Play Now Login Create Account
illyriad
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Peaceful Illy Group (PIG)
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Peaceful Illy Group (PIG)
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 45678 10>
Author
  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Rill View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar
Player Council - Geographer

Joined: 17 Jun 2011
Location: California
Status: Offline
Points: 6903 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Rill Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Oct 2014 at 20:14
The vast majority of players who exited the war did so under the simple term of leaving.  No other conditions were placed.  Entire alliances left the war under those conditions, for example Trivium and Dwarven Lords.  Individual players did so as well.

I advocated at the time and continue to advocate for just letting folks leave a war when they are done fighting.  In some cases during the war when payment was requested (by my side) I put up the gold myself to allow players to exit.

KP, if you think that imposing harsh terms to exit a war is not a good practice, I agree with you.  Both Harmless? and my side in the past war have done so in the past.  Hopefully we can move beyond that in the future.

War is a part of Illy.  It's not a part that everyone enjoys.  I have two hopes: 1) that those who prefer to avoid war will be able to do so and 2) those who wish to participate in war will have a way to exit with dignity.

Perhaps PIG was not able to accomplish these goals, but just as the League of Nations was not successful in preventing future wars but perhaps laid the groundwork for later international cooperation, PIG will have laid the ground work or at least set a precedent.

It does seem that we've seen in this thread leaders of major alliances expressing support for the idea that people should be able to exit a war without onerous terms being exacted upon them, other than a commitment not to re-enter the conflict.  Even if this is not formally codified, hopefully it will be something that people will consider in the future.
Back to Top
KillerPoodle View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar

Joined: 23 Feb 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 1853 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote KillerPoodle Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Oct 2014 at 20:00
Originally posted by Rill Rill wrote:


For the record, the proposal developed by the group was very similar to the actual policy implemented during the war, which allowed people who were sick of war to make peace and exit the war, whether for personal or game reasons.


Originally posted by Capricorne Capricorne wrote:

Thank you it failed!!!
I've tried and tried to see the point in formalizing some course of action that are actually already done in game. I mean, in both side of the war we've let player ran off the war if they wanted to. So what's the point? Ad work to alliance leaders???? 

If anyone feel that the war goes too far for him, he just can mail the leaders of the alliance attacking and most of the time, the att will stop. The olny one who where wipped off the map still wanted to fight... So they were fighted ;)

I fail to see what's wrong with it.


Some sample peace terms from those folk who were "allowed to make peace and exit the war"
  • 1billion+ gold  (for a single player).
  • Dismantle all sov.
  • No more than 5K troops per city.
  • Move cities that were within 50 squares of opponents.
  • Threats of resumption of hostilities for participating in a tourney.
I see no evidence of Rill's "similar policy" in those terms and it also shows the ridiculousness of the "Just surrender and everything will be fine" argument advanced by the folk like Capricorn (of which there were many in PIG) who seemingly have no interest in changing the new standard for warfare and look forward to wiping people out again.
"This is a bad idea and we shouldn't do it." - endorsement by HM

"a little name-calling is a positive thing." - Rill
Back to Top
Capricorne View Drop Down
Wordsmith
Wordsmith
Avatar

Joined: 15 May 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 117 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Capricorne Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Oct 2014 at 19:40
Originally posted by Angrim Angrim wrote:

Originally posted by Capricorne Capricorne wrote:

If anyone feel that the war goes too far for him, he just can mail the leaders of the alliance attacking and most of the time, the att will stop. The olny one who where wipped off the map still wanted to fight... So they were fighted ;)
since i have conscientiously avoided finding out who was behind it, i can say with malice toward none that this plan did not work for Beecks or any number of players who were in warring alliances and for one reason or another were not online at the start of the war and whose accounts were systematically destroyed by their wartime rivals even after deflagging, because "they might come back". it also did not work for the handful of combatants who contacted me during the war and shared (risking reprisal) the astonishing conditions required of them to be let out of the war. i suspect there are survivors of the Consone war that might have appreciated a defined way to exit the war without required city-razings beyond those they had already lost.

victors always feel their terms are fair. it is axiomatic. you can make anyone "want to fight" if you make the alternative sufficiently unpalatable.




Hey Angrim! I'm sure there's no malice behind it. No need to say. We all see this by our own point of view for sure ;)

That said; ouch! Now we still have to worry about "what if the one I att isn't online"? Really? I'm sure you know the time a siege take to land. Here's an hint: dayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyys :) So in one isn't online when the war starts, ye have days to log in. If not, when it land all the alliance have a system alert about it in ac. At this point, I think the leader have to take action to protect his members. Active or not. 
During the war, my alt was in the leadership of an alliance with some inactive members who may returns. 3 were attacked. I chose to defend 2 and kick the 3rd cause I knew that's what he would want. For the 2 others, we defended them (whithout a lot of success I admit). 1 of those return with 2 cities less, the other was almost destroyed but I chose to kept him in the alliance as an human shield. The last one hasn't returned, the 2 other yes and they aggree with my choices. I mean that at any point, leaders have option to protect their members or not. Kicking them out is an option.

Anyway, I thought the point was that we wanted to find a way to not hurnting too much players (I still don't really understand the concept during war time). So If a player do not log during a time long enough to see a war emerging, expanding to other alliances and see siege landing on his cities the question is, is he a player???????????? And if not, why should I care? We all complaint about inactive cities lying around the map and permasat acc. So what's the problem? 

Ok I know, it's a bit tricky but it's somehow how I feel it.

For the exit terms, based of those that I saw it seemed pretty light. But again, I may be missinformed or having my jugement altered by the fact that I was on the "winning" side...


Friendly,
Cap.


Edited by Capricorne - 02 Oct 2014 at 19:41
Back to Top
Gragnog View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 28 Nov 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 598 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Gragnog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Oct 2014 at 19:21
+1000. Someone who speaks the truth.
Kaggen is my human half
Back to Top
Angrim View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar

Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Location: Laoshin
Status: Offline
Points: 1173 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Angrim Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Oct 2014 at 18:46
Originally posted by Capricorne Capricorne wrote:

If anyone feel that the war goes too far for him, he just can mail the leaders of the alliance attacking and most of the time, the att will stop. The olny one who where wipped off the map still wanted to fight... So they were fighted ;)
since i have conscientiously avoided finding out who was behind it, i can say with malice toward none that this plan did not work for Beecks or any number of players who were in warring alliances and for one reason or another were not online at the start of the war and whose accounts were systematically destroyed by their wartime rivals even after deflagging, because "they might come back". it also did not work for the handful of combatants who contacted me during the war and shared (risking reprisal) the astonishing conditions required of them to be let out of the war. i suspect there are survivors of the Consone war that might have appreciated a defined way to exit the war without required city-razings beyond those they had already lost.

victors always feel their terms are fair. it is axiomatic. you can make anyone "want to fight" if you make the alternative sufficiently unpalatable.
Back to Top
Capricorne View Drop Down
Wordsmith
Wordsmith
Avatar

Joined: 15 May 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 117 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Capricorne Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Oct 2014 at 08:20
Thank you it failed!!!
I've tried and tried to see the point in formalizing some course of action that are actually already done in game. I mean, in both side of the war we've let player ran off the war if they wanted to. So what's the point? Ad work to alliance leaders???? 

If anyone feel that the war goes too far for him, he just can mail the leaders of the alliance attacking and most of the time, the att will stop. The olny one who where wipped off the map still wanted to fight... So they were fighted ;)

I fail to see what's wrong with it.
Back to Top
Kumomoto View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General


Joined: 19 Oct 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 2224 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Kumomoto Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Oct 2014 at 05:30
Originally posted by Rill Rill wrote:

Kumo, I assure you, you are not important enough in my life for me to hate you.  

If there is any animosity between us that got in the way of the PIG proceedings, then perhaps they will fare better without us.  Sometimes it is better to know when to get out of the way.




Sometimes it is better to know, especially when you espouse the best interests of the server on a daily basis, to do what is best for the server, instead of your own desires.

Your prose defies your statement.

You have played an aggrieved party so long that you have forgotten (if you ever knew) how to be a gracious winner.

What were the names of the ladies who sat at the bottom of the guillotine and wove souvenirs out of the deceased members' hair in the French Revolution, cackling the entire time?
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 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Rill Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Oct 2014 at 05:22
Kumo, I assure you, you are not important enough in my life for me to hate you.  

If there is any animosity between us that got in the way of the PIG proceedings, then perhaps they will fare better without us.  Sometimes it is better to know when to get out of the way.




Edited by Rill - 02 Oct 2014 at 05:23
Back to Top
Kumomoto View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General


Joined: 19 Oct 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 2224 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Kumomoto Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Oct 2014 at 05:20
If people can't see the vindictiveness of an individual who feels the need to kick the guy who lost the war and then tried the noble effort and failed, then I really don't know what to say...
Back to Top
Kumomoto View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General


Joined: 19 Oct 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 2224 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Kumomoto Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Oct 2014 at 05:16
Originally posted by Rill Rill wrote:

I have held my tongue thus far, but I will not stand by and see Kumomoto playing the victim here without responding.

In my experience of PIG, Kumomoto spent most of his time complaining about horribly he was treated in the last war -- in spite of the fact that he and his alt both emerged with 10 cities intact.

If he had focused a bit more on the actual proceedings of the group rather than on harping on how horrible half of the other people in the group had been, then they might have been more willing to work with him.

As for me, I was willing to be patient and overlook his behavior in the interest of getting things done.  But Kumomoto kicked me out of the group for a simple copy and paste error in global chat, an error for which I immediately apologized.

I now wonder whether participation in the group was for some folks a cynical effort to "pretend" for the future that certain folks attempted to do something that would have created a graceful way out of war.  Perhaps the fact that occurred to me indicates that some residual bitterness remained for me as well.  Maybe the whole thing was undertaken too soon.  (Perhaps it should have been done soon(tm) instead?)

For the record, the proposal developed by the group was very similar to the actual policy implemented during the war, which allowed people who were sick of war to make peace and exit the war, whether for personal or game reasons.  I continue to support this as a policy.  People who don't want to be part of a war should have the opportunity for peace with honor.  What this should look like exactly was what PIG was struggling to define while I was a participant.

This game is supposed to be fun, and even when we are at war, we are still all part of this community.

Perhaps at some point in the future after wounds have healed a little more, additional progress can be made.

Anyway, I want to express my appreciation to the members of the group for trying.  Best wishes to Hath and those still there.  I look forward to seeing your proposals.

"Victim"??? I've never claimed to be a victim? I'm just trying to be someone who tried to do something good for Illy... But really, really nice try at disparaging me...

And Rill's true colours come flying out.

She purposefully "leaked" the initial draft of our convention on purpose to GC and she was consistently against the entire effort. Thank you, though, Rill for showing your true colours!

Very helpful in letting everyone know that you purposefully tanked this noble initiative out of personal hatred for me. This should show how "altruistic", "in it for the server and not herself", and "noble" Rill truly is...

I truly hope that Rill will get behind this initiative now that I've left and she herself can get over her personal animosity. If she actually were half as interested in peace (despite her alliance being one of the main perpetrators of the genocide), she would throw her full weight behind this initiative now that I'm gone. Please, please make it happen, Rill! I will gladly bite through my tongue and join you if you decide to be positive towards this instead of negative and try to make it happen...

You seem more interested in bad mouthing our noble efforts. Telling.


Edited by Kumomoto - 02 Oct 2014 at 05:22
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 45678 10>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

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