You probably have spent too much time switching back and forth between “Imperious Leader” and “Lucas McCain” to notice that there is a “show new replies to your posts” button, which I check up on every now and then.
Your ignorance has reached new levels of hilarity. I posted in this thread 3 times before your first post in it and you accuse me of following you around!
Once again, the evidence and facts expose your incompetence.
You accuse someone of having a second account, but when someone points out you have done the same thing, all of a sudden it is trolling?
It’s only trolling when somebody else does it, right?
L O L
Hey kid, that troll isn’t working either. How bout stop trolling? What a failure.
Hey guys I have looked through this rulebook at least 5 times and can’t find anywhere where it says Italy joins on round 2. I know Larry said this when he was previewing the game but I can’t find it. Care to help the old man out anyone?
Thanks
Dave
It doesn’t. This thread is suggesting tweaks for a potential 2nd Edition.
Allowing Italy to join the Central Powers would mean redesigning the entire game for balance; but having Italy wait a turn before it joins the Allies is historical and gives Austria more options, including moving through SZ17 unimpeded by Italian ships and mines.
@Imperious:
Hey kid, that troll isn’t working either. How bout stop trolling? What a failure.
Your ability to ignore facts and evidence with a straight face is truly a sight to behold.
Look at the difference between how you and I post. You essentially call names, while I make statements and then back them up with logic, facts and evidence.
You claim I follow you around, and then I use the evidence that I had 3 posts in this thread before you had 1 to show how foolish that statement of yours is.
You claim that Flash is using an extra account.
I point out how you have employed a second account in a far more dubious manner.
Yet when I do it, I am a “troll.” Why is your accusation a perfectly legitimate thing to bring up, but mine is “trolling?”
Person A: “Person B has used a second account!”
Person C: “Person A, you have done the same thing!”
Person A: “That is trolling, person C”
What?
Why is yours not trolling when mine is? If Harry is Flash, it’s clear that the account is more for satirical purposes, which is not nearly as improper as using a second account to post in support of your posts and to vote your posts up.
Your ability to ignore facts and evidence with a straight face is truly a sight to behold.
Look at the difference between how you and I post. You essentially call names, while I make statements and then back them up with logic, facts and evidence.
You claim I follow you around, and then I use the evidence that I had 3 posts in this thread before you had 1 to show how foolish that statement of yours is.
You claim that Flash is using an extra account.
I point out how you have employed a second account in a far more dubious manner.Yet when I do it, I am a “troll.” Why is your accusation a perfectly legitimate thing to bring up, but mine is “trolling?”
Person A: “Person B has used a second account!”
Person C: “Person A, you have done the same thing!”
Person A: “That is trolling, person C”What?
Why is yours not trolling when mine is? If Harry is Flash, it’s clear that the account is more for satirical purposes, which is not nearly as improper as using a second account to post in support of your posts and to vote your posts up.
Did they take you away in a straight jacket? It sure sounds like a poor loser who has nothing but trolling to do here…LOL
Too cowardly and just too plain embarrassed and wrong to even try to actually address anything.
I’ll try one more time.
You accused flashman of employing an extra account.
I accused you of employing an extra account.
Why is mine trolling, but yours isn’t?
Too cowardly and just too plain embarrassed and wrong to even try to actually address anything.
I’ll try one more time.
You accused flashman of employing an extra account.
I accused you of employing an extra account.Why is mine trolling, but yours isn’t?
All you can do is troll and hijack threads… nice life you got. To follow me around like some lap dog and PM me a hundred times because you don’t have a shoulder to cry on is pretty pathetic.
OMG ridiculous.
Typical IL, trying to distract from the fact that he is accusing others of things he has done himself, often much worse.
Typical IL, trying to distract from the fact that he is accusing others of things he has done himself, often much worse.
Not trying anything, we are all laughing at how futile you look and why you are so hot and bothered and still hijack this thread and troll like a 8 year old. :roll:
Hey guys I have looked through this rulebook at least 5 times and can’t find anywhere where it says Italy joins on round 2. I know Larry said this when he was previewing the game but I can’t find it. Care to help the old man out anyone?
Thanks
DaveIt doesn’t. This thread is suggesting tweaks for a potential 2nd Edition.
Allowing Italy to join the Central Powers would mean redesigning the entire game for balance; but having Italy wait a turn before it joins the Allies is historical and gives Austria more options, including moving through SZ17 unimpeded by Italian ships and mines.
Flash, besides Italy joining war R2, don´t you think USA should also enter the war later ?
My suggestion is Round 6, with US collecting 40 IPCs or maybe 45 IPCs from that turn on.
I am not sure how to simulate USW since they don´t collect income till R6 in that scenario, any ideas?
(Maybe 40 IPCs from R6 on but before that sending every Round one Art to Canada to represent the munitions it delivered to the Entente from the beginning of the war on - it was never really neutral)
I agree on a lot of you guys points but the issue of Belgium hasn’t been brought up. Belgium was never completely conquered in this conflict and should be given a larger standing army than they have. Also Bulgaria and Romania should be in that vain as well. I know it would be hard to carve Belgium up into 3 territories but I believe that is what should be done to mirror how it was real tough going for the Germans.
Don�t agree because most parts of Belgium that were needed to fullfill the Schlieffen Plan were overrun by the 3 German armys in August 14. The small landscape that was made impassable (because it was flooded) can be represented by Picardie since the tts are that small on the map especially the western front. Otherwise you should cut “Alsace” also in pieces because the Western Allies could never get a feet on german soil except for some villages in the Sundgau.
It is a must (!) for the second edition though to give Switzerland 4 IPCs or even better to make it impassable.
Switzerland had a formidable army and mountains, mountains and mountains.
Nobody in their right mind would have attacked them!
Impassable is the only way to go!
Switzerland had a formidable army and mountains, mountains and mountains.
Nobody in their right mind would have attacked them!Impassable is the only way to go!
I�m with you that an impassable Switzerland would be the best solution.
My beloved jewish comedian Larry David once spoke out the view Americans have of Switzerland:
“Switzerland is a place where they don’t like to fight, so they get people to do their fighting for them while they ski and eat chocolate.”
:lol:
Pretty clever if you ask me! :-D
@Imperious:
Typical IL, trying to distract from the fact that he is accusing others of things he has done himself, often much worse.
Not trying anything, we are all laughing at how futile you look and why you are so hot and bothered and still hijack this thread and troll like a 8 year old. :roll:
Proving your blatant hypocrisy (calling me a troll for making the same accusation you did) is anything but futile. :wink:
Proving your blatant hypocrisy (calling me a troll for making the same accusation you did) is anything but futile. wink
Trolling- Trolling- Trolling keep those doggies Rolling…Rawhide
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ojrQq6yc_2w
What a failure. :-D
@Imperious:
Proving your blatant hypocrisy (calling me a troll for making the same accusation you did) is anything but futile. Â wink
Trolling- Trolling- Trolling keep those doggies Rolling…Rawhide
What a failure. :-D
Let’s face it IL. Â You continually replying to these messages in this manner makes you look just as bad (if not worse). Â None of these replies have ANYTHING to do with the topic(s) at hand.
Feeding trolls (or supposed trolls) is bad, k?
That would be true, but i want him nice and bothered so i can watch him tilt out again. He is already on the edge. You should see all these PM’s he sends. LOL
Isn’t it fun watching a train wreck?
Part of the entertainment package included with your subscription.
@Imperious:
That would be true, but i want him nice and bothered so i can watch him tilt out again. He is already on the edge. You should see all these PM’s he sends. LOL
Isn’t it fun watching a train wreck?
Part of the entertainment package included with your subscription.
Liason Fail.
Perhaps I should post some of PM’s you have sent me over the years?
LOL
My PM’s to you were reply’s to ones you sent me. I don’t send out PM’s FIRST. I just reply LAST.
IL, I asked a simple question. I’ll ask it again.
Why is accusing someone of employing 2 accounts trolling when I do it, but acceptable posting when you do it?
It’s pretty clear you avoid it since you don’t have anything close to a good answer.
It’s hilarious how you assert I am totally “on the edge” and your proof is PM’s. That’s actually an upgrade from your usual evidentiary source, what you call “common sense.”
