I had no problems with F/R leaving TVM to join Dlords and H? but I did resent the fact that they turned to their former alliance to break a siege that was of their own doing due to repeated diplo/magical/military attacks on exceedingly small EE players in my vicinity (I know this because it was what brought me back to EE from their training alliance and into the Consone War.)

As for opportunistic warmongering... I have to take exception to this. TVM did not enter the Consone War (at least officially) until the last days of the war after most of the Consone alliances had already surrendered and EE was left on its own. 

Again I am more aware of the exact timescale of events during that period because I am on TVM's doorstep and  it was their entry in to the war that caused me and my neighbour to retire from the war and look to personally surrender to H? and their allies - in doing so we helped encourage the rest of EE to surrender and so ended the war.

Please note that I am not involved in this war and as such do not have an axe to grind. I just think that we should not be disingenuous.

Your friend,

"Rill's B%^*$"

 .. remember , your words, not mine . . .

A shame you drank your own koolaid on that front, I never once took action against you or your alliance, and even was generous when they mistakenly tread a bit close to me, I had good relations with my TVM neighbors, but of course, my perceptions were quite well poisoned upon my reading, by your own hand, of your plans for the region.  

I hope you do not find it odd that I oppose you now.  

Things could well have been different, but its the choices one makes that decide ones fate ...  and you perhaps picked ...  wrongly...

I would suggest looking at the diplomacy history of the "Non-Interference" group . How frequently have they declared war on other players? I know that for several alliances in the "Meddlers' group", this is their first time going to war.

Also, wouldn't trying to change the nature/existence of either group be considered "interfering"?

Personally I think those labels are rather silly. This is a multiplayer game and interacting and interfering are not easily distinguished. Any action taken by anyone could fall under either/both of those labels depending on the perspective.

~Vanerin

P.S. For future reference, I think you kinda accomplished the opposite of the intended goal with the font-size thing. It was have been *much* easier to read if more words could have been seen at one time.

Actually I like the large print.  Being a bit older and not that sharp-eyed anymore It didn't cause me a headache like most of this forum BS does.  Maybe a smidgen smaller next time though if you please.  This looks about right to me.

Bonfyr,

Could you explain honestly why you have declared war to Valar last war? It is still a question to me. 

Just a short answer with ANY reason will do.

However large bold font does not further your cause. 

You could of simply said you enjoy the smaller conflicts of illyriad, and support Harmless?s agenda of continuing smaller scale conflicts. And you oppose Consone's attempt at no conflict, as well as other alliances attempting to prevent all conflict. 

Let me see if I understand it correctly. 

You have the rights to declare war to an alliance (without any reason or warning) who is already in war for a long while and lost most of his troops, just because they are Consane, BUT when an other alliance declares to you with their own reasons, you cry all over the forum about respect and dishonesty.

One last question: Honestly, how old are u?  

Dark was prepared enough for NC and offered NC to war against us in order to end the NC-Bane war in a way that will result in less hostile feelings.

NC refused and went for another "softer" target...and here we are.

NC are good at war, but they are not THAT good and certainly not too good. Mostly, they are good at selecting easy targets and when they were wrong in the selection they had TVM and at least part of the Coalition to help them out. TVM is now paying for that, nothing more.

NC never considered BANE a soft target. We have always had more respect for them than that. They were a challenge, and we love a challenge. 3 or 4 players from TVM joined NC in response to BANE adding far, far more than than from II. (For the second time!) At all times, we were outnumbered and out gunned. That didn't stop us from razing 45 BANE cities during wartime plus another 22 in the post war settlement, and ultimately securing BANE's surrender.

We were grateful for the 2 weeks or so that the TVM players helped us out, but it did not mean the difference between success and failure. They supported us but never razed a single city themselves. If you think they deserve the "bitter end" for their actions, I think that is heavy handed but you are entitled to seek that if it suits your character.

I find it interesting to see how just like NC you all want to be. You're a vengeful lot, seeking the destruction of players and alliances if they don't surrender. Although I hate to see our friends be the targets of your vitriol, I do find the irony to be delicious. To punish NC, you're actions are the same as the worst of what you ascribe to us.

Kudos!

Halcyon,

Bane MERGED with Insanity Inc mid war.  They add 11 military players to Bane.  Keep in mind at the beginning of the war Bane had at least twice as many players (all mercenaries) than NC had.

As a result a few members of TVM offer to help NC.  Its funny how you had no issue with Venita and her group.  However, Mckenna and others have to pay the price.  Why is that?  Oh, I get it.  Because you don't like them and therefore they should be punished.

Lets face it.  You are a complete hypocrite and are just using an extremely weak excuse to punish (and perhaps eliminate) a friend to NC.

Bane is running around attacking whomever they want right now under the guise of being "under contract".  That is okay, because they are on your payroll (or ditto's).  Slightly hypocritical?

Because TVM sent 3 players to NC during the war the entire alliance must surrender and be under the control of the enemy OR be wiped out.  I have seen dittobite's individual surrender terms.  Part of the terms is to have a player in vCrow sit the account during the duration of the war.  I am sorry but players are never going to agree to such a thing.  The option is 1) lose control of your account and 2 cities)  and your freedom to play or 2) get wiped out.     

When I heard Dark had an issue with NC during the Bane war, I sent an igm to you to discuss.   I was very open to discussing with our allies.  You did not respond to me and several weeks later you sent me a mail basically threatening us to end the war or else Dark would join.

In the end, you have offered zero diplomacy and have apparently out to seek revenge on NC and whomever they are friends with.  

War can be alot of fun.  NC enjoys the challenge of war, however complete destruction of alliances is not cool.  We would never do it to anyone and I would hope our enemies would never resort to such an action.  If you choose to go down that path, so be it.  NC will not follow you.  I have alot of respect for our enemies and would never treat them in that manner.  

Remember, if you war with respect for each other if can be enjoyable and challenging.  If you war with hatred in your heart and seek the total destruction of your enemy, the game is no longer enjoyable.  Pick the right path.

SB

And that SB talks about "positive" diplomacy and to spare alliances that do not surrender, I also find a bit strange. 

Anyway...

Tcol did not go to war with Bane.  Nor did TVM.  Like I said, 3 players from TVM wanted to join NC during the war.  No different than player like Aurordan leaving PLAN to join EE.  Or Subotoi leaving mCrow to join the war.  

I just don't see the outrage from the community when these players do it.  But when 3 TVM players do it, it seems to be a different story.  Do you not see the hyprocrisy in that?

Furthermore, you have not been privy to terms from NC (yet).  However when the day comes you will see how benevolent our group can be.  

I am not complaining at all. Not once have I said what you are doing is wrong. I do think the destruction of Trivium and its players is heavy handed, but I said Halc was within his rights if that reflects his character. You delight in bringing an alliance to the bitter end. I never said you should stop.

Now get back out there, break those players, ruin those alliances, and wreak your vengeance! It is what you want to do and I'm glad you are enjoying it.

Since the beginning of the war they have trimmed down their roster quite a bit.

SB

To claim that TVM and TCol support of the war against BANE AND II was not that significant, is not what I heared. I think nobody claimed so far that this war is only about this issue and 3 TVM players joining NC during the BANE war.

But I am sure others know better...

I have no idea. I could ask Sir Bradly, but I'm not technically disobeying if I don't know what he actually wants me to do ;)

Darkwords wrote: What with Sisren trolling GC your alliance is hardly creating a positive image of late.

Sisren is not and has never been in NC. I haven't been paying attention to GC lately, but he does not represent Night Crusaders in any way.

There is no hate in me towards any of you guys. You played the game and acted as you did, causing destruction to a lot of players and making a lot of us angry with you. Anger does not translate to hate. Especially in a game.

You managed by your actions to bring to life and forge the great opposition that now stands against you. Greater than Consone and much more resolute. This is a globla war and it will probably expand even more before it begins to move towards peace.

You reap what you sow. You can surrender and accept terms or continue to fight and try to force us to accept terms. I can appreciate your refusal to surrender since I will do the same. You have had the run of Illyriad for far too long and caused too much harm for us to allow you to continue as if nothing happened. We will fight you until you accept terms, or until one side is destroyed. At this time, I see no middle path.

Any player who is not resolute as you and us seem to be, is welcome to accept personal terms. On our side, Ditto is to be approached for terms.

Cheers,

You probably pointed out best what this is about to both sides, without showing disrespect to the other. 

Off course your point of view will be the same view from the other side. 

But hopefully they will regard it with the same respectfull approach you did. 

When I approached H? leadership they were generous with the personal terms for my surrender. As it was the war ended 2 days later and I accepted my "fate" along with the rest of EE.

Anyway, my point is that however recalcitrant TVM leadership elects to be, I am sure that any player looking to leave an alliance mid-war will be treated fairly and equitably.

Personally I think this is even more the case, if the reason for war is totally random (=just for fun). That some players come to the forum and declare a war between NC and CK as “fair” (or just) is also a rather funny idea (although their pop might suggest something else). It would have been nice not to have this “take city policy” after wars. But probably it is too late for that.

I do hope in the new Illyriad after the war (however this will look like and who will be the new (or old) masters) will be managed by a different approach to war and punishment of the looser or aggressor. But escalation to something else might be very possible.

Do you refer to NS and their leader concerning the BANE war? I did hear rumours that also NS supported the war against BANE and had not so nice experiences with NS-players myself.

BANE/II vs. NC was eventually a “fair” war (considering army size, battle knowledge, troop building speed, player activity, etc.). But the moment TCol engaged against II players was maybe the moment that made this coalition against “the” coalition possible? My feeling was the peace treaty created some additional bad feelings and particularly NC have made themselves ex-II and BANE players as enemies same as EE might not like H? anymore? It would have been great to say: “Thanks for fighting a great six month war which you did fairly well. Let us return to peace now!” But some humiliation and city destruction from the winners (NC in this case) seems to be part of the game, sadly. Just for fun is only good when all players have fun. And I think an easy peace would have led to a more calm situation then what we experience now. There is now even the risk to move to a more hateful stage then what we experienced before. But only time will tell…

I tried to wage war once with one of my players to capture a mine. An unaligned player occupied the mine (after it appeared and “fairly” close to my player while the other player was about four times further away) and did not respond to any mails which suggested sharing the mine. We decided to use force with the aim to get the player to share the mine. The player turned out to be an H? alt. It took about one day and I had a big siege from H? directly next to my capital. I was told: “Accept our conditions (pay a fine) or loose cities!”

There was no tiny ~NS~ newb getting pushed around.

/me goes back to building troops.   :)

SB

If accepting terms is too distasteful, then the conflict just goes on until ? 

You are wrong, as was Sloter. The war started over a player of mine that had troops next to his city. I sent my troops to surround his city to protect him from a retaliation siege. When this lie was being spread during the war I and many others who had been contacted by BANE leadership with the accusation, asked for proof of this accusation. None was ever produced. 

BTW, thanks for thinking I have 500k troops. 

Again: There was no tiny ~NS~ newb getting pushed around. Nobody was interested enough in your nwebs to push any of them around. NC were looking for an excuse and found a very flimsy one.

This is a blatant lie Myr, you rotated blockades on Sirrazer yourself. Trying a new tactic as i seem to remember it being said.  As for "pushing" around your player I disagree. We did sov around him, though at 135  pop (at the time) what would a player of that size use sov for, they could not afford it. To this day that player has still not claimed any sovereignty at all.  So what was the point in the end, we only had 2 large armies left after tourney which you knew from the heavy diploing undertaken by NC in the weeks preceding it (well electro missed the cav army of hyo). 

As for the sov, I had rescinded it, i do not know why it didnt work, instead of a follow up mail it was a declaration instead.  Your gunboat diplomacy in relation to dealing with people will be your undoing. Also NS players heavily supplied NC with res in the war (we watched the speed vans moving in and out of their towns) and also received diplo's from the Nightbringers as well. 

SB stated that BANE is full of mercernaries implying that we are all mad troop producers, this is not the case in those days only the people that held the rank of BANE and BANELING and above were troop makers. The rest were support. You guys continually bang on about the lack of razed cities by bane, you must have missed all the forced exodus's of electro and sir bradly which amounted to most of them away from buildings and forests. If BANE was doing that badly, then why did we have 5 cities on NC doorstep that they could not get rid of? 

Malek wrote: ...As for "pushing" around your player I disagree. We did sov around him, (emphasis added) though at 135  pop (at the time) what would a player of that size use sov for, they could not afford it. To this day that player has still not claimed any sovereignty at all.  So what was the point in the end...

.. eeek  newb ring talk...  guess this has run its course !

Good day.  

It was dug up by Praetor Nistiner; complain to him about his agenda if you must.