learn ta spell

You gotta earn taking down my cities.  You won't see me just giving em to ya.... COME ON 10 to 1, sounds about like a fair fight for me.  I will never surrender.  I will never "give" you a city.  

Luna

Think of it like this ...

Why should EE be rewarded for dragging out the war?

I am truly baffled.

Paint us as the bad guy if that feeds your delusions but don't for one minute blame us for your members leaving or losing cities, accept responsibility for your poor judgment and leadership.

We will fight on.

I expect the peace discussions with Hath/EE were pre-conditioned on a confidentiality agreement by Hath...

No, many of us would ask - 'what the hell are they thinking?!?  why are they trying to draw first blood, rather than step back and talk???'

Certainly our confeds at least talk to us, and tell us the hows, whats and whys of their coarse, and ask us if it is the right thing at the right time... and let us consider if we can support them with actual support.

Our confeds are mutual defense, not mutual offense.  Its apparent that EE is quite different in this respect...  'Yes, you declare war, we will too!'  Is this how the decision was made?  It seems to have been endemic to Consone starting with SkB and ABSA - certainly Consone happily expanded the conflict from that point rather than stepping back to think about it...  /shrugs

Being in a confederation does not mean blind trust, you need to ask the 5 Whys, you need to think.

You might still be here as you say, but you might end up being a withered, burnt up shell of what you were, and what you could be.

 As with everything concerning H? there is more to this than meets the eye.

 

T_D it is difficult for the community to believe your assertion that Hath tried to prolong the inevitable when he, notably, was the Consone leader that announced the dissolution of Consone purely in the interests of genuine peace - and then initiated the surrender of the member alliances. In effect Hath and others more or less moved mountains, in the interests of the game, to bring about peace and now he finds himself derided, belittled and insulted.

 

Shame on you. Shame on H?

Illy is a game, and games are supposed to be fun.  This is simply the point in which it is no longer fun.  Between apparently reading our Alliance Chat and punishing people for what they say, and constantly threatening to wipe us out if we do not agree to your terms it has lost it's luster.  

This is the reason we have finally decided, if you want our cities and to teach us a lesson then come and take them.  We know we can't win, and it doesn't really matter anymore.

That's not true, HATH, you agreed to confidentiality in previous talks, it has been stated on this forum that we would not discuss or entertain any discussion of terms in this forum.  You did agree to confidentiality.   Your statement here just proves my previous comment that you have no honor.    Continue with your posts as your comments serve to prove what we are saying about your leadership, integrity and judgment.

So, is this feeling of unsecurity good for the game and for the community? Is that really what we all want?

From my eyes, consone was as a project to bring people of various horizons together and give more signification to the confederation system: confederates confed with each one other as a real group, which is something rare currently if you think about it. Could have developped trade, friendship, mutual help, exciting competition during tourneys. Maybe if this project had had the time to mature, other alliances would have followed, giving more meaning to their confederations and Illy may have gone to a higher level: in any case something very interesting would have come out of it im sure.

If community initiatives like this one are so harshly threatened, for me it blocks the possibilities of innovation and the positive evolution of the game. Some people say this game aims to be different (i think GM SC said this too) and people sound more mature than on the majority of the other games in general... but if we block innovations and possible community progress we are not making a so different and mature game. 

Some say this war made people do something, but still many people leave cause it's not funny anymore. When i see what happened between NC and II it makes me think we have a huge potential to make this game more funny, enjoyable and attractive. And it's for a good part up to us, the community. 

Those were my two cents ^^

what they ask for in terms they can just take from you if they choose, and really they could take a lot more. i would of accepted the terms if it was my alliance, and if talks were on the table i definitely would not get impatient and send another siege.

i expect h? to increase the terms further at this point since you made this public in a attempt to get sympathy  from the illy community and hope they would put pressure on h? for you guys.

all i see is a larger alliance trying to give a smaller one a chance to survive and regrow, and a smaller alliance who seems to be to prideful to want to survive.

take the deal work man, the longer you wait, the more public you make it, the worse it will be...

in my humble opinion of course

 Yes, we have heard the stories which H? proudly tells us about how they overcome the White Company and Black - though that is hardly mentioned..

 Some of us will also remember the great VALAR war..

What happened at the end of these two wars?  Well.. The leadership left or got killed.. The alliance members were left in disarray and became easy pickings and.. Well, it has been near a year that VALAR had their pummeling and are still struggling to recover. 

 I doubt anyone finds it odd that EE are not willing to except this Treaty of Versailles with a H? member who-shall -not-be-named acting like Clemenceau. Way to go for peace guys 

If I knock you down and cut off your hands it's because I fear what you may do with them.  If I knock you down and let you get back up it's because I dare you to try again.  Which is a game and which is "real"?

I do believe we are getting slightly side-tracked..

To return to topic : Why must EE be punished so harshly? Just because the treaty has not been signed does not mean that the parties involved have to keep shooting at each other both verbally and militarily (to use another WWI example) like Truman [till the last minute].

Would it at all be possible to set up different negotiators? I am sure that there are some budding young H? diplomats that would love to give this a spin, much the same for EE. 

Last question [for the minute]  Has an armistice been signed yet?

respect and beliefs wont save ee members, nor will pride or arrogance.  if ee was stronger and could put up a fight against h? maybe they could work a better deal but that is not the case.  h? giving them any terms is h? allowing ee to survive at the kindness of their heart.

i dont see why everyone is trying to make h? into the villain here. i see h? showing compassion for ee and all the other alliances they accepted the surrender of yet wanting to  prove a point to other alliances who may want to band together to destroy h? like we have seen again and again. 

Take a look at all the alliances we fought.    They fought hard, they fought well and they have earned our respect.    Someone once told me (won't quote her without permission) that the measure of a good leader is not how they get into war but how they act during and at the end of the war.   :D

 

EE are not negotiating from a position of strength. They are not in a position to bargain and haggle over terms of the peace thread. In fact, they are no even negotiating peace. They are negotiating a surrender. And what that means is that they can choose to accept the terms as they are on the table, and try and haggle a little and get them changed slightly (and slightly means losing 30 cities instead of 40), or they can choose to fight on, lose a few more cities and then face exactly the same situation in a few months time- except to a greater degree. I'm fine with that.

 

What they should not expect is to go through these negotiations and come out untouched. Harmless can offer whatever they want, but in the end they don't need to be accepted. The Coalition could crush EE with relative ease. Hathaldir should not delude himself into thinking that he is going to come out of these peace terms with no reprisals.

good terms for a third change

Which is why you made peace, I assume.

And apparently EE is NOT tired of this since they prefer to continue the war.

I don't understand the point of Hath starting these threads.  They have no impact on his enemies.  They do not recruit military aid for EE.  

Perhaps Hath needs to bolster the morale of his membership and uses these dramatic public threads to do so.

If you dont' want peace, keep doing what you're doing, you prove our point. If you do, take the surrender terms and obtain the peace you claim to want. Otherwise stop the non-sense talk about 'wanting peace', pick up a sword and stand your post. Either way, we will be coming, to accept either proposal, your surrender or your Cities.  We would prefer your surrender but we can deal with the later just as well.

 In the mean time, I will stop attacking H? or looking at them in a negative light (It's in my blood, you crushed our sieges two years back) and pretending to know what is going on. I think it might also be wiser if the wider leadership of EE were contacted, because from what I have seen and heard on this thread, it looks like EE is an oligarchy.

 Might I also kindly suggest that we stop saying "EE are trying to save face - boooo!!"? That does seem very counter productive, though I can see why someone would say that 

Other people than EE leadership and membership, in the Illy community, may feel the war dept for EE is too high. Indeed, some may think they already lost quite enough during this war compared to the coalition, and that we should reduce their payment to H?... How could these people influence the outcome of what will happen to EE members?

I mean, i have a bad taste in the mouth when i hear about all this. EE could be crushed to anihilation if H? wanted so of course, as they are stronger, and nobody would help them.

***mod edit to remove inappropriate content***

So i repeat my question:

How could the part of the community feeling it's going too far, do something about it? 

Should we make a vote? would H? anyway care about others opinion? what would happen if H? and the coalition dont care about opinions?

Or should there be a third party chosen to help finding a balanced agreement between H? and EE? and who could it be?

This thread is initially a request for help, we should digest it seriously. If the community dont help in that case it can be seen as a failure to assist a person in danger. This person could die if it continues like this. But this person is an alliance. I think that when there's a risk of genocide, the civilised and democratic people we are in this community should be able to have a say and a do.

What do you think?

Apparently HATH was approached or talked to Starry on Chatzy to settle the terms.. The confusion lay in the "there are two parties in H? trying to get a peace out of this" clause. 

But like our honored member and disgusting orc from BSH said, a peace treaty would be in EE's best interests. However if they want to save face and haggle with you guys, let them do so.  Give them an extra week to grovel and beg etc, then accept the peace terms or continue attacking.

**Has so totally NOT just done a u-turn in illy politics**

As I posted above, the terms will increase the longer it takes HATH to accept surrender terms.

(Regardless - :) happy KW)

Which begs the question : What are you planning to do if your assumption is wrong .?. 

You are staying vague when you use the word "attacks". How many cities did H? really lose to EE?

I dont have the feeling you lost as much cities by EE than you are asking from them. If what Hath says is true, you are asking for 40 of their cities (and not the smallest i guess) not counting the ones they already lost to you. 

H? doesnt seem to have lost so much pop during this war, it's even the opposit... so im sure your members didnt lose so much cities. 

I think an eye for an eye about cities or twice +  retibutions of some other sort (ressources, relocations,...) could be justifiable as surrender terms... but not retributions in cities which are so higher (i'd bet around 10 times) than the harm they did to you... and while they got already way higher casualties.

Anyway, im glad to hear H? wouldnt destroy more than 2 cities for a player, meaning they wouldnt anihilate an alliance. I hope they will stay true to that principle, which one is noble, for the good of this game. But still in EE's case, surrenders terms must have to be reworked, it's currently going in a very damageable direction. That's why a third party, be it a neutral alliance or the whole community, should help in finding a better compromise.

 

And this will be the death of Illyriad. The path most other games have followed.

It's time for the guy with the biggest stick in the game to show us all that your NOT the bully you proclaim not to be.

At this point it's  "you fought and now these are the terms, surrender or lose everything".

This should be where the big stick says "we love this game, to show how good it really can be we offer generous terms and a chance for real negotiations".  Instead of "to the victors go the spoils", show us you DO have the qualities to be the leaders in this game.

Anyone can be a bully, whether you feel wronged or not. 

I feel like the future of this game is in the hands of H right now. If things continue down this path, I fear in time,  it may be only be H members who still play it.

Gee, EE, when you had a bunch of friends to help you fight on the playground, you didn't say to Consone  "No, just 1 at a time."  

Now that EE's friends have realized their folly and made peace, EE stands alone.   The actions of VICX, VIC, Absa, Roads, VALAR, Skb, Druids, and WE speak volumes about EE -  EE's leaders are unreasonable and act without concern for others in their Confed.

I was there during discussions, and questions about the terms were sent and never replied to as well on your forum.  We even offered to demo ALL requested towns to 100 population and never received a reply.  Meanwhile we continued to receive sieges and threats of accept or be destroyed, so it's kind of hard to believe you are actually open to realistic discussions.

We did not come to the decision to outright refuse your terms until we realized that there would be no actual discussion involved (a fact often shouted by your overly boisterous allies).  Therein lies the problem - we either accept over onerous terms or say the heck with it and tell you that if you want the towns come take them.

No...he bailed on the alliance he was supposed to lead...

/shrugs

Hah...this is great.  One day prior as the siege was incoming and setting up against Tansi, H? responded by simply increasing the consequences of peace specifically focused on the participants in this siege.  This is also where the quote about Kurdruk not showing much wisdom currently came from since he was one of the major participants in this siege vs. tansi.    

"good faith..."  

Razing you get nothing.

Something is better than nothing.

AhHa!  EE does not recognize the comparative advantage of something is better than nothing.  

EE appears to believe in the principle of All or Nothing.

I started saying that in jest ... but looking back on it, it really does help explain things.

lmao, and EE has not demanded that our members move their cities?   Our members received numerous threats, one this past week in fact....move or be sieged.   

So let me get this straight, in the middle of surrender talks you have members that are threatening our members with a siege if they don't move their city out of the region.    Yea, that works really well.

Come on EE, make peace with H?, I know you can do it. All the best!

PS. Can anyone post the actual terms? Everyone seems to mention a different set of terms and it's really confusing. 

Really?  were you even involved?

Who are you?  What skin do you have in this game?

For the exodus vs siege- it allows a person to either relocate their town or potentially lose it.  Not many others will give that option, in this regards H? is quite willing to be negotiable.  An exodused town 'hurts' a hell of a lot less than a razed/ captured one...