G7 - France vs. England

Argument in the sense of legal case.
Glad you found the reply useful.

For what it is worth I think you took on a very difficult position and have done what you could to rescue it. Killing the King James you intended could have worked and achieved what you expected. Everyone was stunned when it turned out to be the wrong one.

RJC - I don’t disagree with your assessment. The forum has certainly increased pressure on players. You only have to look at the length of time some players are logged on for without posting comments to realise the extent of collusion. I think you are being kind to suggest it is largely unintentional. In the last 2 months you’ve had a taste of what I had for 2 game years, which if you recall the letter you received from me at the start of your tenure, I warned was likely to happen. Admittedly, then you were a French ally, committed to upholding honourable conduct, and at that time I don’t think there was anyone who thought you were doing anything but making a genuine attempt to bring peace. However, by switching sides in such an abrupt way and doing what you did, you must have realised it would polarize opinion and leave you open to attacks from all sides.

We are often reminded this is a game played through characters, so consider any criticism that of the actions of your character. As Louis I took a strong stance defending historical play and honourable action. If you look at the posts I have made here, they continue that stance. If a character behaves dishonourably and seeks to justify his actions through contriving weak/false arguments or using propaganda, then you can expect me to expose such actions, and probably for StuartBailey to lampoon them in his inimitable style. Similarly if a character behaves honourably, as you did at the start and Deacon is doing now, then you can expect me to applaud such actions.

Contrary to how it may be interpreted by others, I have no axe to grind. I would be overjoyed if Leopold and his allies recognised they did wrong, not because it would benefit France but because it would be a return to high standards of historic and honourable game play. As a ghost (the spirit of RKL) I have no influence beyond that. However, thanks to your actions, that spirit has grown much stronger and will soon be joined by the far more powerful soul of the martyr Saint King James Stuart. I am very optimistic about the future of LGDR7. Evil always destroys itself. And perhaps after these events we will see a reminder that those who reject honourable play will find they suffer for it.

Despite Stuart's comments in trying to build a case for France abandoning one of the few allies it had, Churchill's own words suggest the more likely course. One of the biggest problems I had during my extended phoney war with Austria was that French nobility were screaming for revenge not peace. Had I given into their demands and sent my armies on the rampage against the HRE to get to Austria then no doubt the French Assembly would have been cheering me. Unless something has changed in France there is no chance that any new French government would survive making the kind of peace suggested.

Members don't need to log in to read comments on the forum. So if you aren't posting, the only reason to be logged in is to use private messages. Check the 'who is online' and it peaks just after game turns come back. Now it is very flattering to think that people are logging on automatically to follow my comments, eagerly awaiting the next post, but somehow I don't think that explains it all. And it is really rather coincidental that players who support each other in the game seem to simultaneously make very similar statements in the Herald and react to events in the same way within the game. If not coincidence, then perhaps Agema customers have a pyschic ability which is far from the norms of the rest of the population.

The comment was made in reply to a valid observation by RJC that technology has changed the way players experience the game in which he highlighted the additional pressures put on players. It was not intended as a dig at other players or a criticism of the way they keep their logons active.

Given the indignant nature of some of the replies I must have touched a nerve somewhere!

Basileus - attempts to smear and discredit me will not stop me contributing to the forum. I have been asked to continue to support the forum through posting and that is what I will do. I don't expect everybody to agree with my opinions, but neither do I post deliberately to upset players.

Anyone who has been in the game for any length of time or read back issues of the Herald know that as Louis I declared war on England because after they failed to honour their agreement with France over dredgers successive governments refused to come to terms. I backed the Stuart succession (or Jacobite cause if you prefer) following an appeal from the then Jacobite player who told me his father (the then King James) had died. 3 years later this proved to be incorrect, but it was believed at the time by every player, so attempts to accuse me of dishonourable actions (breaking the Treaty of Ryswick) won't wash. After negotiations with the Pope I had full Papal backing to put a Catholic on the throne and I did. This may not have been the initial motivation behind it, but it was a clear objective to bring peace to England when other English players had admitted their guilt, but refused to negotiate. The principle was one of honour: that rulers should honour their word. Churchill started off accepting that principle, then turned round and murdered his King, an act which shocked me as it shocked many observers and players. He broke his word and behaved dishonourably.

So did you. You broke your treaty with France within a few months of signing it and declared war on France. You were fully aware at the time you signed the treaty of the situation between France and England, so cannot claim ignorance. You have admitted on the forum that it was always your objective to attack France, so you deliberately deceived me. Do you expect a medal for that kind of treachery?

You make great play about your fine victories which up to the time I left amounted to walking into an undefended town, then blundering into another town which had French troops in it and setting it on fire. That is hardly honourable conduct. When your army was drawn up in a solid defensive position outside Besancon, you fled the field rather than face my forces.

You claimed throughout 1705 that you were attacking France on behalf of William, yet never sent troops to support him. You claimed you did not want any French territory and would withdraw from France as soon as I withdrew from England, yet now you demand Franche-Comte as the price for withdrawal. Is that hypocritical? I'll leave it to others to judge the actions of your in game character.

You are and always were an opportunist who acts first and then tries to justify those rash actions with propaganda and smears. Your ally, Spain, is a much more honourable player who I have praised on the forum and in game letters, for his conduct and his genuine attempts to reason with you. I need not continue to remind you that Spain signed the Treaty of Ghent with France back in 1701, a document you objected to. Spain faithfully kept that treaty despite your appeals that he break it and attack France. Up to the point I left Spain was not at war with France and I do not recall seeing any such announcement in later newspapers either. You have done your best to drag Spain into the war and embarrass your ally by dragging him down to your level, most notably by employing Blackbeard (who you may remember kidnapped a Spanish archbishop and still has a price on his head). France and Spain have always kept their word. This is the kind of honourable game play expected and what I have consistently sought to uphold. Throughout all my years of playing Louis I have been inflexible when it comes to such principles, and I guess it is that inflexibility which so infuriates you and your allies.

I hope I do have different standards to those you have displayed within the game. Is such treachery to be rewarded? I don't know - it is down to the GM, and since you've probably not got your turn back yet, I'm sure you'll have plenty to post when you do. If anyone disputes any of the above as being inconsistent with the facts of the game or information in the Herald, then they are of course free to disagree. However, I stand by my actions in the game which are the only defence against propaganda and smears regularly directed against me.