Play Now Login Create Account
illyriad
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Valid Land Claims in the New Era
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedValid Land Claims in the New Era

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 567
Author
belargyle View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 17 Jun 2010
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 401
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 Sep 2012 at 05:11
Originally posted by Rill Rill wrote:

thank you for attempting to address any misconceptions, Bela.

I said this:

I have received multiple complaints of DLords armies killing gatherers and other armies far from DLords cities.  Not necessarily more so than other alliances, but not necessarily less so either.

This statement is completely accurate, so far as I know.  Your attempts to cloud the issue by commenting on issues which I do or don't bring up directly with you rather than (as you admonished me to do) recommend that people raise with you directly, are entirely beside the point.  The point being that I see DLords as being neither a paradigm of virtue nor as some sort of villain but as essentially typical, although I think that certain of your members made some early missteps vis a vis mines that tended to create a bad impression.

I am not sure why my comment that DLords is essentially typical in this regard should be cause for concern.

I think you are taking my comments a bit to personal, Rill.

Ok, let me clarify something that I should have stated more clearly. I switched gears on the last paragraph and was not speaking of you nor your comment but was referring to point that Dlord, in general, was being used as the example by the original poster. His points were the misconceptions I was speaking to that we and more specifically "I" am obligated correct.

Additionally I don't remember disputing whether or not your statement is accurate.. as far as or anyone else knows it potentially is and I don't doubt it.  Therefore I'm not clouding anything but in fact trying to clarify it. I have not admonished you in any form or at least I did try not try to.  As far as I can see the only thing I stated that could conceivably be considered such is that if someone tells you "Dlord attacked me", knowing you, you will not just ignore the person who comes to you with a problem. But you will at least respond back.. my point was simply why not tell them to talk to us.

However if you took what I stated as an admonition, that was not my intent and if it came across as such, my apology.

I believe however you're taking my comments as though they are strictly at and toward you alone when in fact some of what I said was not, especially when I spoke regarding Dlord being the example.. but on that I take the fault for not being much clearer in that. I was not directing that statement at you but that the thread had chosen to use us as examples and referring to the thread in general.


Edited by belargyle - 08 Sep 2012 at 05:14
Back to Top
Hewman View Drop Down
New Poster
New Poster
Avatar

Joined: 12 May 2012
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 21
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 Sep 2012 at 05:34

Originally posted by belargyle belargyle wrote:

Originally posted by Hewman Hewman wrote:

Sorry for my ignorance, what does "pre-Land claim" mean?

I thought it was self evident.. but no biggy...

A time in which we had not made a land claim, nor for the most part, anyone else.

See, this is part of the problem - you speak of "pre-land claims" as if everyone should know when DLords made their claim of all squares within 10 of their cities.  I'm pretty well read in this forum and active in GC, but I have no idea when DLords made this proclamation (in fact, I didn't even know this was your alliance policy until I began this post).  I think you are asking a bit much to expect every player to be versed on your alliance policies (and for that matter all alliance policies) and if they aren't then they run the risk of war.  

This goes to the heart of what I am hoping to achieve with this post.  I do not wish to DICTATE my views.  I do not wish for the community to legislate hard and fast RULES.  All I was hoping for was to come to some AGREED upon norms that make sense and are easy for people to follow IF they wish to settle/harvest/hunt peacefully.  I'm not, as I think you mentioned previously, looking for a way for us all to sit around a campfire... I'm just trying to see if we can find a FAIR way for people to avoid the wrath of alliances and players like you who are willing to go to war over a mineral deposit that happens to be 8 squares away from your city (but also 4 squares from my NAP city, and 9 squares from one of my alliance cities).  IT'S COMPLICATED to navigate that and I think you are over simplifying it by only looking at it from your own perspective.  Sure, its easy to just say "EVERYTHING within 10 squares is mine and if thats violated I will kill you, grrrrrr."  But going back to my example before, and I will provide the visual again below, there's no way such a rigid policy can work effectively.



So tell me, Belargyle, which city OWNS square [-13|257] under your policy?
Who has exclusive right to square [-4|249]? What about [-11|248]? 
(I've marked them on the above image).

I like to think of myself as a somewhat intelligent individual, but I truly can't figure out who has a right to those squares under your policy.  These are REAL questions that are presented by the policy you advocate.  If your policy is so simple, effective, and fair please enlighten us as to the ownership rights to those squares so we may understand.

edit/disclaimer - I do not mean to single out or villanize DLords.  I have used their name, but purely for the sake of example in order to further this discussion after their members have volunteered their official alliance policy.  I may not understand the choices and policies of DLords, but I do respect them as an alliance and I apologize if any mention is construed as criticism. 


Edited by Hewman - 08 Sep 2012 at 06:25
Back to Top
Kilotov V2.0 View Drop Down
Greenhorn
Greenhorn
Avatar

Joined: 08 Sep 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 59
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 Sep 2012 at 05:40
i just wanted to point out, that i am amazed by his highness's speech, and i am quite disappointed in the reactions of some more illustrious community members. it's just sad that some think to be enabled to lay judgement upon the diplomatic choices of others, and exert criticism against our policies, that are, fair and just. 
 we also don't pretend to tell others how they should enforce their very own alliance or borders, or how to deal whit resource administration. i may advise the people that have problems whit the DwarvenLords to read His Highness's posts at once, for they have all answers to the questions they may be looking for. 
Back to Top
Bonaparta View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 03 Nov 2011
Location: Milky Way
Status: Offline
Points: 541
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 Sep 2012 at 06:00
Originally posted by Kilotov V2.0 Kilotov V2.0 wrote:

i just wanted to point out, that i am amazed by his highness's speech, and i am quite disappointed in the reactions of some more illustrious community members. it's just sad that some think to be enabled to lay judgement upon the diplomatic choices of others, and exert criticism against our policies, that are, fair and just. 
 we also don't pretend to tell others how they should enforce their very own alliance or borders, or how to deal whit resource administration. i may advise the people that have problems whit the DwarvenLords to read His Highness's posts at once, for they have all answers to the questions they may be looking for. 

Kilotov v2.0 hehe Smile, you are funny.

I've read the wall of text and I agree with his highness's views. 

Back to Top
Hadus View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 28 Jun 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 545
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 Sep 2012 at 07:30
Originally posted by Drejan Drejan wrote:

Originally posted by Hadus Hadus wrote:

...
You were not looking for a common agreement? People should learn not to send troops far away from their cities near non-allied cities. Isn't it simpler?
If you are greedy with your troops you risk them, as simple as that.
 
EDIT: Realized you were talking to Hewman not me
DELETED

Edited by Hadus - 08 Sep 2012 at 07:33
Back to Top
Drejan View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 30 Sep 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 234
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 Sep 2012 at 15:54
Sorry Hadus, similar name, same avatar, and was like 4am here.
Back to Top
Berylla View Drop Down
Wordsmith
Wordsmith
Avatar

Joined: 31 May 2011
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 121
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 Sep 2012 at 23:45
Someone had a problem with my pig in my farm allegory... sorry you didn't understand that I was trying an RL example, not an Illy one.

Continuing on the allegory...
I could be enjoying a nice cup of tea on my porch, when the mailman gives me a letter from some hunters who wish to hunt on my land. Reading through what the ask of me and my land, I can either send a letter telling them I will let them hunt, or that I won't let them hunt. They can of course do as I say, or, in the latter, come and hunt anyway... at which point I'm back at the first example.

Everything can be made clearer when people talk... I wonder how many times I have to say that... just talk! Ask questions. Answer messages.

Now... to the matter att hand.
Example 1: Player C has a town in the newbie ring. To protect it, he has placed sov all around his town to protect it from new settlements. Player D has a city 10 squares away. One day player C finds troops on land about halfway between the cities. It's a good food-spot. Being worried, he sends a message to player D, asking what is going on. Player D, replies in a friendly manner, and after a few messages back and forth, the spot is considered the boundary between the two cities and their land.
Example 2: Player E and G are not in either alliance, NAP or confed, but share land. They are on speaking terms. A mine pops up closer to player G, but he doesn't harvest. Player E sends troops to the mine to occupy while his miners gather the minerals. In his eagerness he forgets to send a message to player G. Player G doesn't do anything, for a while, then sends a message asking player E to remove his troops so he can sov the spot. An agreement is made for player E to mine when player G is done sovving. Player E, feeling a bit foolish, makes sure to follow the agreement.
Example 3: Player H has a nice patch of herbs, and sends troops to occupy the spot. While his troops are there, he sovs the spot since it is very close to his city. Thinking that sov will be enough for others to stay away, he lets his troops come back home. A while later, he finds NAP troops on his spot and harvesters at work. Scouts tell him him who it is, and so he sends a message to player J, asking what is going on. Reply is short, just stating there is no threat to the city, the troops are to protect the harvesters. Player H kindly ask player J to remove his troops and not send any more harvesters. Player J refuses and after a few bumped harvesters, and additional sov-levels by player H, the matter is brought to the head of both alliances. In the end, player J backed off.

All three examples show that talk is more useful that fighting.

As far as killing harvesters... well, if you send to a spot with neutral troops, your harvesters will be killed, and the person with the troops will be told that they have gleefully killed so-and-so's harvesters from city so-and-so. That is the way that works.

And for picking and defending spots far, far away... well, as long as it isn't too close to someone's town, it's fair game to be contested. We will try and follow the 10 square rule, but sometimes we get to eager as well, and make mistakes. We will however, honour our mistakes and do right by those who's toes we've stepped on... if it is possible.

And before anyone chews my head off... I am but one person in an alliance... I try to do right, but sometimes I fail too. I am however always open for communication, and will follow the guidance of my HighKing.
I speak peace, but carry a war axe.
Back to Top
Loud Whispers View Drop Down
Wordsmith
Wordsmith
Avatar

Joined: 31 Jul 2012
Location: Saltmines
Status: Offline
Points: 196
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 Sep 2012 at 08:14
Originally posted by belargyle belargyle wrote:

1. Courtesy - Ask first
2. Respect - You might or might not be right, but still have a care in what you say
3. Integrity - if you messed up.. oh well, please refer back to #1
This pretty much absolves all future issues.
"These forums are a Godwin's Law free zone."~GM Luna

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 567
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

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