Print Page | Close Window

nCrow Ursor Directive

Printed From: Illyriad
Category: The World
Forum Name: Politics & Diplomacy
Forum Description: If you run an alliance on Elgea, here's where you should make your intentions public.
URL: http://forum.illyriad.co.uk/forum_posts.asp?TID=4739
Printed Date: 18 Sep 2020 at 15:33
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.03 - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: nCrow Ursor Directive
Posted By: (EOM) Harry
Subject: nCrow Ursor Directive
Date Posted: 03 Feb 2013 at 18:23
From this date of 03/02/2013 until date not yet set, nCrow are initiating a directive in Ursor to prevent all sieges of unaligned players that do not wish to be moved out of Ursor and have done no action to warrant such movement, this is in light of a number of unwarranted and unwanted sieges enacted by a number of players in league (although we will not disclose which) 

This is merely a warning that sieges will be broken and there will be retribution upon this said alliance and players of said alliance, if these sieges persist.


-------------
Fool's watch the land when the problem is in the heart.



Replies:
Posted By: ES2
Date Posted: 03 Feb 2013 at 18:47
Hm,

Is this an act of oppression or is Ncrow acting to protect the Oppressed?


-------------




Posted By: Le Roux
Date Posted: 03 Feb 2013 at 19:53
I believe this is directed at preventing larger alliances attempting to force out unaligned or smaller alliances from peacefully residing in Ursor.  We have stumbled across at least 2 such incidents where those unable to defend themselves were "asked" to leave Ursor for no reason other than that they happend to peacefully  be there.  Unfortunately both had progressed to the point where nothing could be done.

Such wanton land grabs will indeed be blocked,  consider it very much protecting the oppressed, in the interest of freewill. 


-------------


Posted By: Elmindra
Date Posted: 03 Feb 2013 at 19:58
Unfortunately this is the landscape of Illy at the moment.  Call it a combination of congestion and continued open war, but if you are not in an alliance you are at risk, and even alliances are not safe unless geographically cohesive and strong.  The number of IGM's stating "Leave or we will make you leave" is higher than you would think.

-------------


Posted By: ES2
Date Posted: 03 Feb 2013 at 20:29
Originally posted by Le Roux Le Roux wrote:

I believe this is directed at preventing larger alliances attempting to force out unaligned or smaller alliances from peacefully residing in Ursor.  We have stumbled across at least 2 such incidents where those unable to defend themselves were "asked" to leave Ursor for no reason other than that they happend to peacefully  be there.  Unfortunately both had progressed to the point where nothing could be done.

Such wanton land grabs will indeed be blocked,  consider it very much protecting the oppressed, in the interest of freewill. 

That's unfortunate, can't understand why people are being forced out for land. I myself recently went into sov settlement claims with a player that placed a city on a 7 food tile 4.2 sqs from my own city, peaceful settlements such as that can be done.  

Good job for Ncrow for taking a public stand


-------------




Posted By: Ander
Date Posted: 03 Feb 2013 at 20:34
Opportunistic aggression has become commonplace, either for land grabs or for the sick pleasure of bullying. I applaud the decision of nCrow to protect non allied players, irrespective of the parties involved.



Posted By: Auraya
Date Posted: 03 Feb 2013 at 20:44
+1 nCrow, wish I was in a position to help. If I can assist in any way, please let me know. 


Posted By: Darkwords
Date Posted: 03 Feb 2013 at 21:55
Who was it....?   Can I hurt them, ...  I mean ... can I help?

:)


Posted By: (EOM) Harry
Date Posted: 03 Feb 2013 at 22:19
We're not disclosing who it is at this point..

-------------
Fool's watch the land when the problem is in the heart.


Posted By: roughneck
Date Posted: 03 Feb 2013 at 23:14
And here I thought the Illyriad Peace Patrol didn't exist. I guess it's play our way or else after all.


Posted By: Darkwords
Date Posted: 03 Feb 2013 at 23:25
Lol....
RU actually claiming an alliance has no right to militarily influence what happens in a region it has members in.  Whilst claiming someone who is forcing people out of that region have the right to do what they do?

Cowards should not make threats, and moaning that someone stands against such threats is simply even more cowardly.


Posted By: Mona Lisa
Date Posted: 04 Feb 2013 at 00:07
Originally posted by roughneck roughneck wrote:

And here I thought the Illyriad Peace Patrol didn't exist. I guess it's play our way or else after all.

Well, I think anyone may play anyway they so choose, just like in all things, certain choices have certain consequences.  I think Harry's post just pointed out the ... consequences.  It is a sandbox afterall . . .


-------------


Posted By: Sisren
Date Posted: 04 Feb 2013 at 01:33
Originally posted by Mona Lisa Mona Lisa wrote:

Originally posted by roughneck roughneck wrote:

And here I thought the Illyriad Peace Patrol didn't exist. I guess it's play our way or else after all.

Well, I think anyone may play anyway they so choose, just like in all things, certain choices have certain consequences.  I think Harry's post just pointed out the ... consequences.  It is a sandbox afterall . . .

consequences is a good word.  some people say that it is like physics - but my observation is that the reaction is not always the opposite, and rarely equal.


-------------
Illy is different from Physics-
Reactions are rarely Equal, and rarely the opposite of what you'd expect...


Posted By: Gossip Boy
Date Posted: 04 Feb 2013 at 01:55
Originally posted by Sisren Sisren wrote:

Originally posted by Mona Lisa Mona Lisa wrote:

Originally posted by roughneck roughneck wrote:

And here I thought the Illyriad Peace Patrol didn't exist. I guess it's play our way or else after all.

Well, I think anyone may play anyway they so choose, just like in all things, certain choices have certain consequences.  I think Harry's post just pointed out the ... consequences.  It is a sandbox afterall . . .

consequences is a good word.  some people say that it is like physics - but my observation is that the reaction is not always the opposite, and rarely equal.
someone watches a lot of drama films Wink


-------------
Elessar2
[08:34]<Rill> when you've just had part of your brain taken out, you lack a certain amount of credibility
<KillerPoodle> I can say anything I like and it is impossible to prove or disprove


Posted By: Juswin
Date Posted: 04 Feb 2013 at 01:59
The identity is hidden but I can guess the probable involved parties here haha. 

And a very laudable action by nCrow! As a resident of Ursor, this is very welcome news! :)


Posted By: roughneck
Date Posted: 04 Feb 2013 at 02:04
Originally posted by Mona Lisa Mona Lisa wrote:

Originally posted by roughneck roughneck wrote:

And here I thought the Illyriad Peace Patrol didn't exist. I guess it's play our way or else after all.

Well, I think anyone may play anyway they so choose, just like in all things, certain choices have certain consequences.  I think Harry's post just pointed out the ... consequences.  It is a sandbox afterall . . .
 
So rather than the IPP it's more like playground monitor? Confused


Posted By: Hadus
Date Posted: 04 Feb 2013 at 02:29
Originally posted by roughneck roughneck wrote:

Originally posted by Mona Lisa Mona Lisa wrote:

Originally posted by roughneck roughneck wrote:

And here I thought the Illyriad Peace Patrol didn't exist. I guess it's play our way or else after all.

Well, I think anyone may play anyway they so choose, just like in all things, certain choices have certain consequences.  I think Harry's post just pointed out the ... consequences.  It is a sandbox afterall . . .
 
So rather than the IPP it's more like playground monitor? Confused


This is what roughneck is saying: It's okay to use power to get what you want from weaker players, but it's not okay to stand up for the weaker players when they get attacked. The aggressors get to choose their targets, and the targets have to play by their rules or face ridicule.

It's like when a schoolyard bully takes advantage of his size and strength to pick on smaller kids, but when they get help from an adult they are labeled "tattle tails" and picked on. It's an insult on the surface level, but it's actually just whining and complaining from the bullies who are upset that they aren't in control.

"Play our way or don't play at all" is exactly what the aggresive Ursor players are doing by forcing exile, and it is ironic and hypocritical that you would call out nCrow for this and not them.


-------------
http://elgea.illyriad.co.uk/a/p/157483" rel="nofollow">


Posted By: ES2
Date Posted: 04 Feb 2013 at 02:34
This was tried before on a similar scale, where The Mal Motshans threatened to eliminate players if they didn't leave or join up. 

-------------




Posted By: Ossian
Date Posted: 04 Feb 2013 at 10:07
Great title for a movie. Don't you think?
 
(puts on deep movie announcer voice)
The bad guys were looking for defencless newbe settlers to bully and pull faces at...but they found:
"THE URSOR DIRECTIVE"
 
Starring (EOM) Harry as ................................................ Jason Bourne Wink


Posted By: Darkwords
Date Posted: 04 Feb 2013 at 10:43
 Clap


Posted By: Brids17
Date Posted: 04 Feb 2013 at 13:29
Originally posted by Ossian Ossian wrote:

Great title for a movie. Don't you think?
 
(puts on deep movie announcer voice)
The bad guys were looking for defencless newbe settlers to bully and pull faces at...but they found:
"THE URSOR DIRECTIVE"
 
Starring (EOM) Harry as ................................................ Jason Bourne Wink

xD Amazing what big pink letters can do. 


-------------


Posted By: Mayflower
Date Posted: 04 Feb 2013 at 13:30
lol!


Posted By: Cilcain
Date Posted: 04 Feb 2013 at 17:28
So why don't you encourage these non-aligned players to join your alliance?  Or at least form a new alliance in confed with yours?  That would make things a little clearer....


Posted By: Darkwords
Date Posted: 04 Feb 2013 at 17:38
How many confeds do you expect us to take on, The Crows would end up housing half of illy.


Posted By: Le Roux
Date Posted: 04 Feb 2013 at 18:23
Originally posted by Cilcain Cilcain wrote:

So why don't you encourage these non-aligned players to join your alliance?  Or at least form a new alliance in confed with yours?  That would make things a little clearer....
 
I do not quite understand why there would be any lack of clarity,  it just boils down to a suggestion that it may be unwise to wantonly send eviction notices to innocent, non-aggressive people in Ursor.   Just a proposition that empire building within Ursor through threat or intimidation may well be more hazardous to the prospective intimidator than they might have realized.
 
If you are not sending those eviction notices, then Harry's post does not apply to you . . .


-------------


Posted By: roughneck
Date Posted: 04 Feb 2013 at 19:48
Originally posted by Hadus Hadus wrote:

Originally posted by roughneck roughneck wrote:

Originally posted by Mona Lisa Mona Lisa wrote:

Originally posted by roughneck roughneck wrote:

And here I thought the Illyriad Peace Patrol didn't exist. I guess it's play our way or else after all.

Well, I think anyone may play anyway they so choose, just like in all things, certain choices have certain consequences.  I think Harry's post just pointed out the ... consequences.  It is a sandbox afterall . . .
 
So rather than the IPP it's more like playground monitor? Confused


This is what roughneck is saying: It's okay to use power to get what you want from weaker players, but it's not okay to stand up for the weaker players when they get attacked. The aggressors get to choose their targets, and the targets have to play by their rules or face ridicule.

It's like when a schoolyard bully takes advantage of his size and strength to pick on smaller kids, but when they get help from an adult they are labeled "tattle tails" and picked on. It's an insult on the surface level, but it's actually just whining and complaining from the bullies who are upset that they aren't in control.

"Play our way or don't play at all" is exactly what the aggresive Ursor players are doing by forcing exile, and it is ironic and hypocritical that you would call out nCrow for this and not them.

So who are the bullies, now? The alliance in question or the one that's trying to bully them into "playing fair"? Confused


Posted By: Arakamis
Date Posted: 04 Feb 2013 at 20:10
so, we need to have a bully in every action?

The alliance in question chose to get rid of some towns in their area, another alliance stood up against this.

Everyone has their motives and and it is not up to you to put labels on people/alliances. If you really care that much send out your armies instead of writing/whining here.


Posted By: Hadus
Date Posted: 04 Feb 2013 at 20:21
Originally posted by roughneck roughneck wrote:

Originally posted by Hadus Hadus wrote:

Originally posted by roughneck roughneck wrote:

Originally posted by Mona Lisa Mona Lisa wrote:

Originally posted by roughneck roughneck wrote:

And here I thought the Illyriad Peace Patrol didn't exist. I guess it's play our way or else after all.

Well, I think anyone may play anyway they so choose, just like in all things, certain choices have certain consequences.  I think Harry's post just pointed out the ... consequences.  It is a sandbox afterall . . .
 
So rather than the IPP it's more like playground monitor? Confused


This is what roughneck is saying: It's okay to use power to get what you want from weaker players, but it's not okay to stand up for the weaker players when they get attacked. The aggressors get to choose their targets, and the targets have to play by their rules or face ridicule.

It's like when a schoolyard bully takes advantage of his size and strength to pick on smaller kids, but when they get help from an adult they are labeled "tattle tails" and picked on. It's an insult on the surface level, but it's actually just whining and complaining from the bullies who are upset that they aren't in control.

"Play our way or don't play at all" is exactly what the aggresive Ursor players are doing by forcing exile, and it is ironic and hypocritical that you would call out nCrow for this and not them.

So who are the bullies, now? The alliance in question or the one that's trying to bully them into "playing fair"? Confused


In reality, neither. Both are using their military power to influence the game. This is the essence of the power dynamics in Illyriad.

All I was saying is that if you really believed in allowing everyone to play their way, you would have called out both nCrow AND the alleged Ursor aggressors. Instead you showed disdain for nCrows actions while inferring that you accepted the unnamed alliance's actions, even thought both were "guilty" of the same thing.

At least, that's what I inferred from your tone in your initial post.


-------------
http://elgea.illyriad.co.uk/a/p/157483" rel="nofollow">


Posted By: twilights
Date Posted: 04 Feb 2013 at 20:33
do u enforce a dress code in that region too? can i wear makeup? do others call u mom and dad? is there a time out room for misbehaving? things sound alot more liberal there than the west, i might want to move there so i never have to worry cause its like stepford wives...i love planned communities.


Posted By: Le Roux
Date Posted: 04 Feb 2013 at 20:43
Originally posted by roughneck roughneck wrote:

...
So who are the bullies, now? The alliance in question or the one that's trying to bully them into "playing fair"? Confused
 
Perhaps you need to let us understand what your definition of bully is? Easy to be a troll and hide behind an alias and simply be a contrarian for the sake of contrariness   ( was there not a classic Monty Python skit on the subject ? )
 
In any event ..
 
If a first party exerts influence over an unwilling second party...
 
.. and a third party upon hearing of this, acts to end that influence ...
 
... certainly if there is adequate outrage over the third party's actions, they too will feel the wrath of the broader community ...  if the broader community sees the action as no issue ...  then nothing else happens...
 
Kind of a self correcting system, all are free to act as they wish,  if something bothers someone else, they are free to step in to alter it, with the understanding that they too must live with the consequences ...  kind of like life . . . 
 
It could very well be all of this is now moot, and nothing will ever come of any of it.  Other than of course providnig fodder for yet another Illy forum troll.


-------------


Posted By: Darkwords
Date Posted: 04 Feb 2013 at 20:54
Originally posted by gameplayer gameplayer wrote:

do u enforce a dress code in that region too? can i wear makeup? do others call u mom and dad? is there a time out room for misbehaving? things sound alot more liberal there than the west, i might want to move there so i never have to worry cause its like stepford wives...i love planned communities.


Aslong as you wear a mankini you are fine, if not we will strip you naked and drag you through the streets whilst the peasants slap you with rotten herrings.  Hell we have to entertain the locals somehow....

But seriously are you too blind to see that the community the un-named alliance was trying to create, is more of a planned community that the multi alliance community that nCrow are protecting.

There you would have to wear a mankini and drown yourself in fake tan.


Posted By: (EOM) Harry
Date Posted: 04 Feb 2013 at 20:54
Its really strange how the community has changed as of late, we are not telling anyone that they cannot settle in Ursor, nor do we have any intention of expanding as a major force in the Ursor region, we are however opposed to the idea of players being siege'd out of an area, just for the sheer expanding power of this said alliance. I don't understand why people believe that we are forcing people to play our way, when these players who are usually unaligned and small. Are being pushed out by force because they are not "playing" this alliances way or being some where else in essence. 

Therefore, nCrow have come to the conclusion that we neither care nor flinch at sarcasm, hypocrisy and calls of bullying/mollycoddling from the nCrow perspective. 
 This is thus addressed to the players/alliance committing these acts:
  Play your way, do as you want. Siege out new players who want to come to this game and be a part of it, just so you can call a land your own and feed your wee ego's. Regardless if it is that players 10th town or  if it is their first, without mercy and without care for the enjoyment of others.

But know this, in doing so you face the retribution of nCrow and those that wish to see the new blood of illyriad thrive. You will be dealt with in the same manner as you have dealt with the players you so wished to move and you will be dealt with, without mercy and without care for your enjoyment.


How's that for "playing it everyone else's way" 


In other words fella's: You want Ursor? come and get it...


-------------
Fool's watch the land when the problem is in the heart.


Posted By: (EOM) Harry
Date Posted: 04 Feb 2013 at 21:34
Oh, and one last thing. I wanted to post this on a new post so the people behind this (and i know you're watching) hear this.

We have all the information we will ever need, we have your motive, your incentive, your attitude and the way your running your operations. You've got nothing to hide behind.

Make one more false move and the protection you think you have, will mean nothing to us.


-------------
Fool's watch the land when the problem is in the heart.


Posted By: Koth
Date Posted: 04 Feb 2013 at 21:48
Originally posted by (EOM) Harry (EOM) Harry wrote:

Oh, and one last thing. I wanted to post this on a new post so the people behind this (and i know you're watching) hear this.

We have all the information we will ever need, we have your motive, your incentive, your attitude and the way your running your operations. You've got nothing to hide behind.

Make one more false move and the protection you think you have, will mean nothing to us.

What's the "or else" Harry?  Seriously, I want to see it here.  What exactly are you threatening to do if nCrow don't get their way?  What happens when alliances smaller than yours, don't bow to nCrow's wishes when you decided to throw your considerable weight around?


-------------
http://elgea.illyriad.co.uk/a/p/210400" rel="nofollow">


Posted By: Tatharion
Date Posted: 04 Feb 2013 at 22:00
I command the nCrow alliance for stepping up and asserting the right of non-aligned or too weak to defend themselves to settle in Ursor peacefully. Elgea is living troubled times unfortunately but I am thankful that some of us have values.
 


-------------
Be without fear in the face of your enemies. Be brave and upright, that God may love thee. Speak the truth always, even if it leads to your death. Safeguard the helpless and do no wrong.


Posted By: (EOM) Harry
Date Posted: 04 Feb 2013 at 22:01
Koth, all i can say there mate is:

how do you know that this alliance is smaller?
and why are you interested in what we are threatening?

Mate, you gave the game away! Sorry bud. We were keeping names out of here. but you had to bring it all in!


-------------
Fool's watch the land when the problem is in the heart.


Posted By: Aurordan
Date Posted: 04 Feb 2013 at 22:05
Eh, gameplayer was kind of giving it away anyways.  


Posted By: Rill
Date Posted: 04 Feb 2013 at 22:08
Originally posted by Koth Koth wrote:

Originally posted by (EOM) Harry (EOM) Harry wrote:

Oh, and one last thing. I wanted to post this on a new post so the people behind this (and i know you're watching) hear this.

We have all the information we will ever need, we have your motive, your incentive, your attitude and the way your running your operations. You've got nothing to hide behind.

Make one more false move and the protection you think you have, will mean nothing to us.

What's the "or else" Harry?  Seriously, I want to see it here.  What exactly are you threatening to do if nCrow don't get their way?  What happens when alliances smaller than yours, don't bow to nCrow's wishes when you decided to throw your considerable weight around?

If we see sieges on active players, we will break those sieges.  If we receive reports of diplo, magickal or other harassment of active players, we will reinforce and assist the victims and return the same to the perpetrators.  If we hear reports of players and alliances who are threatened with cleansing, we will assist those players and alliances in becoming stronger so they can stand for themselves.

Those are the things we will do to assist our neighbors.

Should an alliance object to our intervention and threaten our members, our leaders or our allies, that will be dealt with in another manner.  As to the details of that response, I leave them to your imagination, except to say that I think you will find that we are creative, resourceful and have a devilish sense of humour.


Posted By: Koth
Date Posted: 04 Feb 2013 at 22:13
Originally posted by (EOM) Harry (EOM) Harry wrote:

Koth, all i can say there mate is:

how do you know that this alliance is smaller?
and why are you interested in what we are threatening?

Mate, you gave the game away! Sorry bud. We were keeping names out of here. but you had to bring it all in!

Why keep names out of it?  Whether or not I might give anything away or not was never a concern.  Why can't you just, in plain and unambiguous terms, tell me exactly what it is nCrow is threatening to do if they don't get their way?


-------------
http://elgea.illyriad.co.uk/a/p/210400" rel="nofollow">


Posted By: Kumomoto
Date Posted: 04 Feb 2013 at 22:14
Kumo pulls out his lawn chair, oils it because it so darn rusty from misuse, sets it up and grabs the requisite popcorn and six pack...  God it's nice when we aren't part of it for once!!!


Posted By: Rill
Date Posted: 04 Feb 2013 at 22:17
Originally posted by Koth Koth wrote:

Originally posted by (EOM) Harry (EOM) Harry wrote:

Koth, all i can say there mate is:

how do you know that this alliance is smaller?
and why are you interested in what we are threatening?

Mate, you gave the game away! Sorry bud. We were keeping names out of here. but you had to bring it all in!

Why keep names out of it?  Whether or not I might give anything away or not was never a concern.  Why can't you just, in plain and unambiguous terms, tell me exactly what it is nCrow is threatening to do if they don't get their way?

See my post above.  And pardon me if I do not give you a specific outline of our tactics and strategy.  I will say that step one is ... we aren't going to describe our intended tactics and strategy on the forum.


Posted By: abstractdream
Date Posted: 04 Feb 2013 at 22:18
Originally posted by Kumomoto Kumomoto wrote:

Kumo pulls out his lawn chair, oils it because it so darn rusty from misuse, sets it up and grabs the requisite popcorn and six pack...  God it's nice when we aren't part of it for once!!!


LOL

btw, who didn't know your target was TLR...umm, I mean TVM

-------------
Bonfyr Verboo


Posted By: Sisren
Date Posted: 05 Feb 2013 at 01:06
Originally posted by Le Roux Le Roux wrote:

Originally posted by roughneck roughneck wrote:

...
So who are the bullies, now? The alliance in question or the one that's trying to bully them into "playing fair"? Confused
 
Perhaps you need to let us understand what your definition of bully is? Easy to be a troll and hide behind an alias and simply be a contrarian for the sake of contrariness   ( was there not a classic Monty Python skit on the subject ? )
 
In any event ..
 
If a first party exerts influence over an unwilling second party...
 
.. and a third party upon hearing of this, acts to end that influence ...
 
... certainly if there is adequate outrage over the third party's actions, they too will feel the wrath of the broader community ...  if the broader community sees the action as no issue ...  then nothing else happens...
 
Kind of a self correcting system, all are free to act as they wish,  if something bothers someone else, they are free to step in to alter it, with the understanding that they too must live with the consequences ...  kind of like life . . . 
 
It could very well be all of this is now moot, and nothing will ever come of any of it.  Other than of course providnig fodder for yet another Illy forum troll.

Excepting that we don't know details.  Who is 1 and 2?  Obviously the outrage is going to be directed towards those Harry feels is distasteful in nature, otherwise he'd not post.

Frankly, I would have preferred nCrow not post this, and just act.  It's a self-correcting system, if the other Crows didn't care for it, the internal system (if there is one) would have redirected nCrow's tactics and antics in regards to this.

Myself?  I feel that nCrow will do what it beleives best for Ursor.  Dark Empire will do what it believes best for the Western Regions...

Ceterum autem censeo Carthaginem delendam esse...Fill in Carthaginem for whomever has pissed me off tonight.  :)


-------------
Illy is different from Physics-
Reactions are rarely Equal, and rarely the opposite of what you'd expect...


Posted By: Brids17
Date Posted: 05 Feb 2013 at 01:22
Originally posted by Darkwords Darkwords wrote:

How many confeds do you expect us to take on, The Crows would end up housing half of illy.

Who says that's a bad thing? 

Originally posted by Sisren Sisren wrote:

Who is 1 and 2?

Well 2 is obvious the newbie and 1 is, well, just look at what alliance Koth is in...


-------------


Posted By: Hadus
Date Posted: 05 Feb 2013 at 01:58
Now that I've taken one side, I think I'll argue for the other. I'm really a contrarian at heart. So I shall challenge nCrow's stance on this issue.

Believe it or not, Illyriad arguments between "warmongerers" and "white knights" (in quotes because I do not use these phrases myself) all come down to ownership; more specifically, they revolve around how ownership is determined.

The general consensus among the community (whether the community recognizes it or not) is that ownership is first-come, first serve. If no one else owns it, then once you build it, or you settle it, or you occupy it, or you sov it, no one has the right to take it from you. This is a very natural philosophy, but also one that many of the "warmongers," as they are often called, feel has created stagnation in Illyriad.

You see, most players have taken it for granted that the smaller, weaker players deserved their locations in Ursor, and the offending alliance was in the wrong for wanting to take the land as their own. But why is this? These smaller players have done very little to earn those spots, other than finding and settling their first. Is this rather arbitrary factor really how we are going to decide who deserves what? Timing is the be all, end all of rightful ownership in Illy? Seems mighty impractical to me.

The unnamed alliance has spend months, probably years combined building up the resources and forces that would allow them to exert an influence in Illyriad. So why, nCrow, have you decided to use YOUR hard-earned influence and power to prevent them from taking this land away from new players who (1) have put in precious little time and effort relative to the other alliance in order to earn there right to the land, and (2) if they are small like you claim, have very little to lose from Exodus other than maybe some storehouse/warehouse levels and perhaps a few other de-levels.

I ask you this, nCrow/EOMHarry: What have these small players done to earn their land and your support of this ownership, and what has the unnamed alliance, who has put in far more time and effort into building their Illyriad presence at this point, done that they do NOT deserve it more that the new players?

Imagine what an interesting metagame could have developed if these smaller players took matters into their own hands, instead of you intervening. They could have banded together, (perhaps under your guidance and support!), grown strong, formed their own alliance, and plotted in secret  to one day take back their rightful lands, all by their own strength! I guarantee if the unnamed alliance were eventually served revenge at the hands of their former prey, they would not complain about it at all; quite the contrary, they'd think it mighty entertaining I reckon.

Oh well, instead these newbies get to ride on the back of your hard work and learn nothing about self-defense or diplomacy; instead of a potentially interesting community story of small players growing and taking down the big bads who beat them before, we get another thread full of insults and whining.

I realize I don't know the full situation. That being said, I'll conclude by revising a well-known saying: "Fight for a man, he'll survive for one battle; teach a man to fight, and he just might win the war."


-------------
http://elgea.illyriad.co.uk/a/p/157483" rel="nofollow">


Posted By: Vanerin
Date Posted: 05 Feb 2013 at 02:24
Hadus,

I have really appreciated your level headed posts and fair perspective. Thank you for all you contribute to this post and the forum in general.

But regarding your question at Harry, I would say that effort and work would not equal ownership either. If I cut down a tree from your backyard (without your permission) and made a pencil out of it, do I own the pencil? I would say the work I invested is null when it comes to what others all ready own (unless there is an agreement).

I do think this is a very interesting question (and key to a number of different aspects of illy) and look forward to hearing what others say, but I feel the answer is not effort/work.

~Vanerin


Posted By: Hadus
Date Posted: 05 Feb 2013 at 02:45
Originally posted by Vanerin Vanerin wrote:

Hadus,

I have really appreciated your level headed posts and fair perspective. Thank you for all you contribute to this post and the forum in general.

But regarding your question at Harry, I would say that effort and work would not equal ownership either. If I cut down a tree from your backyard (without your permission) and made a pencil out of it, do I own the pencil? I would say the work I invested is null when it comes to what others all ready own (unless there is an agreement).

I do think this is a very interesting question (and key to a number of different aspects of illy) and look forward to hearing what others say, but I feel the answer is not effort/work.

~Vanerin


Thank you for the compliment Van. While I'm unable to offer you a worthy reply right now, let me just respond with this: how did I acquire the house and backyard? Did I pay for it with money earned from my time and effort, or did I stroll into town, see the land there, and decide to live there?


-------------
http://elgea.illyriad.co.uk/a/p/157483" rel="nofollow">


Posted By: Vanerin
Date Posted: 05 Feb 2013 at 03:01
hehe, exactly. I don't feel I know the answer to original ownership. Just pointing out that effort and work may not be it.

Part of the problem is that ownership is a very cultural thing. The methods range from ownership by claim, to not having ownership at all. Each of the methods have advantages and disadvantages. So I kinda doubt we will find a firm answer, but it could certainly be an interesting discussion.

~Vanerin


Posted By: Hadus
Date Posted: 05 Feb 2013 at 03:08
^Agreed. I look forward to a reply from nCrow, and reading all the responses tomorrow.

-------------
http://elgea.illyriad.co.uk/a/p/157483" rel="nofollow">


Posted By: abstractdream
Date Posted: 05 Feb 2013 at 03:30
This is not a post to respond to the declaration by nCrow. I do not begrudge an alliance using its power. No, really. LOL.

I am posting because there are a couple of fallacies in third party posts and I would like to bring just a bit of clarification.

This was not an alliance operation and the player challenged is not a newb. I don't know his specific "birth" date but it was in the later months of 2011.

I know none of those who have already made up their mind about us will believe anything I say but I wanted to get it out there.

-------------
Bonfyr Verboo


Posted By: scottfitz
Date Posted: 05 Feb 2013 at 03:36
Fear not, Kumo, I am sure the conspiracy nuts will find some convoluted way of implicating you guys!


Posted By: abstractdream
Date Posted: 05 Feb 2013 at 03:52
Originally posted by Hadus Hadus wrote:

What have these small players done to earn their land and your support of this ownership, and what has the unnamed alliance, who has put in far more time and effort into building their Illyriad presence at this point, done that they do NOT deserve it more that the new players?


http://www.econ.washington.edu/user/yoramb/MightMakesRights.PDF" rel="nofollow - Might makes right

-------------
Bonfyr Verboo


Posted By: Rill
Date Posted: 05 Feb 2013 at 04:00
Hadus raises an interesting question, but I think that it reflects a misunderstanding of our intention and our commitment.  Hadus seems to imply that we find those we are protecting to be particularly deserving and those we are opposing to be undeserving.  This is not the case.

What we seek to preserve is diversity itself -- that is, a healthy mix of newer and more established players.  We are not selecting some people and saying "we like you, you should stay" or "we don't like you, you should go."  (Although we reserve the right to act in our own direct self interest as well.)

What we are saying is, whether we like you or not, we want everyone to have a chance.  And if there are people who would artificially stunt the growth of our neighbors or seek to drive them away from our neighborhood, we will oppose that act.  Not because we like particular ones of them more than others -- but because we value the richness and diversity that is Illyriad.

In fact, those very values are part of what prevent us from acting more directly and more often against those whom we don't particularly like and who have shown themselves to be opposed to our values, ideas or our existence.  We think that diversity is a good thing -- yet we will not seek to annihilate those who believe that only they should exist in an area, although we may act to oppose that particular ambition in some areas in which we have a substantial presence.

We think that having a variety of players and a variety of playing styles in the areas in which we have cities is good for nCrow and is good for Illyriad.  We will act if necessary to preserve that diversity.

Knowing when to act and when not to act in carrying out this principle is a very difficult question, one that I struggle with, as do Harry and Le Roux and many other people.  Probably sometimes we will misjudge and overstep.  Perhaps other times we will not act when upon reflection it would be better that we had done so.

I honestly don't expect this particular philosophy to make us terribly popular in the long run.  It is complex and difficult to articulate.  We are "damned if we do and damned if we don't."  There will be people who fault us for failure to act and just as many who fault us when we do.

I can't promise we will always be right.  In fact, I can guarantee we will sometimes be wrong.  This is part of why our general predisposition is to refrain from acting rather than acting.  Hopefully when we get it wrong we will have wise friends to tell us we are being idiots -- and the humility to pay them heed.


Posted By: Le Roux
Date Posted: 05 Feb 2013 at 04:41
Originally posted by abstractdream abstractdream wrote:

...

http://www.econ.washington.edu/user/yoramb/MightMakesRights.PDF" rel="nofollow - Might makes right

.. irony 





-------------


Posted By: bansisdead
Date Posted: 05 Feb 2013 at 08:13
The GC mob is a fickle beast.

-------------
http://elgea.illyriad.co.uk/a/p/124253" rel="nofollow">


Posted By: Ossian
Date Posted: 05 Feb 2013 at 12:20

(Ossian looks up from his workbench, takes a swig from a nearby tankard and points his screwdriver at the Forum)

Make no mistake, EOM Harry and ncrow have won this conflict before it even starts and the other alliance could well find themselves suffering the same fate that they threatened newbes with.
 
Harry clearly has right on his side here. The tone and content of his posts deliberately send a clear message to an alliance , whom despite their best efforts to use propaganda to paint themselves otherwise, have been caught threatening new players. That is what the real issue is about here.
 
The message is "This Ends Now!"
 
 
In other conflicts, other alliances have been accused ( and to my mind clearly are guilty) of misusing the unwritten newbe protection rule for their own ends thereby undermining it's value. This has actually had the negative affect of playing into the hands of those who would prefer turning Illy into a "Travian" type game. 
 
That doesn't apply here though. It is clear that ncrow do not have designs on acquiring ownership of resources in Ursor as hinted by others in thread.  I believe them when they state that are acting on a point of principle.
 
To me this an example of how diplomacy should be used in mature way for the betterment of the game. The question of whether it ends peacefully or not will be determined by the actions of the other alliance .
 
Well played so far Harry
 
( Ossian returns to his workbench and resumes work on loosening the screws on a rusty old Lawn Lounger cackling evilly - Muhaahaa Wink)
 
 


Posted By: Hager
Date Posted: 05 Feb 2013 at 14:15
Hello everyone
 
This is my first time posting in any forum but I feel that some facts about the situation might help clear some thing up.
 
1. this was a pvp fight
 
2. one side had 5 places with a rough pop of 22000 total, the other 5 places with roughly 23000.
 
So to me neither is a newbie nor is it a total mismatch
 
Very quickly one side asked for peace and a chance to move and the other side agreed and called off their attacks
 
Le Roux was not happy about the situation and has posted what she will do to prevent it in the future.
Her position is on record and quite clear.
 
As far as I know these facts are correct and if someone has misrepresented them to me this forum has my apologies in advance and I will correct them.
 
Now if people wish to continue debating this issue atleast it will be from a knowledgable postion
 
Thank-you


Posted By: Juswin
Date Posted: 05 Feb 2013 at 16:28
I would definitely believe nCrow's story instead of the "facts" being spouted by the other side. The other side has a rather colorful history of painting the forums with propaganda and a history of threatening and attacking other players (of which I am one) for no valid reason. 

I do not believe Harry would spread lies or propaganda. On the other hand, those from the other side are, well, not very believable.

It is mightily clear that nCrow are in the right on this. Hurray for a free, diverse, and multi-alliance Ursor!


Posted By: Le Roux
Date Posted: 05 Feb 2013 at 17:26
To Hager's point,  very convenient to deflect a matter to a 1 on 1 when of course those members may be part of differing alliances ( say a 40k pop alliance versus a 1.2 million pop alliance).  I tend to take the view that an alliance is responsible for the action of its members, and to foist off responsibility " oh , we don't support what our people are doing, they can do whatever they want.. " does not hold water with me (especially when we know such actions are indeed sanctioned by leadership).  Very often the actions of one member, declared a rogue publicly, can be used to further the broader aims of the leadership. 
 
I do indeed hold an alliance responsible for the actions of their membership, its not a stretch, or a theory that is rare amongst leadership of alliances. Especially when we know that leadership had advance knowledge of such actions, and approved of it. (amazing what little tidbits of knowledge filter through Illy...)
 
I very clearly know Bonfyr's view of me, and Crowfed as well ... and that also factors into the overall equation.  Feel free to PVP "one on one" all you want,  just do realize one man's "one on one" can very well be perceived as advancing a very different agenda. . . 


-------------


Posted By: Caconafyx
Date Posted: 05 Feb 2013 at 18:03
As a resident of the Ursor region I am paying particular interest to this thread and its consequences. 

The following is predicated on the previously stated assumption that "might is right"

Can I assume that the unnamed alliance in question that is trying to exert dominance over non-aligned players have an issue with a larger alliance in turn looking to take over Ursor and remove them from the equation or force them to relocate en masse to another region/s?

And given their standpoint within this thread, will the unnamed alliance make assurances that just as non-aligned players should not expect support from others, that the unnamed alliance will not go running for support from others?

As for the whole premise of "might is right" what utter nonsense. I can field an army ten times that of the average player but that does not give me the right to throw my weight around. Any fool can build an army with enough prestige. So perhaps try bringing something useful to the party, like support of new players, meaningful contributions to GC and to the game in general.

In recent months we have all seen the detrimental impact that war has on the game, how GC has become on occasion a thoroughly unpleasant place to be and that a significant number of newcomers have taken one look at the hostile environment that has been created and gone looking for other games. A further war would be unpleasant, however such bullying cannot and should not be tolerated by this community.


Posted By: Rill
Date Posted: 05 Feb 2013 at 18:24
Originally posted by Hager Hager wrote:

Hello everyone
 
This is my first time posting in any forum but I feel that some facts about the situation might help clear some thing up.
 
1. this was a pvp fight
 
2. one side had 5 places with a rough pop of 22000 total, the other 5 places with roughly 23000.
 
So to me neither is a newbie nor is it a total mismatch
 
Very quickly one side asked for peace and a chance to move and the other side agreed and called off their attacks
 
Le Roux was not happy about the situation and has posted what she will do to prevent it in the future.
Her position is on record and quite clear.
 
As far as I know these facts are correct and if someone has misrepresented them to me this forum has my apologies in advance and I will correct them.
 
Now if people wish to continue debating this issue atleast it will be from a knowledgable postion
 
Thank-you

To be abundantly clear, we will not tolerate members of this alliance jumping out of their alliance to beat on other players under the guise of PvP either, so long as the attacks are unprovoked.  Having one side prepare, with full support of their alliance, to beat on a relatively peaceful neighbor and then bully that person out of the neighborhood is no more acceptable to us when that person temporarily jumps out of the alliance to do so.


Posted By: abstractdream
Date Posted: 05 Feb 2013 at 18:28
TVM has never said her members were rogue nor have we ever denied responsibility for our members. Those statements are outright fabrications on your part.

My view of you and others like you is fairly easy to glean but I will state it for the record here. I believe you feel others must play this game in a certain way or you will force that play style. This very thread is the direct result of that philosophy.

Might is right is not some silly little saying and it certainly is not nonsense. Read the link. Conflict is the essence of human nature and support is inherent in an MMO. Do you honestly believe I think non-allied players should not expect support from others?

As for detriment, that would be the obvious conclusion of the losing side of a conflict, would it not?

-------------
Bonfyr Verboo


Posted By: Rill
Date Posted: 05 Feb 2013 at 18:31
Originally posted by abstractdream abstractdream wrote:

 I believe you feel others must play this game in a certain way or you will force that play style. This very thread is the direct result of that philosophy.

This is interesting, because I perceive the same as you do -- that you are trying to force a particular playstyle on others, and that we are acting to oppose it.  So we are in agreement that this thread is indeed a direct result of that philosophy.


Posted By: Le Roux
Date Posted: 05 Feb 2013 at 18:37
Perhaps more carefully read my reply to Hager's post that attempted to place such actions on the level of an even 1 on 1.  Clearly your point is in fact that your member's actions were supported by TVM , and that your "might" made it "right". 
Just so the record is straight....


-------------


Posted By: Hora
Date Posted: 05 Feb 2013 at 18:37
Originally posted by Caconafyx Caconafyx wrote:

As for the whole premise of "might is right" what utter nonsense. I can field an army ten times that of the average player but that does not give me the right to throw my weight around. Any fool can build an army with enough prestige. So perhaps try bringing something useful to the party, like support of new players, meaningful contributions to GC and to the game in general.

You would have every right to throw your weight around...  but that might lead to bad PR and annoyed neighbours. Ouch
As we don't have any laws in Illy (well, besides the ToS...), right or wrong is defined by the community (i.e. the side, which could raise the bigger army or stronger confed or larger Cruzade if needed).
As big parts of the community seem to share nCrows view (and as big parts actually are Crows, too LOL), I find it rather amusing, which side started talking about might is right, etc...

noone can forbid playing with armies in here, just state, that they would want to play along, too.
And one can be happy, if you get those statements before having sieges at ones doorstep Clap


Posted By: Sliveen
Date Posted: 05 Feb 2013 at 18:47
why is it no one has their alliance near their names so I can better understand the people in relation to the stand point of all this "we" talk? 

Im totally lost who "we" is.


Posted By: abstractdream
Date Posted: 05 Feb 2013 at 18:50
Originally posted by Rill Rill wrote:


Originally posted by abstractdream abstractdream wrote:

 I believe you feel others must play this game in a certain way or you will force that play style. This very thread is the direct result of that philosophy.

This is interesting, because I perceive the same as you do -- that you are trying to force a particular playstyle on others, and that we are acting to oppose it.  So we are in agreement that this thread is indeed a direct result of that philosophy.

...and just how do you suppose you will oppose?

This clearly comes down to a matter of degree. I am looking out for my alliance, which requires I also see to the satisfaction of her members. This game would be worse off without them.

-------------
Bonfyr Verboo


Posted By: Rill
Date Posted: 05 Feb 2013 at 18:54
Originally posted by abstractdream abstractdream wrote:

...and just how do you suppose you will you oppose?

.

I think I've already been pretty clear about this in a previous post:


If we see sieges on active players, we will break those sieges.  If we receive reports of diplo, magickal or other harassment of active players, we will reinforce and assist the victims and return the same to the perpetrators.  If we hear reports of players and alliances who are threatened with cleansing, we will assist those players and alliances in becoming stronger so they can stand for themselves.

Those are the things we will do to assist our neighbors.

Should an alliance object to our intervention and threaten our members, our leaders or our allies, that will be dealt with in another manner.  As to the details of that response, I leave them to your imagination, except to say that I think you will find that we are creative, resourceful and have a devilish sense of humour.



Posted By: abstractdream
Date Posted: 05 Feb 2013 at 18:56
That was actually a rhetorical question...

-------------
Bonfyr Verboo


Posted By: Epidemic
Date Posted: 05 Feb 2013 at 18:58
We could settle most of these conflicts if the exodus penalties didn't exist. Alliances then can claim areas as their own and boot other players out. It makes more sense to me to move my town, without penalties, then to stay in a hostile area because the price and time to rebuild is not worth it.


Posted By: Auraya
Date Posted: 05 Feb 2013 at 19:28
I'd like to do what I always try to do with threads of this nature and put things into a rl perspective. If a guy was sitting in a bar and some other guy walked in and punched him with 20 other guys as back-up.. would you think that was right? If the police walked in and took the aggressor away, would you complain and fight for the rights of that guy who punched a dude who was minding his own business? 

Maybe some people would but I think 99% of people would not want to live in that community. So it is in Illyriad. We have no government or police force to stop people acting like this but as a community, most of us try to ensure that if people mind their own business then they will be protected. That is what makes Illyriad special. If you want to be a bully, there are plenty of other places that is accepted. I congratulate and offer my full support to what nCrow is trying to do here. Active players who have done nothing to deserve hostile actions should and will be protected. 

As for who owns what.. no player owns anything in Illyriad. We do not own our accounts, our villages, our sovereignty, our military, our resources, nothing. The Devs reserve the right to take anything from us as they see fit - it is their game, on loan to us. If you truly believe you own anything in this virtual world, you are sadly deluded.


Posted By: Rill
Date Posted: 05 Feb 2013 at 19:28
Originally posted by abstractdream abstractdream wrote:

That was actually a rhetorical question...

Sometimes even a foolish question is worth an answer.


Posted By: geofrey
Date Posted: 05 Feb 2013 at 20:02
After reading the comment i'm a little confused...

So is this only Ncrow acting, or is the Crow confederation backing NCROW? 


-------------
http://elgea.illyriad.co.uk/a/p/45534" rel="nofollow">


Posted By: Rill
Date Posted: 05 Feb 2013 at 20:10
This reflects the policy of nCrow.  We have neither sought nor received any assurances from our fellow Crows with regard to either our specific policy in Ursor nor the philosophy behind it.  Some of our fellow Crows may share our opinions, others may not.  You'd have to ask them.


Posted By: Aurordan
Date Posted: 05 Feb 2013 at 20:25
Originally posted by Auraya Auraya wrote:

As for who owns what.. no player owns anything in Illyriad. We do not own our accounts, our villages, our sovereignty, our military, our resources, nothing. The Devs reserve the right to take anything from us as they see fit - it is their game, on loan to us. If you truly believe you own anything in this virtual world, you are sadly deluded.

...Do you not get that this is a role playing game, or just hate fun?


Posted By: geofrey
Date Posted: 05 Feb 2013 at 20:43
Originally posted by Rill Rill wrote:

This reflects the policy of nCrow.  We have neither sought nor received any assurances from our fellow Crows with regard to either our specific policy in Ursor nor the philosophy behind it.  Some of our fellow Crows may share our opinions, others may not.  You'd have to ask them.

Rill, Thanks for clarifying. 

Is there any rare resources only found in Ursor?


-------------
http://elgea.illyriad.co.uk/a/p/45534" rel="nofollow">


Posted By: Mona Lisa
Date Posted: 05 Feb 2013 at 21:07
Originally posted by geofrey geofrey wrote:

...
Is there any rare resources only found in Ursor?
 
I have been called a rare find,  but alas I can also be found in Qaro and Tamarin in addition to Ursor...


-------------


Posted By: Myr
Date Posted: 05 Feb 2013 at 23:01
I just want to throw out another option for leaders of a large alliance that come across a player being attacked who doesn't want to be. I have recently run across this situation a couple of times and I first got both sides of the story for myself instead of blindly following what I was told. In both instances the players were no more than a couple months old. I taught the players under attack how to build and use their troops to get the best of their attacker. In both instances the player under attack was successful, one of them joined my alliance and is becoming a great player.

I am not posting this to take a stand on either side of the issue. I don't have first hand information so I can't say which side I agree with. I just wanted to remind everyone that there are other ways to use your experience in the game to help someone become a successful player.


Posted By: Auraya
Date Posted: 05 Feb 2013 at 23:25
Originally posted by Aurordan Aurordan wrote:


Originally posted by Auraya Auraya wrote:

As for who owns what.. no player owns anything in Illyriad. We do not own our accounts, our villages, our sovereignty, our military, our resources, nothing. The Devs reserve the right to take anything from us as they see fit - it is their game, on loan to us. If you truly believe you own anything in this virtual world, you are sadly deluded.


...Do you not get that this is a role playing game, or just hate fun?


That it is a game was exactly the point I was making. The only thing you own here are your actions and your words. It is by those and not your account that you will be judged. Being underhanded, trying to bully others.. these things do not instil long time friendships nor earn anyone's respect. Why throw away the things you can keep for a few pixels which you can't?


Posted By: Darkwords
Date Posted: 05 Feb 2013 at 23:29
This is not simply the case of an unalligned player being attacked by another player, it is unalligned players being attacked individually by an alliance.  No matter how well you advise/train them you can not save them without stepping in.

I commend nCrow on taking this stand.  As for the Crow alliance being behind this; what Rill points out is true, they have not come to the Crowfed seeking support on this matter, however I am sure that most in the Crowfed would support them given the situation at hand.  I for one have a city in the middle of Ursor and I would not stand for ANY alliance forcing others out so that they can dominate that land.


Posted By: Daufer
Date Posted: 06 Feb 2013 at 00:05
Originally posted by Rill Rill wrote:

Originally posted by abstractdream abstractdream wrote:

...and just how do you suppose you will you oppose?

.

I think I've already been pretty clear about this in a previous post:


If we see sieges on active players, we will break those sieges.  If we receive reports of diplo, magickal or other harassment of active players, we will reinforce and assist the victims and return the same to the perpetrators.  If we hear reports of players and alliances who are threatened with cleansing, we will assist those players and alliances in becoming stronger so they can stand for themselves.

Those are the things we will do to assist our neighbors.

Should an alliance object to our intervention and threaten our members, our leaders or our allies, that will be dealt with in another manner.  As to the details of that response, I leave them to your imagination, except to say that I think you will find that we are creative, resourceful and have a devilish sense of humour.


Too many words and too much ambiguity just confuses people.  Why not just say what you mean in simple language?

"nCrow claims a protectorate over Ursor.  No one may attack anyone else in Ursor against our wishes. If you disobey us you will be punished severely."

You can flower it up, but honestly that is what you are saying.  I don't disagree in principle.  Small players need and deserve protection.  Joining an alliance with some military muscle and fighting back would be an ideal choice.  Appealing to the 'Peacekeepers' to step in with threats and intimidation should not be, but in fact it tends to be the default method.  It is perfectly possible to build an army strong enough to deter attack while playing as a crafter, a trader or a social butterfly.  In fact it is possible to do all four at the same time.  Instead we seem to be indoctrinating newcomers with the notion that having defenses is unnecessary and that "military" style play is an unwanted aberration that must be rooted out.  Our thieves are only for harvesting abandoned goods, our legions of cavalry merely control rats and other vermin, our traders deal in costume weapons and armor, strictly for show...

Meanwhile we all sit around grinding our axes in the breathless hope that someone medium-sized will do something mean to someone small-sized so we Big-Folk can mercilessly crush them into the dirt in the name of fairness and freedom to play.  It seems like a righteous cause but, do we honestly feel protective of the newbs or are we really just looking to justify giving someone a good stomping without fear of reprisals?  A few days ago unaffiliated player Airborne attacked a smaller player who had some cities nearby, apparently because he wanted to, and not for the first time.  Clearly he doesn't know how the system operates here.  One person immediately negotiated for hostilities to cease, and that is laudable.  A dozen or so other people immediately mobilized the cavalry to start destroying siege camps... well, gunboat diplomacy is crude but effective, and the fight ended before it began.  Then folks started talking about how to divide up Airborne's cities for capture or destruction since obviously we don't want people like him, who siege the weak and defenseless, playing our game.

A Latin American dictator once told a reporter "I am a great friend of democracy and anyone who is against that, I will jail them.  I will crush them."  I'm looking for a word, but it's not irony.  Maybe someone with a better vocabulary can help me out.


Posted By: Grainne
Date Posted: 06 Feb 2013 at 00:45
I do believe Airborne was messaged to cease his hostilities and his answer was:  No.  (Maybe another of the 11 who were on can affirm?)  As well, this was not the first player he had targeted--it was the third.  His cities still stand--I have no knowledge of anyone planning to treat him as he has treated others (3 sieges at one go, 12+ blockades, etc.).  Myself and another player from my alliance decided to act upon learning Airborne had attacked, without provocation, two other players, twice before.  The gun-boating was glorious; I ended up killing a ratling (one) on a blockade tile.  Airborne's cities still stand, days later--pretty sure if we didn't want "people like him" playing he'd be gone by now as quickly as everyone responded.  

-------------
http://elgea.illyriad.co.uk/a/p/45918" rel="nofollow">


Posted By: Sisren
Date Posted: 06 Feb 2013 at 02:08
Originally posted by Rill Rill wrote:

Originally posted by abstractdream abstractdream wrote:

 I believe you feel others must play this game in a certain way or you will force that play style. This very thread is the direct result of that philosophy.

This is interesting, because I perceive the same as you do -- that you are trying to force a particular playstyle on others, and that we are acting to oppose it.  So we are in agreement that this thread is indeed a direct result of that philosophy.

And in this...the terrorists won!  because guess what- now you are drawn into the conflict!  :)
Congrats!

Also, the same could very well be said of your style...  /me shrugs
The whole thing where you intervene I mean, not the other parts.

This is an amusement for moi...  when can we change the channel back to farmville?  /me yawns...


-------------
Illy is different from Physics-
Reactions are rarely Equal, and rarely the opposite of what you'd expect...


Posted By: Pellinell
Date Posted: 06 Feb 2013 at 02:09
Originally posted by Grainne Grainne wrote:

I do believe Airborne was messaged to cease his hostilities and his answer was:  No.  (Maybe another of the 11 who were on can affirm?)  As well, this was not the first player he had targeted--it was the third.  His cities still stand--I have no knowledge of anyone planning to treat him as he has treated others (3 sieges at one go, 12+ blockades, etc.).  Myself and another player from my alliance decided to act upon learning Airborne had attacked, without provocation, two other players, twice before.  The gun-boating was glorious; I ended up killing a ratling (one) on a blockade tile.  Airborne's cities still stand, days later--pretty sure if we didn't want "people like him" playing he'd be gone by now as quickly as everyone responded.  


Actually I sent 2 sizable attacks (cleaering armies) at AIRBORNE and a siege. Though I will be recalling the siege Wink


Posted By: Meagh
Date Posted: 06 Feb 2013 at 03:25
Originally posted by Daufer Daufer wrote:

Appealing to the 'Peacekeepers' to step in with threats and intimidation should not be, but in fact it tends to be the default method.  It is perfectly possible to build an army strong enough to deter attack while playing as a crafter, a trader or a social butterfly.  In fact it is possible to do all four at the same time.  Instead we seem to be indoctrinating newcomers with the notion that having defenses is unnecessary and that "military" style play is an unwanted aberration that must be rooted out.  Our thieves are only for harvesting abandoned goods, our legions of cavalry merely control rats and other vermin, our traders deal in costume weapons and armor, strictly for show...


Except this isn't what is happening. Even as this thread continues on we see many or most of the social crafting butterflies embroiled in or recovering from the consone conflict. Many groups no one considered militarily active have been swept away in the conflict (Who would have thought alliances like the Druids would have been caught in it? I know that I sure didn't.) So in the end all of the accusatory and inflammatory remarks directed at the protectionist "Peacekeepers" about Illyriad lacking in military conflict aren't taking into consideration the recent military actions by those same protectionist "Peacekeeping" gc socialites.

Also, have you created an alt account recently? Despite all the community effort, the newbie ring is a very very hostile place. Newbies are, in general, very quick to attack other newbies. No one who stays in that ring for very long can think of Elgea as warm and fuzzy.

Finally and most importantly I think, the social and diplomatic aspect to military conflict is part of the pvp aspect. Campaigns in Illyriad must consider this social aspect. Players cannot successfully just rush after another player because Illyriad is a multifaceted game. A successful military action must be multidimensional in this respect imho. Reactions to that one alliances aggression or that particular players are all just part of that multifaceted gameplay. - M.


-------------


Posted By: Rill
Date Posted: 06 Feb 2013 at 03:43
/me sighs


Posted By: Meagh
Date Posted: 06 Feb 2013 at 03:49
Originally posted by Rill Rill wrote:

Originally posted by Daufer Daufer wrote:

"nCrow claims a protectorate over Ursor.  No one may attack anyone else in Ursor against our wishes. If you disobey us you will be punished severely."

You can flower it up, but honestly that is what you are saying. 

Please re-read what I said.  Because this is most decidedly not what I said.  I don't think I said anything about punishing anyone for attacking people in Ursor.  In fact, the only reference I made to reprisals of any kind were in reference to people who act directly against nCrow.  I was extremely specific about that.


I dunno.. he seems pretty spot on in that regard. nCrow *is*acting as a protector state for unaligned players in Ursor... However I don't think that (EOM) Harry's post was ambiguous at all. He was pretty clear from his first post onward. - M.

EDIT not really spot... maybe too hyperbolic but still...


-------------


Posted By: Aurordan
Date Posted: 06 Feb 2013 at 04:02
Originally posted by Auraya Auraya wrote:

 

That it is a game was exactly the point I was making. The only thing you own here are your actions and your words. It is by those and not your account that you will be judged. Being underhanded, trying to bully others.. these things do not instil long time friendships nor earn anyone's respect. Why throw away the things you can keep for a few pixels which you can't?

Yes, everyone realizes it's a game.  Some people are trying to play it.  There's no need to barge in to diplomacy threads and remind everyone.  People's in game actions in no way determine who they are in real life.  


Posted By: Chaos Armor
Date Posted: 06 Feb 2013 at 04:29
I'm going to go ahead and place a Ward of Canon. Hopefully, this will keep Godwin's Law from proving true.






Posted By: Sliveen
Date Posted: 06 Feb 2013 at 04:36
I am saddened to see these types of threads. I cannot possibly know all the nuances of other's comments in relationships with player v. player or alliance v. alliance, as I have only been in the game for less than half a year. 

My hesitation in understanding this situation at hand; is the historical perspective which has not included any glimpse of diplomacy between any over reaching alliances with protectorship alliances. In other words, before this thread came about, was any attempt made by ncrow to resolve this diplomatically in IGM before bringing this to the Illy community?

I worry for the idea that diplomacy is the true victim in this announcement and any repercussions that are perceived or felt by any members of Illy. I also wonder to the possible far-reaching effects such a role as this will create in that region for confed  alliances of all involved in each action that takes place. This could embroil that region in a bitter and long enduring set of battles. 

On another note I would like to address a comparison that Auraya wrote. She compared a person entering a bar and picking on a little guy and cop stopping the action. That is not really a realistic comparison of the proposed actions that could take place. 
I think it would be more like John Wayne walking into the bar and getting into a fisticuffs with the perceived bully instead of a law man.

Otherwise, what we are doing is allowing one alliance to become a self-described sheriff in town without election. Now that may be, as the crow confed is quite large and may have the army power to take on such a job, but how does that change for better or worse, the landscape of Illy as a community? Notwithstanding, the obvious advantage to a regional manipulation of markets if a resource is primary to that area, then one must ask if it really makes any sense to land baron certain areas, anyway. 

Finally, in the truest sense of the definition of sovereignty, the individual is in fact his own sovereign state. To arbitrarily believe that might or moral is justifications for forcing anyone to move when they have not broken the overall Illy standards of 10 square seems rather short sighted in the long term affects of alliances and memories of players.

This last thought is perhaps my first and foremost reason in believing that all alliance must eventually take to diplomacy regardless of how dark or military they be. 

That's all I have on this.


Posted By: Brandmeister
Date Posted: 06 Feb 2013 at 05:01
Illy is an anarchy. The community has decided on a relatively peaceful coexistence, but it's still composed of fluid tribes with varied goals. Since it's a game of pretend, I think it's fine that some people want to play as black hats, or warlords, or whatever they wish. But the white hats outnumber them here, and anyone who fails to take that into account is a poor warlord indeed. There is no right or wrong way to play an anarchy, except if people start taking it personally above the game.

As an aside, I do find it amusing when people argue that solitary military force is a Right in these sorts of games. It's equally valid that people pursue survival and safety by cultivating friendships with other players. Everyone has an ability to interfere on some level, regardless of whether or not you think they have the right. In that regard, this little microcosm of anarchy is just like the real world.


Posted By: ES2
Date Posted: 07 Feb 2013 at 13:46

You have it exactly right


-------------




Posted By: RatuJone
Date Posted: 07 Feb 2013 at 18:32
Kumo, wake up!!!  You'll get sunburned ;)

-------------
I'm pretty Harmless, really :)


Posted By: jikeltine
Date Posted: 08 Feb 2013 at 17:19
Illy is not an anarchy. I learned that on my first day here when I received a gift from King Sigurd.

Now apologize to our more-often-absent-than-present King.


Posted By: Darmon
Date Posted: 08 Feb 2013 at 19:48
Originally posted by jikeltine jikeltine wrote:

Illy is not an anarchy. I learned that on my first day here when I received a gift from King Sigurd.

Now apologize to our more-often-absent-than-present King.

"[Elgea] has no king.  [Elgea] needs no king."


Posted By: Rill
Date Posted: 08 Feb 2013 at 20:17
"The Truth is plainly visible even to a simpleton: King Sigurd is naught but a weak, craven and venal heir to murder, who dances as a puppet on the strings of a 'Council' that speaks for none but themselves. "

Hail the Undying Flame!


Posted By: Hadus
Date Posted: 08 Feb 2013 at 21:22
I can't help but think of this:



I think King Arthur would sympathize with Sigurd.


-------------
http://elgea.illyriad.co.uk/a/p/157483" rel="nofollow">


Posted By: tansiraine
Date Posted: 09 Feb 2013 at 04:02
Originally posted by Grainne Grainne wrote:

I do believe Airborne was messaged to cease his hostilities and his answer was:  No.  (Maybe another of the 11 who were on can affirm?)  As well, this was not the first player he had targeted--it was the third.  His cities still stand--I have no knowledge of anyone planning to treat him as he has treated others (3 sieges at one go, 12+ blockades, etc.).  Myself and another player from my alliance decided to act upon learning Airborne had attacked, without provocation, two other players, twice before.  The gun-boating was glorious; I ended up killing a ratling (one) on a blockade tile.  Airborne's cities still stand, days later--pretty sure if we didn't want "people like him" playing he'd be gone by now as quickly as everyone responded.  


I have dealt with this player with 2 of the incidents  first with a Cave member the weekend we lost Durc.. and the second most recently when I went to GC to make it public cause of it being the 2nd time in 2 months with this behavior.  Airborne's latest victim is now a member of Cave but was unaligned at the time of conflict, GC did stand up to the bullying and made me proud that even during war people were willing to help someone that was in need.  Airborne would not have stopped I had the IGM that stated so.  Until GC stepped in and there was inbound to Airborne's city he refused to recall his sieges on 3 of the persons cities.  This player was quiet and liked playing with out being forced to join an alliance.  i am happy he found a home in Cave but is it fair that he had to join an alliance to stop random attacks with no provocation?


Posted By: Tyrande Whisperwinds
Date Posted: 02 Mar 2013 at 12:22
I just had to register to comment on this,as i can't believe what some ppl wrote in this thread so far.

Too many words and too much ambiguity just confuses people.  Why not just say what you mean in simple language?

"nCrow claims a protectorate over Ursor.  No one may attack anyone else in Ursor against our wishes. If you disobey us you will be punished severely."

You can flower it up, but honestly that is what you are saying.

And what is the other alliance doing? If i go with your "no flowering it up theory" we can just state that:
"XXX alliance claims owership of Ursor. Leave or we will destroy you."
As for minding our own business.. doesn't this happen in RL all the time as well? Is the UN called to intervene only when it's states are being attacked? No.
(not comparing NCrow to UN in any way, shape or form, just wanna give an example)
I am a middle size player by now.. Why was i allowed to grow?
Because i had stability. No one was forcing me to move out of my spot every now and then. How can other players have the same opportunity if ppl keep picking on them?
Question is: would YOU have liked the same treatment when YOU were nothing else than a newbie with a couple of cities?
And pls, don't come up with the "join a bigger alliance if you want protection" argument.
They are not picking on ppl because they have no alliance. They are doing it because they can. I doubt the hostilities would stop if any of those players decided to join a small sizes alliance.

Note: sorry for my bad EnGrisH.. This is so NOT my native language.




Print Page | Close Window

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.03 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2019 Web Wiz Ltd. - https://www.webwiz.net