Multiple-choice:

Vengerak · January 12, 2003, 05:18:52 PM

I'm guessing that logic will carry the day, but no doubt there will be many in the anti-Vengy talking camp.

Wickedclaw · January 12, 2003, 05:23:29 PM

I voted for the 5th one down, like Raine said, its the probably the most logical and the one that most people will pick. Plus it just makes sense.

Shael of Torethevel · January 12, 2003, 05:24:03 PM

Raine, you're weird. You made me lose necessary brain power to figure out that poll. But I don't get why someone would attack another horde who can easily defeat you...maybe we should start an anti-Vengy talking camp... :P

Vengerak · January 12, 2003, 05:26:43 PM

Exactly! Once again I point out the first rule of Roman warfare: ''If you can't win, don't fight.''.

Therefore any attacks upon anyone (Lest you're suiciding against some powerful guy.) are inherently dishonourable, because you will only do it if you feel pretty sure that you're opponent will not be able to fend you off.

Which debunks the whole ''honour'' thing.

Vengerak · January 12, 2003, 05:27:54 PM

darn it Shael, squeezing in between posts like that ^_^ ... & I meant that in reply to Wickedclaw.

Wickedclaw · January 12, 2003, 05:39:07 PM

lol, I do agree about the whole attacking if you know they cant attack back and kill you thing. Most people see someone below them that they know they can beat, but they dont realize that they might also be able to beat you. I have gained that through experiance, mainly when I attacked one guy, who had a lot of skiffs and I blew him away with my stoats, then he came back and blew me away with his skiffs, taking all my land I just got from him, plus more. So I also agree with "If you can't win, dont fight" but it is actually pretty basic.(Those Romans were smart people, lol)

I wonder if this was a Roman rule of war: "If you cant beat em', cheat em'."

Fenix · January 13, 2003, 08:33:55 AM

This poll is very odd, I'd rather attack someone who has ALOT of land to the point that he no longer has alot of land ( a better target arises )
allies and NW has nothing to do with it...

Trident · January 14, 2003, 02:07:43 PM

I voted the choice that made most sense: shut up Raine.

Vengerak · January 18, 2003, 08:40:58 AM

You editted darn? How middle-class are you? Good GOD. What sort of insanley politically correct left-wing enviroment were YOU brought up in?

Stupid cult of censorship...

Vengerak · January 18, 2003, 08:42:34 AM

Seriously, I think you should ask around the forum, see if there is anyone at ALL who is offended by the word ''darn''. It isn't a curse by ANY stretch of the imagination.

Bloodrath · January 18, 2003, 08:47:23 AM

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Heh, this is going to be a long process...

Vengerak · January 18, 2003, 08:56:09 AM

Bloodrath agrees with me, by the by.

Also, at least 95% of us use ''swear words'' casually in real life. Why pretend that you are offended by them online? You're eighteen, Stormclaw. Unless you are INCREDIBLY upright & middle-class, I cannot possibly believe that you are either offended by or never use the word ''darn''.

Menatus · January 18, 2003, 01:12:19 PM

Wait...darn is a swear?

I choose someone land fat. And weak.

Trident · January 18, 2003, 01:30:39 PM

Most four letter words are swear words -.-

Vengerak · January 18, 2003, 01:32:45 PM

Heh. My real name consists of four letters.

Multiple-choice:

Vengerak

Vengerak

Vengerak

Fenix

Vengerak

Vengerak

Vengerak

Vengerak