Yarr/Tuf

LOL @ "Treaty of Tuna." I like that!

I want to make something clear, my issue is not with DLORDS vs TUF, my issue is how YARR joined this war. 

Urian wrote: ajqtrz wrote: I invite you to join us and fight for a free Illy where wars have to be founded on just reasons. So this war is unjust and unjustified.  I find nothing.  At least dlords had that flimsy excuse, as patently lame as it is. Nothing has to be founded on "just reasons". It's a game.  And that would be a just enough reason for those who want play the game . You are just adding the drama.

The fact is people DO try to justify their actions and that is why justice matters, even in a game.  Remember, it's not an avatar you are attacking, it's the hard work and creativity of a real person.  Even in Illy people tend to align themselves with others based partly on who they think is justified in their actions.  So justice, in spite of your apparent desire to have it matter not, does matter.   

If I go to the store and buy a game of "Monopoly" it's just a game, isn't it?  And it remains "just a game" as long as it's in the box.  But when we engage in playing the game, we are using a game to accomplish something...usually fun.  If we took the game out of the box and did nothing it would still be a game, but no pleasure would be derived from it.  Real people have to play the game for it to be anything other than "just a game."  And if you join me at the game and I played it with a different set of rules, rules that put you at a severe dis-advantage, you'd not think that just and would probably actually say, "that's unfair."  And you might stop playing the game if I insisted on my rules.  So justice, fairness, and all that DO matter and pretending otherwise is a sad exercise is self-deception.

But to make another point, if we decide that we want to play the game a certain way...perhaps with clubs we use whenever we get upset at another player....we are free to do that, are we not?  If we agree that the "Free Parking" space will receive all the penalty's of the game and that if you land on it you can collect those penalty's, we can do that, can't we?  In other words, "it a game" is true, but it's also a game that can be modified so that we increase (or decrease I suppose) our enjoyment.  In Illy the game is "just a game" only so long as nobody is playing.  Once we start playing it's not "just a game" it's a social interaction using the mechanics of the game to govern our actions within the game and even in the "meta-game".  So it's a game plus social interactions.  And any extra-game rules must be negotiated by the parties playing the game, right?  It's patently unfair to allow one set of players to dictate the rules to the others.

So here's the thing.  The point of a contest is that it be fair.  Nobody derives much pleasure from seeing a team obviously out of their league get crushed.  We have an innate sense that in a game the "playing field" should be level to some degree or other, and go through great effort in many games, to make it so.  If you simply allow larger forces in Illy to willy-nilly attack whomever they wish without just cause, how is that making the game fair?  How is that making the game more enjoyable to more people?  It isn't and you yourself know it isn't.

But perhaps you are Darwinian at heart.  Perhaps you think, too bad for the little guy.  If so think of this.  When alliances in other sandbox games are allowed to run over small players and alliances "just because" the game suffers, the number of players playing suffers, the revenues suffer, and the game goes "good bye."  Then nobody gets the fun.  So even if you are Darwinian you might consider some restraint a good thing...especially restraint of actions and attitudes which have proven to drive away players.  The most fun for the most people should be our motto and what we strive for in our actions.  In the end you have to balance the health of the game against your own pleasure. 

In any case, I think most players agree with me regarding the need for a war to be just (i.e.in response to a real threat or provocation) as evidenced that most alliances, including the current ones, are attempting to justify imposing war on TUF.  The discussion is not about if a war is just, but what constitutes THESE wars being so.  For if they are not, then the community of Illy needs to decide if they care about the game or not, and do something about it.  So I keep asking and waiting for a real answer as to how or where TUF has threatened or harmed either dLords or Yarr.  So far the answers are pretty thin to non-existent.

AJ

....Karl.... I am not "sent" anywhere, I go wherever I damn well please.

I was one of the founding members of Shu-han along with Liu Bei (Eternal Fire, Attila the Hun, Flavius Aetius, etc.), 2nd command while he was around, leader when he left. I stepped down due to RL pressures and several of members of Shu-han went to RE and Yarr! for a WoW. Those pressures died down and I joined Yarr as a late entrant into the WoW with intention to return to Shu-han.

After TUF had declared on Death (may have been the other way around, I don't remember), Mongo/Rygar, then called Kratos, ran around seeking help from everyone he could think of. I decided to leave Yarr! and join Death for the war and I stayed there for the duration of it and a little while afterwards. Some time later I had a long conversation with Ranalos, we talked about his vision for Yarr among other things and I agreed to join him. My first officer was also impressed by Yarr during the time he spent there and he convinced the rest of Shu-han to go along with the merger.

I am not some pawn of Ranalos or anyone else, neither is anyone in Yarr!.

I don't know where you guys get this nonsense about a Dlords conspiracy, the only thing we have in common is an enemy. I spent a lot of time with Eternal Fire/Attila the Hun/Flavius Aetius/Liu Bei (the list is longer but I can't remember them all), I know what a backroom deal, political manipulator looks like. I've also spent a good deal of time talking to Ranalos, he's just not the type to pull this sort of thing that you're claiming he's pulling. The reasons that he gave for pushing what was an inevitable war forward are consistent with what I know about his personality and personal life through conversations within and without the game.

It would have been better to wait until Dlords got sick of waiting for two weeks for sieges to arrive and called for peace, but it really wouldn't have changed much except this one issue that to an outsider looks like a bigger thing than it actually is.

On one final note... AJ stop spamming with that nonsense please, thank you. Although I do find it amusing that you've joined an active BL military alliance and have taken part in aggressive military operations yourself and yet you still spew the same sophistry that you have since the days of STOMPS.


Edited by Princess Botchface - 04 May 2016 at 23:40

Justa quick reply to this post.  Curm keeps copies of all pc's and undoubltly has a large file.  I doubt very much that he has shared my conversations and reassurances to him.  As a leader. perhaps you should ask him for those conversations, they might be enlightening.  The Unfettered has two founders, one not so quick to anger and a tad bit more diplomatic.  When I give my word to someone I do not break it.  There are those here who do prefer the 'drama' and twisting of the truth and rapidly forget that we gave a 'white peace' since this is a game and should be fun to play.  If it isn't then perhaps those 'players' need to move on to Candy Crush or Farmville.