For DB, the war began when we started fighting PLAN. I won't go into the details of that right now because it's not entirely relevant. However, I soon got a message from a prominent member of the Crow Federation, who was trying to ascertain whether a peaceful solution could be found. He had been asked to do so by other members of the Crowfed, and through some further enquiries I was told that vCrow were concerned that DB's war against PLAN was a war by proxy against what is now being styled as "the Grand Alliance". It was further revealed to me that for some time, there has been pressure in the Crowfed to come into opposition (militarily or otherwise) against the Dominion.

T-O took this time to complete relationships which had been in the works for a long time, and joined the Dominion.

In early 2014, TCol announced their plan to surrender to vCrow. After a lot of discussion with Zenorra and Tacardi, who were personally against surrender but were voicing the opinion of some very vocal players in TCol, we persuaded them not to surrender. The vocal players soon left after that. As such I, as well as a Harmless and an NC player, moved our alts across to help with war time planning for TCol. However, there was little to do except to constantly defend.

I have already told the story of what happens next on these forums (look for the "Grandpa tell me a story" thread) so I'll rush through this. Two reversals of fortune made victory impossible- the defeat at Ely and the EE advance south, both of which took all of the troops the Dominion had left. We soon surrendered. Some day I will be at liberty to reveal those terms.

The Dominion made a decision to drop longstanding NAPs with nCrow after that settlement dispute had been resolved in favor of the Dominion (after Ryelle graciously agreed to have her city razed, in spite of the fact that its placement was consistent with common practice at that time, being more than 10 squares from any other city).

In fact, as I recall it was you Nokigon who informed nCrow that the Dominion felt it could no longer maintain NAPs -- NAPs that had remained in place during the settlement discussions and which nCrow was committed to honoring.

I myself (personally rather than as a matter of nCrow policy) did not find the Dominion's exclusive claim to Mal Motsha to be acceptable, especially given history with regard to that particular territory, and I had long had concerns about TCol's actions with regard to new players and small, independent alliances in the area.  I was absent in the months leading up to the war, so I cannot say to what degree similar objections on the part of others might have affected the course of events.

The decision to drop NAP was something which we agreed on unanimously. I was the spokesperson for the Dominion because we felt it would be less confrontational coming from a mouth other than Kale's. We did it because the settlement dispute had scared the crap out of us... Months and months of good relations had been brushed away over one incident (and I seemed to recall that the city was just within the boundaries of ten squares).

The Dominion, with the possible exception of BSH under Rorgash, has never bullied new players in MM. That is not a stance I, Kale or Pellinell will EVER support. If you can give me examples, maybe I can do something about them. However, I would be amazed if examples are forthcoming- because they never are.

With regard to my concerns about actions against small players and alliances in Mal Motsha, I will also have to plead ignorance on the exact names, since much time has elapsed since they occurred.  It was a laptop ago for me as well -- perhaps a great statement about the longevity of relationships in Illy, in that they outlive our hardware.     What is most important is that it is not happening now and hopefully will not happen in the future under the new leadership of TCol.

It's all Kale's fault! That's my story and I'm sticking to it!

Thanks for writing this, Noki. Very informative!

As to Mal Motsha, yes, TCol considers it our home. Do we 'claim' it? No. We are aware of Kale's stance regarding this, and Tacardi and myself do not agree and have therefore changed the way we look at our neighbors. 

We would also like to recognize dittobite. He has been such a huge help to us and has extended the olive branch to the new and improved TCol. We thank him and look forward to a wonderful friendship.

So I would like to pick up on one thing from the OP and that is that information was leaked from EE's external forum. In the Consone War there were spies in EE's AC and now I am dismayed to hear that not only is that continuing but has extended to offsite forums. One could almost accept that an alliance member was being sat by someone from the other side. However to actually join our external forum with the sole intention of relaying information back to the opposition is repugnant and not worthy of this game and the vast majority of these players. Any credibility that Harmless? and her allies had has gone as far as I am concerned.

So my question is simply this: How can you demand that the we fight with honour when you cannot conduct yourselves in an honourable manner yourselves?

Spies are nothing new. vCrow has, and still refuses to identify, spies in TCol. I was also told that I had spies in my own alliance during the war- whilst no proof has ever come of this, and I'm still not sure how true the claim is, it serves to illustrate very nicely that spies were perpetrated by both sides (by the Grand Alliance more so than the Coalition, incidentally). I don't defend the practice, but it is a reality of war that has always been present. I also don't see much difference in having a spy in an AC or looking on a public forum... I actually think that the AC spy is worse.

Rill- the problem is this. You attempted to deliberately antagonise TCol, and very nearly managed to incite war a year and a half ago. This worried us, quite frankly, because it showed us how thin our relations with the Crows truly were. Our actions in removing the NAPs were designed to give you pause for thought and be more careful about antagonisms in the future... It seemed to be successful.

Incidentally, the claim that TCol claimed Mal Motsha is a fallacy. They claimed a section of Mal Motsha- which they were already dominant in.

I think there is a lesson there for both sides about not over-reading other people's intentions.  With regard to exclusive claims, TCol most certainly had an exclusive claim on their alliance page to a specific area for some time.  In fact Ryelle's city was not in Mal Motsha proper but in part of the "invisible square" claimed by TCol.  It was located at 651/-73, a location at which there is a TCol city -- which apparently is not "too close" to its neighbors.

The fact is that settling a city at that distance should NOT have been a provocation to anyone.  The fact that it was taken as such was the problem that I saw with Dominion policies.

And Deranzin, if people dislike me so much that they dislike people simply because I express something positive about them, then I think that really says a lot more about such people than it does about me.  Haters are gonna hate, as they say.

We made some activities on our forum, and announced in AC and GC that they would be open to all. Permissions were changed. The Hath post is put up and leaked immediately. Events unfold, which oddly enough would not have had that post been not obtained. What would have occurred would have been a limited war with TVM. Instead others involved themselves, which again is odd if they believe they had scored an intelligence coup. as the post laid out fairly well what then came to pass.

Just something to think about...

I wish the coalition the best of luck, and everyone else including tamaeon 

I think that is a fair speculation, Noki...

Sometimes friends are the only people who will tell you what you don't want to hear.

It may be something different, but it does seem like one rook using confidential information to discredit another rook. 

Angrim wrote: says more about the player using it than the player to whom it's being applied.

Clearly, you have never tried to change Kale's mind.

Incidentally, if we can dispose with the patronising rhetoric about how the Dominion have been bad and now they've been put on track...

I regret a lot of things I've done in this game. I regret going to war against PLAN. I regret any diplomacy I've made that was not to my best standard. I regret supporting Kale's land claim IF (and I still am yet to receive any proof or examples of this) it meant that new players were forced out of a region. I could go on.

What I do NOT regret is joining and fighting alongside the Dominion. If I could have to choice to join the war and again, I would do so. We were always aware of the risks we were taking, and Kale was no fool who thought that everything was going to be fine. We always knew that the way we played would either lead to victory or to defeat. And I personally didn't give a damn about that, because this is a game and I play it for my own enjoyment.

And I believe that DB, TCol and T-O are the best friends that I could have in this game. I appreciate them much more than a group of sycophants who would be terrified of any sort of action for fear of the consequences.

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.

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 ), but I do not poke them with settlements, nor provoke them to fights over things that are none of my business ...

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 ...

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 .?.

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 .?.

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 ...
 

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 ...

 

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 .?.


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



Just like a "before and after" ad ! ahahahaah :p

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.

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.

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.

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. ;)

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.

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.

She could abide by the rules and refrain from posting the IGM to the forums. She could simply forward it to players that requested it, or; she could publish the message somewhere besides the forums. The rule just applies to sharing it within the forum.   

Illyriad Admin wrote:  "Forum Specific: Public posting of private messages between fellow players or players and Illyriad staff is prohibited".

"Public posting of private messages between fellow players or players and Illyriad staff is prohibited. This includes discussions of warnings and suspensions of both game and forum accounts."

Other than that, no posting of ANY part of an in-game mail is allowed because others can assume the other side of the conversation... something that might do more damage. So, no, don't do it. It's very easy to fake or change text as well, another reason not to do it.

As for me, I consider this discussion over.  People who want to continue talking about it should apply to Angrim directly.

Whut .?.

GM Rikoo wrote: EDIT: I want to clarify something. If a person posts their specific half of an in-game mail (example: "I went to the store") and does not tell anyone that she did so, there's no stopping her and no way to tell that she did that, unless I investigate it further. Other than that, no posting of ANY part of an in-game mail is allowed because others can assume the other side of the conversation... something that might do more damage. So, no, don't do it. It's very easy to fake or change text as well, another reason not to do it.

If someone sends you a private message -- giving advice for example -- and you later want to share that advice, put it in your words and without copying and pasting the email/message was sent to you.

Use common sense. We have gone over the reasons against allowing the posting of private messages, so you can refer to those posts if you need to. Feel free to email me directly. 

Let's get back to topic at hand, or I will close the thread.

PS: I meant "war" as in "go play the game!" ..it's a game that allows for war. ;)

GM Rikoo.