>You aren't forced to come and defend. How ever quitting in this
>case sure lame and break CF rules.

I wasn't trying to address the quitting thing. To a degree, I think you *are* sort of forced to come defend. Most imms and mortal leaders won't fault a guy for not showing up when its a foregone conclusion. But if two people are raiding your cabal, then most people will expect you to show up and at least put up a token defense.

The problem comes when those two raiders are SO powerful that there IS no "token" defense, i.e. you incur a high risk of death to even show up AT ALL.

>As Mizfara you didn't mind of coming and attacking
>centurions/vanquisher in order to make me come there.

I don't recall doing it for that reason. I would periodically clear out centurions just to keep the path to the Vanquisher open in case I had to retrieve at some point. Also it forced Empire to continually place new ones, which depleted their donations.

If I attacked the Vanquisher it was probably for the same reason: a pre-emptive weakening to make the job of retrieval easier.

>"no-win" does not mean "no chances to survive" actualy you
>have a lot of chances to survive encounter with AP unless he
>has a lot of charges.

I'm using "no win" to mean "no realistic chance of killing the person you're fighting". Could I have engaged Gzurweeg on the Eastern Road and lived? Probably, if I put up a bunch of preps. But what's the point? I'm not going to kill him. All I've done is waste preps.

>For example you never fought with Ahtieli because you though
>it's "no-win" situation but you fought a lot with people who
>had HIGHER chances to kill you than me. I'm not saying it's
>bad though.

I fought those people because I thought I could kill them. Biklaha is a good example. I didn't think I had any chance to kill Ahtieli, even in the wilderness, so I didn't try.

>Sure you had to go somewhere.. because it gave you a lot of
>advantages rather than fighting before someone's cabal. Nor
>you could attack a lot of cabals anyway.

Uh, I could attack any cabal I chose to. The point is that, when I killed someone, *usually* they were an unwilling participant in the affair. Killing someone whose only objective is to "get away" seems slightly more cool than killing someone who knows he's outmatched but feels obligated to fight you anyway because his role demands it.

>Also you were a stealth class. Probably you should try to do
>it as non-stealth class against enemy who just quit/teleport
>whenever he sees you.

That's the cost of not playing a stealth class.

So you know, I don't so much mind the "global summon" thing when the matchup isn't that skewed. Like, a non-rager warrior attacking another warrior's cabal outer in order to get that guy to come fight. Warrior vs. warrior can get pretty skewed in outlying cases, but usually it's not "assured death" for either party.