Claims of Ignoration of Claims

Thorgrim wrote: twilights wrote: I realize it was many years ago and I was only a kid but as I remember on several ocassions and Myr being only one example we enforced the land claim area and in fact basically siege a former leader out of the game...as I remember both the alliance soon and WOT gave their blessing and were deemed off limits to our very aggressive play....that dark used the soup war as an excuse to push out both Vic and EE from our joint land claim. I will agree that current leadership were in growth stages but all were large enough accounts to actively support the western land claim. My question is why the change to be against plus we must all admit that the land claim was fun and exciting play. personally I believe that wide spread permasat and the laughable 90 day deletion rule ruined the early land claim strategy and doomed it until recent changes...so many accounts just sat and the game went out of whack with inactivity and wait for the next tournament play style instead of constant competitive play...winks at devs m That proves my point. Thank you for being open, Twi :)

Edited by Halcyon - 29 Jul 2015 at 12:06

And you diploed ME ay a LATER time. I did not like it!

I realize it was many years ago and I was only a kid but as I remember on several ocassions and Myr being only one example we enforced the land claim area and in fact basically siege a former leader out of the game...as I remember both the alliance soon and WOT gave their blessing and were deemed off limits to our very aggressive play....that dark used the soup war as an excuse to push out both Vic and EE from our joint land claim. I will agree that current leadership were in growth stages but all were large enough accounts to actively support the western land claim. My question is why the change to be against plus we must all admit that the land claim was fun and exciting play. personally I believe that wide spread permasat and the laughable 90 day deletion rule ruined the early land claim strategy and doomed it until recent changes...so many accounts just sat and the game went out of whack with inactivity and wait for the next tournament play style instead of constant competitive play...winks at devs m

Edited by twilights - 29 Jul 2015 at 00:12

I just looked at my outgoing IGM and found out that the first alliance wide message I ever sent in Dark was written on Feb 24 2012, two days after Sisren's Writ of Notice.

Edited by Halcyon - 28 Jul 2015 at 21:33

King korr wrote: Janders wrote: Jejune, we mean this in a case-by-case basis.  Just a VERY hypothetical example-- (1) HYPOTHETICALLY, SIN claims Fellandire, and despite WoT having cities on the border / a few squares within, states we don't have the right to harvest or expand around those cities. (2) HYPOTHETICALLY, WoT has a large cluster of cities (say 45) spread around Farshards outside of the SIN claim. However SIN has 5 cities mixed into this area, which they plan of leaving there and using to harvest aggressively.   We would be AGAINST this arrangement.  We are against LC in general, but especially if you are going to kick us out of an area and tell us not to harvest there, but then leave cities of your own outside of your claim and harvest amongst us.  Certainly we don't mind random people settling within our loose clusters, and harvesting as they see fit as friendly neighbors.  But if you are going to restrict our livelihood, crafting, hunting and trade, we will feel free to do the same in return. Now all of this is quite hypothetical, we don't have clusters of cities next to SIN and SIN doesn't have cities amongst our cluster stealing our earth salts ;) Let me expand on this Say Alliance A has claimed a region next to WoT we have no cities in that region. BUT they have a few cities in Ainoara, where we have cities. What would stop Alliance A claiming a second region as their alliance expands and needs more harvest able location so then WoT would either have to go bow to this alliance demands to settle in a region we've been, be kicked out or go to war.  Seeing as how WoT as a whole is against land claims and won't avoid region's where there are some, and will defend members right's to settle anywhere (out side of 10sq radius of course), and will use ALL  means to defend our right to do so. How this makes use grey i don't know as we not saying we're against land claims but will just stay in our location's we are actively settling where members want to and informed alliance's close to use that if they stick to their land claims it will bring them in to conflict with us. Also we don't believe alliance's should be able to have their cake and eat it as the saying goes if you want a region to your self you should Be able to defend and enforce such claim If blocking others from a region you should stay in that region and not be surprised others are hostile to you trying to have a land claimed region. While still settling freely everywhere else, this is a double standard and we're pointing it out it's a double said.