A question for H?

uhm.. the topic...the question....is there an answer?

HATHALDIR wrote: A question to help me formulate an opinion. Did every war you parcticipated in before the current one, did it end by the other side surrendering?

If the outcomes of wars are unfamiliar to you, then I suggest you dig through the forums and read about the history of Illyriad (Noki has a great thread for this - I believe Lorre did one as well). 

But I have been racking my brain to see where this line of questioning is going...and how it will help you formulate an opinion.  Is the purpose of the question to imply that Harmless has gone undefeated, or that every alliance has either been met with the option of surrender or annihilation?  Because I can recall a couple names which deny the latter...names of accounts which Harmless (following their attacks) neutralized the military threat but allowed to remain in the game even though they would never officially "surrender." 

(Opps, just saw H? reply as well with the same thought in mind...wanting to know the why of the question)

Actually it was a pretty simple question that i wanted to make sure that i was not wrong, and what better way than to go to the source!

I will take it that every other alliance has surrendered to H? due to the amount of gerrymandering.

And i will start as many topics as i like regarding what ever issue i like as long as it is in the terms and conditions of the game. If you do not like what i am posting either ignore it or argue your point, but please do not denigrate me as i have done nothing wrong

... For the record... VIC had accepted peace terms, after long considerations, to end the war. We wanted the war to end, because we were nor are a fighters alliance, and had no chance to win it. Many players left because fighting a war is far more time consuming than living at peace and building cities.

Sir A wrote: Its amazing how no one from H? has been able to answer such a simple question.  Of course we all know the answer and we all know the reason this war is still happening is because H? is too full of themselves to admit defeat.  Yes I said defeat.  You lost.  It happens.  Get over it.

Well, I bet that many people can answer it pretty well ... the problem is that Hathaldir will have to make a new topic and ask again just like the other times we did address the same question ...

As far as I am concerned I do prefer to see him interject and ask the same thing again and again in this topic, instead of going to another one and filling the forum with similar topics ...

I will only say that I find quite funny two logical issues with his motive behind the question :

1) The logic that since something worked once ergo it will work in the future, forever and unchanged, without adapting to the new situations, is quite obviously wrong. Surrendering only works on people that are willing to surrender and that is all it takes to stop that tactic from working.   Just adapt instead of still trying to use out of seer frustration the same tactic which worked on yourself. I understand his need for vengeance and of course he wants a surrender just to feel nice about it, but it ain't happening. Move on.

2) After your side tilted the table and changed all the informal "rules of engagement" that existed in this game, it is quite a logical leap that you ask for the informal "standard way of ending a war" to still apply. If you wanted a surrender you should never have crossed lines which your opponents can never accept (massive destruction of multiple accounts). Then again, knowing Hathaldir's "quest for revenge" my guess is that this is exactly why he crossed those lines in the first place in order to create the current mayhem.

I think that only those two are enough for him to make a new topic ! ahaahahh