Care to explain Taron? How about a few word's from our God of War GODsDestroyer?

 

Hmmmm... does this include you Quackers?

 

Interestingly, crusaders can have a self-preservation instinct as well.  I do not attribute the backing down of Æsir to anything TLR did, but rather to the response that the community gave to an alliance attacking another, much smaller alliance.  Æsir saw that they were wrong to attack TLR via the most basic form of democracy:  "We have more troops than you, therefore our opinion outweighs yours"  Did they really have a whole lot of choice?

on the other hand, you know that TLR is playing with fire, keeping their attitude. 

i would be aware to not give even the slightest reason to the illy community to wipe them off the map, cause if they would ever get said reason, you could kiss them goodbye.  

 

 

This is not news to TLR. They knew about this from the earliest days of the alliance.  Yet they are not the villains that others paint them to be.  For many of those, who are TLR bashers really only  jump on the band wagon for their own  self interest.

 

Nevertheless TLR is a hard alliance . It has to be.

 

 

Both TRO and Aesir used armies rather than words, and while I support Aesir in its repugnance at TLR demands, I think it is possible that words were the better response in that situation.

The question of when using armies is appropriate is a difficult one; hopefully we have learned and grown as a community since, for example, the Valar episode.

TLR obviously has diplomatic relations that aren't as visible without looking further, while AEsir acted unilaterally and without such aid.

Hopefully we won't hear about the GPs for a while at least...

 

I am curious as to how you perceive this "consensus" of yours. What are the constituents elements? Since you have applied it to the alliances of Illyria. Which alliances are you referring to?  Alternatively , perhaps you are referring to the opinons sometimes stated in GC or maybe here in the forums both if which are subject so much pnp? Surely they can hardly be a foundation for a balanced consensus ...

 

Please enlighten me.

 read H? and it's people.

i despise that. i despise people that manipulate the ignorant masses to their own profit. 

consensus is an other word for making unjust just and bleach personal opinions and individual freedom into a blank monotone of gray. Yucks! 

I'm kind of surprised that you 2 don't really understand the concept.

As far as it being about just/ unjust - justice is giving to each what they deserve tempered by mercy.  But i guess you may not know that either...

And I am unfamiliar with you SugarFree, do you actually play Illy?  or just trowl the forums?  I am not sure why you feel the need to bring up H?  near as I can tell they commented on the original post and are out of it.  /me shrugs

i may sound a bit jerkish at times, and i have to put up a troll mask, but that's a necessity, sadly. 

i brought up H? cause to my experiences, those guys are the true neutrals of illy. 

No matter what, you need that larger group "on your side".  The only distinction is whether you need them on your side passively or actively.  Those arguing against "consensus" are really arguing for a global "passive consensus" to not involve ourselves in "others affairs" (I imagine you'll argue for a long time over that phrase).  It's a passive consensus to not support or oppose any action taken by any subgroup (of course, what about confeds, friendships, morality, etc...).  In some way shape or form it still must be a consensus or it won't work...

Keep in mind that the dev's made the game an open sandbox but they did include alliances.  In a very real sense, an alliance is a consensus among a subgroup so the idea of consensus is very much part of the game already.

I agree with this quote, and it speaks to my original post in the other thread wherein I speculated that there was a conspiracy to take down TLR among other alliances other than Aesir (as yet identified) who stayed out of the fight because they "felt it was not the right time," aka, once NC, N, Skorn, and KV jumped in on TLR's side, they weren't willing to stick their necks out. Not all conspiracy theories are "vast mumble-wing conspiracy" theories with no basis; TLR and EF's controversial nature make them a target for such a conspiracy. I don't even think EF or TLR would contest that. 

But I fundamentally believe that this ain't over, and that we'll see further military action in August. Act 1 was the TRO/TLR war, act 2 was the Aesir/TLR war. What will act 3 be? And will this play turn out to be a comedy or tragedy? 

(Thus far, I'd say it has elements of both.)

6 months is a long time. "Interested parties" may strike early if they see that their rivals have a chance to gather power.

LOL -- "optimistic." Just so you know, I'm dispassionate about it either way. I'd just say "probable."

Isn't TLR located in Ursor? And isn't Ursor rich in the rare mineral stuff? If so, trade v2 could present a new conflict over turf wars that could lead to "Act 3."

TLR will most likely have one of the largest supplies of rare minerals and so TLR's armies will be better equiped then other alliances making TLR harder to defeat.

Prediction: TLR will win "Act 3."

Very true ....  I friend willing to act is worth 100 willing to talk.

I speak for what I believe; when I see something that I think is wrong, I condemn it; when I see something that I think is right, I praise it.  I do not do so with perfect consistency, and perhaps sometimes I speak too quickly, too loudly or too often, but I do my best.

I have no expectation that I will be universally liked or admired, but if you are going to denigrate or despise me (or others), then do so for something I (or they) actually say or do, not as some sort of symbol of something you don't like.

However, you do seem to have this habit of turning a neutral discussion that doesn't really affect you into one about yourself. I wasn't 'denigrating' you, if you could really call it that, I was 'denigrating' your idea that for an action to happen it must have a huge group of people supporting it before it goes ahead. Which, by the way, is far from the most decisive course of action. Aesir had no need to consult other people about their own affairs, and as far as I am aware did not call for aid. Where other people erred was to decide that this was their business, and that was why Aesir did as they did. The purpose of my post was to offer my own point of view on your thoughts. It most certainly was not intended to scorn you or turn the thread about a war into one about you.

I hope this is the last post that trails off the topic of the thread. 

Based on watching you in global chat, I think that that first sentence is true, as there is certainly no physical evidence that you were/are at the center of a plan to raze EF and TLR from the game. In fact, I've seen you say some very kind, encouraging, and magnanimous things about EF.

That being said, even if, behind what is seen in these public places (the forum, global chat) you were in fact scheming heavily and at the heart of power plays to neutralize your rivals and enemies, that wouldn't make you a "bad person" or "bad player." In fact, it may make you the opposite -- a very cunning player who would know how to work the game.

The fact is, if we are universally liked or admired in this game, we're probably not playing it to the fullest. Illyriad is a game of friends and social networking, yes, but it is also a game of conquest, politics, rivalry, and power playing. Think about in the other Aesir/TLR-related threads some of the fierce comments that Kumo made about past foes from past wars -- how reassuring to know that that measure of tension still exists! 

My feeling is that we should play this game hard and complex. We should be complex characters, with various layers and levels to our personas. If this describes you, Rill, or anyone else here, then I say "bravo!" 

blood for the blood god, Skulls for the skull throne!