Celtic Heroes

What we're doing in a mobile app is no different to what politicians do with armies across the world.

Why be Nazi Germany? Poland was invaded by Germany in World War II, that was unfair, the whole world saw it and Germany was grilled for that.

If you're going to compare this game to real life then I will call out the griefing initiated by your clan as invading Poland, and so be ready to be grilled for that like Germany.

I do agree with your quoted statement but its entirely up to the leaders what kind of state they want, if they want to invade a peaceful state and make bad blood thats up to them and they must bear the consequences.

It's never too late to withdraw your troops from the battlefield.

Please don't compare one of the biggest tragedies to a disagreement in a game. It's still only a game lol. Not being sensitive or anything just isn't right. Also just as we were coming to a conclusion and Kril and Seph were being productive you had to pull this out of your pocket.

The only ones who've made any sense here have been Rimple & Kril maybe put them together to come up with something all we've been doing is point scoring and it's sad lol.

I think pointing fingers over who broke the agreement is stupid, I am not sure which side wrote it up but it was badly written and it isn't the fault of any one clan. By the wording of the agreement, it wasn't broken because what happened was a grey area. If another agreement does get written up it needs to be assured to cover every possibility in ensuring no cheating/loopholes can be found and exploited as this facilitates enmity.

Please don't compare one of the biggest tragedies to a disagreement in a game.

Nazi invading Poland wasn't a very big tragedy, the amount of deaths that happened was very tame compared to rest of the war.

Sounds like fun.

I think pointing fingers over who broke the agreement is stupid, I am not sure which side wrote it up but it was badly written and it isn't the fault of any one clan. By the wording of the agreement, it wasn't broken because what happened was a grey area. If another agreement does get written up it needs to be assured to cover every possibility in ensuring no cheating/loopholes can be found and exploited as this facilitates enmity.

Please don't compare one of the biggest tragedies to a disagreement in a game.

Nazi invading Poland wasn't a very big tragedy, the amount of deaths that happened was very tame compared to rest of the war.

I'm not talking about the one event about what it caused and comparing a clan in a GAME to nazi Germany not comparing it to the singular event. Also with the agreement I'm not sure exactly what it didn't cover it was pretty clear the losing clan stands on the arch behind a certain line or leaves and you can only go for lock with 25 or more. Any thing beyond that would've been a clear breach so I don't see any grey area.

I think pointing fingers over who broke the agreement is stupid, I am not sure which side wrote it up but it was badly written and it isn't the fault of any one clan. By the wording of the agreement, it wasn't broken because what happened was a grey area. If another agreement does get written up it needs to be assured to cover every possibility in ensuring no cheating/loopholes can be found and exploited as this facilitates enmity.

Please don't compare one of the biggest tragedies to a disagreement in a game.

Nazi invading Poland wasn't a very big tragedy, the amount of deaths that happened was very tame compared to rest of the war.

I'm not talking about the one event about what it caused and comparing a clan in a GAME to nazi Germany not comparing it to the singular event. Also with the agreement I'm not sure exactly what it didn't cover it was pretty clear the losing clan stands on the arch behind a certain line or leaves and you can only go for lock with 25 or more. Any thing beyond that would've been a clear breach so I don't see any grey area.

That's the grey area right there. We were told you could go for lock but if you lost it you stand back not 25 or more to go for lock, shows how unstructured it truly was and why there was miscommunication when it was "broken"

I think pointing fingers over who broke the agreement is stupid, I am not sure which side wrote it up but it was badly written and it isn't the fault of any one clan. By the wording of the agreement, it wasn't broken because what happened was a grey area. If another agreement does get written up it needs to be assured to cover every possibility in ensuring no cheating/loopholes can be found and exploited as this facilitates enmity.




Nazi invading Poland wasn't a very big tragedy, the amount of deaths that happened was very tame compared to rest of the war.

I'm not talking about the one event about what it caused and comparing a clan in a GAME to nazi Germany not comparing it to the singular event. Also with the agreement I'm not sure exactly what it didn't cover it was pretty clear the losing clan stands on the arch behind a certain line or leaves and you can only go for lock with 25 or more. Any thing beyond that would've been a clear breach so I don't see any grey area.

That's the grey area right there. We were told you could go for lock but if you lost it you stand back now 25 or more to go for lock, shows how unstructured it truly was and why there was miscommunication when it was "broken"

You can't lock battle if you have less then 25. If you do you are breaking the rules if you have more and you go for lock you are ok. Where is the middle ground? Did your leaders not share the entire agreement with you if so I can see the confusion.

Well in this case both clans broke agreement to start off with, whenever each clan attempted only 1 had 25+ when these battles happened, the other times there was this fake assurance from each clan that more toons were on the way which didn't happen but held onto the boss

Well in this case both clans broke agreement to start off with, whenever each clan attempted only 1 had 25+ when these battles happened, the other times there was this fake assurance from each clan that more toons were on the way which didn't happen but held onto the boss

Yes in this scenario both clans had been at fault at times, the lack of being able to enforce a agreement like this can be hard, now an addition about more rooms on the way may have been needed and whether it's ok or not.

The agreement made was limited & vague the reason it was because you guys had actively interfered with Gelebron while he was locked at this point we still hadn't we had only held him, I regret not negotiating more but you have to understand the position we where in at the time was very stressful everyone here was angry & wanted nothing more than to give you a taste of your own medicine, I'd managed to convince people not to grief and it was very hard given how angry everyone was my options at the time where extremely limited and my main goal was just to prevent what we are seeing now all that hate and stupidity.

I don't really think it's what everyone still wants but if there are people who want to see an end to this nonsense as Rimple said so long as it would be fair & sincere I would be more than willing to listen.