A posthumous siege break on now-permabanned TUF member ajqtrz, as Princess Botchface’s siege on Doralia 3 appears to have been broken by TUF forces. The siege had set up on May 11th, but current the city is still intact, with only a blockade left as part of the op.
It is unknown who had the decisive hit on the siege camp.
Meanwhile, Botchface has initiated new siege operations against another of ajqtrz’s cities in Almenly while TUF continues to keep the account in their roster:
| ajqtrz [MAD] | Doralia 6 THR | [54|-2503] in Almenly | Princess Botchface [YARR!] | Thu 12 May 19:00 |
| ajqtrz [MAD] | Doralia 6 THR | [54|-2505] in Almenly | Princess Botchface [YARR!] | Thu 12 May 22:05 |
It is unknown at this juncture if these sieges by Botch are being supported by accompanying YARR troops or not, but for as long as AJ’s account remains in TUF, operations will continue to be reported on by the Times and counted on the war’s Score Card. With 1 raze and 3 siege breaks, TUF is currently ahead in the war.
The Illyriad Times 
Aga broke the seige and considering what it cost him to do so and the fact that AJ is now irrelevant, I do not personally consider this outcome to be a major loss.
LikeLike
the other two are decoys with a single cat, they wil be withdrawn eventually.
LikeLike
See right here is where we differ, I never count the cost when it comes to coming to the assistance of my players, sad to see that others aren’t willing to do that for their alliance mates.( and before others chime in I am speaking to biatchface)
That’s why TUF is what it is, maybe we don’t have the knowledge or the skills to be the best but we sure have each others backs!!!
Salud my friend AJ see you on the flip side.
LikeLike
Is not the point that by using your troops clearing a siege on a permabanned account then those troops will not be available to clear a siege on one of your more active members.
Personally I’m a fan of pointless demonstrations of honour and loyalty, but other members of your alliance may feel differently when they lose towns as a result.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I see it the other way, Agalloch.
When you have cities placed in really bad places where you know that you’re going to be a siege target, and you do not move them — and then when sieges come oat you, you do not exodus them — I think that is incredibly selfish to do to your fellow alliance mates. You’re basically saying, “yeah, I know my city placements are shite, but I don’t feel like moving them, so you all, come and save my cities and get bad value for the troops you spent so long to build.”
To me, if you’re in a military alliance, you OWE it to your alliance mates to not be potentially wasting all of their hard work by forcing them to run their cavalry into a small hill where they get no terrain bonus versus plains. Or having to break a siege on a large mountain, which sucks most of the time also.
LikeLike
Yarr! has supported her allies throughout this conflict and will continue to do so, I myself have recieved reinforcements from our dear leader who shares your sense of duty. You know this from combat reports on your end, you are not being very honest here.
And besides… My post was just about how I think that killing your expensive t2 cav with some cheapass spears was a good silver lining. Your feelings about your alliance doesn’t have anything to do with me or what I said.
LikeLike
Yes using multi accounts to set up traps for people you don’t like is what you do best isn’t it?
@JJ I have never tried to emulate SIN in all aspects of their game, I have my own way of doing things
if people dont agree TUF.
LikeLike
Nice play on words
LikeLike