Turn sent

Halflings, Day 28

A peaceful day in the shire. We rolled barrel hoops down hills all day. Pure bliss.

TS

Azracs, Day 28

The Azrac lizardman did not follow order, going into Dwarven territory like that. He was immediately disbanded.

Turn sent

Highmen, Day 28

All quiet today. No blood has been spilled.

turn sent

Dwarves, Day 29

We have declared war upon the azracs and taken over the watch tower and killed one scout. We had already threatened to attack them on our previous turn. We dislike their ideology of sending young warriors to the end of the world and abandoning them afterwards. Especially when those warriors become renegades and wreak havoc everywhere. We killed a few of them to help the frostlings.

Turn sent.

Frostlings, Day 29

Turn sent.

Humans

We declared war on the Azracs who so treacherously sneaker into Dwarven territory.

We also think we commited a warcrime, we took out 3Azrac troops the same turn. Not sure if that is a violation of conduct code in AoW1? We apologie and are willing to make amends for it.

Ts

Halflings, Day 29

War! What is it good for? Absolutely nothing!

TS

If I knew we could attack on the same turn that that we make war, I would not have moved all my units away from the town. Is this allowed?

I second that I might have made a mistake by killing your lone 3 unit party, but the 4 hex town was under independent control when I took it - it had rebelled since you did not leave enough troops. So my crime is in each case limited to killing those 3 units. I am willing to make amends for that.

It is not allowed to attack on the same turn that you make war. However I abide by: "No attacking without previous declaration"

I sent a 'threaten to attack' signal before I started the war. I personally think that is acceptable. Not sure how others think about that. In the case of Wennejoekel, I think it is not allowed. Though your town did rebel. Honestly.
The three troops were not allowed to die though. What I did was taking 1 watch tower and killing one scout unit. So it is a very mild attack after the threat.

I'd like to know from others how they think about this.

That's funny. I remmeber how someone made big deal of this in prevvious game...
And no, even if you threaten before you declare, you shouldn't attack on turn you declare war. It doesn't matter if you take watchtower and kill scout or slaughter whole city.

Threatening to attack is not a declaration of war, it is a negotiating tactic. In all multiplayer AoW or AoW:SM games using the etiquette rules, a player must spend an entire turn turning an alliance into peace and another entire turn turning peace into war. That means: execute your turn and at the end of your turn, declare War with no attacks at all. This does give an advantage to the defender, but that is the intention of the rule.

Allright, I will pay the equivalent of those 3 Units. The city was rightfully taken from Independents, bad luck it rebelled like it did but that does not violate any rule :)

All remains friendly amongst us imaginary allies and enemies. Now if a neutral battle just happens to suck in a potential enemy to the battle and that potential enemy loses all their units to the neutrals before you lift a finger to move forward, that's just some good strategizing. ;-)