On Dwarven Druids war declaration on Harmless?
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=4342
Printed Date: 17 Apr 2022 at 14:48
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.03 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: On Dwarven Druids war declaration on Harmless?
Posted By: Nesse
Subject: On Dwarven Druids war declaration on Harmless?
Date Posted: 15 Oct 2012 at 22:33
|
I am sorry for posting this so late, but
the war declaration happened late at night my time and although I spend too
much time playing Illyriad, I do have a life. I feel strongly that the reason Harmless? declared war on our confederate Invictus was that Harmless? fears that of the growth in playing a game of building and collaboration will take away the importance of the wargame that they are playing and thus reduce the control they feel and their “winning” of the game as they play it. The size and growth rate of Consone is obviously a danger signal to a wargame player, and although we have never done anything aggressive to the wargamers, we have always been accommodating and striving to make peaceful and rational decisions and agreements; a wargamer will not understand what a builder-game player has as a motive, and they turned even more frightened by our lack of aggression. Dwarven Druids have declared war on Harmless? because Harmless? declared war on an alliance that we are confederated with, and according to both Harmless? wargame code of honour and our building game code of honour that is what you do, it is the default action. But there is more than a default action of protecting a confederate alliance from an unwarranted or at least un-proportional attack. We have declared war on Harmless? at this instance because we believe that if we do not stand up now and defend our way of playing the game by peaceful building, then the next alliance that grows big from successful application of those ideals will be the next target for attack – or worse, the game might deteriorate towards one of many similar wargame clones and the joy of building, exploring and seeing the world unfold into exciting details and events will be lost in a mist of battles. (Don’t get me wrong, I enjoy the occasional wargame, it is just that that is not my reason for playing Illyriad.) Thus, for those in Harmless? that understand the concept of the builder game that the bulk of Consone players are playing, if you just take the time to read our posts and declarations with that in mind, you will find that we do not challenge Harmless? as an alliance, we just want to be able to play our somewhat different game in our part of the world – the two parts could indeed overlap almost completely and we would only very rarely notice, unless you choose to keep regarding us as a competitor for power in your wargame. We are not a competitor, and will not be, unless you force us to compete – we might not be the best at it, but we are pretty persistent, and by the way the game is developing there will be more of us coming in, so you better get used to us if you want to keep your wargame up and running as well. May your beards grow, and your wisdom! /Nesse, Great Archdruid
PS. Peace negotiations should preferentially be directed through Jasche, as the head of Consone. |
Replies:
Posted By: ES2
Date Posted: 15 Oct 2012 at 22:51
|
What brave soldiers, selflessely throwing their own cities are risk of military agression to defeat those horrible players in Harmless! ------------- Eternal Fire |
Posted By: Darmon
Date Posted: 16 Oct 2012 at 02:53
|
I do think that in some instances the war declaration is more of a token of support/opposition, rather than an indicator of the more meaningful conflicts. For example, I rather doubt there will be a great deal of fighting between H? and the three alliances they're at war with that have less than 10 people each. It does make the H? diplomacy page more interesting than it was. But so do all the new confederations. There's just all sorts of diplomacy on there now!
|
Posted By: Rorgash
Date Posted: 16 Oct 2012 at 02:58
|
I raise my Tankard to Harmless? may your mercy not reach these people, crush Consone underfoot before you burn their world to the ground! ------------- 
|
Posted By: Nesse
Date Posted: 16 Oct 2012 at 04:30
Do you disagree, did you not read my post or are you just expressing an anonymous but somewhat unrelated opinion? |
ES2 wrote:Posted By: Brids17
Date Posted: 16 Oct 2012 at 04:49
You realize the Crowilition has exceeded H? population for far longer than the Consone was even an idea right? Not to mention we've been neutral in just about ever war that has ever taken place in illy. I'm not really for or against either side, I think it's great that there's finally a really big war but your reasoning of why Harmless? is getting into it seems flawed.
-------------  |
Posted By: Darmon
Date Posted: 16 Oct 2012 at 06:06
As far as I can figure it, the Crows must be a special situation, and I can only think of a few possible scenarios as to why H? doesn't react to them like they do to Consone: 1. They don't consider the Crows a threat. As you say, the Crows tend to stay neutral, for whatever reasons. The obvious options that come to mind are excellent diplomats and/or dubious strategic military strength. Alternatively, a low capacity for sympathy. 2. The Crows have already been pacified. I don't know anything about H?/Crow history, but if H? does indeed choose their diplomatic relationships carefully, and the Crows all have long-standing NAPs with them...well, maybe the Crows already tread lightly around H?. 3. H?'s assertions about Consone containing strong anti-H? sentiment are valid and Consone is the exception to the rule, not the Crows. I mean...are you still paranoid if someone really is out to get you? In this scenario, H? might want to think about getting some PR upgrades. I get the impression, though, that power-blocs have been consistently growing over time, and that prior to Consone, the Crows were fairly unique in their confederacy size and cohesion (assuming it's ever actually been put to the test, I mean). So it's probably a waste of time trying to draw conclusions about H?'s confederacy metagame from a very limited set of data.
|
Posted By: hellion19
Date Posted: 16 Oct 2012 at 07:35
|
We need more threads. There are 241 different alliances and the first page is each guilds thoughts on the war which takes away 8-10 of those... so we have the potential to make about 230 more threads.. Each more or less determining that the other side is full of communist mutant spies! The Computer does not like such things and its best to see your happiness officer promptly. If no happiness officer is readily available then be sure to visit your nearest ultraviolet citizen. Thanks. |
Posted By: Mr Damage
Date Posted: 16 Oct 2012 at 07:54
| Darmon you might be onto something there mate, good luck with discovering more. |
Posted By: Darmon
Date Posted: 16 Oct 2012 at 16:39
As I was writing that, I almost hoped I was just very tired. I realize I wasn't the one to bring up the Crows, and it was more restrained than some of the current conversations happening around here...but in that moment, I felt like EF, poking their nest with a stick. I do kind of feel like this war might set some precedents for confederate-level diplomacy. I mean, does anyone realize that this war involves a third of the server's population? (Roughly 63 out of 190 million.)
|
Posted By: ES2
Date Posted: 16 Oct 2012 at 23:33
I read your post and came across comments like this "I feel strongly that the reason Harmless? declared war on our confederate Invictus was that Harmless? fears that of the growth in playing a game of building and collaboration will take away the importance of the wargame that they are playing and thus reduce the control they feel and their “winning” of the game as they play it." So you are declaring war on "warmongers" who are defending their ally, by declaring war you are in turn defending your ally. Why can't these war declarations just simply say you are aiding your ally without so much propaganda? "we have never done anything aggressive to the wargamers, we have always been accommodating and striving to make peaceful and rational decisions and agreements" A war declaration doesn't sound very peaceful to me. "We have declared war on Harmless? at this instance because we believe that if we do not stand up now and defend our way of playing the game by peaceful building, then the next alliance that grows big from successful application of those ideals will be the next target for attack – or worse, the game might deteriorate towards one of many similar wargame clones and the joy of building, exploring and seeing the world unfold into exciting details and events will be lost in a mist of battles" Seriously.. how much oppressing has Harmless? and her allies done to you, in my opinion they've only attacked people that's deserved it. Take me, in the past i insulted a player rather badly and was attacked as a punishment. i can accept it was a fair punishment and move on. You, like your friends in VIC are putting out propaganda that is so tedious to read through "this is an attack against those that harm our way of life blah blah blah blah". Seriously, just put out a declaration without any propaganda for ONCE. Truth is the FIRST casualty of war. ------------- Eternal Fire |
Posted By: Darmon
Date Posted: 17 Oct 2012 at 00:19
| EF, I don't think it's very effective to criticize people for putting out propaganda, and then moments later start doing the same thing yourself. I find it's good to practice what you preach. |
Posted By: ES2
Date Posted: 17 Oct 2012 at 01:25
|
I do not see any propaganda in my post. ------------- Eternal Fire |
Posted By: Darmon
Date Posted: 17 Oct 2012 at 03:18
| I decided not to take it further down that road, since there's already too much of that going on in all these threads. Let's just agree that things can look very different depending on what angle you view them from. |
Posted By: Kumomoto
Date Posted: 17 Oct 2012 at 03:50
|
Except for the fact, Darmon that EF used to be on the receiving end of Harmless' pointy end... He more than most, can talk intelligently about whether we are merciless bloodthirsty folks or not through experience... And on the H? Character after these experiences... |
Posted By: Darmon
Date Posted: 17 Oct 2012 at 04:00
Huh, so the vague allusions to EF's prior days of super-villainy might have some substance? Considering people don't find it worthwhile to explain, I just figured we were talking some minor incidents that no one cared enough to bother recounting. Hmm...
|
Posted By: ES2
Date Posted: 17 Oct 2012 at 04:13
|
I can message you the details if you'd like, to not.. de-rail this war declaration ------------- Eternal Fire |
Posted By: Mr Damage
Date Posted: 17 Oct 2012 at 06:37
Once again, good luck with discovering more
|
Posted By: Ossian
Date Posted: 17 Oct 2012 at 10:27
|
Posted By: Sisren
Date Posted: 17 Oct 2012 at 11:26
How does an abandoned account contribute to the efforts of war and peace? ------------- Illy is different from Physics- Reactions are rarely Equal, and rarely the opposite of what you'd expect... |
Posted By: Myr
Date Posted: 17 Oct 2012 at 11:36
Ossian (Abandoned)Male Human Unaffiliated with an Alliance
|
Posted By: Sisren
Date Posted: 17 Oct 2012 at 12:28
Ossian's new character has contacted me in-game. I recant the previous post. ------------- Illy is different from Physics- Reactions are rarely Equal, and rarely the opposite of what you'd expect... |
Posted By: ES2
Date Posted: 17 Oct 2012 at 13:35
True, but the point of my comment before the offer of explanation was to show that even someone on the receiving end of Harmless can, accept and agree with their actions. I have never thought Harmless? members to be aggressive or war mongers, more of people that moderate a few parts of illyriad a majority of the players in illyriad enjoy, such as prohibiting newbie farming. So my comments were meant to illustrate the point that Harmless as a whole acts nothing the way Consone is portraying them to be. ------------- Eternal Fire |
Posted By: hellion19
Date Posted: 17 Oct 2012 at 14:04
 People are going to start getting angry if you don't jump on the H? hate train and use other propaganda against you  . |
Posted By: Nesse
Date Posted: 17 Oct 2012 at 20:28
Thank you for clarifying your view. I realise now that your post was just a misunderstanding of my original declaration. I do NOT think that Harmless? are particularly evil, and not even that they are warmongers as such. It is just that their perception of the game is fundamentally different from mine. I do however interpret the bulk of statements by Harmless? players in other threads as well as their declaration of war on Invictus at a "fortunate" moment over such a detail as VIC "attacking" siege armies bombarding cities of a confederate alliance to be a reaction in fear of being "overtaken". Not a panicky fear at all, but a cold and calculated strategically perceived risk of losing power. I am trying to say that the risk is minimal, since the majority of Consone (actually all the Consone members I have met) have small or no ambitions for the kind of power that (again to my understanding and experience) the majority of Harmless? players measures success in. And no, I do not consider Harmless? to be the only alliance playing by those rules, nor an unfair or one in that game. But it so happens that it is the alliance that is attacking a confederate alliance to the Dwarven Druids. We are not a competitor in the wargame, and would prefer to play our game in parallell and by staying out of wars. It is my belief that if the leadership of Harmless? had understood the underlying principles and ideals of Consone, the war declaration from Harmless? on Invictus would never have occured. ES2, if you try to read my posts in this thread without your "this-is-propaganda glasses", you might understand what I mean. May your beard grow! /Nesse, Great Archdruid PS. I consider defending the bombardment of cities (by force or war declaration) to be an aggressive act, while I also consider attacking a siege to prevent it from bombarding a city to be a defensive act. Obviously you and I disagree on both those statements. |
Posted By: Jane DarkMagic
Date Posted: 17 Oct 2012 at 23:36
That's silly and uninformed. I believe it's something as simple as a mutual respect between Crowlition and H? leadership.
|
Posted By: ES2
Date Posted: 17 Oct 2012 at 23:45
|
Just because I called out the propaganda does not mean I am reading words and randomly getting "propaganda". I am yet to see a reason of war against Harmless post from any Consone member without use of propaganda, though I understand how important it is to win the PR war as much as the real war. ------------- Eternal Fire |
Posted By: Hora
Date Posted: 18 Oct 2012 at 01:20
Ehm... OK, I'll try without any PR talk... thus, just facts as I see them (biased as I am) 1. H? has seen Consone as a competitor from day one. Only understandable, as we have same size. 2. ABSA and RHY had an argument on a mine. Unkind words were exchanged. RHY sent sieges on ABSA. 3. Consone saw those sieges, decided sieges to be out of any proportion in a discussion about a trout mine, decided to break sieges while trying to solve this conflict diplomatically. 4. H? declared war on VIC, claiming, that attacking those siege camps was an act of bullying, aggressive, and such... 5. Mutual defense triggered. Consone alliances not hit by H?'s war declarations either decided to stay neutral like FF, or to defend VIC, stating this by declaring war themselfs. In my opinion, this declaration of Dwarfen Druids against H? falls under "Mutual defense", and not under "Warmongering". Mutual defense was stated from the very beginning of Consone, and any alliance attacking, would have had to expect this protocoll to take effect.
|
Posted By: hellion19
Date Posted: 18 Oct 2012 at 02:12
3 is where the problems started as did the actual escalation. Prior to 3 it was being dealt with between the parties involved in said disputes as most disputes should be. At the time ABSA and SkB were already bigger than RHY numbers wise. They were not likely considered large enough to be bullying RHY however and it was possible for either side to win it. Involving the rest of Consone in a dispute to save the already larger side in a war is a bit much. Regardless of stated intention it became a war of RHY vs Absa / SkB / Consone. |
Posted By: Hora
Date Posted: 18 Oct 2012 at 02:29
|
But the larger side never attacked RHY cities, to my knowledge. Thus H? is a bit overexagerating when stating, they rescued RHY from their doom. Even now, all Consone activities are limited to breaking siege camps and throwing/recieving blights. (Only exception is that one strange camp against RES... I know...). Consone's sole intention was to avoid damage to cities (ON BOTH SIDES!!!). Noone wanted to go for retaliation, or anything similar!
|
Posted By: N. Chadgod
Date Posted: 18 Oct 2012 at 02:39
------------- It's beyond fairytale, it's inconceivable! |
Posted By: Sisren
Date Posted: 18 Oct 2012 at 02:42
The issue with #2 isn't ABSA, it was SkB. SkB requested ABSA to attack RHY. ------------- Illy is different from Physics- Reactions are rarely Equal, and rarely the opposite of what you'd expect... |
Posted By: DeathDealer89
Date Posted: 18 Oct 2012 at 03:36
|
Well you kinda skipped over ABSA attacking RHY and then taunting and insulting them. There was no attempt at diplomatic solution by consone no matter how many times you say it. In fact RHY were the most diplomatic alliance involved. RHY and SKB agreed on a diplomatic solution. Behind the scenes SKB was aggressive and asked ABSA to attack RHY. ABSA attacked RHY. RHY attempted diplomacy and asked for repayment for lost troops. ABSA refused insulted, taunted and demeaned RHY RHY responded with military offensive (The only next logical step when the other side chooses to ignore diplomacy) VIC also ignores diplomacy and attacks RHY's sieges (While it can be argued that was in defense of an ally still no diplomacy involved here) H? supports RHY VIC and consone ask for sieges to be recalled (This is actually the first attempt on Consone side to maybe kinda be diplomacy) Consone piles on and declares war (Btw consone declared war many more times than H?/Rhy) A few people jump into the war on both sides because hey why not. Sages (this is my fav) makes a post about recruiting because well they are tiny and can't fight on their own. The war rages on, and although I haven't read all 10 threads and 10 pages in each to see if anyone offered anything in terms of peace. I doubt there will be any within the tourney timeframe. Oh and while Consone, H? and everybody else were busy fighting. Crows and soon took the opportunity to just own at the tourney. Grats to them :D And i must admit while i thought Soon was impressive rate of increase Crows really took it to the bank. |
Posted By: N. Chadgod
Date Posted: 18 Oct 2012 at 04:27
|
Oh, the tournaments over? ------------- It's beyond fairytale, it's inconceivable! |
Posted By: Buridan
Date Posted: 18 Oct 2012 at 06:07
I'm sorry, but that is entirely speculation on your part. |
Posted By: hellion19
Date Posted: 18 Oct 2012 at 06:18
This would be true if it were only the people involved. Getting a huge alliance involved in the matter could easily be seen as far more aggressive regardless. Lets go with another example not related to this war as it seems the propaganda attached to this one is quite a bit. Lets use the NC and STEEL war as an example. The 2 had a dispute whatever that may be and who was right or wrong means little in the matter. They decided to fight it out because of a breakdown in diplo talks to end it peacefully early on so therefore it escalated. Which is fine and good as it happens sometimes. Lets say now that NC decided to call in a bigger alliance as an example lets just say the entire Crowlition to correct the wrong that they perceived STEEL did to them. This is where the main issue is... which is the same as this war. Letting the two sides come to their own terms would of been far better than interfering with a dispute between the two. Unless Consone wants to also dictate the actions of all their guilds it is not going to be ideal to also back everyone in their coalition without a little extra care in their decision making. Most of the argument that happens doesn't argue that RHY was the initial instigator in the war but rather people argued they haven't followed an agreement in the time frame that SkB wanted and therefore called in ABSA. Which ABSA drew first blood and after that cryed foul when they get hit back and managed to pull all of consone into the mix. Lots of over reaction on Consone part which led to other groups interfering. It could of simply been a similar situation to other wars where they conduct their own war and be on their way after. If H? didn't support RHY in this I would of questioned our friendship and I am glad to see H? step in and assist where someone was clearly being bullied by a far greater sized alliance. So yes the escalation started at 3. Until then it was a war between 3 guilds of relatively equal sides dealing with their difference in opinions. Sieges are sometimes a part of a war... whether you like it or not. |
Posted By: N. Chadgod
Date Posted: 18 Oct 2012 at 11:52
|
Yeah, I dont buy any of that. If youre admitting a siege is an act of war then defending yourself cant be worse.
------------- It's beyond fairytale, it's inconceivable! |
Posted By: Rorgash
Date Posted: 18 Oct 2012 at 12:04
|
i think people are forgetting that this started with Skb and not absa. but i dont care, the war is going and im happy :) -------------
|
Posted By: hellion19
Date Posted: 18 Oct 2012 at 12:16
More so the argument was that having others joining a war between SkB + ABSA vs RHY escalated the situation. Up to that point it would of simply been just another small war between the 3 of roughly equal sized sides. Calling in someone that is nearly larger than all 3 combined caused the mess that your in currently. Which I explained a little better in my previous post... |
Posted By: Sisren
Date Posted: 18 Oct 2012 at 14:46
Really? It's the presented position stated many times and rather clearly in other posts... ------------- Illy is different from Physics- Reactions are rarely Equal, and rarely the opposite of what you'd expect... |
Posted By: Rorgash
Date Posted: 18 Oct 2012 at 15:44
|
Yea :/ SkB and ABSA both confirmed it, as did RHY and H? -------------
|
Posted By: belargyle
Date Posted: 18 Oct 2012 at 16:11
Then you have never been in fight in your life nor do you understand the limited rules in fightings. Here is one rule - if you involve yourself in someone else's fight, be prepared to fight. example: If two people are fighting and you jump in to stop the fight by protecting the other person (ie. blocking some punches and pushing then back a bit to allow some room for the person to get up) No matter the reason or intention for entering that fight, you just entered the fight and had best be prepared to defend yourself and the other guy. Thus if one does determine to 'aid', it doesn't matter YOUR opinion of what you did, it matters how the opposing side sees it. You can call it aid all you want, but the fact is, when you use force to 'aid' you have swung your fist and connected. You have entered the fight and it IS aggression - whether one considers it positive or negative is others call.
|
Posted By: Nesse
Date Posted: 18 Oct 2012 at 16:53
|
Could you please stop discussing the Rhyagelle-Absaroke incident in this thread? I thought I rather clearly said that the reason Dwarven Druids declared war was as a declaration of support for a confederated alliance that Harmless? declared war on because they were helping another of our confederates defend against sieges. You may take note that we have not declared war on RHY. The reason we have not done that is that they have a dispute with Absaroke that I haven't seen a reason to take a firm stance in, as I have no stake in the mine or mines being disputed and the measures taken on both sides, although escalating, could have been defended as reasonable - probably - with not too much stretching of the truth or imagination. But Harmless? going into a war to defend sieges ... well, if you think that's reasonable, I don't think anything I say will make any difference. May the beards of posters grow! /Nesse |
Posted By: ES2
Date Posted: 18 Oct 2012 at 18:21
|
Wouldn't it make sense to declare war on the entire other side, seeing as they in turn may help their ally Harmless?, instead of just harmless?
------------- Eternal Fire |
Posted By: scaramouche
Date Posted: 18 Oct 2012 at 18:22
|
lol..messed this up ------------- NO..I dont do the Fandango! |
Posted By: Loud Whispers
Date Posted: 18 Oct 2012 at 19:50
He has no beef with all else.
|