Championship questions

yes. you got the province. i can confirm that...

It's not even a city, it's a mountains province, my units had the long path. His units were going home, when my units started marching. So they would have been unable to retreat in time anyway. One of my units was already in the center, when he conquered it, automatically causing war.

My units did already do all the fighting when he tried to grab the spoils.






I don't find it very sporting to grab other peoples spoils, it is more of an hyena action.

And if you force me into war anyway, I am old school and will duke it out, honestly.

None of your units was in the center when i came there. otherwise YOU
would have been in close combat with the local forces, which you were
NOT. and you know that.
Your single armoured arrived AFTER i defeated the local forces and occupied the province. and declared war like that.

At that time your infantry stopped. and you had to move it manually.
At that time i set back my status to peace already and wrote to you asking to do the same.
You claimed you cant, which is quite logical when you move your inf towards the center of an occcupied province, so you declared war again in that moment.

And yes, i "retreated" for a moment, because my troops were set to the next province, to march through (as you can see).
The moment i saw that one occupied by you, i set the troops to only go to Bratislava, since i saw i will be there first.
so this adjustment you call "retreating" was made to avoid war. and i was honestly hoping you do the same for Bratislava, seeing i will be there first.
And look at your arty. You claim you were at the center? Doesnt look like it to me

I already posted the proof, that my armored unit was in combat with the guard before yours came to kill it:





Still no idea what you talk about my artillery being in the center.

You seem to miss a lot. I did as you asked, and we were immediatly back to war, because my armored unit was at the center of the province before yours was.

Your SS even prove, that my armored unit was alone.

Also no idea why you marked an infantry in a different province, that has nothing to do with this at all.

The screenshots and newspaper do indicate factually that an polish armored division engaged the national guard before it was engaged and killed by a german troop.

It also indicate that when Germany declared war to Slovakia by entering (or shooting) on it, Poland Armored Troop was exactly 4 minutes from Bratislava, which indicate, at this time, that it was very close, and if he retreated, the server would have considered the armored unit to be "too close", and the fight would have began anyway.


Screen of casualties also seems to indicate that Poland, while having less troops and "raw power" than Germany in the vicinity, inflicted more damages than Germany to Slovakia. Germany seems to have landed "the killing blow".

There are approximately 18 minutes between the Polish on Bratislava, and the arrival of a German troops. And there are approximately 22 minutes between border crossing and arrival on bratislava.




Do you guys really want to settle this on cold hard facts, that don't take into account that human mistakes are common and that 18 minutes is really short when it comes to this kind of decision making ? I do not really like to make myself ennemies, but here, Dates, timestamps, and screen, will be in favour of Poland, undoubtly.

I suggest you forget about it till the war day. Both of you wont agree anyway.

Well.
I can get upset. and i also always admit when i am wrong.

I overlooked that screenshot with the armoured.
And it surprises me, because i actually was checking the arrival time of every unit involved at least 5 times. and always it said my troops will be first (otherwise i wouldnt have bothered)...
In the end (according to the screenshots) it seems it wasnt, and in that case my accusations would be wrong.
This was essentially tactical to both of us i guess, because it cut me from any further move southwards.

in any case, just to clarify this for me:

In my understanding, to occupy a territory, you need a unit capable to do so and we all know that. So if i send a unit which is not capable,though arrives earlier, i can claim the territory anyway?

The rules don't specify it, as far as i know. it's hard to establish a proper rule.

When there are already troops of an other player in the center, conquering it will automatically cause war between players and therefore violate the rule.

Can we do it like anonymously?

War began and I found 2 nations troops from another continent on my shores. Not sure how many are more to come, or how many forged an alliance to bring me down

I dont play the CoNmunity Championship just to get targeted by numerous nations right from the start, I dont think its the spirit of the Championship either


Edit:
As South Africa, I get early rushed (immediately after end of peace period) by Congo, Argentinia, Brazil.

8 infs, 1 recon vehicle, 1 artillery, 1 mobile AA. Pretty much the starting army, by Argentina.

Looks like TLL wants to get revenge for their past failures by rushing me with me being very outnumbered

I don't think there is an anonymous feature yet.


And from my experience, anonymous round = secret alliances round.

At least, unmasked, people from the same alliances can hide harder.

Where's the difference between secret and open alliances? They will bond together anyways and the rules allow that.

Its not just player from the same alliance that form a coalition, but also cross alliance

I may be wrong, but i think i understood Leiprechaun reffering to punishment for alliances instead of solo play. Not sure indeed.

only a unit that can claim the land matters. if you send an armor unit it does not make claim to any land . and that land is open till claimed by a correct unit .

@Dr. Leipreachan
you really need to change the rules. I've been telling you that since game 1 day 0. Any rules that allow cooperation beyond limit are bad. You can't consider that competitive in any sense. As I've said many times before, this "Championship" is less about skill, but more about who is in the biggest mass alliance.

Disallowing coalitions won't change anything. It doesn't prevent players from cooperating and acting like one coalition. As long as thats allowed, it will happen. Is that what the Championship map is about? Getting the most allies to secure your own victory?

Let me recall:
First game, TLL consists of Russia and Algeria. Asia and Europe teamed up on them, effectively outnumbering them greatly in player count.
When America joined the war as a third party, attacking TLL too, TLL and Asia have teamed up on America.
-> mass alliances

Second game, by day 4 we had a 10 vs 7. Its one big mass alliance vs. another even bigger mass alliance. The bigger mass alliance won the war.
In the last week of the map, there was the 2nd war. First, it was a 3 man coalition against a 3 man coalition. Which also ended up being a mass alliance stomping another mass-alliance (didn't change the outcome, the smaller alliance was almost dead anyways).

Third game, I, as South Africa, get early rushed by Congo, Brazil (6 Infantries), Argentina(8 Infantries, 1 mob AA, 1 Art, 1 Recon) and Arabia (8 infs, 1 mob AA, 1 recon).
If you ask me, thats a 4vs1 while only Congo had a proper strategic reason to attack South Africa.
Why the F does Arabia sail all the way south when Turkey, Iran, Egypt are all active players.

Just like in the previous game, its 1 mass alliance vs. a smaller alliance (in this case, a 1 man alliance). (Alliance is not the CoN alliance, more like coalition)
Of course, the mass alliance is going to win.

But is that the purpose of this game? Grab as many allies as you can and stomp those who don't have as many allies? This is exactly how it feels like and as mentioned above, it just isnt this map.


I dont complain because this time I'm on the non-mass-alliance side and losing, I tried to talk to Dr. L about the rules before the start of the first map, in the middle of the first map, in the middle of the second map. And now again but here because Discord kinda doesn't work.

For this to be a real championship map and not just a casual no-gold public map, you can't allow mass alliances. No (unwritten) agreements between teams (//Teams of one). But as long as players can do agreements, another player is going to be the victim of those agreements. And he doesn't fall to more skillfull players, he falls to those agreements.

MJ but it was ok for you to do the same thing in round 2.
What Goes Around Comes Around

But i also agree it does tend too cause big teams that try to remove the largest threat to winning this championship. i was not in the first one for long but the second was gang up on TLL and looks like the 3rd is gang up on PK . next game it may be some one else.

Having played the last round, i am a "little irritated" (to say the least) by the complaint as well, looking back at the history of game 2...


"I dont play the CoNmunity Championship just to get targeted by numerous
nations right from the start, I dont think its the spirit of the
Championship either"

This one is just hilarious, coming from you, Caaake

well, thats exactly how i saw it and acted the way i did!

And in that case, this would be the fact that matters, thats why i asked...

But anyway, if everyone says thats wrong, then i have to accept it i guess.

Seriously Mc_Caaaaaaake? In round 2 you PMed everyone trying to form alliances, now after taking 2nd place in June and 1st place in July (by getting other people to do your dirty work) you're crying because you have a target on your chest. I have no clue how old you are, but this seems a little childish man.
For real man? I have beat you in Pubs (even before I was in TLL), because you couldn't play politics. Past failures? Your stats aren't that impressive in 29 games you're ranked 3,188 Overall Caaaaaake and as Mc_Johnsen in 14 games 6,993 Overall. How many accounts do you have?

I've seen you QUIT gold games before just because people hit you. Man up, it's a game, apparently you can't win them all.

FOR THE RECORD: Win or lose, next month I will be the 1st person to attack you. Unless there's a don't attack poor Caaaaaake rule.