kirefla91 Posted March 14, 2016 Share Posted March 14, 2016 To the british nation and their leaders, are we fools? Lets begin to wipe these dutchies asap, the south is now open for conquest. The 'certainty' of victory have lead to the fall of greater men than any of us gathered here. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admiral Horatio Hornblower Posted March 14, 2016 Share Posted March 14, 2016 (edited) The 'certainty' of victory have lead to the fall of greater men than any of us gathered here. None of them were british. None of them had so weak and coward enemies. I knew the dutchies, they had to beg us to attack the spaniards at the same time in Panama because of their own lack of skills. Edited March 14, 2016 by Admiral Horatio Hornblower Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baron Quertier Posted March 14, 2016 Share Posted March 14, 2016 None of them were british. None of them had so weak and coward enemies. Steady sir, although I sail a French ship presently I am no friend of CSNF nor the Dutch. However I wouldn't go so far as to call them cowardly... Conniving yes, ambitious certainly, perhaps lacking in the stoicism of many British captains, but I wouldn't refer to them as cowardly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kirefla91 Posted March 14, 2016 Share Posted March 14, 2016 None of them were british. None of them had so weak and coward enemies. I knew the dutchies, they had to beg us to attack the spaniards at the same time in Panama because of their own lack of skills. Is that a fact? What about these battles; Saratoga, Islandlwana, the battle for the danish straits against Bismarck, Singapore, or even at the Gazala line. How'd all of these go for the british, hm? Saratoga is an excellent example if I do say so myself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baron Quertier Posted March 14, 2016 Share Posted March 14, 2016 Is that a fact? What about these battles; Saratoga, Islandlwana, the battle for the danish straits against Bismarck, Singapore, or even at the Gazala line. How'd all of these go for the british, hm? Saratoga is an excellent example if I do say so myself. Sir if I may, you have certainly proved the gentleman's argument to be part false, 'none of them were British' . As for the second part, I wouldn't say that any of the enemies faced by the British in any of the battles you listed were cowardly. No nation has had a clean slate in regards to warfare, although I will admit many British defeats had been caused for some ridiculous reason and could have been easily avoided. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Comodoro Posted March 14, 2016 Share Posted March 14, 2016 None of them were british. None of them had so weak and coward enemies. I knew the dutchies, they had to beg us to attack the spaniards at the same time in Panama because of their own lack of skills. Few days ago, the attack to Spain was because spanish forces attacked you, now you say you attacked in response of a demand made by dutch. Always easy catch a liar, and in GB faction there are a bunch as far I see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johan Posted March 14, 2016 Share Posted March 14, 2016 None of them were british. None of them had so weak and coward enemies. I knew the dutchies, they had to beg us to attack the spaniards at the same time in Panama because of their own lack of skills. Sir, you are taking this all way to seriously. Its hard to make out, but I better assume its just RP? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crowley Posted March 14, 2016 Share Posted March 14, 2016 Insults and accusations aren't going to help any nation with their current circumstances. Bringing real-life losses, for whatever reason, is not relevant or appropriate- regardless of what certain posters have stated in the past in attempts to bait people into retorting. If the French do indeed come west, I relish the chance to trade broadsides with our natural rivals. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kirefla91 Posted March 14, 2016 Share Posted March 14, 2016 Sir if I may, you have certainly proved the gentleman's argument to be part false, 'none of them were British' . As for the second part, I wouldn't say that any of the enemies faced by the British in any of the battles you listed were cowardly. No nation has had a clean slate in regards to warfare, although I will admit many British defeats had been caused for some ridiculous reason and could have been easily avoided. Oh I agree completely with you, and I do believe my examples show that the enemy of the british were indeed far from cowardly- Such as the Zulu for example,- Attacking british red coats armed with rifles, while your own forces are armed with spears and the like most certainly require some balls, if you pardon my french. Insults and accusations aren't going to help any nation with their current circumstances. Bringing real-life losses, for whatever reason, is not relevant or appropriate- regardless of what certain posters have stated in the past in attempts to bait people into retorting. If the French do indeed come west, I relish the chance to trade broadsides with our natural rivals. I agree in regards to insults and accusations, even more so with your last statement- Battling is far more fun than idling. I do however disagree with your real-life losses in this regard, when someone claims such a thing as the 'gentleman' above, then he clearly requires a lesson in history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alexander Reher Posted March 14, 2016 Share Posted March 14, 2016 (edited) None of them were british. None of them had so weak and coward enemies. I knew the dutchies, they had to beg us to attack the spaniards at the same time in Panama because of their own lack of skills. Lol what? Dutch beg for help? lacking in skills? Hardly. I'd never expect either from any of the factions in the Dutch nation. You clearly had no part in any of the actions down in Panama, if you did you'd have a healthy respect for the participants of the other nations. Edited March 14, 2016 by Alexander Reher 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Vicious Posted March 15, 2016 Share Posted March 15, 2016 go guys give britain hell usa should join too instead be passive 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wang Posted March 15, 2016 Share Posted March 15, 2016 go guys give britain hell usa should join too instead be passive Yawn, ignore this troll. Just wants to boost his own ego. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kutai Posted March 15, 2016 Share Posted March 15, 2016 None of them were british. None of them had so weak and coward enemies. I knew the dutchies, they had to beg us to attack the spaniards at the same time in Panama because of their own lack of skills. This chap certainly likes to blow his own horn. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jager Posted March 15, 2016 Share Posted March 15, 2016 This chap certainly likes to blow his own horn. Some of us don't know who the hell he is, i've asked around and no one really knows who this person is, to me he is most likely a troll so i would ignore most of his posts as half of them he has no idea what the hell he is on about. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skor81 Posted March 15, 2016 Share Posted March 15, 2016 None of them were british. None of them had so weak and coward enemies. I knew the dutchies, they had to beg us to attack the spaniards at the same time in Panama because of their own lack of skills. Dont get upset Jager. We dont need the dutch. In fact they needed us in the past because of their own incompetence to fight an inferior and pathetic force of spaniards. We will be happy to show them who really owe the sovereign of the seas. I´m a spanish player and have fought against pirates, US , Dutch and British. And I can say that the Dutch have been the bravest enemies , have fought as equals without hiding his ports with impossible timers and behaving honorably and politely. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hethwill Posted March 15, 2016 Share Posted March 15, 2016 That is because the United Provinces players ( quite a international mix up I must say ), generally speaking, do enjoy the game for what it is. Naval combat during the age of sail. Plus making our nation great while at it. Thank you for the consideration. Hope to see many caballeros kicking some timbers in the future. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E.P. Juel Posted March 15, 2016 Share Posted March 15, 2016 (edited) Ok, let me get this straight... Denmark/Norge is allied to France France is allied to Sweden Verenigde Provinciën is allied to Denmark Sweden and VP are currently fighting port battles. France is at war with the british Denmark/Norge is at war with the british Sweden is allied with the british This is like playing chess with 5 colors of pieces! Danmark-Norge is allied to france, yes (they joined us against the brits thats all) Danmark-Norge is allied to Sweden? No. (Neutral, PvP is allowed) VP is allied to Danmark-Norge, yes - we were told that you had made a treaty with the british (Non-agression pact in Panama region) Sweden fight VP, VP has not asked for interference. Can't you handle it? If france attacks you, its quite another political situation, but why should they?.. Sweden is allied with british? Naah, they are not... Not for real anyways.. So really I can sum up this for you: Danmark-Norge is allied with France and VP. Danmark-Norge is Neutral/Non-aggression pact with Sweden. Sweden is fighting VP, we don't want to do another black Friday and we have not been asked to interfere. Sweden is allied with the British? Not an alliance that is worth anything after their previous failure to support them. Edited March 15, 2016 by E.P. Juel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts