Why the war against World's End?
Printed From: Illyriad
Category: The World
Forum Name: Politics & Diplomacy
Forum Description: If you run an alliance on Elgea, here's where you should make your intentions public.
URL: http://forum.illyriad.co.uk/forum_posts.asp?TID=1294
Printed Date: 17 Apr 2022 at 04:58
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.03 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Why the war against World's End?
Posted By: Finrod
Subject: Why the war against World's End?
Date Posted: 20 Nov 2010 at 13:49
|
Approximately two days ago Prisoner's of Society, Caliquendi, and Order of the Valars began military and diplomatic attacks against World's End. Today an attack was dodged by Love World Order. We have sent messages asking why these alliances are attacking, but have been met with silence. Only one member of Prisoner's of Society has responded, stating a WE member is "rumored" to be behind spell and diplo attacks against various Prisoner members.
I've asked for reports so we can deal with it in house, but have received no further replies, ergo, no reports. I remain open to the possiblity that members of WE have committed said actions, however, no one is providing information for us to act on. Further, despite multiple attacks landing and en route, no formal declaration of war has been issued.
The leadership at World's End is seeking to learn what crimes we have been found guilty of to warrant a united attack against us from four alliances, three of whom are individually larger than World's End. While we remain open to the possiblity we have acted provocatively, because we don't have more information, our current position is that these attacks are unprovoked, or in the least, a disproportionate response to grievances committed by one member.
We continue to refrain from counter attacking at this time until more information is known. But if the attacks continue, our survival may depend on our response.
Any and all information or defensive aid is welcome,
Finrod
|
Replies:
Posted By: King EAM
Date Posted: 20 Nov 2010 at 13:51
| Lots of wars this time of year... |
Posted By: Kumomoto
Date Posted: 20 Nov 2010 at 16:54
|
True, King... Must be the changing of the seasons... |
Posted By: HonoredMule
Date Posted: 20 Nov 2010 at 18:01
|
Aw, it's snowing and I can't go out biking. Whelp, guess I'll go declare war on somebody.  |
Posted By: Sgt..Shanks
Date Posted: 21 Nov 2010 at 11:05
|
Bullies are using the TMM smoke screen.. its unfair and unjustified:( The above was my original statement.. and i stick by it!! However please note that my opinion was and remains to be, that [Valar] WERE and STILL ARE using the oportunity (and cover) to cause WE members many problems. Do Valar even acknowlege how many Alliance members of WE, are actually "New players"??  Not to mention (unfortunately) the 8 members that have not logged on for over 4 weeks. Therefore I can think of no other word than "Bullies" :P oportunistic, yes! But Bullies.. None the less :( |
Posted By: -hypocritical-
Date Posted: 21 Nov 2010 at 12:36
erm... TMM are the bullies?
|
Sgt..Shanks wrote:Posted By: lorre
Date Posted: 21 Nov 2010 at 12:38
they mean an other alliance is using the how u say it (activety)? around TMM to make there move unnoticed ------------- The battlefield is a scene of constant chaos. The winner will be the one who controls that chaos, both his own and the enemies. Napoleon Bonaparte |
Posted By: Teiru
Date Posted: 21 Nov 2010 at 12:43
|
I just fail to see why Cyan is being sieged. He had nothing to do with PoS or Valar. There have been some issues with a small member Kome and SirTwitchy but that has been sorted out, or so we thought. The only contact Cyan had was that a PoS member had sent a mail to Cyan accusing him for sending 900 thieves to one of his settlements. The proof for that was that Cyan is the only player big enough to have that high amount of thieves in our area. Firstly, you dont need to have 60k+
pop to have 900 thieves. A 10k heavy diplo player can easily have that. There are plenty of players of that size in our area. Secondly, Cyan does NOT thieve/attack ACTIVE players. This is being stated in his profile since he was a 500
pop player, if that would happen that you should contact him regarding this
etc. Thirdly, Cyan doesnt use only 900
thieves. At first we thought the letter was a joke and Cyan said in alliance
chat: Like I would use a petty number like 900 for thievery lol. Im aware that this is a war game
and should be played as such, otherwise it would be pretty boring. But cant
you at least start a war for a more proper reason than on the basis that Cyan
is the only big player enough to have 900 thieves? Is that all your justice is worth? While we are at it and as far
thievery goes, Komes settlement in the more southern region was being harassed
by PoS thieves which we solved in a diplomatic manner. Another 200 pop player,
NikNaki, in the same region had been harassed by thievery before joining our
ranks. Im afraid that both Valar and PoS
are mere puppets for the real puppet master behind all of this. Please feel free to add your side of the story. |
Posted By: Finrod
Date Posted: 21 Nov 2010 at 13:51
|
In my initial post, I listed an attack from Love World Order. That player, and alliance, has made it clear that they are not involved and have declared they will not attack again. WE holds no grudge and considers the matter with LWO resolved.
However, the #10, 13, and 15 ranked alliances continue to attack, assissinate, and siege World's End, ranked #17. We still don't know why, and we can't mount a defense against those odds that will give us a hope of surviving.
I know TMM is the main focus of Illyria right now, and they've ruined the game for countless new and smaller players, but if we don't receive help, and the attacks continue, we will be destroyed.
|
Posted By: Teiru
Date Posted: 21 Nov 2010 at 14:15
|
Dont really care if I, or some of us for that matter, get destroyed, that is bound to happen to alot of other players as well which is also a great part of the game. It's just the way they do it that makes them look pathetic. We welcome any support out of your own free will, but we wont beg for it nor will we beg for mercy.
|
Posted By: lorre
Date Posted: 21 Nov 2010 at 14:18
|
diplomacy didnt work? did u try letting a third party negotiate for you? ------------- The battlefield is a scene of constant chaos. The winner will be the one who controls that chaos, both his own and the enemies. Napoleon Bonaparte |
Posted By: Finrod
Date Posted: 21 Nov 2010 at 14:54
|
I've contacted SirTwitchy of 0-0, azreil from Valar, (I haven't had time to write to Tinuviel-meant to yesterday) asking why they are attacking. ST said Cyan was the target, but has not responded to follow up requests as to why. Azreil didn't reply.
H? has not replied to my request for advice or mediation (I did not ask them to intervene militarily). I contacted shayala, MoreBlue4U2, and Pasi from Tranquil Vision, again asking for mediation, but have not received a response.
My understanding is Good Company is trying to gather info from both sides, but I haven't heard from them for a day perhaps.
I've tried to avoid contacting alliances I know are dealing with TMM (except my request to H? for diplomatic aid).
I believe a WE member who was once part of T? contacted Starry, but again, they are having trouble with TMM.
What dismays me most is that my messages have been read, and no reponse was given; it is not that my requests for mediation have been denied, it's that they seem to have been completely ignored.
|
Posted By: Zangi
Date Posted: 21 Nov 2010 at 15:26
|
Consultation with alliance members? Preventing a war is one thing... but, getting into another needs the backing of the alliance. Mulling over logistics? The farther away they are from you, the less willing people are to help. (At least, supposedly to your benefit, you guys are in a central place.) Those things can take time. Rogue/vigilante actions are looked down upon because it reflects their alliance as a whole. It isn't so simple... look at how long it took for the anti-TMM coalition to get together... |
Posted By: Starry
Date Posted: 21 Nov 2010 at 16:01
|
Finrod, my inbox has been a disaster for days but I don't remember getting a message from an ex-T member about your situation. If I had, I would have responded that Toothless is in no position to help anyone, I have an alliance full of new players who are just learning the game; we are also a peaceful alliance. The TMM situation has us busy trying to protect our new players in that area of conflict (including those fleeing the threats by TMM). :( |
Posted By: Yearick
Date Posted: 21 Nov 2010 at 17:21
|
As various members of WE have already mentioned, these attacks have come out of the blue. While we tried to reach an NAP with them once the thievery accusations came to light, they left mails unanswered and the NAP unaccepted the only response I had was from one of their members who was rather approachable concerning the situation. The text is below:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Posted By: some random guy
Date Posted: 21 Nov 2010 at 22:03
|
"Oh, its lovely weather for a slay ride together with youuu!!!" "History is written by the whiners" Just a couple of (altered) quotes that I thought might add a bit of merriment to this post... note: The opinions stated in the above quotes do not necessarily reflect the beliefs and/or views of the poster or his small, peaceful alliance that has nothing to do with any of the wars going on.
|
Posted By: Finrod
Date Posted: 22 Nov 2010 at 00:29
|
Zangi, my initial inquiries were for advice and mediation, not intervention, so I wasn't worried about logistics. This is the first war most of us have been involved in, so it's a tough environment to understand what is going on, let alone all of the game mechanics involved in a siege set against your city. Prior to this, our only major military battle came when a Mal Motshan attack followed a new member to our alliance cluster after she teleported out of their territory. Thank you for offering the considerations we must have of the other alliances decisions. I have tried to message soome members of the alliances, as free time allows, but some don't answer, and some claim they are just following orders.
Starry, it wasn't my intention to get T? involved, I know and appreciate what your alliance is about and what you do. The message was to ask if you would petition H? on our behalf to mediate. I sent you an in-game message with the player's name to keep their identity private. I don't know what happened to the message that was supposed to have been sent. After your reply, I checked the player's alliance history, and the player was not in T?, so I'm a little confused about how this happened... Apologies.
I hope to join you in Mal Motsha should fate allow.
|
Posted By: Becblue
Date Posted: 22 Nov 2010 at 06:05
|
Hello,The position of Prisoners of The Society is this is happening because of a few reasons. First starting off with Cyan mass diplo attacking mine and Valars alliance and giving me no other reason then he suspected my alliance of attacking 1 of his members when i asked who he couldn't even provide detalis and had never contacted me about problems. Even though i apologized nicely even though i did nothing wrong and asked him for a NAP twice he ignored it.Whilst a NAP was eventually offered we still had nothing but problems diplos,caravans&spells. I have found him to be unpolite and a bigheaded bully (it's amazing now he is under pressure he is trying to be nice,lol) I also found out about him doing the same sorts of things to Calaquendi. I went on to learn alot more about them too via a friend in their alliance even the fact that they were planning to attack my alliance here is just a little bit from their chat-[17:52] -Yearick- Exactly, and if Kome needs some resources that bad, I have some I can spare. [17:52] -Yearick-I'd rather wait a few days for a building binge if it means keeping 0-0 quiet while we grow [17:53] -Teiru-Yep, I would gladly donate resources to him too just like you say. We need some more time. [17:53] -Yearick-Its just unfortunate that he's on the front line of it [17:54] -Teiru-Indeed **Im so sick of the bullsh*t the last few days,lol the truth of the matter is Cyan is not innocent. It is a game with armies so when you piss alot of people off you got to expect their armies to come knocking besides from his chats he seemed so sure he is the best and could handle anyone,lol so i hope you now understand the reasons why i have chosen to attack Cyan i personally have no problems or intentions of going after anyother members (Even though by rights we could as they were planing on attacking us but i believe only because of Cyan) and that is why i have not declared war because as far as im concerned it's only revenge against Cyan not a war against the whole alliance. Here is another one of their alliances chats to shed a little light on why-[00:57] I can send you 10K stone in a bit Balks, just waiting for my caravans to get back from shuffling resources around during mass diplo attack [00:57] who attacked you? [00:58] Queen of the Calawotsits, she objects to my killing alexius's caravans when he is harvesting on my soverign terrains [00:59] So far shes had a couple successful scout missions, lost 200 sabs and 75 thieves, and managed to get off with 7K gold. Fair swap so far [00:59] stone is on the way [00:59] yeah, he tried to harvest on my sovereign terrain too [00:59] I have informed her that we consider harvesting on soverign terrains as thieving [01:00] and thieving caravans are subject to execution [01:01] yep [01:02] She said where she comes from destroying caravans is a declaration of war and invited me to move close to her so she could show me what she did to destroyers of caravans. [01:02] I said I pity her for living in such a barbaric place and said I would not move from my nice civilised spot [01:03] yeah, what's her pop? [01:03] 85K I think [01:03] ouch Whilst i feel Yearick is a good alliance head i think due to Cyans size he is the main diplo influence and i felt he should stew in retaliation to their intial diplo efforts and whilst i cannot speak for others my alliance has every intention of stopping when Cyan has payed. Oh and in response to RMY-Shanks before you make a comment find out the facts first, the fact of the matter is our issues had started before issues with TMM had blown up so we are not hiding behind their smoke screen as you put it and we have nothing to do with TMM. We are not the bullys, I tried diplomatically to sort things out and was very nice about things considering. I myself like to help and be friendly and i have made alot of friends in game because of it. Anyway that is just my 2cents feel free to contact me if you are wishing to discuss the problems further. Thanks & Best wishes to all, BecBlue 
|
Posted By: Aelfric
Date Posted: 22 Nov 2010 at 06:13
| Wait, who declared caravans harvesting on sovereign tiles must be destroyed? The chat log does not show the names. Either way, that concept is silly. |
Posted By: Teiru
Date Posted: 22 Nov 2010 at 06:47
|
I love how you post bits from our chat to make it angle like We were the ones planning an attack. Why dont you post what was said before that or is your spy just wanting to portrait us as hostile? Well, I'll tell you instead.
I was criticizing our own member, Kome for being so sensitive to caravan bumping which is also the reason that led to the SirTwitchy/Kome incident in the first place. Which is why Yearick stated that if he needed resources that he would send him some instead in order to AVOID conflicts with Prisoners. Also this is why Yearick stating that it is unfortunate that he is in the front line of it beacuse he is the one closest to you with such attitude. Me saying We need more time gets a different meaning now, doesnt it? More time to solve and avoid further conflicts with our neighbors. And wanting to grow is almost every alliance goal, but apparently its now equal to planning a war. As for the rest, I’m sure Cyan/Yearick can fill in with better information than I can. Anyways, Bec I'm glad you decided to give your side of the story no matter how much we might disagree with each other. EDIT: This also tells me how early you have started to gather intelligence on us while we still did not even think the slightest thought that things were that serious. If we were planning a war with you then I'm sure you could get a more proper "chat screenshot" of us stating that we had plans on going to war with Prisioners. |
Posted By: Smoking GNU
Date Posted: 22 Nov 2010 at 07:41
If you REALLY feel this strongly that your position against Cyan is a righteous cause, even going so far as to post chat logs (censoring names does not help your cause much) the one thing which will quieten down the uproar of dissaproval from the Illyriad community at large (this excludes the 3 alliances against Cyan of course) is actual proof of Cyan thieving the alliances and casting hostile spells (I concede that if these were one-shot spells they prob won't be identifiable). It's not that hard to identify the source of a diplo attack, all you need is a lot of free time, screenshots and graph plotting skills. On the other hand i see absolutely NOTHING wrong with killing caravans on YOUR sov squares if they're not in your alliance/NAP/Confed. It's your Tile, you claimed it as your land, therefore it's your res spawn point. Thats the whole point of claiming sov, is it not? |
Posted By: Teiru
Date Posted: 22 Nov 2010 at 08:05
|
The thing is, Cyan is not exactly known for being a discrete person. I mean people on global chat saw him yesterday publish his troop size. In alliance chat he talks about everything, especially how much his Dark Elves have gathered from various inactive players. They even have a spy that has been in our alliance for quite some time now and yet they can’t even provide a chat log of him saying anything about his thievery on PoS/Valar. |
Posted By: Becblue
Date Posted: 22 Nov 2010 at 09:11
|
If you REALLY feel this strongly that your position against Cyan is a righteous cause, even going so far as to post chat logs (censoring names does not help your cause much) the one thing which will quieten down the uproar of dissaproval from the Illyriad community at large (this excludes the 3 alliances against Cyan of course) is actual proof of Cyan thieving the alliances and casting hostile spells (I concede that if these were one-shot spells they prob won't be identifiable). It's not that hard to identify the source of a diplo attack, all you need is a lot of free time, screenshots and graph plotting skills. On the other hand i see absolutely NOTHING wrong with killing caravans on YOUR sov squares if they're not in your alliance/NAP/Confed. It's your Tile, you claimed it as your land, therefore it's your res spawn point. Thats the whole point of claiming sov, is it not? **To reply to your post Smoking. I didn't not censor the names they didn't appear when the chat was copied and sent to me. As you said yourself one time spells are hard to trace and you can never have real proof of it other then monitoring a players magic rank and as for your identifying diplo attacks i myself was on and witnessed Cyans diplo attacks but unfortunately i do not have alot of free time nor do i have screenshots or graphing skills (Iam no computer wizz i'm a country girl who only got a computer last year) If you think it is justified to kill caravans on sov squares then you should also realise it is going to piss some people off and they will seek payback coz not everyone agrees with it so you shouldn't have a cry if someone comes after you for revenge because of it. I would also like to ask everyone why is this such a big deal he pissed alot of people off that is why the 3 alliances came together. Has everyone forgotten the fact that this is a game and not everyone is going to get along. I ask you this are we never meant to use the armies and sieges we build if someone continues after we have tried to diplomatically resolve the issue? Because if so that would make the game a little pointless. |
Posted By: Smoking GNU
Date Posted: 22 Nov 2010 at 09:33
|
Let me put it like this. People are Riling up against the 3 alliances because they're screaming Bloody Murder and Revenge, yet fail to substanciate their claims. This sets an ugly precident. When will the 3 involved allianced decide I need to be taken out "For revenge cause i aggrivated a lot of people" then refuse to prove anything that you claim? Where will this stop? Is there anyone you won't accuse of wrong doing? A reason is not needed to go to war. Yet saying you have a reason might require some proof if you're don't want a political clustersuck on your hands. The playerbaseis riling against the "Cause" as it were, because the excuse can be used against anyone to justify any attack, no matter how baseless. Basically, all your saying is "We attack you because you hit us and we WON'T Prove it, so stfu and take your punishment" Also, if you get all bent out of shap cause you lost a few caravans when you sent it out of your own safe zone and into non-friendly terretory, i REALLY do not want to see you when faction AI gets introduced. You are going to loose a LOT more caravans, trade missions and so on than you ever did with Cyan. PS: Use Paragraps please. Walls of text make my eyes hurt. |
Posted By: Zangi
Date Posted: 22 Nov 2010 at 13:01
This. Just to make it clear to you guys. Trying to be righteous about it falls short when all you got is: "We got no proof whatsoever, but its gotta be him." Also, @BecBlue use the quote thing when you quote people, less confusing that way. |
Posted By: Tinuviel
Date Posted: 22 Nov 2010 at 20:05
|
Well I suppose I must now delve into this discussion from the Calaquendi viewpoint. As you may know, I rarely come onto the forums. Calaquendi's issue is with Cyan only. This thread has pretty much explained the issues I had with Cyan against my Alliance member Alexius. Issues were still continuing. BecBlue contacted me explaining their attacks. I took the decision to send my troops against Cyan only. I have not attacked any other players in WE. My instructions to my people have only been directed towards Cyan. I didn't know anything about TMM. And I responded back to Finrod as soon as I got the igm. I find the chat conversations most interesting. |
Posted By: xilla
Date Posted: 22 Nov 2010 at 20:52
You are just fearmongering. I don't know what you stand to gain from that, but telling everyone you live in fear of the day we come for you is ridiculous. A lot of PoS came from IE. We were not a ruthless, warring alliance when we were at out peak at rank 3 or 4. We are not ruthless or bloodthirsty now.
I'm sorry, but you all were 'riling' long before Bec decided to come on here and state some facts. Before we apparently made baseless accusations, you already made up your mind about what we were all about. Whatever WE said might have been pure truth, might have been pure lies, unless you hear it from the horses mouth (sorry Bec :P) don't be so easily swayed. The point is so me people decided to come on here and start painting us in a bad light. Saying we are using TMM as a smokescreen is a baseless accusation in itself. Shouldn't slander us on the public forums; people in glass houses and all that.
I think you just want to see us as the bad guys. You know that AI is obviously different from human players, I don't even know why you'd want to make a joke out of us getting 'riled' over AI attacks. Unless it's a not-so-subtle attempt at making us look foolish, which is childish tbh. I think we are also not alone when we think that bumping caravans is bearable, but destroying them is not. http://forum.illyriad.co.uk/invictus-victrix-announcement_topic1271.html - http://forum.illyriad.co.uk/invictus-victrix-announcement_topic1271.html Injustices have been committed upon our members. We found our enemy had been busy making even more enemies. We are dealing with the situation. We are not destroying poor defenceless newbies. We are teaching a particular someone who has been around long enough to know better that when you push, sometimes people push back. You accuse H? of policing the server. Lol. I think what people are more concerned with is the fact that they want to go around policing the server and imposing their morality upon every alliance and H? scares them too much to do it. Stop trying to police other alliances actions that you have no affiliations nor concerns with. Rest assured that we are not going to come after you if you don't destroy our caravans and send mass diplo missions. I'll leave you with a final thought. A lot of people across 3 alliances are targetting a select few. Is it more logincal that there was a mass coordination of resources to get together, pool information, scout out and find a random target to attack simultaneously, or do you think that maybe, just maybe, that person has pissed a lot of people off? |
Posted By: Teiru
Date Posted: 22 Nov 2010 at 22:06
|
At first I wanted to write a really harsh post but I realized it wouldn't do anyone too much good so instead, let me tell you all a story from not long ago. When I started playing this game close to the position I am now, I had this neighbor 50ish squares north of me with 500 pop named Cyan. The reason he was the first guy I noticed around was that he was so active, his caravans were everywhere. Whenever my caravans got interrupted I didn't even had to check who it was, it was him. I noticed he was farming all the inactives around with armies, thieves you name it. Mercilessly but effectively using all the game mechanics to maximize his growth. He was a real 'macro' player what we would call in RTS games. At first I was like, aren't I the unlucky guy to get placed next to such a greedy player. After the first ingame message exchange with him, I got a whole different impression. He seemed so nice and different from the first impression I have gotten of him. Eventually I joined World's End where he was second in command. The guy that at first thought seemed greedy and selfish was in reality one of the nicest and most generous people I have met in any game. Whenever he finds a big inactive player he would clear its ward/guards with his units and then invite the whole alliance to join him in emptying it as there was always plenty for everyone, sending resources, gold etc to anyone needing. I'm pretty sure that almost anyone that had any kind of message exchange with him would agree that he is not the guy they thought him to be at first glance. So to all of you guys that are annoyed with Cyan had probably not even bothered to actually TALK with him without being too narrow-minded. Thanks for reading. |
Posted By: Noryasha Grunk
Date Posted: 23 Nov 2010 at 00:50
|
hI remember vhen Cyan vas a tiny little guy! And den vhen he used prestige to get really big really quick (and he hyused it damned smart to grow as fast as he did, honestly) and started attackink and threatenink to siege da cities of some of our members, for reasons dat vere never quite made clear. He does know how to throw his veight around doh, and hI imagine dat at least a few people in various alliances hef reason to dislike him. Still, he never bothered me, and never launched da siege he vas threatenink, so who knows. Hef fun vit hyus var, guys. |
Posted By: Brids17
Date Posted: 23 Nov 2010 at 01:26
Well lets look at what was stated here. 3 alliance grouped together to attack one guy. Why are so many people needed for one guy? WE is smaller than all three of the alliances attacking Cyan. It's also been said when they asked you guys why Cyan was being attacked, there was no response. Worse yet, it's been said you guys read the messages but ignored them. If your reason for attacking Cyan is so just, why were you afraid to give the alliance leader the reason? You guys only showed up when you started to look bad in the forums and you showed up with little to no proof of your accusations. All you could provide was some broken up chat logs from a **spy** you had join WE and that Cyan had destroyed a few caravans. So unless there's some real proof that either WE was planning to wage war with an alliance twice it's size or that Cyan was stealing from your members, I don't see why we shouldn't see you guys in a bad light.
As I said in that thread, it's just a horse and 10 gold. I'd hardly consider that a good reason to destroy a player. Especially considering it looks like you guys were more eager to wage war than to try and settle things diplomatically. Unless you can provide some screenshots of messages sent to the alliance leader and Cyan trying to diplomatically solve the issue, you still don't look good. Y
Once again, there's little to no proof he's done so. If he's pissed so many people off don't you think there would be a little more prove of such? |
Posted By: Finrod
Date Posted: 23 Nov 2010 at 01:27
|
For what it's worth, I don't believe 0-0 and Valar are using TMM as a smokescreen; the timing of the events they charge Cyan with occured before the TMM flare up. It is just unhappy coincidence for WE (from the WE perspective) that these wars coincide. Since this started, I've been trying to get to the truth, and to find a diplomatic solution. Until multiple siege camps have recently been erected, I didn't ask for troops, only mediation. Even now, I don't want the war to escalate, I would rather find peace and satisfy all sides.
BecBlue, would you speak with me? In private messages? I take no offense if you refuse.
Cyan has been a good member to his alliance, sharing knowledge and resources; obviously our neighbors view him differently.
I will agree that the chat posted on this forum did occur; but also state that they were taken out of context. Kome was left to deal with SirTwitchy because Yearick believed, after SirTwitchy told his side, that Kome acted aggressively (killing caravans). Yearick's post in context was that if Kome needed resources so badly that he just had to have that resource spawn, Yearick would have gladly given some of his own rather that cause an incident over killing a caravan. That was the "official" end to the matter on our side; although it would seem diplomatic attacks continued; 0-0 remain emphatic on this point and it is fruitless to argue it. I concede they very well may have. I honestly don't know what our relationship could have become if this had not occurred, which is regretful.
Now, I read the other chat quote this morning and it is no longer on my web page... I can't remember what it said, so I won't pretend
 While I haven't learned the complete facts of this war, I am certain that among the causes was the lack of open communication between the alliances. Had our alliances communicated more often, a greater level of trust was likely to have existed, and a different conclusion than war may have been reached to resolve disputes.
Finrod
|
Posted By: col0005
Date Posted: 23 Nov 2010 at 03:14
|
Hey just thought I should let everyone know that bec has entered talks with finrod and while its too early to announce anything we're looking for apologies on both sides from particular members. |
Posted By: Brids17
Date Posted: 23 Nov 2010 at 04:31
More people know how to do: [21:34] -Cyan-I hate 0-0 and so I'm gonna mass diplo attack them! Than people who know how to do what you just said. Screenshots are far better proof if you as me. |
Posted By: col0005
Date Posted: 23 Nov 2010 at 04:53
| Yeah true, however there would be atleast one player with a rudimentary understanding of photoshop in any decent sized alliance, therefore any proof is very flimsy, and in some ways could be interpreted as an admission of guilt, as you're already building your case before any accusations are made, just a thought. |
Posted By: Smoking GNU
Date Posted: 23 Nov 2010 at 10:06
If it's so easy to do, why not make some yourself then and post it here in order to passify the masses? Oh, thats right, because it would be fake, and the accused would then be able to come up with actual evidence refuting youres, and you'd have gone nowhere. Nice try. |
Posted By: Finrod
Date Posted: 23 Nov 2010 at 12:14
|
I would like to confirm that BecBlue has contacted me to talk about the situation.
WE has been ordered to commit no aggressive behavior against 0-0, but we'll continue to defend with what we have left.
There has been no contact with Valar, I admit in part because I haven't had time (I've typed more the last few days than I ever did in school); but they have also not contacted me.
|
Posted By: col0005
Date Posted: 23 Nov 2010 at 12:55
|
GNU do you really believe that WE has evidence that can prove that they're innocent? Assuming that all 0-0 is evil and have been lying the whole time what could possibly be used as proof that they didn't committ a certain act, unless they for some reason took a screen dump of them not doing anything, which would HAVE to be photoshoped because why would they take a screen dump, in the same position of nothing happening? Also assuming I had a screenshot of the diplomatic attacks, the thing would be that it would just show diplomatic attacks and we would enter a discussion about what type of unit they were, if they're only scouts you certainly can't fault cyan, however we'd have no way of proving one way or another what they were.
I believe that this has become a seperate issue from the current topic, but I would like to suggest that you should either gather support to petition for scribes to be added as an ingame feature for proof. Whereby un-alterable photo's can be sent via ingame mechanics, or that this absurd demand for proof be droped for the different sides stateing their case, and judgments being made due to what external players know of player charater and what has been said.
|
Posted By: Teiru
Date Posted: 23 Nov 2010 at 13:25
|
I have said this before in global chat and I'll say it again here. To prove innocence is quite hard when the accuser does not provide any dates with timestamps. Otherwise we would all have to screenshot and log everything we do just in case someone in our area gets thieved from to be able to prove our innocence. Let me see if I have gotten this straight. You wrongly accuse us, you destroy several cities and then you want to solve things in a diplomatic manner, which btw you have ignored during all this time, and after all that you demand an apology? An apology for something we have not done! You know all this but you do it so that other players of Illyriad can see how you "tried" to solve it and not look like the offenders that you are. Very clever, I must admit, I did underestimate your intelligence. You have won this war. Cyan is no longer a member of WE neither am I, so this has nothing to do with WE anymore. I applause and congratulate you for your great victory. Your moms must be proud. |
Posted By: Smoking GNU
Date Posted: 23 Nov 2010 at 14:27
| Sad to hear that Teiru. |
Posted By: Becblue
Date Posted: 23 Nov 2010 at 16:33
|
@Let me see if I have gotten this straight. You wrongly accuse us, you destroy several cities and then you want to solve things in a diplomatic manner, which btw you have ignored during all this time, and  after all that you demand an apology? An apology for something we have not done! Sent By: Cyan Received By: BecBlue Sent: 23OCT10 14:50 Subject: Re: Re: Re: Hello :) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hard to say which one exactly but using a ruler and extrapolating back it was either Rockhaven (Cantab) or his clanmate from the other river bank New Horizon (Rexxen). ~C~ > ------------------------------------------ > Sent By: BecBlue > Received By: Cyan > Sent: 23OCT10 11:28 > Subject: Re: Re: Hello :) > Message: > ------------------------------------------ > Sent By: Cyan > Received By: BecBlue > Sent: 23OCT10 11:04 > Subject: Re: Hello :) > Message: I do believe it was YOUR players launched thief attacks in under three hours from moving into our area before we even knew you had arrived. That I send scouts and spies to find out more about such hostile invaders should not be too surprising. **Why not message me about the problems first :P ~C~ **Hello, I was not told of any attacks from my players could you please name who & who they attacked so i know. We are a pretty happy & helpful bunch and hope we can come to a agreement for peace(NAP) Iam very sorry for any wrong doing on our part. Thanks Bec :)------------------------------------------ > Sent By: BecBlue > Received By: Cyan > Sent: 23OCT10 04:07 > Subject: Hello :) > Message: Hello How r u? I was wondering what your intentions towards my alliance are. I had hoped we could work together peacefully in securing this area on the map but i have been informed by my players they have had diplo attacks and we believe they are coming from you and we would like to know why? Thanks BecBlue :) **Just so everyone can see i was the one who tried to be friendly and diplomatically sort things out to start with. My point of view is Cyan knew about the Kome-SirTwitchy problem but used it as a excuse to attack PoS and Valars with not scouts and spies as he said but theives and i was on at the time and witnessed the attacks that's why i knew who to send a message to but enough said already, me and Finrod are reaching a agreement to restore peace between the alliances Thanks and Best Wishes BecBlue :) Oh and Teiru was @ Your moms must be proud. Really needed :P |
Posted By: bartimeus
Date Posted: 23 Nov 2010 at 16:34
|
@becblue.
did not read your post, it's way too messy...use quotes, don't just copy-paste.
------------- Bartimeus, your very best friend. |
Posted By: Becblue
Date Posted: 23 Nov 2010 at 16:46
| Im sorry if you think it's way to messy to read but we can't always be perfect, It is currently 2:30am iam tired but wanted to make the post whilst im still on as i haven't had much time lately as i have been busy in RL. So again Sorry to anyone who has a problem with my post. Thanks BecBlue |
Posted By: Teiru
Date Posted: 23 Nov 2010 at 16:57
|
Sorry but It always takes me a good 5 min to figure out your trying to say due to that layout of your posts. I'm not sure if your spy has informed you but Cyan only had GOOD things to say about you, Bec, in our alliance chat, unlike me. And as we all can see the date on those mails is 23rd October. Whereas, if you check Yearick's mails that were posted earlier in this thread are from 25th October. Point is that our leader had tried to follow up this issue and solve it peacefully with you, even offering a NAP that was not being accepted for over a week. As far as I know it wasn't these minor diplomatic issues that even started the war. Instead it was some "thievery" from Cyan which you claimed. But you are right, none of this matters now as neither I nor Cyan are a part of WE anymore. And yes, I had to say that last thing about moms as well. :) |
Posted By: Teiru
Date Posted: 23 Nov 2010 at 21:19
|
One thing that bothers me is that you, Bec, actually call Cyan a bully. The irony of it is that you and your friends fit the description of a bully perfectly. Allow me to demonstrate. A bully is someone bigger going against someone much smaller than him. PoS/Valar/Cala combined number is roughly a bit over 1 million population, whereas WE was about 210k. Not much to discuss here so let's move on. A bully is someone despite already having a great advantage seeking other cowardly ways to increase his already great advantage.
Sent By: darkone Received By: Balkin Sent: 21NOV10 17:44 Subject: A bit of advice Stay out of the fight and we might
leave you out of it. Get out of the alliance and we
certainly will. Now, if this was just some foot-soldier or a novice member it wouldn't really matter, however, the person in question happens to be ranked as 'High Council' in his alliance, Valar. Not only were they afraid of other WE members reinforcing Cyan's cities but they also threatened other members to leave the alliance. I thought Cyan was the only issue, so why bother attacking Balkin? A bully is someone seeking to humiliate his victims and despite his great advantage, he is proud of it. While for most by standers it's perceived as rather pathetic. http://img197.imageshack.us/img197/5434/patheticbill.jpg - http://img197.imageshack.us/img197/5434/patheticbill.jpg As you can see in the linked picture above, WildBill is proudly showing his 'trophy' not even bothering to change the name of the city. Laughable, at best. I think that most people of Illyriad get a clear picture of who and what you guys really are. Although, I'm aware that you have some exceptions, some good guys which I won't name, as that would be punishing them for being good. This will also be my last post here as I wasted enough time on you already. |
Posted By: Finrod
Date Posted: 24 Nov 2010 at 00:50
|
Due to real world geography, time zones, and the inconvenience of the human body needing sleep, I can't say with 100% certainty, but with 98.4% certainty, I think an agreement has been reached between World's End and Prisoners of Society. |
Posted By: Finrod
Date Posted: 24 Nov 2010 at 11:40
| Azreil reports his alliance is convening to discuss whether they will end hostilities or not. Any help with these negotiations would be greatly appreciated; I haven't had a lot of sleep lately because of all the messaging I've been doing. |
Posted By: Shadar Logoth
Date Posted: 24 Nov 2010 at 18:26
|
When the city-movement period started I contacted several alliances in this game for temporary confederations, allowing us, and their alliances to jump more freely. One of those alliances was 0-0 lead by Becblue.
Obviously you discuss stuff as well, and seeing as the moving had been going relatively well for Invictus, I informed with Beclue how the moving for her alliance was coming along. She informed me that she had had most people jump to an area which they losely shared with WE.
Later on she emailed me saying 0-0 had run into some trouble as, as soon as their cities appeared in that area near Cyan they were being hit by diplomats, and caravans had been killed by Cyan.
We exchanged our views on that, and I had asked her if they had caught any thieves at that moment (with the possibility of them telling her who their master was), which was not the case. I suggested back tracking the thieves and she mailed back later that she had indeed seen thieves leaving cyan's city, attacking people from 0-0 .
She had send emails to various people of WE, Cyan and Yearick being some of them.
They denied all charges. WE then offered a NAP to 0-0, even though attacks were still happening. Becblue asked me what I thought and I suggested accepting the NAP. There could be 2 possible outcomes.
1. WE would indeed stop the attacks and thus, problem solved.
2. WE would just keep on attacking and then at least it would be clear that they had no honest/ friendly intentions. Problem solved to, because then 0-0 was justified in taking counter steps.
The NAP was signed, and shortly after canceled again by WE, needless to say that attacks had not ended.
As members from 0-0 in the past have helped out Invictus, and Invictus values its friends, we offered to help out if need be.
Then the TMM trouble arose. And Invictus was in a bind as we were just committing some troops to help out our friends, and we suddenly had to divert our course to TMM.
It was also clear that 0-0 didn't need our help, and when I suggested to Becblue that we could open up a small siege on one of the other WE members she said not to bother, as they were only focusing on Cyan, with him being the main offender.
The story continues...
But I just wanted to put this out in the open that a. this clearly was already happening before TMM, and thus, there is no smoke screen or whatever you want to call it, b. Becblue had consulted with other people BEFORE even deciding that 0-0 should take steps to remedy the problem.
I am quite sure that Cyan can be a wonderfull friend to people, and so there will always be people to speak out in his favour.
The same goes for Becblue.
In this case Cyan over-extended his reach, and got a hand chopped off. But fortunately in this game you can grow those on again, no harm done.
It remains a wargame at heart, with the emphasis on GAME...
I for one never have found any reasons to ever doubt Beclue before, just like some are so sure about Cyan, and just like there will always be people doubting everything that has been said and done.
And considering all I have read I will keep on valueing my friendship with Beclue, just as others will with Cyan.
Que sera sera
(ps yes the post has been edited... i corrected some spelling errors )------------- More Orc, less talking! All that is said is my own opinion. I am not a leader nor voice for Invictus. I will always abide by Invictus's rules. |
Posted By: some random guy
Date Posted: 24 Nov 2010 at 19:42
| Well, at least it isn't 28 pages long... yet. |
Posted By: Finrod
Date Posted: 25 Nov 2010 at 05:57
|
Shadar Logoth: I received the below from a third party when I was trying to learn if Cyan was guilty or innocent. The only thing that differs from your account above is that in the below the NAP was recsinded before it was signed, not after. I wasn't in leadership at that time, so I don't know which is true, and I don't know why WE recsinded the offer; I also don't know that this is the same message you refer to above, only that the accounts are similar and one detail differs. At that time, I was trying to learn as much as possible about what caused this, and asking as many alliance leaders as I could for what they knew. This was shared with me in hopes it would help me bring peace to the situation.
"0-0 talked with me, asking what i think the should do, as Cyan was still harassing them even while the leader send that NAP.
So i told them to take their bluff... if it was bluff by accepting them NAP. If they accepted it, and WE still kept going they would know the NAP was just a cover up. Then WE apparently suddenly withdrew the NAP and diplomatic assaults kept being thrown at 0-0 so now they decided to take the initiative by going after Cyan, the main offender." Please note, in a prior post I agreed with BecBlue in saying that I don't believe they were using TMM as a smokescreen; it was just the timing. I have found BecBlue to be respectful in our dialogues, and I hope that I have conducted myself in such a way that she would say the same of me. Unfortunately, what has happened cannot be undone, and we are now trying to move forward. I don't know if I stated this before or not, but I would also like to say that Tinuviel of Caliquendi has also been most gracious in our talks, and she has my full respect for the way she has conducted herself.
|
Posted By: Sgt..Shanks
Date Posted: 26 Nov 2010 at 12:54
|
"Bullies are using the TMM smoke screen.. its unfair and unjustified:("
The above was my original statement.. and I stick by it!! However please note that my opinion was and remains to be, that [Valar] WERE and STILL ARE using the oportunity (and cover) to cause WE members many problems. Do Valar even acknowlege how many Alliance members of WE, are actually "New players"?? Not to mention (unfortunately) the 8 members that have not logged on for over 4 weeks. Therefore I can think of no other word than "Bullies" :P oportunistic, yes! But Bullies.. None the less :( |