While I completely agree with your assessment that alternate accounts should not be created for the sole purpose of besieging, I'd like to point out that Steadfast Shield was created only a few minutes after Silent Sword (See playerId, 47524 for silent and 47525 for steady) while I was still a very new player, and had no idea of the concept of siege in illyriad.  The original intention was to create two accounts that would coexist and benefit from each other, such as The_Dude and El_Jeffe (from who(m) I got the idea) however Silent's city of westin exodused to a 7 food square at the crucial time, while steady's twin city of eastin was not, which pushed the account into an uncertain situation of no growth.  I had no reason to continue to use up an account slot with an essentially static rate of growth, which is why I am doing this.  

Of your two cities in Fremorn, at least one of them has 3 remarkable sovereignty squares which should raise a few eyebrows, and I do not recognize your right in claiming them. 

My 2c.

Having 10 cities on both my accounts I won't be capturing them myself. I dont acknowledge special rights or prerogatives to suspended player accounts tho, and find it rather self centered to ask for such. 

So regardless what consequence SS had in mind for those who disobey his "claim", he should be prepared that any aggression towards said players would have consequences. 

LOL, threatening SS now if he takes action against those who attempt to take HIS ALT's CITIES? Seriously? 

I do think he has all the right to reserve those cities, considering that those are from his alt. There is a lot of reservation messages going on about when players in an alliance get suspended. The alliance reserves the right to siege the cities themselves, capture those cities, etc. Why can't SS keep his alt's cities then? I think your actions are very disrespectful toward SS.

The players who wish to reserve some cities to themselves, why don't they do it by sending an empty siege? They could send the real siege when they are ready to capture it. That way they can claim first rights and don't invite unwanted attention. 

Will you support their sieges if the city belongs to me?  I have a siege at the site of the good sov square, and your alliance member bren'th is speeding up the process with a siege of his own, which to my knowledge is not there to capture.  If you can get the city before I do, there is nothing I can do, given the difference in our size.  

The reason that I posted this is because someone was starting a siege on one of steady's cities, and someone else had settled another city next to a different one.  If I hadn't spoken up things would be much more gnarly than they are right now.  I do have sieges inbound to those cities, and the players who are involved with them have been kind enough to work with me and comply with my request to the best of their abilities. 

While these cites are in fremorn, where tordenkaffen's alliance does have a hub, they are in eastern fremorn, while the majority of the fremen curse members are in southern and western fremorn.  Titanium Tower, the lesser of the two fremen cites, is somewhat in southern fremorn, however it is the less contested of the two cities, and curse has made no move to capture it.  Concerning E/A, we do have a fairly large hub (for us) in fremorn, and the cities, especially cobalt castle, are within our territory.  

Not cool.  Not cool at all.

I suspect he is playing more than 2 accounts and wrong one got banned....

How is Steady's actions to siege his suspended alternate account's cities so that he may capture them and thereby absorb them into his current account wrong? The majority of players use their accounts to benefit the player, TD and EJ, Nesse and Odd, SS and SS, EF and Subatoi and so on.  If there is a fault in sieging a Suspended account's cities and absorbing them into your current account, which happened to be under the same control of the person who controlled the suspended account, then why is it allowed to have the two accounts in the same alliance?  You'd most definitely use the two accounts to help the person operating them in any alliance situation, tourney, warfare etc.

Curse: Fuchsia - Fremen (all three alliances): Blue - E/A: Green

This differs from alliances claiming cities of suspended players because the alliances did nothing to cause the suspension of the player, which is against the interest of the alliance (because having an active player in possession of said cities is better for the alliance than sieging them to 25% and trying to find players who can take them).

A player who suspends his account or has an account suspended should not have any special claim over any resources of that account.  That is what suspended means -- you are giving it up.

Yes he has the right to claim them, as does anyone else.  I have the right to claim the land outside Lloyrn's cities, but he "and his fellow members" has the right to counter-claim that claim and so on and so forth.

In the end you'll war over this but anyone that is actually interested in counter-claiming should do it in game instead of doing it in here.

I disagree.  I think the forum is a logical place for such discussion to take place.  Talking here can resolve things without resort to lengthy and inefficient wars.

I do agree that one can metagame on the forum all one wants, but what counts is whether one has the ability to perform on one's stated intentions in game.

-Mak

I am fully aware that there are many theoretical things I could have been doing given the situation that I'm in now.  However, the proposition that "the wrong account got banned" is absurd.  I mentioned on GC that Steady was getting suspended BEFORE it happened, to my knowledge the GMs do not warn a player before they suspend an account.  

The proposition that what I am doing is "wrong" is also absurd, given that I have been able to enforce the original points of this post to an extent that I am satisfied with.  This is a sandbox. Therefore, the GMs rules are the only ones that are absolute.  I hope that the rules set forth by me will be followed, however if they are not I may or may not choose to enforce them, due to my self preservation instinct.  I claim these cities, until I do not.  I still claim them.  Although ethics are a wonderful thing- especially in this game- I am not breaking any of the game rules. 

That history was of W.N.  E/A has no affiliation with this alliance.  It is an alliance that ceases to exist. "Fremen" refers to the fact that the city is in the fremorn territory.  The city that is in close proximity to Cobalt Castle was settled there after steady was suspended.  It has 7 population, and is currently being diplomatically dealt with.  

Any player can break the rules I have set in the start of this post.  It is up to them, and I will use common sense to deal with them as I see fit.  It is a sandbox game, practically the online definition of an "open competition".

You are completely correct, I did want to begin a new account, I felt that steady had no life in him. However, I have no plans to take this new alt's cities, and I have no plans for the two alts to co-exist, as silent and steady did, and their cities will not be near each other.

SunStorm wrote:   Silent/Steadfast wrote:   I mentioned on GC that Steady was getting suspended BEFORE it happened, to my knowledge the GMs do not warn a player before they suspend an account.  Illyriad Admin wrote: Failure to comply with the Illyriad Code of Conduct and Rules may result in warnings followed by either a temporary or permanent suspension . . .

 

It may... But to my knowledge, multi-accounting isn't a meta-game offense (as opposed to Racial slurs, etc, which are certainly something that a warning can be given to) thus it doesn't need a warning.  If the GMs could clarify this I'd appreciate it. 

Luna

I created this post so that people were aware that I had claimed Titanium Tower and Cobalt Castle.  I didn't want to have to break sieges and then apologize and explain that I was going to siege the cities. That would create lots of messy work for me, repeating the same thing to those who showed an interest in the cities over and over.  I decided to approach the problem in a more central way, by posting it on the forum so that I didn't have to repeat myself.  I never expected any players to morally question my motives, nor did I expect that I would be framed for multi-accounting.  In retrospect, I should have realized that these are the illyriad forums, and that you can't escape from being framed for something when you post in the politics and diplomacy forum no matter how you approach the issue.  

Silly me.  

Shut up Rill. Stop playing your serpentlike tongue in this discussion. You did not suggest that SS broke a rule yet you mentioned that you think he's doing something unethical, bringing into the discussion the possibility that SS is doing this self-centered action that is against your personal moral code. Screw that. He never broke a rule and just came here to state his intentions of claiming the city of his alt, which is technically his in the first place. Stop putting any color into his statements and actions.

I have no issue with rill's suspected immorality of my actions, since she isn't directly contesting my claim.  She is my friend, and I'd prefer that you don't insult her.  

Congratulations to Rill for enforcing her personal brand of morality! Given her stature, a lot of players seem to blindly follow her statements, rendering anyone who opposes her "wrong" and "immoral". Shut up Rill. Stop trying to dip your snakelike tongue in every issue.

SS, just go forth and capture those. Ignore those hypocrites.

Someone laid siege to a player in my alliance who had been inactive for less than 30 days.  The player was not suspended, and we had hope that the player would return.  We objected.  I imagine most people would do the same.