On Dwarven Druids war declaration on Harmless?

Ossian (Abandoned)

Ossian wrote: ES2 wrote: I can message you the details if you'd like, to not.. de-rail this war declaration This conflict has nothing to do with TLR. Unless The Long Road is going to join it officially you should refrain from making comments on it!

ES2 wrote: So you are declaring war on "warmongers" who are defending their ally, by declaring war you are in turn defending your ally.  Why can't these war declarations just simply say you are aiding your ally without so much propaganda? ... Seriously.. how much oppressing has Harmless? and her allies done to you, in my opinion they've only attacked people that's deserved it. Take me, in the past i insulted a player rather badly and was attacked as a punishment. i can accept it was a fair punishment and move on. You, like your friends in VIC are putting out propaganda that is so tedious to read through "this is an attack against those that harm our way of life blah blah blah blah". Seriously, just put out a declaration without any propaganda for ONCE.

Thank you for clarifying your view. I realise now that your post was just a misunderstanding of my original declaration. I do NOT think that Harmless? are particularly evil, and not even that they are warmongers as such. It is just that their perception of the game is fundamentally different from mine.

I do however interpret the bulk of statements by Harmless? players in other threads as well as their declaration of war on Invictus at a "fortunate" moment over such a detail as VIC "attacking" siege armies bombarding cities of a confederate alliance to be a reaction in fear of being "overtaken". Not a panicky fear at all, but a cold and calculated strategically perceived risk of losing power. I am trying to say that the risk is minimal, since the majority of Consone (actually all the Consone members I have met) have small or no ambitions for the kind of power that (again to my understanding and experience) the majority of Harmless? players measures success in. And no, I do not consider Harmless? to be the only alliance playing by those rules, nor an unfair or one in that game. But it so happens that it is the alliance that is attacking a confederate alliance to the Dwarven Druids.

We are not a competitor in the wargame, and would prefer to play our game in parallell and by staying out of wars. It is my belief that if the leadership of Harmless? had understood the underlying principles and ideals of Consone, the war declaration from Harmless? on Invictus would never have occured.

ES2, if you try to read my posts in this thread without your "this-is-propaganda glasses", you might understand what I mean.

May your beard grow!
/Nesse, Great Archdruid

PS.
I consider defending the bombardment of cities (by force or war declaration) to be an aggressive act, while I also consider attacking a siege to prevent it from bombarding a city to be a defensive act. Obviously you and I disagree on both those statements.

Just because I called out the propaganda does not mean I am reading words and randomly getting "propaganda". I am yet to see a reason of war against Harmless post from any Consone member without use of propaganda, though I understand how important it is to win the PR war as much as the real war.

Hora wrote: ES2 wrote: Just because I called out the propaganda does not mean I am reading words and randomly getting "propaganda". I am yet to see a reason of war against Harmless post from any Consone member without use of propaganda, though I understand how important it is to win the PR war as much as the real war. Ehm... OK, I'll try without any PR talk... thus, just facts as I see them (biased as I am) 1.  H? has seen Consone as a competitor from day one. Only understandable, as we have same size. 2. ABSA and RHY had an argument on a mine. Unkind words were exchanged. RHY sent sieges on ABSA. 3. Consone saw those sieges, decided sieges to be out of any proportion in a discussion about a trout mine, decided to break sieges while trying to solve this conflict diplomatically. 4. H? declared war on VIC, claiming, that attacking those siege camps was an act of bullying, aggressive, and such... 5. Mutual defense triggered. Consone alliances not hit by H?'s war declarations either decided to stay neutral like FF, or to defend VIC, stating this by declaring war themselfs. In my opinion, this declaration of Dwarfen Druids against H? falls under "Mutual defense", and not under "Warmongering".  Mutual defense was stated from the very beginning of Consone, and any alliance attacking, would have had to expect this protocoll to take effect.

3 is where the problems started as did the actual escalation. Prior to 3 it was being dealt with between the parties involved in said disputes as most disputes should be. At the time ABSA and SkB were already bigger than RHY numbers wise. They were not likely considered large enough to be bullying RHY however and it was possible for either side to win it.

Involving the rest of Consone in a dispute to save the already larger side in a war is a bit much. Regardless of stated intention it became a war of RHY vs Absa / SkB / Consone.