Releasign city or territory ownership

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • Back in my historical studies (8 years ago), Wikipedia was still pretty unreliable for precise events, but it has improved. Nowadays, Wikipedia became increasingly sourced and reliable in many of its references, and can be given as an introduction to many topics. Not sufficient for extended studies, but if more people were reading it, some myths and lies about history would be less popular. The Korean war article has an impressive number of 400 sources for citations and a good thirthy bibliographic references, that can be used for source-checking.

      Diplomacy, and Politics, are an important part of every conflict, whatever the solution. I imagine that between you two, there is an interpretation gap about what "not solved diplomatically" means : diplomatic solution doesn't imply "bloodless"

      On the Korean War Topic, i suppose Last Warrior reffered to the Korean Conflict as a whole, who is indeed, not finished --> there are still two korean entities that have territorial claims on each other. The military phase known as "Korean war" was indeed diplomatically solved, something that can be said for pretty much every military conflict, in the end. Even the Third Reich initiated a conventional diplomatic process after Hitler's suicide, to formalise Germany's capitulation.

      India's independance was bloody, as the British DEFINITELY didn't let go without conflict the productive gem of the empire.

      And the Cold war is something too complex to be summarised to this simplistic term. Pretty much as "the hundred year war(s)".
      Running an online alliance is pretty much like running a small company, except you need to find other way than money to keep your employees productive. May they play or work, they are humans.
    • I can only say that in East Germany the cold war actually ended because of the obvious discrepancy between party line and reality. It was becoming farcical.
      And obviously there were agents involved as well. Yes. Anyone denying this is naive.

      Now that we've clarified this, I would kindly like to remind you:


      thanks ;)
      "Going to war without France is like going hunting without an accordion." Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf
    • So back to the original point: why can't territory be returned to someone who joins your coalition after you take their territory? Currently playing in game 2572757, where N Korea and S Korea are both in my coalition, they both control part of each others' homelands, but it isn't being returned to the rightful owner. (It's only a few provinces + 1 suburb, but would it happen the same way with cities?)

      Does it only apply if you take it over after you've joined the same coalition? Why is this?