Talk:Eastonwood/archive

From The Urban Dead Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search

Please read the Danger Levels descriptions

Most buildings wide open or zombie-infested; OR hostile zombie mobs of 150+. DO YOU SEE THAT "OR"?!!! --Experiment211 20:45, 16 September 2008 (BST)

NO U! But... seriously... Easton meets the criteria for a Ghost Town. Ghost Town over-rides Very Dangerous: most ghost towns have the majority of buildings wide open, but are still ghost towns because they are abandonded. Anyhoo, Funt Solo provided evidence for his change. Until counter-evidence is provided, I am reverting to the correct danger level. --WanYao 20:53, 16 September 2008 (BST)
See... I reverted the status to V/D earlier, and then asked Funt on his Talk page to back up Ghost Town status. And he did that. See the News. If there are less than 60 zombies in a suburb, and most buildings are open, it's a Ghost Town. Many Ghost Towns may be very, very, dangerous to be a breather in... but they're still ghost towns. Seriously, I did everything to avoid an edit war here... Please don't make one, Experiment211... And if you think Funt is wrong, then provide counter-evidence to support your claim. Thanks. --WanYao 21:04, 16 September 2008 (BST)

srsly 2 Cool

Your group has two memebers and claims to be activ group in two suburbs. So Please don't list yourself as an group because one of your alts runs into Eastonwood to get eaten. Show some presence get some members and than list your group again. And if if you find yourself attacking zombies while your are a zombie yourself more often than not you should think about listing yourself under hostile groups. --Experiment211 12:48, 15 September 2008 (BST)

Repaired and caded an NT building with a ruin cost of over 100ap (repaired since the update in may) - as small as that may be we are by far the most active currently pro-survivor group in the suburb. I'll send ya an iwit some time if you'd like. --xoxo 12:56, 15 September 2008 (BST)
You're not a confirmed group: you're two people... Meanwhile, as a counter example, XIII is a actually a confirmed group (even if barely), and like you were are mobile. Yet we don't list ourselves in the suburb groups. Sorry, but, yeah... 211 is right. --WanYao 19:41, 15 September 2008 (BST)
Shrug, whatever. We are the most active group in the suburb, nowhere does it state that a group must be "confirmed" (i assume you mean on the stats page) to be on a suburbs group listing, i didn't add us back onto the list AND this has nothing to do with you so myob plz.--xoxo 08:40, 16 September 2008 (BST)
I think you mean "myofb". "Confirmed"? You can take your "confirmed" status and shove it up your rectum. Here's the facts: 1. We're a group (i.e. a number of people that work together), 2. we've been in Eastonwood and Brookesy consistently for about two months, running repairs and barricading, and 3. you're both douchebags.--Nallan (Talk) 08:51, 16 September 2008 (BST)
The wiki is every concerned citizen... erm... user's business. And, I'd remove a mobile "army-of-two" with no significant presence from ANY suburb... So don't think you're being picked on -- outside of the attention your own antics bring upon you, yourselves. --WanYao 21:07, 16 September 2008 (BST)
Oh... and someday you's kids will grow up... But I am sure as hell not waiting around for that day, or coddling your antics in the meantime. So take your teenage-rebellion-without-a-clue attitude and stuff THAT up your ass. Twit. --WanYao 21:10, 16 September 2008 (BST)
Besides your ageist "grow up" comments, all you've asserted is that in your opinion, we have no significant presence in Eastonwood. Well in my opinion, the Zombiefied Republic of !zanbah have no "significant presence", because through my limited perspective I've not seen any of them around - which means they mustn't exist. Oh well I guess I'd better remove their group... You see the problem here? 2 Cool is a two man group - it will never recruit more members - get over it. We're also actively repairing Eastonwood and Brookesy (Jed you might wanna upload the full screeny of your 105ap ruin repair now), so, having met the two criteria necessary to be listed in active groups, 2 Cool will remain on the list.--Nallan (Talk) 07:02, 17 September 2008 (BST)
Suburb pages are no recruiting pages. Please use Category:Recruitment if you're looking for new members. It's also very unpolite to put your "group" as you call it on top of older, confirmed and far larger groups instead of below. --Experiment211 19:04, 17 September 2008 (BST)
You are judged by your actions, and I'd say the same thing if you were 97, I'd just say you were old. Anyhooo... cut the fucking drama already. Your army of two is not a legitimate presence in the burb. And if you wanna find ZR! members -- scan. However, groups should go in alphabetical order... period. --WanYao 19:17, 17 September 2008 (BST)
Can all of you just leave this already? I didn't think we had an issue however you both said a few wrong things i might as well address. One - survivor groups go on top, i don't know why, i was just following the convention on every other suburb page. Two - We aren't looking for new members, read what Nallan wrote again. Three - EF are disbanding in 13 days so they'll be removed off the page too leaving us as the most powerful group in the suburb, if the most powerful and relevant group in a suburb doesn't deserve listing i'm not entirely sure anymore who does. Four - Wan, We begin with a number, while sorted alphabetically numbers can go last they can also go first, also groups are sorted by category so 2 Cool would be under pro-survivor and thus the only group in the suburb thus alphabetical order (or any order for that matter) is irrelevant. Five - Wan, you bought into something that had absolutely nothing to do with you behind your role as a "concerned citizen", come over and give your two cents by all means but don't start telling other people to cut the drama, you don't like the drama, you leave, no biggy as it's nothing to do with you anyway.--xoxo 04:50, 18 September 2008 (BST)
it's totally my business. deal with that fact. other than iterating that, yes, i was calling you out on being attention whores, i do in fact have nothing further to add. CHEERS! --WanYao 06:23, 18 September 2008 (BST)
it's your business if you want it to be your business, but then you have to put up with the drama. Your choice... :P In other news 2 Cool are all about the attention whoring, no need to call it out - we've got a whole page that broadcasts it loud and clear, catchya 'round Eastonbrooke.--xoxo 06:33, 18 September 2008 (BST)
Whay is Wyan such a douché? I'm so confused.... Just when the wiki is so peaceful... DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 09:56, 18 September 2008 (BST)

Truly contested?

I'm changing the text under 'Overview' because it's silly to say that Eastonwood is 'one of the few truly contested areas of Malton'. In Wikipedia terms, it isn't only NPOV, but it's full of weasel words. I don't know !zanbah well, but I'm pretty sure there are other contested places in Malton. Karaburma 23:08, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Revive Point Cleanup

Revive points, Nt buildings, and Entry Points now:

30,20

31,20

32,20

St Chad's Church

33,20

34,20

35,20

36,20

the Coutts Building

37,20

38,20

39,20

Roadnight Walk

30,21

31,21

32,21

St Simon's Hospital

33,21

34,21

Brabner Row School

35,21

Attrell Road Fire Station

36,21

37,21

38,21

39,21

the Stonnard Building

30,22

31,22

32,22

33,22

34,22

35,22

36,22

the Cheeke Building

37,22

the Knyps Monument

38,22

39,22

30,23

31,23

32,23

the Tryme Building

33,23

34,23

35,23

36,23

37,23

38,23

Luellin Lane Fire Station

39,23

30,24

31,24

Darke Walk

32,24

Evans Row Fire Station

33,24

the Nettleton Building

34,24

Postlethwaite Drive

35,24

36,24

37,24

38,24

39,24

30,25

St Antheros's Church

31,25

32,25

33,25

Radiotransmission.gif

34,25

Pooll Crescent Police Dept

35,25

36,25

37,25

the Dukes Hotel

38,25

39,25

Felix General Hospital

30,26

31,26

32,26

33,26

Masey Drive

34,26

the Harold Building

35,26

36,26

37,26

38,26

Timewell Drive Police Dept

39,26

30,27

31,27

Courtney Lane Fire Station

32,27

33,27

34,27

35,27

36,27

37,27

38,27

39,27

30,28

31,28

32,28

33,28

34,28

35,28

36,28

37,28

38,28

39,28

30,29

31,29

32,29

33,29

34,29

35,29

36,29

Patriarch General Hospital

37,29

38,29

39,29

Green = Revive Point

Orange = Entry Point

Blue = NT building

Revive points, Nt buildings, and Entry Points in my plan:

30,20

31,20

a cemetery (SGP)

32,20

33,20

34,20

35,20

36,20

the Coutts Building

37,20

38,20

39,20

30,21

31,21

32,21

St Simon's Hospital

33,21

34,21

35,21

Attrell Road Fire Station

36,21

Norvell Avenue Railway Station

37,21

38,21

39,21

the Stonnard Building

30,22

31,22

32,22

33,22

34,22

35,22

36,22

the Cheeke Building

37,22

38,22

39,22

30,23

31,23

32,23

the Tryme Building

33,23

34,23

35,23

36,23

37,23

38,23

Luellin Lane Fire Station

39,23

30,24

31,24

32,24

Evans Row Fire Station

33,24

the Nettleton Building

34,24

35,24

36,24

37,24

38,24

39,24

30,25

St Antheros's Church

31,25

32,25

the Ellicott Building

33,25

Radiotransmission.gif

34,25

Pooll Crescent Police Dept

35,25

36,25

37,25

the Dukes Hotel

38,25

39,25

Felix General Hospital

30,26

a cemetery (SGP)

31,26

32,26

33,26

34,26

the Harold Building

35,26

36,26

37,26

38,26

Timewell Drive Police Dept

39,26

30,27

31,27

Courtney Lane Fire Station

32,27

33,27

34,27

35,27

36,27

37,27

38,27

39,27

30,28

31,28

32,28

33,28

34,28

35,28

36,28

37,28

38,28

39,28

30,29

31,29

32,29

33,29

34,29

35,29

36,29

Patriarch General Hospital

37,29

38,29

39,29

Green = Revive Point

Orange = Entry Point

Blue = NT building

-- goebi oo ooooooo 16:34, 4 August 2007 (BST)

Matterfoot's Obsession with Ghost Towns

Who’s your character in Eastonwood? Where do you get your Intel from? I’m the Leader of the Unknown Armies and my group is active in this Sub for more than 10 months. I’ve done my homework, do yours! You come here and start your one man group and suddenly the suburb page, including danger level is your personal playground, step of a little, please! Eastonwood is not a ghost town it has more than four active zombie groups and a bunch of active survivor groups battling each other. From where do you get the impressions that nothing happens here in our sub? I doubt you have ever been in our fair neighbourhood. --Sgt Milton 23:37, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Definition of a Ghost Town: At least 2/3rds of the suburb's buildings either Empty of Survivors or Ransacked AND having no zombie mobs of over 10 and no total zombies over 60

  • First: There are far more than 6o zombies in Eastonwood
  • Second: Many groups are active in Eastonwood, so Ghost Town doesn't really suits the status quo
  • Third: NNRC, Matterfoot's group, isn't among the present groups. With their HQ of current operation in the Cheeke bulding, a building far in the north, from where he doesn't has a good oversight over Eastonwood. BTW His HQ is destroyed, empty and ransacked for over a week now. No trace of any NNRC members, and we have Intel. --CannibalX 23:56, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

1. find some

2. Just because groups are active there has nothing to do with beign VD or GT

3. what does my group have to do with this?

4. yes I know its just I have been dieing for the past week and had to wait 3 days before I got revived

5. My members are spread out across malton


And its GT because

A. Is there a 150+ mob of zeds in eastonwood NO!

B. Are MOST of the building open yes...are most of them ransacked yes does that fit the profile of a GT YES

C. I am willing to make it a M or at most a D but a VD is over streching it to much

My intel came from being a zombie for the past week and making this a personal attack against me and my group really shows you maturity. Also I have been I your fair suburb that is in bad condition you better help make it better instead of critizing me for reporting what I saw. And by the way Most buildings open or a 150+ mob is a VD And since you both zeds I see why you have such a bias against having !stanbal grey and not red,its bad press By the way nice little image name matterfoodshqfuckingemp

Oh and this should go in my talk page for my user not the EW talk page

--Matterfoot 00:13, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

  • Could someone link the section were it defines a ghost town please I can't seem to find it...
@ the Sgt and Cannibal, keep it civil we don't stand for petty bickering like that on neutral pages and I wanna keep it that way.
@ Davinos please phrase your entries honest while you're at it, I think we both know that Eastonwood is no fun playground where all zombies are just a revive que from Caiger, BTW I think that you will notice how it wasn't EF or UAG but a survivor who made the subs page to a ghost town and that the Sarge in fact changed it back to VD and it's certainly not in our interest (for propaganda reasons as you so nicely put it) to make Eastonwood a ghost town. It becomes apparent that some of you DEM/EC desperately want to blame EF for everything you don't feel right about and hey, it's getting kind of old.
@ Matterfoot, what CannibalX probably tried to tell you wasn't primarily an insult (even though very nearly so) but an information of how somebody looks who has neither the resources (i.e. manpower), the experience (being f**ing forever in the same location and thus have some streetwise/credibility) or advocates (you will notice that of the many resident groups the ones active in wiki editing are disagreeing with you) and still makes claims about how the overall situation is. If the DEM, with dozens of characters in and around the area (they don't sleep in the 'wood much cuz it's very dangerous for survivors see) is telling you this is not a ghost town and the EF and UAG both with sizeable forces to back this claim, are telling you that it isn't while you alone are saying different than please don't be pissed if everybody is reverting your claims on the subs page. is the suburb very dangerous for survivors? Yes, if you go there you will probably die after a brief period of time. Does Eastonwood even posses the ability to ever be a ghost town? No, because it's the transition point between 4 Malls Within one suburb distances and has been and will always be fought over by survivor groups who need their travelling route to be safe and zombies who are looking for a meal. Regardless of what any intel any of our groups gather is saying, at every given time there are at least 10 survivors in the suburb who are just passing through or just sleeping there, now throw in the mix of survivor groups who just refuse to let go, Warseers, the wood crew, the EC, the sun organization even Fanny for heavens sakes not to forget the zombies, like the EF who per default can not abandon the place how on earth is this a ghost town? This is no Houldenbank, this is practically the heart of the Northwest.--Foxfire 00:35, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
Hear hear! I don't see how a lack of a mob of 150+ zombies would classify it as a ghost town either. The 'Wood has seen consistent activity throughout the last year, with a few drops around holidays. For d 12:40, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
I dont get this whole definition stuff right here... lack of barricades? => Dangerous? No Mob of 150 Zeds => Everyplace (not Barrvile or Ridleybank) == Ghost Town? (not part of ghost town definition!!) Survivors does not count (error in definition of Ghost town, they should count)? => Zombies == Ghosts?. Group activity is not important to determine a ghost town? (another error in Definition) so if all Survivors gather in easton and therefore do not need to barricade the place its a Ghost town?
    • Some Logic Analysis:

The OR Operator used in the Following analysis is Inclusive so if I ask "tea OR Coffee?" the Answer "Yes" would be a correct answer since the question is "do you want (one or all of the disjunct expressions)?".

Ghosttowm definition: {[(At least 2/3rds of the suburb's buildings either Empty of Survivors OR Ransacked) AND (having no zombie mobs of over 10 AND no total zombies over 60)].

  • funny facts about ghost-towns:

either a or b A XOR B <= (according to mathematic and linguistic logic this staes, that if 66%+ all buildings are empty AND ransacked the suburb is no Ghost-town XD.

After using the fundamanetal rules of solving Atomic expressions: we get the following term {[True or True] and (false and false) == {True and (false and false) == True and false == false. Sorry for my formulaic analysis. therefore we can clearly say Easton is no Ghost Town

Danger level: try to survive (not shamble) in Easton more than a day and tell me its a moderate threat^^. Our home unit is constantly open up NEWLY barricaded buildings. I admit very dangerous is a bit hard to say but the burb is constantly battled. We may have a Vote by every Group in easton just to check what they say but i doubt it will change anything. Hell i am forced to agree with my opponents see what you do to us :D. (did i just ate up the entry of Matterfood)? something went just wrong. Zawa o'Draugr 19:15, 20 February 2007 [UTC]

  • Zombies inside many resource buildings(illogic that open buildings do not count here), OR hostile mobs of 50+ is for dangerous. I am going so far to lay the question: Is 2/3 open/Ransacked in fact not only MANY but MOST of the buildings?. However, the constant wake up headache tells me that its not "VERY DANGEROUS" in Eastonwood. But hell how can Eastonwood be called Ghost Town, nor Medium. Even according to these Definitions. Zawa o'Draugr 19:59, 20 February 2007 [UTC]
    • Problem solved? Eastonwood == VD fine for everyone? I dont feel VD really :D. Just as questiion: should the 10th February entry, really stay this way? --Zawa o' Draugr 17:41, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

The Current wiki war

Apperently the views about how save or unsave Eastonwood is at the moment differs greatly. I advise the survivor side who cry so bodly for unbiased news not to try further antagonizing their oponents on the meta game level. Even though their ingame behaviour is subject to much dispute, as was the USAI behaviour some time ago, it is easy to handle. However the immature need to try and provoke people outside of the game boundaries is a path which leads to neither anything good nor entertaining for both sides. In essence it creates in the people that currently are in the area fighting an image of the groups involved which is less than favourable. Propaganda, which latest news clearly are belong to the site of the group in question. If you truly want a page that is not biased for the suburb I sugest not trying to use it for propaganda yourselves. I will have a talk with the people on my own side who are in charge if that pleases you but I think you should do the same. To take over a building after it's occupants have no further ap is not an achievement for the page of the suburb but for the page of the group. To hold a place against an onslought of enemies that have ap is a noteworthy event. Currently I don't see how the suburb is any less dangerous than it was during last week. (And I don't see how people who are hiding in the surrounding suburbs can even consider to claim they are gaining ground when they need to re-barricade the buildings they "hold" every day anew) It isless dangerous than it was during the time we held it barricade free for over a month though, but this is even noted on the EF wiki page propaganda or not. The current information is a direct insult to the zombies fighting in the suburb on a meta game level. Given that it isn't the first offence in that direction I would even go as far as to describe the last news entry as on the brink of vandalism. I won't edit it myself, and I will encourage people in my group to leave it as it is for I believe it to be the survivors task to correct this. If user: Dickholeguy is not able to handle his anger because his initial plan did not go as flawless as expected I advise him to leave wiki edits to another member of his group. --Lord Aronax 13:14, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

I read through the report made the Rangers. I detest wiki wars as much as you do. I agree that the information on the Eastonwood wiki page should be unbiased and reporting the bigger picture rather than details of operations. As for the last revert by Foxfire, I feel he may have been a bit too zealous however. For example, a sentence on the burb being mostly caded disappeared, which, by our intel was an absolutely correct remark. As for the suburb being very dangerous or not, well, the EF rampaging hasn't been what it used to in the past just recently (erm, well, uh, stupid sentence structure). I expect the fight to escalate, however. For d 23:06, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
I thought I had that one covered with "In due time, many of the buildings have been barricaded leaving the zombies apart from a core resistance only with their daily attacks." But if that's not clear enough I try to find a better phrase. As for the suburb danger level, I do not dispute that it's not very dangerous but the Malton Ranger editor had lowered the danger level to moderate which in my opinion wasn't true. --Foxfire 09:00, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Diplomacy in Eastonwood

The Gangsta Business group is not, and was never meant to be, a pk group. After months of battle with the Warseers, it is apparent that the original perpetrators (Ad'Lan, frigga, eskamennamenna,Egack Abergack +alts) have only a minor presence left in Eastonwood. The GB does not wish to continue fighting the new blood of Warseers, who have never attacked GB, (180 solutions and Norminator2) - in fact, we think these two are nice guys. GB proposes a truce in the pk wars with the Warseers. Here are the main points that need addressing from a 'seer representitive.

  • The NorthWest corner of Eastonwood belongs to GB. No tagging over GB tags. The Yeatman and Wyles Banks are the official GB Headquarters. Warseers are allowed to sleep there, but no tagging over our signs.
  • GB will take over responsibility of revives in the cemetery next to St. Chads Church
  • Pauley Bank will be a secondary GB HQ.
  • Warseers must declare that GB is the victor of the gang war by tagging in Poole PD.
  • All Official Eastonwood policy (inlcuding barricade plans, organized zed attacks, etc.) must go through GB as well as other groups who reside in Eastonwood (MRBMB,etc.)
  • Warseers may reside in Oakes Arms - no GB member will tag that building (but you must give back the two Clubs to MRBMB)
  • Any individual pk by a Warseer will result in the placement of that pk-er on our hit list. A consecutive pk will void any truce and reignite our fight against the Warseers.
  • GB expects revives from Warseers when necessary.

If these conditions are acceptable, let us know. This cease-fire for negotiations will only last 48 hours.


To For d: If Eastonwood can be broken up into smaller pockets which individual groups can control, it will make it a lot harder for the zeds to keep running it over. I propose an Eastonwood council, with a representitive from each group to dictate policy in this suburb. For d and Stick up kid can be co-presidents.(stick up kid)Gangsta1 22:04, 6 September 2006 (BST)

I'm not sure if these conditions are meant to apply to all groups or just the Warseers? Are you expecting other groups to follow these rules as well? If so, here are some comments: Handing over control: At the moment, there are several groups operating in the 'Wood. We have forged alliances with most of them. The DEM is founded on the ideal of helping survivors, wherever they are, so simply handing over a part of the burb to a particular group is not an option for us, in so far as we "own" anything to hand over. If you guys want to maintain barricades in the NW, all the better. We want to keep this burb free of zs, and you can help in this regard. Tagging: We have many operations in the NW, ammong them a very active publically available revive point (the cemetary you wish to "take over"), and we try to maintain the NTs in that area. Tagging is vital in order to rally people, and we will use them for this purpose, not simply to mark our own territory. But, if you guys want to avoid tags in the banks, I think that is fine by us. But you could render assistance back by helping to defend Stonnard. Revive points: Please note that the DEM already has an infrastructure for maintaining RPs, cf our Revive Request Tool and the Malton Forensics Unit. It wouldn't be effective to simply hand this over to one group. Instead, I propose that the GB start using the tool actively, both in asking for revives and when performing revives. Note that subjects wanted for murder, however, will not be revived by the DEM. Raids and cading policy: Similarly, the DEM and it's allies will not ask GB for permission to kill zs. We will defend survivors everywhere. And the barricade policy is a matter of public record. I'm sure we can agree on it's content, rather than say one group "owns" the plan. Do you feel the general rule of EHB for normal buildings and VSB for resources buildings is a problem? Feel free to comment on the current plan. PKing: The DEM is and will remain netural in PKing conflicts. We respond to bounties posted in our PKing forums. A certain marshall in the 'Wood recently demonstrated this, resulting in a lot of threatening graffitti from GB. The Warseers and Gangsta Business may kill eachother as much as they like (even though we'd much rather see you expend that energy in killing zs instead of eachother), but if you kill civilians during your conflict, our marshalls and police officers must respond. As members of the MPD, I and my colleagues are obliged to uphold the law, so if the GB or others make themselves guilty of murder, we have to respond. I hope you can understand and respect this. (PS, please sign your entries by using four ~ signs. Makes it easier to see who posted and when) For d 20:20, 6 September 2006 (BST)
By "owning/taking control" what Kid meant is that they would be off limits to Warseer tags. The same would apply to buildings they designate as free of GB tags. I am referring to non constructive tagging, "revive point 1NE" would not be considered vandalism. Going forward, we would not consider any hostile acts by a rogue Warseer as representative of the group as a whole.
Look at you D, you deserve the Noble peace prize. Steadymobbin 21:36, 6 September 2006 (BST)
Thanks for the response D, but we have yet to hear from any 'seers so the following comments only apply to you and DEM.
  • Stonnard - GB will help defend from zeds and will advertise it with graffiti inside the building.
  • Tagging - No GB tags overwritten by anyone! Doing so will be a provokation of war (we dont want that do we?).
  • Revives - If you see a GB member, just revive him. Its not difficult and we dont need to fill out forms. We will do the same for you.
  • Reporting pks - The most reviled person by GB is a snitch. If you would like to snitch about pks, do so. It does not affect us. But seeing as we are on the "other side of the law" we will choose not to respect your actions.
  • Barricades - The current plan is woefully inadequate. We will keep our buildings at EHB.
-(stick up kid) Gangsta1 22:04, 6 September 2006 (BST)
The DEM does not do random revives, so we stick to our publically available tools. Which buildings do you want to keep at EHB? St. Chad's? St. Simon's? All the rest in the NW are designated EHB already. Why is the plan inadequate? As for PKing reports, we will have to agree to disagree. For d 12:00, 7 September 2006 (BST)

-- I have read your proposals and I feel disgusted that you wish to insult the Warseers in this manner. You are the perpetrators of the murder of Warseers, and we will never surrender to you! Consider the war ongoing until you agree to an unconditional ceasefire - we will not be bullied and coerced into an agreement that defiles our name in this way. Glory to the Warseers! -- Norminator 2 23:05, 6 September 2006 (BST)

It is unfortunate that our overtures for peace have been rebuffed; however we are not sure that norminator speaks for all the Warseers. Honorable Warseers who wish to acquiesce with the peace truce should change their group affiliation to "Warseer/GB". The last thing we would want is to attack any friendly Warseers. Welcome friends! Steadymobbin 23:47, 6 September 2006 (BST)

I speak for all Warseers in this matter. This is essentially a hostile takeover - and as a result we shall treat you the same way we treat the Eastonwood Ferals. Consider this war. -- Norminator 2 17:37, 7 September 2006 (BST)

  • Being a representitive from The Sun Organization, who have, over the past month or two, increased their presense in Eastonwood, paticulary on the eastern border, I beleive that some of your conditions are unfair, to say the least...

Claiming a Revive Point as your own seems out of line to myself as GB don't show up on the STATS page, so with less than 10 members, how can you operate a Revive Point to it's full potential? It also appears to be too much in claiming a quarter of suburb as your own for tagging rights, what about all the other groups fighting for the greater good of Eastonwood? The DEM, TSO, CMS-Meta, FANNY etc...

I just think perhaps you're asking a little too much is all. A re-think on what truely matters would be a possibility, as you can cleary view; the Warseers are unhappy with the options they've been given. Regards... --Chopper 18:19, 7 September 2006 (BST)

Speaking as one of the more experienced Warseers now, though certainly not as someone with any say in the matter - for I am but a solider - there is no potential that any Warseer would accept the terms in the current suggested form. Peace has always been preferable, for there is the greater foe of the zombies and I would far rather be dealing with this threat then continue to slug it out with GB. However, frankly both sides are stubborn, both sides keep comming back for more, neithers gonna realisiticly back down, ever.

If GB genuinely seeks peace and a future where Warseers and GB might actually work alongside each other rather then trade blow for blow and death for death, a long term ceasefire, initially unconditional, so that we might together - united - trully reclaim Eastonwood for all survivors is the only way thats ever gonna come about. If GB are serious about this that is how you are going to achieve it, anything else will just continue the bloodshed between our two groups - your call. --Col.Gravis

Here's an idea... Perhaps if both the Warseers and GB join the Eastonwood Confederation, an alliance forged by For D that consists of all the groups who continually hold a presense in Eastonwood, fighting for it's greater good. On joining, both the Warseers and GB will put forward their conditions that would result in a mutually respectful and permanent ceasefire. A representitive or two will then be put forward from each group already participating in the EC to form a jury. A vote will then be cast, unanimously if prefered, and a conclusion will be reached that is beleived to be fair on both the Warseers and GB's parts.

Hey, that's not bad... It would end the bloodshed between both groups and it would result in a much stronger survivor presense in Eastonwood which would easilly be able to crush the EF. So what do you say folks? --Chopper 23:53, 8 September 2006 (BST)

What is unacceptable? Offerring revives? Claiming the two banks as GB HQ? Tagging? No pks? You had your chance. The peace treaty was sincere but if you want to battle, we will battle. We will accept a position in the Eastonwood Council.
The goal of the negotiations was to end our battle as the original Warseer perpetrators (frigga, AdLan, eskamennamenna, Egack abergack, etc.) seem to have dispersed from Eastonwood, or stopped playing. Attacking the new blood of Warseers is not as fun, expecially since they all travel with alts ready for revives. We respect col.gravis (for his sense of humor) as a worthy opponent and look forward to more slugfests - next time we meet, only knives! (stick up kid) Gangsta1 02:19, 9 September 2006 (BST)
  • Warseers must declare that GB is the victor of the gang war by tagging in Poole PD. , that quite simply is what to me is unacceptable, any other item there does'nt bother me at all, territory is not an issue, revives is not an issue, that load of rubbish I quote, thats an issue. This started about tagging, which essentially if I am correct left you guys feeling slighted therefore I know you have a sense of honour - for any Warseer that would be utterly unthinkable because its simply not true, as I said earlier the war is even essentially, I suspect that you achieve a great kill ratio on account warseers with their greater numbers are easier to find, but with those same greater numbers the battlefield remains drawn.

I shall say this, an offer of sorts given I would consider that I've probably killed more of your number then any other Warseer. From 0000GMT on Monday 11th September (giving time for this to be concidered by both sides) I shall only hunt down those GBs who make fresh Warseer kills. Others, even should I come across them I shall not, I would encourage my fellow Warseers to consider taking the same action. The fighting could stop just like that and we could easily chuck out the undead horde in that situation, all it takes is a bit of trust where there is none and both sides being prepared to bury the hatchet for the good of all survivors. Col.gravis 18:23, 9 September 2006 (BST)

  • I'm saddened to see that this is the end result of the peace negotiations, is there no way of settling this how I'd previously mentioned? Rather than war between your two groups, the only other way I could imagine this being settled would be an old style duel to the death. The leader of the Warseer and GB both step into an EH Barricaded building, armed only with either a Kitchen Knife or Fire Axe and they fight to the death, the leader left standing will have his group declared the victors. This way it would save an awful lot of bloodshed and we could all get on with the greater good of Eastonwood. Because that's what the Eastonwood Confederation is... The groups situated in and around Eastonwood who have allied together to fight for the greater good in protecting Eastonwood and crushing the EF. But in my eyes a PK war within Eastonwood is not for it's greater good. How about any other opinions, For D? Davinos? AnotherZombieKiller? Blue Chixen? Elizabeth? Ladydarke? --Chopper 17:22, 9 September 2006 (BST)
I don't see duking it out as a solution to any problem. I'm not interested in seeing either side "win" this conflict, and I don't see what a fight to the death would prove. Each time we kill eachother, the EF laugh. The Eastonwood Confederation stands together in fighting the ferals. Stand with us, help protect the survivors of our burb. Help protect your fellow human beings, don't squabble over territories, buildings and the like. While you squabble, the ferals succeed in klling more of us. For d 19:33, 9 September 2006 (BST)
Gah...I hate wikis. They're so awkward to post in...interesting that someone's seeking the Fire Marshal's opinion, though, and I'm amused to see that my name for our little alliance has stuck. I suppose I stand with For d on this issue. I'm truly not at all interested in who "wins" the conflict between the 'Seers and GB. If I had to throw my hat into the ring, I'd support the 'Seers, but that's simply because my Imperial friends have revivified/healed/'caded for me several times in the past, and the only contact at all I've had with the GB is them killing my friends in the 'Seers. Naturally, I'm biased, and therefore can't offer much of an opinion...but, as has been stated, the only reasonable ending to this conflict is declaring it a draw. Shake hands like men and get back to doing what's important. Rolling around in the filth over who's going to garner the "glory" of winning a gangfight in MALTON, of all places...for pete's sake, you can't even kill people around here, so it doesn't really matter who has the most territory/kills/etc. Personally, I can't blame the Warseers for not accepting the terms of the truce. It's biased, and lays false claim to a feel-good sense of 'winning' that's not good for anything. No rational group engaged in a war would capitulate under the stated terms, and no agressor who was honestly seeking a truce would put forward terms like that, whether bargaining from a position of "strength" or not. So, like I said, both parties need to step forward and settle for an even-terms termination of hostility if anyone in either organization ever wants to see progress. After all, what's a little spraypaint between friends, eh? ----blue chixen


I won't take any offensive actions against any warseers unless they draw blood 1st. I think most of GB would be comfortable with that. Regarding the Eastonwood Council/Confederation, I'm fine with that too. Steadymobbin 01:03, 10 September 2006 (BST)

  • Ah' well there we go! The only reason I never made more of a point on a mutual ceasefire was because I'd seen members of GB say they'd refuse to accept anything less than their demands, which as I've alreayd mentioned, I thought were completly unfair. It's good to see fair responses from you both, if only the stick up kid (Gangsta1) could agree to this, as he is the leader of GB to my knowledge, right? For D brings up probably the most important point of this whole discussion; every time one of you kill each other, it just results in one more laugh the EF have at our dispense. They snicker amongst themselves when it turns out that Survivors are killing each other, this giving the EF themselves far less work to actually do! Think of what's actually possible should you both shake hands and call it quits on this one. Eastonwood would be declared a Survivor controlled 'burb as with the number of all of us combined would simply over run the EF.

And I think that's a rather respectable first point Steadymobbin too! If only the rest of GB could be persuaded to opt in this way... --Chopper 01:20, 10 September 2006 (BST)

A ceasefire like this, unconditional on both sides, sounds like a fine option. Is this a deal then? -- Norminator 2 19:44, 10 September 2006 (BST)

  • AAerghabaegeck killed steady mobbin.

Oh thats just grand, the Colonel camped out in the same building as steady last night to test the theory of ceasefire and thats what greets me when I wake up. In retrospect some Warseers are never gonna stop - or at least not any time soon - and that in mind I believe I shall be moving on. I'm still tagged as a Warseer at this moment, but wont be for much longer. Col.gravis 10:05, 11 September 2006 (BST)

  • And another is down to a different Warseer, until the Warseers house is in order I and a few others will be resisiding under the banner of the Neo-Warseers (=][=). Come on Zombies time to get reaquanted with mr.hunting cannon! :) Col.gravis 15:01, 11 September 2006 (BST)
  • I can see that the Neo-Warseers truely are looking at the bigger picture here, it being Eastonwood, not a war between those who in retrospect, should be allies! I've spoken with For D and it's been mentioned that perhaps due to you and your Neo-Warseers being neutral and in the hunt for Zombies rather than fellow survivors, what would you say to joining us in the Eastonwood Conderation? I beleive those who fight under the colours of the Neo-Warseers are just in their actions and are aiming for a Zombie free Eastonwood as we are. Well, what's to be said about it? --Chopper 01:27, 12 September 2006 (BST)
  • Col.Gravis: We respect a warrior of your admirable values. GB has decided NOT to attack any Neo-warseers. In fact, we would be honored if the Neo-Warseers were a GB ally. Under our wiki, you are posted as Friends of GB. Unfortunately, as you witnessed with your very eyes, some of the crumbling, obsolete Warseer fundamentalists have decided not to attempt any negotiations for peace. As a sign of good faith, our hit-list will be cleared, and we will start a new list (2 members already - and both retro-Warseers). Our wiki will slowly be updated with new group goals, etc. We will accept the invitation to Eastonwood Confedaration and a position on the governing council for a GB representitive. Neo-Warseers and GB together! Who would have thought it possible? --(stick up kid) Gangsta1 01:57, 12 September 2006 (BST)
    • Note that there is no gouverning council at current. The Confederation is simply a loose alliance of survivor groups in Eastonwood. We'll be happy to fight the same fight with you against the undead, but the DEM and the MPD in particular does have a certain problem cooperating with groups which have criminal activities. If either the Warseers, Neo-Warseers or the GB PK, relations will be strained. It's not only illegal, but counter-productive in the battle against the undead, as I've mentioned earlier. We don't interfere with a PKing war per se, except reporting what we witness, but sitting down together when two groups have bad blood is difficult at best. For d 19:30, 12 September 2006 (BST)
  • Jeff Oneil-DHPD Hello all from the DHPD. As I write this a task force has been sent into the Eastonwood suburb. Our mission is a simple one. Help anyway we can. I look foward to working with everyone Jeff Oneil 18:43, 13 September 2006 (BST)
  • As much as we look forward to working with you? Heh', great to see the DHPD getting involved in the war against the undead in Eastonwood! With numbers like these, it doesn't look like it'll be too long before this 'burb belongs to Survivors again! --Chopper 18:54, 13 September 2006 (BST)
  • Jeff Oneil-DHPD Not only did we bring a task force but we brought friends. make sure you say hello to THE REGULATORS
  • Up to now, we have not carried out any reprisals against any warseers who have pk'd us. It is obvious they have no intention of participating in the cease fire. All retro warseers on our hit list will be hunted down over and over again. Those who are not on it (retro, neo, or anyone else), you have nothing to fear. You guys can thank Frigga for pushing us over the edge by vandalizing our wiki. Steadymobbin 01:27, 20 September 2006 (BST)
Hmmm, Frigga is an ass, theres no need to be vandalising wiki pages, its pointless, counter-productive and immature. 'nuff said. Col.gravis 09:26, 21 September 2006 (BST)
  • Joy, a Warseer alt is now killing Neo-Warseers, dont you just love politics lol

http://urbandead.com/profile.cgi?id=294644

Col.gravis 17:41, 21 September 2006 (BST)

    • Is Mercinius an alt of a retro-Warseer? If so, let us know and we will update our hit list.(stick up kid) Gangsta1 19:18, 21 September 2006 (BST)
He is, though in the hope that peace may yet reign I wont say which one at this time. Col.gravis 14:06, 22 September 2006 (BST)]
    • Bah, he's killed again, Mercinius3 is an alt of Norminator2, as is Olianius Pius and apparently a 'Norminator' though I've never seen that one myself. Norm previously set up 'The Emperor's Wrath' an assination group to take out people without linking it to Warseers - including other Warseers and PK for hire, sadly in his newbish ways he posted on the 'Emperor's Wrath' wiki page as himself, deletd the group after I pointed it out to him. Col.gravis 17:50, 26 September 2006 (BST)
    • Bullshit! Me and Norminator2 are completely different people. and thank you for accusing me as an alt! --Mercinus3 14:44, 1 June 2008 (BST)

Conduct on the Eastonwood front page

This is a very difficult topic. And I don't want to be overly critical. First of all I'd like to commend Ailton for participating on this page. It's great to see some commitment. However, I do believe it is prudent to raise a few points: First of all, the wiki page is for all parties in the burb, both the zombies and the survivors. As such, the front page is supposed to contain relatively objective information. I notice Obeah-man edited Ailton's last history text, and I agree with the change. I think the last addition of the place where everyone can add something, is a general good idea, and much in line with what wikis are about. But may I suggest changing it to Billboard, grafitti wall or something, to integrate it a bit more? Take a look at the format I set up in Timewell Drive Police Department for this. Finally, I think it is important to follow general wiki guidelines, like for example having the correct nesting of headers and stuff. For d 11:29, 25 August 2006 (BST)

Alright, that is fair enough! Sorry , totally forgot the Eastowood Talk.

Maybe we could add some additional points beneath the history topic!

Advertisments

and

Historical comments by groups maybe just with a link to annother page!! Darvall heights is a good example, I personally think!

Cause it is not so funny to see, that somebody else has change your text or kicked things out which you have added... Well but feel free now to remove my recently entered new points! The XP-Fuelstations could be put in Advertisments instead!!

Ailton 11:29, 25 August 2006 (BST)

I'm sorry if we have offended you in any way. the page was edited because in the past we from the EF wiki team came to the conclusion that often times survivors lack the distance when describing hostlities between their own groups and I myself edited the wiki many times to provide unbiased and more general information. As it is an open space you are free to edit it back to the way it was any time, but I have to ask everyone, as I have in the past, to use their groups own wikis for propaganda and such because the Eastonwood page is an outlet of the entire suburb and not one individual group.--Foxfire 19:59, 25 August 2006 (BST)
Have edited it into an advertisement section. You might want to put something there too For d, it's a lot of fun :)--Foxfire 20:32, 25 August 2006 (BST)
Does none of you living people wanna make a new history entry, I mean we clearly reached a new stage here and I myself currently have writers-block. Go ahead and write something nice, either the Captain or I will meddle with it as soon as we get 'round to it ;)--Obeah-Man 02:07, 23 September 2006 (BST)

PK'ing wars

I note with distress that several survivor groups have started wars with eachother in our burb. For the love of all that is holy, this must stop. We have zombies breaking down our doors and killing fellow human beings. It is time to pull together and fight for our burb, not get bogged down by internal strife! The DEM has a principle view of PKing as wrong, and any operatives will report PKing to the Rougues Gallery wherever seen, regardless of cause. We remain netural in any such conflicts. Please, I ask you, please stop killing eachother. if you are PKed, report it, claim the bounty if you can, but let us not descend into barbarism! For d 11:05, 23 August 2006 (BST).

---

The Warseers have been set up in Club Vagg for months and months now. I'm not sure when MRBMB started laying claim to that same spot, but it's been a center of operations/safehouse for some Warseers since I arrived in this burb. If you don't beleive me, check out the history of EF attacks and note the many tiems they have raided Oaken Arms and Club Vagg to get to Warseers. It seems the MRBMB have arrived relatively recently, and have mostly claimed territory in the south ... and Club Vagg in the north? Personally, I find the whole "fight for territory" thing to be silly, and detrimental to continued survival for us all in the burb.

As near as I can tell ... the "PK WAR" consists of *one* person killing one of MRBMB. Do you have screenshots to back this up? It has all the earmarks of someone trying (and succeeding) to stir up trouble for trouble's sake, and it apears to be working. I can hear the EF laughing at us. Davinos 23 August 2006

Man, man, man...your group really starts to get annoying. You feel somehow like the kings of Eastonwood. And Groups like the gangsta business and us the MRBMB seem to have no rights in this quarter. We allready do operate in this quarter since May. You never claimed to possess Club Vagg. So it is ours. We always respected you possessing the Oaken Arms. But you just want to have all and tagg whereever you want. Your lack of diplomatic abilitities has become evident in the peace talks above. If you do not start to rethink your strategy and continue to tagg in Club Vagg you will get into serious trouble! Funny that Gangsta Business and us are not the only one who feel disgusted by the Warseers' behaviour. There seems to be some other people too. Or who is always tagging these strange Hawaian taggs. Well do not expect any support from us, if you will get into new trouble with some new groups!! But these taggs are funny though. And btw your group has already pked some of our members for unclear reasons 3-times. If you still try to deny that these things have happened you will get your claimed evidence in the form of nice shotgun bullets, as it already was done by us when you had started your first pking actions!!! As it seems the only language you really do understand is serious gun-talk!! So better stop pking and tagging in our Club!! Ailton 10 October 2006 / The Malton Red Berzerk Militia Brigade

Cleaning up our fair burb

For d 10:14, 9 August 2006 (BST) (MPD Inspector for Eastonwood)

It seems there are a few groups working in the 'Wood. I note especially TechCom, the Warseers and the DEM. We are under constant threat from the Eastonwood Ferals and right now, our burb is quite devoid of life. We need more survivors to stem the tide. And we need to coordinate. We can do this in several ways:

  1. Setting up and working common revive points. Revivification is essential in order to prevent more people from going to the other side, and in keeping a healthy population in the burb.
  2. Setting up a barricade plan, what to keep open and not.
  3. Coordinationg radio frequencies.
  4. Coordinating graffitti, the public face to survivors visiting our burb.

Revive Points

I'd strongly advise using our two cemeteries. We get lots of free publicity through the Sacred Ground policy, and those two points have visitors often. The DEM has revivers working both those points. Several other rogue revivers also go there to help out. I'd suggest dismantling Garret Row as an RP and moving that activity to the cemeteries. Additionally, St. Chad's Church [32, 20] was previously set up as a revivication point and is a pretty safe bet as it is within close range of two NT buildings. By pooling all our resources, we can get more effective revives, and maximise the effect of our marketing of those points.

Please, please, please instruct people to use the Revivification Request Tool: http://tinyurl.com/zmmas

Barricade plan

The barricade plan has been moved to Eastonwood Barricade Plan, and discussion to the corresponding talk page -- boxy T L ZS PA DA 13:14, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Radio frequencies

Can we try to compile a list of frequencies that are being used in the burb, and possibly coordinate the usage of one to reach everyone across the burb?

  • I think it's already been defined here. Should be 26.01 MHz and it's shared with other suburbs. About group frequencies, just scroll down the list. --Seagull Flock 16:32, 28 August 2006 (BST)

Survivor Grafitti

I do understand that groups have a need for marketing, but spraying the group logo -everywhere- is a bit counter productive. The Eastonwood Ferals have also been known to arrange attempts at spraying demoralizing messages. I propose that the following is useful with regard to grafitti:

  1. Graffitti about revive points and usage of the revive tool.
  2. Graffitti about useful radio frequencies.
  3. Group marketing. Let people know you have a presence.
  4. Graffitti about instructions for certain buildings.
  5. Border grafitti welcoming people to the burb (don't underestimate the psychological effect)

I think the most important is the first. We're using: 'http://tinyurl.com/zmmas 4 revives' on the revive points.

And the areas around the points (and at intervals around the burb) should point to the cemetaries.

Comments on the suggestions

Feel free to leave comments.

I just have downgraded the suburbs danger level to dangerous. It would be nice if some survivor could do that whole suburb report thing from know on, given that we have a lot of active survivor groups in the burb it seems strange to me that the one person interested in keeping survivors informed about the suburb is a member of the only known Z. group here ;).--Foxfire 19:55, 11 August 2006 (BST)

The Malton Zookeepers are most certainly not a paramilitary group. We are a zookeeping group. Please adjust your article accordingly. --Belmond 10:54, 12 August 2006 (BST)

So, no actual comments on the suggstions...? Sheesh. Come on folks, pull together. -For d 07:48, 14 August 2006 (BST)

The barricade plans looks like an excellent one to me, For D. I hope many groups will choose to help support it.

This looks great to me. I may soon be joining in the battle here, and a barricading policy would be good so I know where to shelter. molestargazer of MEMS

All these suggestions look great, but can u please please let the right people know that the number of survivors currently awaiting a revive are really starting to pile up . -BenderWaW 02:43, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Older communications

  • It would be nice of the Eastonwood page had a table of contents at the top for easier and clearer navigation. Also, does Eastonwood have any kind of barricading plan? If so, it ought to be more cleary marked on the page, if its there at all. Not trying to boss you guys around, I've just found the Eastonwood page to be a little rough-around-the-edges when compared to other suburbs' pages.
-Of course Eastonwood has a barricading plan, either all buildings open or all of them EHB, depends on whom you ask. It tents to balance itself in the middle.--Obeah-Man 08:19, 30 May 2006 (BST)
-I don't knoe that there's really been much discussion on a formalised barricade plan. Common practice seems to have it that resource buildings are at VSB, everything else is at EHB.--Dread Lime 16:08, 30 May 2006 (BST)
  • Warseers, please rember that you don´t own this wiki site. Other groups can make statements, too.
  • Yay, extensive sounds so much better than mild intermitent, s'good to know one makes a difference.--Obeah-Man 12:28, 27 March 2006 (BST)
  • I'm not trying for "dominance" of the wiki, I'm just trying to be impartial. Others members/groups you may believe are trying so. If ya got a problem with someone send them a message in their profile. The other alternative is noone gets to update the board. Also Mms please use the tag shortcut ~~~~ in the discussion/talk section. Talos 16:19, 27 March 2006 (BST)
  • Sooo many typos corrected a few (hence lots of silly little edits :-s sorry ), meh an edited some blatant rubbish :P I'm one of those Warseers not in Eastonwood and running aint on my mind lol Col.Gravis 10:50, 28 March 2006 (BST)
  • From what I can gather from their message board I presume the PMS-Clan inactive since january 22. Would be nice if one of them could check in to confirm or denie this so we can update the history accordingly.--Foxfire 13:08, 31 March 2006 (BST)
- Thanks for that little clean up Foxfire Talos 17:37, 5 April 2006 (BST)
  • The PMS clan has been murdered and fed to the zombies, just ask the ferals. -- Mr. V Giner
  • Could anyone who remembers them put the PLFE weather map on the Eastonwood wiki, I think it comes in handy if you try to grasp the situation with one quick view.--Foxfire 12:36, 10 April 2006 (BST)
Wasn't it a report? I can't really remember to be honest Talos 15:22, 10 April 2006 (BST)
  • Thanks for the update William. I'm always afraid I'm a little biased regarding the situation in the suburb. I'm glad that you summed it up nicely, better than I could anyway.--Foxfire 22:04, 24 April 2006 (BST)
  • I'm by no means an expert in these kind of things, but I honestly can't figure out what's the problem with the suburb map. I compared it with some other suburbs, must be an error in the template or something.--Foxfire 19:50, 27 April 2006 (BST)
  • Hey frigga, 4.2:1, nice figure, were you a former Enron accountant. As you brits would say, that's rich. I take it math isn't one of your strong points. -- Steady Mobbin
  • what I said: DELUSIONAL! It is not a math problem, it is a living-in-a-fantasy-world problem! frigga seems to be a compulsiv liar and braggart --Snitch 04:23, 29 April 2006 (BST)
  • It's nice of you all to keep me occupied with rephrasing lots and lots of funny insults, but could all involved parties at least try to keep it civil, stating facts would help too, or at least keep your propaganda subtile. For obvious propaganda I suggest using the groups own wiki-page.--Foxfire 11:36, 29 April 2006 (BST)
  • 72 hours, you will see --PatheticBill 01:38, 3 May 2006 (BST) damn, only 17 hours --PatheticBill 17:40, 3 May 2006 (BST)
  • Someone wanna correct the Barricading Plan? I've made an edit but GB clearly think alot of themselves with whats there at the moment, any of you guys GB guys need a tissue after looking at that? And no I'm not implying any bodies crying lol
- Edit: An I am kinda wondering where frigga got his figures from, as far as I know we're all mostly dealing with Zombies at the moment :-/ -- col.gravis
Personal tools
advertisements