PA and Champ declare war against Valar

Createure wrote: Although I do feel I should point out that " i will defend the innocent and attack the bully" is NOT the reason there is a war at the moment - nobody is saying that one side is a victim more than the other and no one side is trying to be a 'police force'.

Albatross wrote: This thread has taken a nice turn: dare I say I see some agreement :o) I take the sandbox view, which doesn't necessarily counter the other (war); one is a subset of the other. In being a sandbox, it more correctly reflects the diverse set of views that one would find in real life: some want to build and work for the common good; others define a set of people who are deemed to be 'outside' and want to exploit them in competitive ways. So in the spirit of sandboxing, I don't think any particular outlook on the purpose of tools is 'correct' or 'wrong'. We form opinions on our preferred goals and styles of play, and it may cause conflict with those who disagree or are hindered by the resulting actions. There's only one behaviour that doesn't fit with the sandboxing ethos, which is newbie-bashing, because it doesn't allow affected players to grow into the game and use what the sandbox has to offer; it's like targeting children in war (by analogy, rather than importance, I should add). I think the grace period (newbie protection) is too short to be survivable, should anyone 'go rogue'. In the meantime, I can only hope that newbies know they can just shout for help and get it, rather than leave the game.

I agree. I have seen and learned many people in my 9 months of Illy playing i do like the huge map trying to do my cities better all the time, enjoyed tournaments e.t.c. But also have learned that always are more agressive people testing their military overpower to new players. In another games we would not discuss reasons of war, in this game we like to discuss them and any of us is trying to be the saint or find the reason. So considering that we all have diferences we have to accept that others may dont like our way of playing the game and in this point maybe a war will begin. So really cant understand those who are trying to impose their believes or to missjudges actions. This is a great game having too many things to do but also a strategy one. If i dont like to see a new player been attacked by a bully (big old player) perhaps i will defend the innocent and attack the bully it is my freedom and decission no one can force me to act like the one way or the other.

p.s. As my actions are talking more than my words i have never attacked any player and as TD said i am not vet (not yet participated in a war)

This thread has taken a nice turn: dare I say I see some agreement :o)

I take the sandbox view, which doesn't necessarily counter the other (war); one is a subset of the other. In being a sandbox, it more correctly reflects the diverse set of views that one would find in real life: some want to build and work for the common good; others define a set of people who are deemed to be 'outside' and want to exploit them in competitive ways.

So in the spirit of sandboxing, I don't think any particular outlook on the purpose of tools is 'correct' or 'wrong'. We form opinions on our preferred goals and styles of play, and it may cause conflict with those who disagree or are hindered by the resulting actions. There's only one behaviour that doesn't fit with the sandboxing ethos, which is newbie-bashing, because it doesn't allow affected players to grow into the game and use what the sandbox has to offer; it's like targeting children in war (by analogy, rather than importance, I should add). I think the grace period (newbie protection) is too short to be survivable, should anyone 'go rogue'. In the meantime, I can only hope that newbies know they can just shout for help and get it, rather than leave the game.

Createure wrote: I am not entirely sure what other reasons you suggest people should go to war other than for reasons of 'fun' 'helping friends' and 'not liking someone' in an online strategy game? Should we pick a target randomly using dice perhaps? Or maybe you are just saying that all war is wrong? So are our soldiers just to be used for gathering experience points and trying to win tournaments?

LordOfTheSwamp wrote: Nokigon wrote:   Kurdruk,  Whilst the Cave are being Switzerland ATM I would also like to point out that if you don't like Azreil's approach, then you're probably not in the right alliance.   I also admire the way he dealt with _duQ: he had to walk a fine line between standing by an alliance member and dealing with the fact that duQ was acting like an utter *rse - and I think he did that very well.

Gonna have to disagree with you there.  Az had no issues with the way _duQ behaved *until* he messed with someone in H? 

The problem for Az (and ultimately _duQ) was not what _duQ did but who he did it to and that's the meat of a lot of the arguments against VALAR.