Play Now Login Create Account
illyriad
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Concerning the cities of Steadfast Shield
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedConcerning the cities of Steadfast Shield
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 23456>
Author
  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Subatoi View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 01 Mar 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 380 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 Apr 2012 at 20:30
But the action benefits the player that operates the two accounts, that is what I was getting at.

If say I irritated Luna and she banned EF so I just possed Subatoi and I attempted to re-claim EF's cities through siege by Subatoi's account, you all would say as previously spoken above "this violates the rules,  this is helping the account out". But having the two accounts in the same alliance that could potentially break sieges on each others cities would be helping the accounts out in an unfair way, no?

You'd be and people are, controlling potentially 20 cities at the same time, where two different people controlling ten cities could log in at different intervals and send reinforcements to break sieges at different times, thus potentially rendering a greater siege damage to the friend's cities, as it is currently you could be in the same situation but with the ability to quickly check your other account for incoming attacks, ready up defenses in 20 cities in a few minutes.

Is this making sense?


Edited by Subatoi - 06 Apr 2012 at 20:32
Back to Top
SunStorm View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 01 Apr 2011
Location: "Look Up"
Status: Offline
Points: 979 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 Apr 2012 at 20:16
Originally posted by Subatoi Subatoi wrote:

The majority of players use their accounts to benefit the player, TD and EJ, Nesse and Odd, SS and SS, EF and Subatoi and so on.
First of all, why was I not listed?  (only kidding)  Anywhooo - these accounts you have listed are not raising cities to be sacrificed to the larger account.  That is what Rill is getting at...  not one player having two accounts which can potentially help each other out.

Again, the fact that Silent was open about this account and it was not kept secret leads me to believe that this account was not suspended by his own choice...  I dare not say more on the subject...
"Side? I am on nobody's side because nobody is on my side" ~LoTR
Back to Top
SunStorm View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 01 Apr 2011
Location: "Look Up"
Status: Offline
Points: 979 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 Apr 2012 at 20:10
I accessed your post on the history of E/A (http://forum.illyriad.co.uk/the-history-of-wn-warriors-of-the-new_topic3390_post41827.html#41827) and you mention that E/A has had trouble in the past with staying within their defined boundary.  May I ask if there is any boundary agreement with Curse, WoT, Fremen alliances, etc...?

Now, in a previous post, you said the word "Fremen" ("Titanium Tower, the lesser of the two fremen cites . . .").  I am assuming this was a typo, but have decided to include the Fremen alliances in here as well (since everyone knows they are based in Fremorn).  I have created an overlay image for the community to see based on the information in this post.


Curse: Fuchsia - Fremen (all three alliances): Blue - E/A: Green

Tordenkaffen is in Curse (I chose to make them fuchsia for fun - not making any political statement here...  lol) and would like those locations for Curse members.  As you can see, this is an obvious claim due to the locations of the contested cities and the fact that they lie right next to Curse cities. 

Yes, E/A does have "a fairly large hub (for [themselves]) in fremorn" - however, these cities are spread out...  It is difficult to see where exactly your hub is concentrated.  Furthermore, there is a large grouping of E/A cities in the far south of the map (not shown above).  How many hubs are you claiming for this alliance and are their any defined boundaries listed?

I must say, I don't fully understand why you suspended your account and then made such a hasty claim about the cities...  perhaps I should refrain from saying any more on that...

I also like you as a player, but this may very well be a losing battle.
"Side? I am on nobody's side because nobody is on my side" ~LoTR
Back to Top
Subatoi View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 01 Mar 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 380 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 Apr 2012 at 20:04
Originally posted by Rill Rill wrote:

By the way, Silent Sword stated many times that he was putting Steady's cities in those locations so he could siege them later.  He planned this.  I like Silent, but this is wrong.

How is Steady's actions to siege his suspended alternate account's cities so that he may capture them and thereby absorb them into his current account wrong? The majority of players use their accounts to benefit the player, TD and EJ, Nesse and Odd, SS and SS, EF and Subatoi and so on.  If there is a fault in sieging a Suspended account's cities and absorbing them into your current account, which happened to be under the same control of the person who controlled the suspended account, then why is it allowed to have the two accounts in the same alliance?  You'd most definitely use the two accounts to help the person operating them in any alliance situation, tourney, warfare etc.
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: 06 Apr 2012 at 19:51
Why didn't he siege his alt town, while alt was still active?

I suspect he is playing more than 2 accounts and wrong one got banned....
Back to Top
Rill View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar
Player Council - Geographer

Joined: 17 Jun 2011
Location: California
Status: Offline
Points: 6903 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 Apr 2012 at 19:40
By the way, Silent Sword stated many times that he was putting Steady's cities in those locations so he could siege them later.  He planned this.  I like Silent, but this is wrong.
Back to Top
Rill View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar
Player Council - Geographer

Joined: 17 Jun 2011
Location: California
Status: Offline
Points: 6903 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 Apr 2012 at 19:38
So a player settled a city next to your former suspended account, and you coerced them into moving so you could siege that city?

Not cool.  Not cool at all.
Back to Top
Silent/Steadfast View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 03 Jun 2011
Location: Pacific County
Status: Offline
Points: 553 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 Apr 2012 at 18:34
Sunstorm:
While these cites are in fremorn, where tordenkaffen's alliance does have a hub, they are in eastern fremorn, while the majority of the fremen curse members are in southern and western fremorn.  Titanium Tower, the lesser of the two fremen cites, is somewhat in southern fremorn, however it is the less contested of the two cities, and curse has made no move to capture it.  Concerning E/A, we do have a fairly large hub (for us) in fremorn, and the cities, especially cobalt castle, are within our territory.  
"Semantics are no protection from a 50 Megaton Thermonuclear Stormcrow."-Yggdrassil (June 21, 2011 6:48 PM)
"SCROLL ya donut!" Urgorr The Old (September 1, 2011 4:08 PM)
Back to Top
SunStorm View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 01 Apr 2011
Location: "Look Up"
Status: Offline
Points: 979 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 Apr 2012 at 18:23
Silent-

Are these cities within the defined boarders of your alliance or are they some of the cities that encroached upon the boundary line you had previously negotiated?  perhaps that will help people to understand more fully the reasons behind the claim / counterclaim. 

Do these cities lie within Tordenkaffen's alliance hub?
"Side? I am on nobody's side because nobody is on my side" ~LoTR
Back to Top
Silent/Steadfast View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 03 Jun 2011
Location: Pacific County
Status: Offline
Points: 553 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 Apr 2012 at 18:04
Originally posted by Ander Ander wrote:

The players who wish to reserve some cities to themselves, why don't they do it by sending an empty siege? They could send the real siege when they are ready to capture it. That way they can claim first rights and don't invite unwanted attention. 

The reason that I posted this is because someone was starting a siege on one of steady's cities, and someone else had settled another city next to a different one.  If I hadn't spoken up things would be much more gnarly than they are right now.  I do have sieges inbound to those cities, and the players who are involved with them have been kind enough to work with me and comply with my request to the best of their abilities. 
"Semantics are no protection from a 50 Megaton Thermonuclear Stormcrow."-Yggdrassil (June 21, 2011 6:48 PM)
"SCROLL ya donut!" Urgorr The Old (September 1, 2011 4:08 PM)
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 23456>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.03
Copyright ©2001-2019 Web Wiz Ltd.