As I understand the backstory, LWO got caught thieving from BSH, BSH sent thieves in response, LWO then declared war on the grounds that BSH are "aggressive", so BSH besieged a couple of LWO cities, and LWO don't seem to have done much.

Now CoK have weighed in, for reasons which I cannot even guess - leading me to suspect that there is rather more going....

Can anyone shed more light on this...? 

there is no need for the overprotective community to stick it's brown nose int this.

This was not intended as an invitation to "the community" or anyone else to get involved. And I'm aware of the entirely arbitrary way that the community behave in the name of "protecting".

But I'm also curious as to why distant alliances might come to blows, I'm aware that this is escalating, and I'm inclined to think that people in general - "the community" or otherwise - make worse decisions from a position of ignorance than of knowledge. And if I blog about it, I'd like to get my facts straight.

Might shed some light too?  

I see no need for anyone else to get involved.

Have you actually bothered asking them? Like in private message? Away from the forums that tend to brew things up...

Never leaving again.

LordOfTheSwamp wrote: As I understand the backstory, LWO got caught thieving from BSH, BSH sent thieves in response, LWO then declared war on the grounds that BSH are "aggressive", so BSH besieged a couple of LWO cities, and LWO don't seem to have done much.

From what I understand of the backstory, your brief rendition of the facts is basically what happened. BSH had been experiencing thefts for a while, and eventually caught LWO as the sender. Before sending any thieves in response, and in a very civil manner, BSH privately messaged Zolvon of LWO questioning the reason for sending so many waves of thieves. Zolvon replied, in what seemed to be a quite conceited tone, "Because your alliance appears to be fundamentally different than ours." This very short and uninformative message prompted BSH to send thieves in response while trying to continue to find an oral diplomatic solution. I don't know if there was anything else done by BSH aside from sending these thieves, but LWO declared war on them. You say LWO doesn't seem to have done much; however, they were the initial aggressors and they declared war. 

Rill wrote: As I recall, the diplos were exchanged after the war declaration, but I might be wrong on the timeline.

To clear things up, diplos may have continued after war declaration, but LWO continued to send many thieves anonymously before they were caught and declared war. 

Rill wrote: I see no need for anyone else to get involved.

I hope you mean 'non-allied members of the global community' when you say 'anyone else.' CoK has been allied with BSH since November, and I think it is perfectly rational to go to the aid of our fellow confederate.

Brids17 wrote: Have you actually bothered asking them? Like in private message? Away from the forums that tend to brew things up...

This is the first rational thing I've seen in this thread. Glad there are some of you out there. We have not been contacted at all, and I am unaware of any attempts to contact BSH (though there may have been). 

I have already written more than I intended, and could probably rant a bit more if I wanted to. The above may or may not clear things up. Either way, I don't care. We are helping our allies who are not the aggressors in a war which was not declared by them. I don't see why there is any question as to the reasoning behind our involvement. 

Cheers,
Luc

It seems from Luc's point of view here, that the aggressors should have to bear the weight of more enemies, simply for starting the warish conflict?

it also seems to me that this is a "whats right" stance," i was thieved, you kind of admitted it in a snarky way so we war."

So to me it seems the justice thing in illy is odd..  I've noticed newbs here thieve others and just get gently scolded and sent down their merry way, but when its a diplomatic attack with experienced players all of hells doors open up..

Could just be me, oh and Luc, just because LWO was caught one or two times diplomatically attacking bsh does not mean they were responsible for the attacks prior, theres no proof stating such, you are just leaning on a very strong suspicion. 

my two cents..

*places two pennies on the ground and walks off*

listen, if you declare war on an ally with confed, you sure bet they are not gonna sit there just doing nothing do you?

it's LWO fault for attacking, has petty motives and all in all seems looking for death... seriously who taunts the biggest orc ally with no death wish?

I admit there is no proof in regards to this matter. However, when Skull' messaged Zolvon with an inquiry about the thieving, Zolvon did not say that the thieves were not sent by LWO. 

Relaying the amount of thieves that were sent was not the primary point of my previous message, though. 

I know you are attempting to find little flaws in my statement - little pieces of information that you might be able to use to point fingers at me and my CoK, when clearly fingers should be pointed at your own, alliance. 

Cheers.                                                                                                                       (EDIT: Spelling)

LWO thieved BSH, got caught.

BSH messaged Zolvon, he admitted BSH was targeted due to unexplained philosophical differences and because of their alliance to CoK. That part was rather specific, actually, compared to the rest.

Zolvon states that they want to have a fun war, does not wait for BSH to agree or disagree, before a random member (no idea who, as all members have all alliance options) declares war with Zolvon's agreement.

Attacks against BSH are made, repelled, and the count attack begins.

LWO would have to give you more, as they have not communicated further with BSH, that I know of, but those are all of the relevant facts.

So, there ya go: Thread question answered. Toodles!

Not sure why CoK are getting defensive about this - I don't think anyone has painted them as villains.

Thanks for the explanations, folks.

There was some confusion for a long while about why LWO chose to attack us, since (as you read) their reasoning seemed vague and, frankly, fabricated. At this stage, though, I must confess that I am beginning to believe their reasons as stated: they started the conflict for the pure entertainment of it, and to gain war experience.

As it happens, they didn't bother to ask if a war would be entertaining for us ... and I think I speak for the majority of our members when I say that we would have preferred to make a decent showing in the tournament, rather than engaging an opponent half-way across Illy. And there is something a bit unsatisfying about fighting a war you don't really understand the reason for.

But ah well, such is life. :) There will be other tournaments, surely, and we will eventually recoup the cost of the war.

Overall, I'm still having a good time, and I hope everyone else is, too.

Agreed. No reason for anyone to step in unless either one of the parties currently at war request aid from their allies. 

But I must admit, I see no reason why you're trying to turn a war into what seems to me to be a tourney. War is war, I'm afraid, and there are no rules. The loser gets some surrender terms, the winner get a pat on the back and a nice fat wad of gold. There's not much more to it than that.

Not your fault per say.

i, on behalf of all the The Horde, apologize to those who hoped to meet us on the field of battle in this tourney. Regrettably, we had to attend to more important matters, as you have read. 

getting back to the point...

we expect this war to end soon, hopefully with a surrender, however considering the fact that in LWO all members have complete control, we cant be sure.

this war teaches a good lesson to all alliances out there: Careful what you wish for, you might get it 

So sayth Nilock BloodHammer

Gilthoniel, I so apologise for daring to put time and effort into writing a blog to help new players understand the game.

I also apologise profusely for attempting to understand an issue by polling a broad range of people who might have insight.

You are so right.

Thanks SS. And in fairness I should learn not to feed the trolls.

The thread has also thrown up some other issues, which are just as interesting. The division between those who want violence to be consensual, and those who want a less humane game is bubbling along, of course. More interesting is the immediate reaction that if something is talked about it will get worse....

On a theoretical level I disagree with this. I think some of "the community's" more questionable actions have been based on very limited information, and a fuller understanding of a subject should avoid people jumping to false conclusions in future, so I'm always going to be up for fairly full disclosure. But on the other hand, on a practical level, there have been examples of people trying to blow things out of proportion in order to justify battering people, so I do get why people might fear this. (And someone sent me an IGM quite justifiably pointing out that I've previously said that the absence of the bloodthirsty concerned and humane community getting involved in disputes does make a diplomatic resolution harder - fair point.)

Still, the level of fear over this is striking.

Oh, you're just mad that he's drawn attention to the fact that you're leaving your ally to twist in the wind.  See, I can extrapolate motives too.  I would even venture that mine is better than yours.  

 that was perhaps the cheapest forum post of the post-Luna era.

Back onto topic..

So I think I got this

LWO wanted fun thieved bsh, bsh caught  asked LWO why, but no real leadership in lwo, just got answer "we want fun"  bsh pissed and war, confeds come into play and war.

LWO gets fun, bsh called war but isnt warring, is using confed to dispatch lwo so it can stay in tourney.

am i right on all this?

LWO declared the war, not BSH.

How about, we all just stop talking, texting, facebooking, tweeting this?

LWO thieved BSH - BSH caught them and mailed LWO to find out why -- got vague response about being a "diametrically opposed" alliance to LWO beliefs -- LWO suggested a fun war and without waiting for BSH to agree -- LWO declared war -- now my Orc Brethren are giving LWO what they asked for -- WAR ! Since no rules were applied to the war I say "GO BSH !!!" 

 

Please dont use this thread for you 'Rules of war' conversations or for anything else 

Go home everyone. 

Move along...nothing to see here.

lock this thread if you want 

-Mak

Questions?

Why certainly  fire at will.....

[01:47]<Ryelle> there was a statement on the forum that LWO has surrendered

[01:47]<Ryelle> so we wondered whether you wanted to confirm or deny that

[01:47]<Magnificence> !! LWO!!!

[01:47]<Deathe> Or use the ever popular 'No Comment'

[01:48]<Ryelle> would you mind if I posted in the forum to that effect?

I shall put it on microfiche!

we had revived messages that LWO had surrendered.

we gave them time to give us our 'compesation'.

time ran up, and LWO kept fighting

i do not condone this war, nor do i condone the publicity it has gotten(even if its just a few forum posts)

i posted this because i really thought it was over. shame i was wrong.

i just wanted to keep this between us and our allies. so i jumped at the chance to get ppl to stop staring at us.

its not like eveyone needs to know every detail about every little thing that goes on in the vast world of Illyriad

so this confusion is my fault.

sorry for disapionting you all 

PS: gemley, this war is real.

i dont see how people can think its fake 

I think the most I've done on this is make a support LWO and Support BSH banner, which is on Eternal Fire's profile

While I'm here perhaps some GM's will be reading!

Would you please resolve petitions from MisterChris and me quickly. We lost quite a bit of units regarding that siege bug (in my humble opinion). The situation on the ground would be quite different now and I believe LWO would have one city less, because we destroyed their units even trough lvl 20 wall, but we had double the casualties which were not planned.

I know it's from cool text, I never claimed that I made the images, I made the images become Support Banners.

Adorn as you wish.

noooo

btw, this war is fair and square. maybe not, but wars happen and heck, it's good this way.

Kudos.

Please get involved in the war as well. 

on with the war then.

But lets the proof be teh pudding.

War On! 

Rill wrote: Wait ... you're using pudding in your siege engines?  That could explain a lot ...

So anyone that attacks/goes to war whit any of this alliances, he is actually going to war whit the Orc HORDE.

Now, about something - something said around here by Magnificence, about conf:

About COK, well i dont see why is that the attacker ( LWO) would be able to dictate the terms of the defence and retaliation of BSH. Realy... 

like LWO would says, allright, we are gona hit you BSH, but you can only defend and retaliet whit:

1 . Only blind Orcs can attack us!

2. No non-Orcs races in the battelfield, we just like to hit orcs.

3. No other troops that ones using bows  ( dont forget point nº1 ofc).

4. Your cataputs can only be load whit balls of wheat. ( so its does not hurt anyone)

5. Oh yes.. finnal rule, no allies/ conf alliance in this, I mean, just cuz you were attacked and declared war on that's no motive at all to get help from allies. We in LWO say that conf whit Orcs is just for alliances to look more cool in there alliance diplo page.

Btw Magnificence, are you realy worry about SCH to the point to mention/protest about it, in being in the War? Is just funny, cuz your two bigger players got about the same pop toghter that our entire Clan (alliance). but we thank u for not forgeting us! we will not forget LWO, and will sing songs about our littel battels! 

 

Wolfgangvondi

(just another Orc)

disclamer: my opnion is just my opnion, and may or not reflect SCH, BSH, COK, TCol, LWO opnions or official positions on the matter. Im just an littel orc in an big Elf World... that bashs things when he can. : )

And...we'll see what happens.

This is even better value than when BSH sent a siege without siege engines.

Rill - they really were throwing pudding, and stones and whatever else they could find.

But they both work for entertainment.

If you really want to make this an entertainment for public, please post the battle reports too. I hope I am not the only one interested in reports of big battles fought on various terrains.