttlig smil til den fremmede, en munter vise og en lun historie. For sånn er de, disse Sørlandets barn."

King of Men wrote:
Anders is correct.

Fivoin wrote:
Yeah, Anders is right.

baronbowden wrote:
I would tend to agree with Anders.

Support Ederon.net via your Amazon purchases!

I joined Ederon.net before it became mainstream
danomite
Posted: Monday, February 22, 2010 5:29:28 PM
 Tribunus laticlavius

One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

Joined: 9/17/2008
Posts: 2,768
Location: Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Anders wrote:
In regards to nukes, they are inherently more suitable to MP than to SP as the AI never use them due to a missing (though modable) trigger code (unless 1.3 changed it).

AI's do use them, though relatively poorly.
As for nukes I am pretty much at the point that if you want to use them, use them, but expect the favor to be returned in kind.

It is said that the future is always born in pain. The history of war is the history of pain.
If we are wise, what is born of that pain matures into the promise of a better world,
because we learn that we can no longer afford the mistakes of the past.
OrangeYoshi
Posted: Monday, February 22, 2010 5:48:03 PM
 General

One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

Joined: 2/4/2010
Posts: 2,115
Anders wrote:
In itself that comparison is worthless. You might as well say that even if democracy is a better from of government than theocratic feudalism, democracy isn't a good form of government in any real sense.


Many forms of Government have been tried and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.
Foelsgaard
Posted: Monday, February 22, 2010 6:26:47 PM
 Colonel

One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

Joined: 9/1/2009
Posts: 943
Varyar wrote:
You're welcome


Well, my point is that if someone is a warmongering opportunistic bastard then deal with him using ingame means rather than calling him a "bad player" and accusing him of ruining the game.

Varyar wrote:
I raised the issue well before the HoI phase. That the other participants are either short-sighted or fanboys for overpowered newbie weapons is no fault of mine, so excuse me if I choose to pursue my anti-nuke crusade through in-game means.


I know you did. However, the majority apparently didn't feel the same way. I didn't really have an opinion on them at that time except that I had made some strategic decisions in Victoria assuming there would be nukes in HoI.

Varyar wrote:
So? Losing means bending over, what's the problem with that? Using nukes just because your nation gets eliminated is akin to walking up to the winner after [insert random major sports event] and blasting him with a shotgun. It's a textbook example of poor sportsmanship and reflects very poorly on the character of the player in question. For someone to enjoy victory someone else needs to suck up a defeat: if you can't handle that then don't play competitive games. I rather lose to Jakalo because he's a superb HoI player than to win against him because I can click-send a few missiles against him.

Seriously Foelsgaard, you're a brilliant HoI player, why would you prefer the use of nukes?


Part of it is that I sort of want it all to end in apocalyptic nuclear warfare, since I've never actually tried it (in fact, I have only played two MP games before this one the second of which crashed before the war started. I also usually get bored of SP after a year or so of fighting).

Also, since we didn't ban them, they are a legitimate part of the game. If I won a game because someone chose not to use nukes even when losing badly, I think it would cheapen the victory since my opponent was really just pulling his punches. "I could have won but I chose not to".

Lastly, I'm no brilliant player. My HoI skills are average at best. My successes have been due to my Vicky economy and diplomatic luck. My failures have been due primarily to tactical and strategic mistakes.
Anders
Posted: Monday, February 22, 2010 6:37:30 PM
 Generalfeldmarschall

Forum Supporter Medal 1st ClassOne Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal2012 Good Cause Support MedalBanned in ActionAuthor of 7000th post

Joined: 3/9/2007
Posts: 13,057
Location: Auf das der Adler wieder fliegt
OrangeYoshi wrote:
Many forms of Government have been tried and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.

Indeed, though in place of full centrally planned economy and authoritarianism, I would pick a completely free market democrazy Big Grin

Oh, and when you get to the nuclear holocaust, be sure to take lost of screenies!

"Hvor fattige var de ikke, disse fiskere som levde av havets nåde! De slet sig gjennom livet uten å se sig om til høire eller til venstre. Deres gleder var få, deres bekymringer mange. Men de hadde allikevel et gemyttlig smil til den fremmede, en munter vise og en lun historie. For sånn er de, disse Sørlandets barn."

King of Men wrote:
Anders is correct.

Fivoin wrote:
Yeah, Anders is right.

baronbowden wrote:
I would tend to agree with Anders.

Support Ederon.net via your Amazon purchases!

I joined Ederon.net before it became mainstream
Jakalo
Posted: Monday, February 22, 2010 7:49:27 PM
 Hauptmann

One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

Joined: 8/12/2009
Posts: 369
Location: Ogre, Latvia
King of Men wrote:
What, you dare to imply that the Ynglings would sacrifice the territory of an ally rather than accept a nuclear exchange? Death to Russia!

Dano's point about lack of manpower is a good one. Norway still has a deep reserve of manpower. I also have 50 divisions just waiting to be transported across the Atlantic in neutral, Malaysian ships. (Go on, declare war on Malaysia if you like.) Italy likewise has a bunch of divisions which have been prevented from getting into action by this minor problem of Japanese carriers in the Atlantic. In short, you are bluffing. The situation is nowhere near as favourable for your side as your proposed terms imply.

Regarding the nukes, however, I am willing to recall mine, and I feel sure that Varyar will recall his, provided of course that none fly in the other direction. Heat of the moment. Blushing


While I agree with Varyar that Nukes is not the most glorious way of fighting Foels is right, now is way too late to do anything about it and ending game in a nuclear holocoust too has a certain glow to it.

As it is now I dont see a chance of peace as long as KoM doesnt agree to teritorial concessions to Japan and why should he if he feels that they are winning.

And regarding Nuklear strike to Hiroshima I commend it as a good strategic decision, Norway has no provinces of similar worth to be nuked. But although they have no provinces they fear to lose they can lose its most powerful ally.
My reasoning is following - while Norway may have quite big MP pool their IC is quite limited and to be reduced even more with Junger taking over Scandinavia. So all I have to do is send 2 nukes to Italianpolis bringing their dissent to 100% to force KoM spend all of his IC to supplies to prevent Italy from collapsing and his army dismantling while getting his share of nukes too.
Sure Japan will be nuked few more times but what does it matter I will give Junger his cores back and either perish or China will divert supplies to sustain me long enough to recover.

That or Italy can step out of this war. Either way is fine by me.

BANZAI!

If you can`t do something smart, do something right.

Frosty wrote:
Great Strategic Master Jakalo.

We should all heed to deep wisdom revealed by ancient one.
E. Jünger
Posted: Monday, February 22, 2010 8:19:26 PM
 Corporal
One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

Joined: 1/20/2010
Posts: 43
Location: Sweden
King of Men wrote:
What, you dare to imply that the Ynglings would sacrifice the territory of an ally rather than accept a nuclear exchange? Death to Russia!


Yeah speaking of that, rather than take Italy from France I think giving GB to Jakalo is a more logical solution, so you will not have to shame yourself by screwing over Foelsgaard.

Jakalo wrote:
My reasoning is following - while Norway may have quite big MP pool their IC is quite limited and to be reduced even more with Junger taking over Scandinavia. So all I have to do is send 2 nukes to Italianpolis bringing their dissent to 100% to force KoM spend all of his IC to supplies to prevent Italy from collapsing and his army dismantling while getting his share of nukes too.
Sure Japan will be nuked few more times but what does it matter I will give Junger his cores back and either perish or China will divert supplies to sustain me long enough to recover.

That or Italy can step out of this war. Either way is fine by me.

BANZAI!


My Cores! My interest in provoking the Nuclear Winter into existence just increased by 59%! No seriously, just 23%...

Let America know and ponder on this: there is something more frightening than Cain killing Abel, and that is Danomite killing Falador
King of Men
Posted: Monday, February 22, 2010 8:34:57 PM
 Legatus legionis

One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

Joined: 11/23/2007
Posts: 8,493
Location: Nowhere
E. Jünger wrote:
Interesting, so the 60 divisions lost in archangelsk meant nothing? In that case one does have to wonder why you decided to sell out Varyar with that nuke...


I claim nothing of the kind. 60 divisions is a hard blow any way you look at it. I say only that they were not a sufficiently hard blow to decide the war. Neither was Hiroshima.

Read my blog.
Norway Rome The Khanate Scotland Scotinavia Christendie the Serene Republic has always been at war with the Bretons False Empire Caliphate Persians Russians English Hungarians Oceanians Saracen Jackal! Death, death, death to the Frogs barbarians infidels necromancers vodka-drinking hegemonists Sassenach nomad menace Yellow Menace heathen Great Old One!
King of Men
Posted: Monday, February 22, 2010 8:40:31 PM
 Legatus legionis

One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

Joined: 11/23/2007
Posts: 8,493
Location: Nowhere
Quote:
As it is now I dont see a chance of peace as long as KoM doesnt agree to teritorial concessions to Japan and why should he if he feels that they are winning.


I am prepared to consider concessions (subject of course to the agreement of my allies); but not the ones proposed by Blayne.

As for Arequipa, I note that it can only be bombed into radioactive rubble once; after which, it is not longer an effective threat, but is a rallying point for the Allied populations.

Read my blog.
Norway Rome The Khanate Scotland Scotinavia Christendie the Serene Republic has always been at war with the Bretons False Empire Caliphate Persians Russians English Hungarians Oceanians Saracen Jackal! Death, death, death to the Frogs barbarians infidels necromancers vodka-drinking hegemonists Sassenach nomad menace Yellow Menace heathen Great Old One!
E. Jünger
Posted: Monday, February 22, 2010 8:58:32 PM
 Corporal
One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

Joined: 1/20/2010
Posts: 43
Location: Sweden
King of Men wrote:
Dano's point about lack of manpower is a good one. Norway still has a deep reserve of manpower. I also have 50 divisions just waiting to be transported across the Atlantic in neutral, Malaysian ships. (Go on, declare war on Malaysia if you like.) Italy likewise has a bunch of divisions which have been prevented from getting into action by this minor problem of Japanese carriers in the Atlantic. In short, you are bluffing. The situation is nowhere near as favourable for your side as your proposed terms imply.


King of Men wrote:
I claim nothing of the kind. 60 divisions is a hard blow any way you look at it. I say only that they were not a sufficiently hard blow to decide the war. Neither was Hiroshima.


You claim to have 50 fresh divisons just waiting for Danos benevolent ships to send them to Valhalla by way of Shanxi, and a deep manpower pool to continue aiding in the construction of Nagelfare, but the death of your 60 freed up 80 of our divisions. During the past session your alliance has lost something like 270+ divisions in encirclements, and god knows how much in regular losses. Barring complete nuclear armageddon, I can almost guarantee a similar outcome in the next session since I have almost doubled my army during the last session. If your quick you may even save 20 of the divisions retreating in the Mezen area. From where I'm standing, we're letting you off too cheap.

Let America know and ponder on this: there is something more frightening than Cain killing Abel, and that is Danomite killing Falador
E. Jünger
Posted: Monday, February 22, 2010 9:00:29 PM
 Corporal
One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

Joined: 1/20/2010
Posts: 43
Location: Sweden
King of Men wrote:
I am prepared to consider concessions (subject of course to the agreement of my allies); but not the ones proposed by Blayne.

As for Arequipa, I note that it can only be bombed into radioactive rubble once; after which, it is not longer an effective threat, but is a rallying point for the Allied populations.


Ohh, now we are communicating. I would soften some of the points in my earlier post if I wasn't enthralled by their poetry.

Let America know and ponder on this: there is something more frightening than Cain killing Abel, and that is Danomite killing Falador
The Professor
Posted: Monday, February 22, 2010 9:46:42 PM
 General of the Army

One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

Joined: 11/17/2007
Posts: 8,437
Location: Time
King of Men wrote:
What, you dare to imply that the Ynglings would sacrifice the territory of an ally rather than accept a nuclear exchange? Death to Russia!

Dano's point about lack of manpower is a good one. Norway still has a deep reserve of manpower. I also have 50 divisions just waiting to be transported across the Atlantic in neutral, Malaysian ships. (Go on, declare war on Malaysia if you like.) Italy likewise has a bunch of divisions which have been prevented from getting into action by this minor problem of Japanese carriers in the Atlantic. In short, you are bluffing. The situation is nowhere near as favourable for your side as your proposed terms imply.

Regarding the nukes, however, I am willing to recall mine, and I feel sure that Varyar will recall his, provided of course that none fly in the other direction. Heat of the moment. Blushing


Bullsh*t you sold off several Russian cores to Germany just to acquire a peace so you could attack dano and now dano is your ally and I'm getting attacked yet again, I call shenanigans.

Their game can only exist to be won.
Then so be it who else can see it done.
The Professor
Posted: Monday, February 22, 2010 9:49:21 PM
 General of the Army

One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

Joined: 11/17/2007
Posts: 8,437
Location: Time
danomite wrote:
ugh 3rd time typing out this message.

Americans aren't done, They're nukes are en route, no turning back unless they plan on surrendering... Which is silly, Blayne would only be coming to the table if he HAD to, they're manpower must be in a really bad shape, not to mention resource wise too. Americans need to keep up the pressure and they can take home the gold!


More bs, I have never advocated annexation and in fact I am not the aggressor it was Norway who dowed me bringing in my allies and never once heard what the proper terms were aside from 'annexation'.

We are at the table seeing if we can arrange a peace that would be acceptable to everyone in preference to nuclear obliteration to both sides.

Our demands for territorial concessions stand.

Their game can only exist to be won.
Then so be it who else can see it done.
Gollevainen
Posted: Monday, February 22, 2010 9:51:02 PM
 Legatus legionis

One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership MedalAuthor of 50,000th Forum Post

Joined: 4/5/2008
Posts: 4,235
Location: "I need zoo love!"
A fligth of vulture fanbois circle atop the battle ground:
"No conncessions! TO the Death!!"
Quote:
Bullsh*t you sold off several Russian cores to Germany just to acquire a peace so you could attack dano and now dano is your ally and I'm getting attacked yet again, I call shenanigans.

I call it Ynlging hospitalityViking



Irsh Faq wrote:
I've noted with Golle a trend of stirring up as much drama publicly as he can whenever he's up to something shady in the background. Presumably its a smokescreen strategy.
Jakalo
Posted: Monday, February 22, 2010 10:06:06 PM
 Hauptmann

One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

Joined: 8/12/2009
Posts: 369
Location: Ogre, Latvia
The Professor wrote:
Bullsh*t you sold off several Russian cores to Germany just to acquire a peace so you could attack dano and now dano is your ally and I'm getting attacked yet again, I call shenanigans.


And here they come!




If you can`t do something smart, do something right.

Frosty wrote:
Great Strategic Master Jakalo.

We should all heed to deep wisdom revealed by ancient one.
King of Men
Posted: Monday, February 22, 2010 11:30:15 PM
 Legatus legionis

One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

Joined: 11/23/2007
Posts: 8,493
Location: Nowhere
One of the screenies Jakalo posted in the edit-request thread shows that Japan has 46 manpower left. I suggest that this does not put you in a position to take a hard line. Divisions that cannot be reinforced must eventually be overwhelmed.

As for shenanigans, that's just a synonym for diplomacy. Smile

Read my blog.
Norway Rome The Khanate Scotland Scotinavia Christendie the Serene Republic has always been at war with the Bretons False Empire Caliphate Persians Russians English Hungarians Oceanians Saracen Jackal! Death, death, death to the Frogs barbarians infidels necromancers vodka-drinking hegemonists Sassenach nomad menace Yellow Menace heathen Great Old One!
The Professor
Posted: Monday, February 22, 2010 11:54:16 PM
 General of the Army

One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

Joined: 11/17/2007
Posts: 8,437
Location: Time
And with an aar reward he'll double it.

Their game can only exist to be won.
Then so be it who else can see it done.
King of Men
Posted: Tuesday, February 23, 2010 12:05:55 AM
 Legatus legionis

One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

Joined: 11/23/2007
Posts: 8,493
Location: Nowhere
That is true, yes. But 100 manpower just does not go very far in the current fighting conditions. Again: Nations scraping the bottom of the manpower barrel like this should not be trying to dictate far-reaching terms. Especially when the opposing alliance has a powerful uncommitted affiliate who is approaching belligerency; the Troop Transport Agreement is this timeline's equivalent of the Lend-Lease act.

Read my blog.
Norway Rome The Khanate Scotland Scotinavia Christendie the Serene Republic has always been at war with the Bretons False Empire Caliphate Persians Russians English Hungarians Oceanians Saracen Jackal! Death, death, death to the Frogs barbarians infidels necromancers vodka-drinking hegemonists Sassenach nomad menace Yellow Menace heathen Great Old One!
Users browsing this topic
Guest


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Powered by Yet Another Forum.net version 1.9.0 (NET v2.0) - 10/10/2006
Copyright © 2003-2006 Yet Another Forum.net. All rights reserved.
Copyright © 2005-2007 Daniel "Lord Ederon" Scibrany. All rights reserved.