Play Now Login Create Account
illyriad
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - DB in the Coalition War
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

DB in the Coalition War

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 3456>
Author
Deranzin View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 10 Oct 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 845
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote Deranzin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 Mar 2014 at 14:59
Originally posted by Rill Rill wrote:

Deranzin, I think Nokigon has made it clear that Kale was the one who saw war as a solution.


Maybe, but here we are talking about on how the problem was created in the first place and not the validity of any solution ... Wink

Originally posted by Rill Rill wrote:


 I was on sabbatical from Illy when the war began (and for months beforehand), so persistent efforts to credit and/or blame me for the war don't really have much basis in reality.


Well Rill it is not me or anyone else who brought up Ryelle in this conversation, but you yourself, so I do not see your point ...  of what "persistent effort" are you talking about, when you run into this topic full speed to make many posts and bring the matter .?.

Originally posted by Rill Rill wrote:


I believed then and I believe now that it is possible to disagree with someone without desiring a war about it.


It certainly is possible, but this is not how this story seems to be unfolding ...

Originally posted by Rill Rill wrote:


In some ways I think the disagreement between Kale and me reflects differing philosophies about how to maintain a successful defensive posture in Illyriad.


I happen to disagree with many people and on many matter(though this is not news LOL), but I do not poke them with settlements, nor provoke them to fights over things that are none of my business ...

Originally posted by Rill Rill wrote:


Kale's approach emphasized exclusive control of territory.  It is possible that this was merely intended as a demonstration of power or sort of ego-driven quest for dominance, but I prefer not to read it that way. 


Yeah, but anyone would note that if you really preferred to NOT read it this way, you wouldn't have mentioned it ... Tongue

In any case, regardless what Kale perceived, what would have been your problem in leaving him alone to his perceptions .?. What exactly was your issue and you had to provoke things with a deliberate settlement .?.

Originally posted by Rill Rill wrote:

I disagree with this approach.  I think that living peacefully with a mixture of people -- even those with whom one might eventually have conflict -- is the soundest approach.


So what .?. Did Kale and anyone for that matter have any obligation to follow your approach .?.

Originally posted by Rill Rill wrote:


Personally I think that the results of the current conflict have if not vindicated at least tended to support my point of view.


Quite the opposite ... the amount of destroyed cities and accounts outside centralized hubs bear witness on how wrong you were ... Tongue
 
Originally posted by Rill Rill wrote:

Some might argue that by settling a city in the area claimed exclusively by TCol, Ryelle was imposing her view on Kale as much as Kale was attempting to impose his view on others.  This concern was what ultimately made Ryelle choose to remove the city, even after Kale had agreed to let it stay.


Why are you speaking of Ryelle in the third person .?. it was your alt, not another person ...

 
Originally posted by Rill Rill wrote:

A lot of times in Illy (and probably real life too), honest disagreements about what is most effective and/or what is most ethical get lost in ego battles and personality conflicts.  I am as subject to this rule as much as anyone, and I appreciate those who point out to me when I am falling victim to this problem.  I do struggle with whether there might have been a more effective way to express my disagreement in this issue -- perhaps standing back and letting time do its work would have been better.  And yet at the same time, if I passively waited for others to to act, would that necessarily produce a better result?

Interesting questions, and ones I struggle with.


Well, reading up this topic the answers to these questions are quite easy, but I'd rather not share them ... who needs "persistent effort" when you are doing such a fine job on your own .?. LOL



Just like a "before and after" ad ! ahahahaah :p
Back to Top
Praetor Nistiner View Drop Down
Greenhorn
Greenhorn
Avatar

Joined: 09 Jan 2014
Status: Offline
Points: 49
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote Praetor Nistiner Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 Mar 2014 at 17:03
Originally posted by Rill Rill wrote:

Deranzin, I think Nokigon has made it clear that Kale was the one who saw war as a solution.  I was on sabbatical from Illy when the war began (and for months beforehand), so persistent efforts to credit and/or blame me for the war don't really have much basis in reality.

I still haven't received a copy of the mail Angrim cited as proving his point; I remember sending all Crow rooks a mail alerting them to the situation, but I honestly don't recall what I said other than "heads up, there may be trouble."  As I have said, Angrim and I had a difference of opinion about how to approach TCol's exclusive claim -- he believed accommodation was the best answer, I thought open and frank opposition was a better approach.

I believed then and I believe now that it is possible to disagree with someone without desiring a war about it.

In some ways I think the disagreement between Kale and me reflects differing philosophies about how to maintain a successful defensive posture in Illyriad.

Kale's approach emphasized exclusive control of territory.  It is possible that this was merely intended as a demonstration of power or sort of ego-driven quest for dominance, but I prefer not to read it that way.  Rather, I think he perceived it as the best way to keep he and his alliance "safe" in a world that he perceived as dangerous.  I think he believed that not having potential adversaries within a core region (everyone who was not Dominion being considered a potential adversary) and maintaining and demonstrating significant military strength was the best way to maintain and strengthen his alliance's position.

I disagree with this approach.  I think that living peacefully with a mixture of people -- even those with whom one might eventually have conflict -- is the soundest approach.  The act of excluding folks with whom one might have conflict, in my view, tends to create more conflict than it avoids.  I also believe that creating an exclusive area of control is not more successful as a military strategy than maintaining a fairly concentrated BUT NON-EXCLUSIVE distribution of cities.

Personally I think that the results of the current conflict have if not vindicated at least tended to support my point of view.  It has been demonstrated that maintaining exclusive control of a region does not imbue one with magical protection.  Some might argue that this is merely because of the great odds, but those odds were significantly more even at the beginning of the war, and the result has been that those alliances that sought to maintain exclusive control of a region did not find that it provided them with a significant advantage over alliances with large concentrations of cities in neighboring regions that did NOT have exclusive control.

Some might argue that by settling a city in the area claimed exclusively by TCol, Ryelle was imposing her view on Kale as much as Kale was attempting to impose his view on others.  This concern was what ultimately made Ryelle choose to remove the city, even after Kale had agreed to let it stay.

A lot of times in Illy (and probably real life too), honest disagreements about what is most effective and/or what is most ethical get lost in ego battles and personality conflicts.  I am as subject to this rule as much as anyone, and I appreciate those who point out to me when I am falling victim to this problem.  I do struggle with whether there might have been a more effective way to express my disagreement in this issue -- perhaps standing back and letting time do its work would have been better.  And yet at the same time, if I passively waited for others to to act, would that necessarily produce a better result?

Interesting questions, and ones I struggle with.
U had an advantage because it was numerous ammounts of alliances against Tcol, Its not like Ncrow fought  Tcol alone if that was the case im pretty sure Tcol Would have won, so your  OPINION  on being spread out is more advantageous is just funny.
Back to Top
Nokigon View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar
Player Council - Historian

Joined: 07 Nov 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 1452
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote Nokigon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 Mar 2014 at 21:09
I think it's time for a secrets speech (and im not comparing the dominion to the USSR).

DB intended to implement a land claim some time ago. I even got to the level of mailing dittobite to tell him about my claim... But at thelast minute I chose to go about it in a different way. I just claimed the territory by covering it with DB cities. TCol intended to do something similar- their land claim was fairly irrelevant by the start of the war as they had covered the whole area in cities anyway.

The point of the above is to illustrate that the land claim no longer mattered especially to kale anymore. He had effectively fully implemented it by this point, so would have been fully prepared to give up the claim if offered something in return.

The dominion originally wanted the crowfed to be our allies, for no reason other than geography. We were prepared to give as well as take for this.

So essentially... The dominion wanted to be allies with the crowfed and would have given up the land claim for this. Your passive antagonisation, a contradiction in terms btw, eliminated this possibility.


Such is life.
Back to Top
Nokigon View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar
Player Council - Historian

Joined: 07 Nov 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 1452
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Nokigon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 Mar 2014 at 21:11
And incidentally, dont twist my words- I said that kale wanted war and that he was a rarity on our side, although not unique. There were far more alliance leaders - again, nit all- who wanted war who were fighting with vcrow et al.
Back to Top
Angrim View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar

Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Location: Laoshin
Status: Offline
Points: 1169
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Angrim Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 Mar 2014 at 22:09
Originally posted by Rill Rill wrote:

I still haven't received a copy of the mail Angrim cited as proving his point;
this is, quite possibly, because you have not asked me for it. it is, though, a good example of how a true statement can be used to leave a misleading impression.

Originally posted by Rill Rill wrote:

I believed then and I believe now that it is possible to disagree with someone without desiring a war about it.
i am not sure if this was directed to me or not, but in case it was...to take a page from GM Stormcrow, there is a difference between war and conflict. i did not then and do not now believe that you desired war, only your own way. but war is rarely an end in itself.

Originally posted by Rill Rill wrote:

In some ways I think the disagreement between Kale and me reflects differing philosophies about how to maintain a successful defensive posture in Illyriad.
i disagree. i believe the disagreement reflects differing philosophies on what it means to allow players to pursue different paths in the game. you place a higher value on an individual player's right to settle a particular square than on a player's right to form a society with other players and to norm within that group. but that discussion is best pursued in another thread, if it is of interest at all.

Originally posted by Rill Rill wrote:

I think that living peacefully with a mixture of people -- even those with whom one might eventually have conflict -- is the soundest approach. 
Originally posted by Rill Rill wrote:

Personally I think that the results of the current conflict have if not vindicated at least tended to support my point of view.
if you can't see the irony in this, you're too close. ;)
Back to Top
Rill View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar
Player Council - Geographer

Joined: 17 Jun 2011
Location: California
Status: Offline
Points: 6811
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Rill Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29 Mar 2014 at 00:05
Angrim has now forwarded the mail to me.  It was a comment on Kale's poor taste in invoking the term "Manifest Destiny" in part of the TCol alliance banner.  For those who are not familiar with the slogan, it was used to justify the extermination of Native Americans and oppression of others during U.S. western settlement.

I am not sure how my objection to someone using what to me is a poor historical example came to be interpreted as a call to arms.  Angrim will have to clarify his thinking on that one.
Back to Top
Niccolò Machiavelli View Drop Down
New Poster
New Poster


Joined: 29 Mar 2014
Status: Offline
Points: 3
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Niccolò Machiavelli Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29 Mar 2014 at 03:07
Originally posted by Rill Rill wrote:

Angrim has now forwarded the mail to me.  It was a comment on Kale's poor taste in invoking the term "Manifest Destiny" in part of the TCol alliance banner.  For those who are not familiar with the slogan, it was used to justify the extermination of Native Americans and oppression of others during U.S. western settlement.

I am not sure how my objection to someone using what to me is a poor historical example came to be interpreted as a call to arms.  Angrim will have to clarify his thinking on that one.


It seems to me that you two are interpreting the message in two different ways. The message was referenced on this thread as a means to illustrate the war involving The Colonists and Dark Blight, correct?
 
You two are still disagreeing about the message, but; the message is still being used to advance your agenda in this thread. So, maybe you could post a copy of that message so those of us that are curious can form an opinion?
Back to Top
Angrim View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar

Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Location: Laoshin
Status: Offline
Points: 1169
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Angrim Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29 Mar 2014 at 03:11
Originally posted by Rill Rill wrote:

I am not sure how my objection to someone using what to me is a poor historical example came to be interpreted as a call to arms.  Angrim will have to clarify his thinking on that one.
of course i would defend that...if i had said it. but as your comment is strictly for public consumption and i've already made my comment on what can be done with the truth, there seems little point in my continuing. i said, several posts ago, what i had to say about it that relates to the topic.

Originally posted by <span id=userPro47 =msgSidePro title=View Drop Down>Niccolò Machiavelli</span> Niccolò Machiavelli wrote:

So, maybe you could post a copy of that message so those of us that are curious can form an opinion?
as i've noted, posting the igm is, for me, against ToS. i've no idea how the ToS feels about Rill posting her own igm.
Back to Top
Niccolò Machiavelli View Drop Down
New Poster
New Poster


Joined: 29 Mar 2014
Status: Offline
Points: 3
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Niccolò Machiavelli Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29 Mar 2014 at 03:16
Angrim, would you be willing to forward a copy of that message to anyone that asked? I personally would be thrilled to be able to read the message that sparked this lengthy conversation.
Never was anything great achieved without danger. - Niccolo Machiavelli
Back to Top
Angrim View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar

Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Location: Laoshin
Status: Offline
Points: 1169
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Angrim Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29 Mar 2014 at 03:25
Originally posted by Niccolò Machiavelli Niccolò Machiavelli wrote:

Angrim, would you be willing to forward a copy of that message to anyone that asked? I personally would be thrilled to be able to read the message that sparked this lengthy conversation.
no, it is for Rill to decide.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 3456>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd.