This suddenly seems to be a foreign notion in Illy.  Personally I have found it works incredibly well if you share guard duties, share the items and avoid conflict.  Silverlake is correct of course, but  it is not unexpected that all of a sudden "might makes right" and sov and other such inhibitors of socially unsanctioned behaviour have totally disappeared in the face of trade v2.  I was hoping they wouldn't, but I am a realist.  Some people just have to have it all, and if they are big enough they will take it.  However, there are pockets of resistance to this mentality, and in time it will be interesting to see who does in fact end up with the larger "share" of items.  It's hard to produce when you're getting bumped 50% of the time by irate players.  When you share that just doesn't happen.  We live in interesting times.

"I felt I didn't need to message you before bumping your harvesters and locking down the patch because I thought you were inactive."

"Inactives send harvesters?"

"..."

:/

not much bumping after killing all their harvesters and camps 

Interesting comment coming from a player in a Consone alliance.  Last I heard, Consone is substantially larger than Crow.  And unlike Crow, which grew rather organically for the most part as players from established Crow alliances began their own alliances and chose to affiliate, Consone is a group of alliances that began independently and decided to announce a confederated group in order to ... apparently establish that they are a group to be reckoned with.

I have nothing against Consone and respect many fine players in Consone.  I also have nothing against the idea of a group of alliances that "have each others' backs," whether it's Harmless? and DLords, the Crow alliances, Consone, whatever.  I personally think having a large group of friendly players makes that game more fun.

But when one of your members singles out Crows for being a large group of confederated alliances I just have to well ...

CE joined consone?

I remember a school girl having to write a composition on 'post office' for an examination. But she had studied to write about 'cow' only. So she wrote - "Post office is not like cow. Post office doesn't eat grass. Post office doesn't give us milk... " 

That said, I don't agree with the comments on Crow. I don't know the reason behind that post either.

Silverlake wrote: you need to get off the cross, someone can use the wood..

Absolutely! Sharing makes it more fun to all. 

Edited to clarify:  I mean, ask any newb whether I share my wood.  Not about the quality of Fluffy's wood.  I mean, some of them might know, but others might not.  Not just anyone gets to sample Fluffy's wood.

Oh, wait ...

/me goes to hide

You should ask Calcr to tell you about what was going on before they were part of the crowiltion. 

If you have a problem with a policy of an alliance, take it up with their leadership. Or even take it up with your leadership to discuss with their leadership. Communication is the key.

In Illy, Justice is delivered from the business-end of T2 Siege Machines.

My take is that if a resource is within few squares from my cities it will be hard for someone coming from far away to not get consistently bumped and coming back with empty hands and if they find the right "window" of time to succeed then all the better for everyone.

First, you might like to add that after the wiki's definition of 'Sovereignty' it continues to great lengths elaborating on the abstractness, function, validity and ever-changing nature of sovereignty claims. Basically boiling down to the following: Your sovereignty claim is only as valid as others (especially the ones with the capability to challenge or destroy your claim) consider it to be.

Second, having a game mechanic called 'Sovereignty' does not necessarily impose any meaning of what we think 'Sovereignty' may mean onto that said game mechanic. The game mechanic doesn't give you "supreme, independent authority over a geographic area", regardless of what it is called; The name only serves as a label to use when referring to the game mechanic, it does not add/change anything to how it works.

Similarly if I start calling my city a boat that won't necessarily mean it will be able to float.

sovereignty is military control of a square.  one can argue that control thus established is only as good as one's ability to hold it, but the same argument can be made for one's towns or the resources within them.  most alliances will regard a military presence on a sovereign square as an attempted invasion, and well they should.  in the same way, harvesters on a sovereign square are thieves, and are likely to be treated as such.

while i mourn with others the death of sharing, it died because many large, well-established players from several alliances blanketed the board with harvesters in the early days of t2 trade, before squares were generally garrisoned.  while that may have given them a head start on t2 resources, it also taught many of us how quickly a rare herb could be picked into oblivion by a careless player hundreds of squares away.  as long as the game mechanics remain unchanged, holding ungarrisoned resources in common between neighbours will continue to be a risk most will not take.

I think the general concensus will be claiming sovereignty over land makes that YOUR vessal state. so to speak.

To the people who mean to steal off my sov land. please do... my cav is getting ancy 

Also, are you seriously saying that casual gamers in larger alliances are bullying smaller alliances by existing? How you got to that conclusion, I do not know. Here's how small alliances recruit:
They recruit. Advertise, tell new players what their alliance can offer - being honest.

Illyriad is the only casual game of this genre. Conflicts arise when people settle closely without asking their would-be neighbours. Illyriad is over crowded, commencing a mass cleansing of all the players sounds horrendous - and that would drive away new players. As would killing every account that ever collected dust once in a while.
In short, your argument is coconuts.

7 food squares are all over the map, so that shouldn't be an issue. I do think the inactive accounts should be regulated differently. If an account, with multiple towns, isn't logged into for 30 days it is automatically booted from any alliance it is in. After 45 days of inactivity (inactive) is shown next to player name. 90 day inactive accounts are deleted. An account with only 1 town should be deleted after 7 days of inactivity. The only exception to this rule is prestige buyers. If you buy prestige you are immune to these rules, your account will never be deleted. Just my opinion.

He didn't say you said sit.  He just said you were sitting on them.  Which it can be at least reasonably argued you are.  

When SC or TC announced the new inactivity rules they explicitly mentioned siege as keep-alive strategy, presumably a blockade would also work.  It's rather convoluted if an alliance sieges or blockades their own inactive members for the purpose of keeping the accounts alive.  Vague idea, leave alliance, send dummy siege (no catapults) or blockade for 15 days, and join alliance again.  But convoluted is not the same as abusive, published rules are supposed to work as designed. 

http://forum.illyriad.co.uk/nonaligned-alliance-movement_topic4273.html" rel="nofollow - http://forum.illyriad.co.uk/nonaligned-alliance-movement_topic4273.html

This is still an active project and we are happy to debate or engage with more alliances. So if you are interested, feel free to send me a pm.

CE is in Consone!?!?!?!....... Rill must have better information sources than I do then!! Last I checked, CE were NOT in Consone. I do not see any mention of CE being in Consone anywhere except for Rills comments in GC and in this forum. I do not see CE's name on the Consone members list. So I think it is pretty interesting that you Rill, are the only person that I have personally seen refer to CE as being in Consone. That could be an assumption of grave proportions if that were true now wouldn't it!? CE is confederated with a Consone alliance, does that make us part of Consone? I wish you would have told me that my alliance was part of the super-fed earlier Rill!.... We all know what happens when we ASSUME things, right kids?!