Would this be considered slot filling?

[Sargun]

Just want some clarification, not trying to start a fight.

 

https://politicsandwar.com/nation/war/timeline/war=205306

 

Looks like the aggressor nation declared a few minutes after update (while the defender nation was involved in wars), did one minimal damage attack, and then peaced out an hour later after peak declaring hours were over.  Is this considered slot filling or is it kosher since it only lasted an hour?  With the fiasco that happened earlier I feel like it'd be good to know what this counts as going forward.

[Kastor]

It wasn't a minimal attack, I did full force with what I had at the time, and was honoring a treaty with Lordship.

 

Lmfaoooo you guys try too hard.

[Kastor]

Also, for those saying "they peaced out" Me and Roq made a deal, which shall be kept private. Lordaeron is committed to defending her protectorates. Why people are diving into our political affairs in a mod forum is questioning.

 

I'll also add that Roq's slots weren't filled by me hitting, nor during the time of our war, nor when we peaced, and the nation that attacked, attacked after the war was even done and there was at least another slot open.

 

Also, I'm getting really sick and tired of having to explain every war to the entire forum, this is borderline using a mod as a weapon, and I'm going to have to ask you Alex, to do something about it. I shouldn't have to explain In-game politics in an OOC, Mod forum.

[Queen M II]

Link to the treaty you have with Lordship?

 

 

You're full of shit and should be banned.

[Kastor]

Link to the treaty you have with Lordship?

You're full of shit and should be banned.

https://politicsandwar.com/forums/index.php?/topic/18087-lordaeron-hereby-protects-lordship/

 

EDIT: It even says in his nation description that he is protected by Lordaeron. https://politicsandwar.com/nation/id=17559

Edited April 30, 2017 by Kastor

[Codonian]

Link to the treaty you have with Lordship?

 

 

You're full of shit and should be banned.

 

Salty much?

 

Edit: Here's your proof of the treaty 

Edited April 30, 2017 by Codonian

[Kastor]

Also, to add some math:

 

I did 24.15 damage to Roq's city, which means he would have 675.19 infra before the attack.

 

Using the Naval Simulation, I would need to use between 8 to 10 ships to make that attack possible, considering Roq had 0 ships.

 

Since I've been at war for a while, and Roq not having any ships, using more than 10 ships would be almost a waste of gas and munitions, since 10 ships would also do the job needed to blockade him.

 

According to the math, my attack was justified. Also I ONLY HAD 10 SHIPS

 

Sources:

https://politicsandwar.com/battlesim/navy/ using 8-10 ships attacking, 0 ships defending, as well as current city infra (651.04) plus the 24.15 attack equaling 675.19

 

Link to Roq city https://politicsandwar.com/city/id=18668

 

Salute to Zhen o/

[Kastor]

Yeah, and I'm sorry that Lordaeron cannot defend her protectorate without being told they are war slot filling. I suppose any attack ever made by Lordaeron is war slot filling.

[Sargun]

non-stop whining

 

whine whine whine

 

 

can't stop whining

 

 

the most whining

 

 

more whining

 

whining

 

Calm down Kastor, this isn't about you.  This is about whether or not a one-hour war during peak declare hours with only one minimal damage attack is war slot filling.  I don't care about you or Roq, I just want to know whether or not this is against the rules so I know how far some minimum declarations can go for future conduct. 

 

In case you forgot, I was one of the people who lost a city and 40mil over alleged slot filling and got a warning over it when the punishments were reversed, so I'm trying to figure out what exactly the boundaries are to prevent from being punished in the future.  You don't have to have a five-post meltdown about shit just because you're too self-centered to think everything is about you.

Edited April 30, 2017 by Sargun

[Kastor]

Calm down Kastor, this isn't about you.  This is about whether or not a one-hour war during peak declare hours with only one minimal damage attack is war slot filling.  I don't care about you or Roq, I just want to know whether or not this is against the rules so I know how far some minimum declarations can go for future conduct.

 

This is most certainly about me, you targeted me to try to get me a nation strike, there were plenty of other instances you could've used. Don't bullshit me because the facts are against you. You sound like Curufinwe.

[Sargun]

This is most certainly about me, you targeted me to try to get me a nation strike, there were plenty of other instances you could've used. Don't bullshit me because the facts are against you. You sound like Curufinwe.

 

If I were targeting you this would be in "Game Reports" and I would be explicitly reporting you for a nation strike.

 

Kastor, do you remember the scene from Mad Men where Ginsberg goes on this long rant to Draper about how he has all these great pitches and how Draper isn't taking advantage of them?  Ginsberg is mad at Draper and has this long diatribe about selfishness; he's clearly only thinking about himself while Draper is thinking about the bigger picture.  Ultimately, Draper lets Ginsberg know that in spite of the rant and Ginsberg's feelings over the issue, Draper doesn't think about Ginsberg at all.  I don't care about you at all, Kastor.

 

That's what's going on right now - you are not a target, you just gave a good example to ask in a forum devoted to asking questions about moderation issues.

[Queen M II]

Salty much?

Always and forever 

[Justin076]

https://politicsandwar.com/forums/index.php?/topic/18087-lordaeron-hereby-protects-lordship/

 

EDIT: It even says in his nation description that he is protected by Lordaeron. https://politicsandwar.com/nation/id=17559

 

Wait a second.....

 

This treaty also states that Lordaeron protects any alliance Lordship is in, which is currently The Knights Radiant..... So therefore you are legally bound to protect TKR.. 

[Kastor]

Wait a second.....

 

This treaty also states that Lordaeron protects any alliance Lordship is in, which is currently The Knights Radiant..... So therefore you are legally bound to protect TKR..

 

Isn't the place for politics.

[Woot]

Wait a second.....

 

This treaty also states that Lordaeron protects any alliance Lordship is in, which is currently The Knights Radiant..... So therefore you are legally bound to protect TKR.. 

TKR cancelled that protectorate: https://politicsandwar.com/forums/index.php?/topic/18090-tkr-declares-war-on-lord-a-aron

Lordship's protection stands though.

[Alex]

Depends on a case-by-case basis, unfortunately. In this instance, it does not appear to be war slot filling. But generally in questionable cases like this where there may be a legitimate purpose for the war, or it could be war slot filling, I will look at the relationship between the two nations (are they in alliances that are friends with each other, for example), messages between the two nations, the amount of damage done and the length of the war, etc.

 

When it's not textbook war slot filling there are a lot more nuances and ultimately it comes down to whether or not I believe there's a real intention to fight a real war or not.

[Kastor]

Depends on a case-by-case basis, unfortunately. In this instance, it does not appear to be war slot filling. But generally in questionable cases like this where there may be a legitimate purpose for the war, or it could be war slot filling, I will look at the relationship between the two nations (are they in alliances that are friends with each other, for example), messages between the two nations, the amount of damage done and the length of the war, etc.

 

When it's not textbook war slot filling there are a lot more nuances and ultimately it comes down to whether or not I believe there's a real intention to fight a real war or not.

2 things, why, "unfortunately"

 

And 2, why does alliance matter, if you aren't political then that shouldn't matter. You can't base a war slot filling on political reasoning. It has to be done on a case by case basis based on the war in question.

[Alex]

2 things, why, "unfortunately"

 

And 2, why does alliance matter, if you aren't political then that shouldn't matter. You can't base a war slot filling on political reasoning. It has to be done on a case by case basis based on the war in question.

 

Unfortunately because as a person I'm flawed, and I wish there was a more set-in-stone criteria without all the nuances and judgement calls.

 

Alliance matters because it's very obvious if two treatied alliances are declaring war on each other around update time, doing a minimal attack, and then peacing out an hour or two after update, that they never intended to actually fight each other.

 

Why do you say that I can't base war slot filling on political reasoning? That's basically the only reason that people war slot fill - to help win wars, which are (with the exception of raids) political by nature.

[Kastor]

Unfortunately because as a person I'm flawed, and I wish there was a more set-in-stone criteria without all the nuances and judgement calls.

 

Alliance matters because it's very obvious if two treatied alliances are declaring war on each other around update time, doing a minimal attack, and then peacing out an hour or two after update, that they never intended to actually fight each other.

 

Why do you say that I can't base war slot filling on political reasoning? That's basically the only reason that people war slot fill - to help win wars, which are (with the exception of raids) political by nature.

Because in your other post, you stated you don't base decisions off of political measures. If 2 allies attack each other, who cares? They're wasting pixels(if they actually do real attacks, that is).

 

My main thing is you can't base war slot filling off of politics, any noob can make a mistake, just this war a TKR guy declared on a TCW guy and a tTO person declared on a CKD guy and peaced out, right after update.

 

If you base it off of attacks, then that's fine, if you base it off politics, a lot of people will get burned because of it.

[Alex]

Because in your other post, you stated you don't base decisions off of political measures. If 2 allies attack each other, who cares? They're wasting pixels(if they actually do real attacks, that is).

 

My main thing is you can't base war slot filling off of politics, any noob can make a mistake, just this war a TKR guy declared on a TCW guy and a tTO person declared on a CKD guy and peaced out, right after update.

 

If you base it off of attacks, then that's fine, if you base it off politics, a lot of people will get burned because of it.

 

If it's a real war, I don't care about the politics of it. There's multiple situations here when looking at a war someone reports for slot filling:

 

1. It's a war where people are actively fighting

2. It's a war where people may be pretending to fight to avoid being penalized for war slot filling

3. It's a war that is obviously war slot filling

 

In case 1 & 3, politics and stuff don't really matter. If you're fighting and winning wars, it's not war slot filling. If you're just Fortifying, or you've been at war for days without launching any attacks, that's war slot filling.

In case 2, it's far more nuanced. The scenario asked about in this thread falls under #2, but as far as I can tell, it was a legitimate war without evidence of war slot filling. I gave an example above of a scenario that falls under case 2 which would be war slot filling.

[Sargun]

Thank you, Alex; the clarification is very helpful.  I think that's all I needed out of this thread!