Dark Empire, NAAM, TOR
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=5738
Printed Date: 17 Apr 2022 at 04:30 Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.03 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Dark Empire, NAAM, TOR
Posted By: Hiei
Subject: Dark Empire, NAAM, TOR
Date Posted: 20 Jul 2014 at 18:55
|
I understand, to bring peace between Harmless, and the Grand alliance, NAAM must disband. All the folks in NAAM, we would definitely make claim to allies and very much so, brothers and sisters of the Dark Empire.
I'm declaring a confederation with The Old Republic, the people of TOR are good people and just as respected as any NAAM player. Some players of NAAM may join The Dark Empire as well.
Now I just wanted to state our point clearly as well, anyone who attacks TOR unjustly or any ex-NAAM player, The Dark Empire will back them with all our hearts and will. (We all hope that doesn't happen!)Let our alliances ride on together, AS ONE!!! *Pulls out the kegs* Cheers,
|
Replies:
Posted By: Deranzin
Date Posted: 20 Jul 2014 at 20:28
Finally they can be re-aligned ...  
-------------

Just like a "before and after" ad ! ahahahaah :p
|
Posted By: auel
Date Posted: 21 Jul 2014 at 08:13
|
Thanks Hiei and indeed Deranzin.
I have had no chance to consult before responding to this, so best take this as a personal view and in no way an "alliance" statement.
Having been an avid reader of the forums but only a very occasional contributor I know the way this thread is likely to deteriorate but can only ask those who have been on the other side of this conflict to accept that what I am going to write is a sincere attempt to explain one or two aspects of NAAM that have clearly been a source of irritation to some of our adversaries.
First our name, which as things have turned out was far from accurate and in hindsight should have been reconsidered when we took on an "in game" identity. The Non Alligned Alliance Movement was an attempt by Janosch to bring together some of the most able players from a number of small and medium alliances to meet what she saw as a threat from Night Crusaders. Now we could argue for weeks about whether the threat was real or not, the fact is that she felt threatened and whether TOR, Alizes or anyone else was ever on Sir Bradleys "to do" list, only he can say.
The thinking was genuinely to steer a middle course between the games two power blocks and be able to take on NC on its own. In theory and our forum NAAM was very much bigger, the sad thing is that some people who she (Janosch) thought were committed to support this effort sat on their hands when push came to shove and either did not join or went to bigger alliances where they no doubt felt safer. Also as events around the Roman Empire - Celtic Knights - Night Crusaders situation developed two things became clear -
1. That NC had other alliances standing behind them who had no intention of allowing NAAM to win a straight fight (which we almost certainly could not have done anyway)*. 2. That there was something much bigger forming in the wings and as a matter of survival we had better be part of it.
I think some people have thought that NAAM was central to the formation of what became known as the Grand Alliance. Sorry, we were very much on the edge and were only guessing who else was involved and what parts they would play. NAAM was told that some alliances would be too busy to attack us and that was about it.
Once we actually started to try to fight NC, we found that several things happened, NC armies would regularly shelter in H? cities and we would find that when we attacked NC cities they were garrisoned by H? armies, also alliances we were not at war with and didn't want to fight would attempt to break sieges. I can now see that H? would feel this to be totally fair and justified but I can also say that at the time NAAM had no intention of fighting H?, T-O, Dlord or anyone else, (apart from NC) and tried hard not to do so right up to the time that they started to siege our cities.
By the time H? decided to come clean and declare war on NAAM we were pretty integrated into the GA organisation, not because that was the original intention but because that is where the actions of others forced us to be.
Non-Alligned? That was the original ideal, it is certainly no longer true but we make no apology for that.
*Another fact, we were all peaceful players and as far as I know none of us had ever participated in an Illy war. Only two or three out of thirty odd accounts were in any sense battle ready and we did not even know how to sov for decent military production.
Josiah
|
Posted By: Hbz77
Date Posted: 21 Jul 2014 at 11:51
|
Thanks Hiei, those long months of war let NAAM members, that for the most part come from TOR, to meet great people like you and others in GA.
TOR will be more than happy to continue his adventure in Illyriad with friend like DARK on his own, to share experience, help each others and have fun togheter.
About the non alignment matters, Josiah said well and enough, those are the fact that happened, now we are certainly aligned with our friends.
|
Posted By: Deranzin
Date Posted: 21 Jul 2014 at 12:07
Posted By: auel
Date Posted: 21 Jul 2014 at 12:45
Deranzin we have to plead guilty to naivety, we simply did not realise BEFORE the war actually started just how close NC and H? really were, in that sense we tried to stand between the lines because we believed the hype that they were themselves truly independent.I have no intention of getting into an ongoing debate but I thing SimplyBeast and Myr would agree that NAAM made no undeclared attacks on NC, in fact we probably hardly laid a glove on them for the first month of the war. If any "undeclared" attacks took place I have no knowledge of them.
Josiah
|
Posted By: Deranzin
Date Posted: 21 Jul 2014 at 13:29
Posted By: Hiei
Date Posted: 22 Jul 2014 at 18:20
|
Yes, I already knew all these facts of the NC and NAAM thing, but I was very surprised myself to see H? attack, after that I thought maybe the other around them would be involved as well, such as Aesir, because they were so close and still sort of involved in the war. They never took action, so I assume maybe it was because NC and H? are close allies.
|
Posted By: auel
Date Posted: 25 Jul 2014 at 16:13
In accordance with clause 6 of the Harmless? surrender terms NAAM confirms that is has disbanded.
Josiah
|
Posted By: Angrim
Date Posted: 25 Jul 2014 at 17:04
as one who would have preferred to see NC issues settled without the intervention of the great powers, i offer my personal congratulations to NAAM for having done what it set out to do (albeit in an unforeseen way) and disbanded. this is, to my mind, not much different from NC's own experience. the beginnings and ends of these two alliances have something to say about the nature of the sandbox and about what properly constitutes "victory" in it.
"Retire when the work is done. This is the way of heaven." --Lao Tzu
|
Posted By: KillerPoodle
Date Posted: 25 Jul 2014 at 22:39
Firstly I would like to state that H? made no requests regarding NAAM at all during the negotiations - the idea to disband was theirs and the clause stating it was a surprise to us.
Secondly, NAAM only decided to declare and start attacking after NC had been under heavy attack for some time and almost all of the GA had already entered and started offensive ops, so however noble they claim their intentions to be, in reality they were just one more boot in the crowd of people piling onto NC and they really should not be surprised that we viewed them as exactly that.
Had NAAM vs NC happened as a 1 on 1 things might have been different but as we know their alliance was public lie from the beginning.
Lastly, I find it funny that Hiei in particular would be confused about H? deciding to defend an ally given DARK's desperate attempts to escalate the Bane/NC conflict even though that war was much closer to a 1 on 1 and not a one-sided massacre attempt.
------------- "This is a bad idea and we shouldn't do it." - endorsement by HM
"a little name-calling is a positive thing." - Rill
|
Posted By: realist
Date Posted: 26 Jul 2014 at 02:18
I thought it was odd as well. Never thought the victors would disband an alliance in negotiations. It makes zero sense to be included in the terms.
I think some players in the Grand Alliance are so use to having to disband at the end of wars that they felt it was mandatory. lol
Let me repeat, the only alliances that should disband at the end of the war are the ones that lost the war. Victory is just that, the victors should never have to disband because they won.
But anyway kudos to at least getting Harmless to surrender. Victory in it self.
However, even in defeat harmless still trying to set rules for everyone to follow. And we all know they don't follow them.
|
Posted By: jcx
Date Posted: 26 Jul 2014 at 02:37
realist wrote:
Let me repeat, the only alliances that should disband at the end of the war are the ones that lost the war. Victory is just that, the victors should never have to disband because they won.
|
Cheers realist! its over... Josiah disbanded NAAM..
------------- Disclaimer: The above is jcx|orcboy's personal opinion and is not the opinion or policy of Harmless? [H?] or of the little green men that have been following him all day.
jcx in H? | orcboy in H?
|
Posted By: Kumomoto
Date Posted: 26 Jul 2014 at 08:31
realist wrote:
And we all know they don't follow them.
|
We all know how evil Harmless is, but, to date, I have yet to see a single example of Harmless not doing what it would say it would do or follow the rules it set out... MANY hated the rules we set out and those rules were crushed by popular acclaim, but H? not following its own rules?
We have pretty strict rules in H? and to my knowledge they have never been breached. I would welcome an example (if "we all know H? doesn't follow the rules"). Then surely it should be easy to show an example of H? doing anything other than being honorable...
K.
|
Posted By: Kumomoto
Date Posted: 26 Jul 2014 at 08:33
Kumomoto wrote:
realist wrote:
And we all know they don't follow them.
|
We all know how evil Harmless is, but, to date, I have yet to see a single example of Harmless not doing what it would say it would do or follow the rules it set out... MANY hated the rules we set out and those rules were crushed by popular acclaim, but H? not following its own rules?
We have pretty strict rules in H? and to my knowledge they have never been breached. I would welcome an example (if "we all know H? doesn't follow the rules"). Then surely it should be easy to show an example of H? doing anything other than being honorable...
K.
|
Put it this way... If you can supply a single example of this, I will do backflips off the Washington Monument.... This is typical irrational H? hatred.
|
Posted By: realist
Date Posted: 26 Jul 2014 at 09:38
Kumo, stop pretending that I or anyone else that has been in Illyriad from the beginning knows nothing of the history of Harmless in terms of creating rules and breaking them as they see fit.
Maybe you think I am as gullible as the people that thought North Korea won their group stage in the world cup this year...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJoRZOK18Fg" rel="nofollow - example
|
Posted By: Steven Quincy Urpel
Date Posted: 26 Jul 2014 at 10:26
That video is a hoax, realist. Learn Google. You are gullible.
------------- They call me MISTER Urp!
|
Posted By: abstractdream
Date Posted: 26 Jul 2014 at 14:56
Really?
With the simple task of providing an example of H? discarding their own rules for their own benefit, given that everyone knows this happened all the time, shouldn't it be a walk in the park? Just give us the names of the H? members, a quick synopsis of the event and there you have it. Certainly less effort than you expended looking up the URL to that video.
Instead, you post a link to a video, which has nothing to do with Illyriad, whatsoever. I'm at a loss to see how anyone thinks that makes any sort of point beyond "I have nothing".
------------- Bonfyr Verboo
|
Posted By: realist
Date Posted: 26 Jul 2014 at 15:15
|
Don't motivate me to become the player I once was.
|
Posted By: jcx
Date Posted: 26 Jul 2014 at 19:55
LoL.. love the link.. 
------------- Disclaimer: The above is jcx|orcboy's personal opinion and is not the opinion or policy of Harmless? [H?] or of the little green men that have been following him all day.
jcx in H? | orcboy in H?
|
Posted By: Ander
Date Posted: 27 Jul 2014 at 06:58
Kumomoto wrote:
supply a single example of this, I will do backflips off the Washington Monument.. |
1. Malpherion sieged an abandoned valar city without permission. Valar wanted to capture the city. They sent an army against the sieging force and requested H to withdraw the ongoing siege. H razed the city and later 'punished' valar.
2. Humbaz forcibly took sovereignty from a player near a dwarwen trade hub. H consulate told the player that since his alliance was aligned with consone, they approve of Humbaz's actions.
3. Absa got declared upon for attacking a trove mine 2 squares away from our city, forcibly occupied by an H ally. No 10-square-5-square rules for the unfortunate.
4. Great Dane kept on attacking a 3 city Absa player in Tor Carrock during the war until he quit. H policy of targeting smallest Absa members didnt change. Me, Neytiri, Grego, Qaal all lost cities after the war as part of war reparitions - not during the war.
I dont think H is evil. Compared to some of your allies, you were angels.  No need to backflip off the monument. If you wait long enough, you might see some of your past enemies doing way worse than you ever did. Then you could chuckle to yourself thinking what power does to people.
Also, I hope to see H build up and become one of the leading alliances again.
|
Posted By: bansisdead
Date Posted: 27 Jul 2014 at 11:11
Posted By: Ander
Date Posted: 27 Jul 2014 at 12:26
|
No one is evil. I was just joking. :)
|
|