Amnesty Offer to SHARK Players, January 29-31
Printed From: Illyriad
Category: The World
Forum Name: Politics & Diplomacy
Forum Description: If you run an alliance int the Broken Lands, here's where you should make your intentions public.
URL: http://forum.illyriad.co.uk/forum_posts.asp?TID=6780
Printed Date: 16 Apr 2022 at 19:54
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.03 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Amnesty Offer to SHARK Players, January 29-31
Posted By: Jejune
Subject: Amnesty Offer to SHARK Players, January 29-31
Date Posted: 29 Jan 2016 at 16:27
|
Due to the strategic nature of the current war and the fact that our declaration was not based on a grievance, SIN has afforded SHARK players who wish to leave the war lenient surrender terms. Now that the opening round of the war is coming to a close, SIN would like to extend a general amnesty offer to any enemy combatants in SHARK who wish to leave the war. This is an opportunity for SHARK members who are disenchanted with the war to leave and not be targeted in the future through SIN's Persistent Pursuit Policy during or after the war. Stipulations for the amnesty include the following:
For players with cities in Newlands, amnesty will only be officially recognized once the first city is in exodus. This offer will remain open until midnight server time on February 1st. After amnesty closes, surrender terms from this point forward will become increasingly stringent. Any questions may be directed to SIN leadership. Thank you. ------------- https://elgea.illyriad.co.uk/a/p/394156" rel="nofollow">  |
Replies:
Posted By: Diva
Date Posted: 29 Jan 2016 at 16:59
|
Am I clear on this?? Sin started a war for no particular reason, and those that defended themselves from attack, you are offering amnesty for defending themselves and retaliation for attacking their cities?? And feel you can control where they can live now...? That's kinda messed up... bloated egos maybe?
------------- "Um diva.... you are sort of acting like a .... diva...." - PhoenixFire |
Posted By: Wartow
Date Posted: 29 Jan 2016 at 17:17
|
I currently have no skin in this war... and I hope it stays that way. I believe Jejune and SIN are going to try to capitalize on players who aren't particularly excited to see their work being undone in this war and may want to turn tail and run without suffering any further losses. It is a WIN-WIN for SIN and anyone who accepts the offer and only a potential loss for SHARK. It will be a test of an individual's loyalty to the SHARK alliance and self-interest in maintaining what they have built in the game. In all a wise offer at this point in time, anyone that flees the battle is one less opponent for SIN. Did SHARK develop the devout loyalty that we all suspect has been made among the members of SIN? The social engineering side of the game can make up ground against an opponent without ever having to put armies on the move... Good luck to all. Wartow ------------- 
|
Posted By: Tink XX
Date Posted: 29 Jan 2016 at 17:24
Umm wasn't WoT looking for a merger with SIN last week? Guess that's not on the table anymore  |
Diva wrote:Posted By: Gragnog
Date Posted: 29 Jan 2016 at 17:29
|
Well yeah Diva. We know you like to comment on things you are not part of, so I suggest you join either Shark or VIC and then comment. Throwing comments from the peanut gallery helps nothing. This seems to me to be an offer to Shark members. Read the post more closely next time. This war seems to be about players having fun. A door has been opened for those who are not. Simple enough to understand. ------------- Kaggen is my human half |
Posted By: Diva
Date Posted: 29 Jan 2016 at 17:33
|
rofl, Tink, that was in house humor from the lowly Hothlings.. they got their daily dose of rant from me when I learned of the disobedience.... But jokingly (when I learned it was) it still wasn't humorous. ------------- "Um diva.... you are sort of acting like a .... diva...." - PhoenixFire |
Posted By: Fyzz
Date Posted: 29 Jan 2016 at 17:36
|
On one side, I fail to see how terms can be much more stringent than those those, but I am sure I will find out after they have captured/raised all my towns in Newlands - can't see much point surrendering before then following that announcement :P On the other, I wonder who will be next after they achieve their goal. Maybe people will start to see what kind of game SIN want to play Fyzz PS - my thoughts alone not necessarily SHARK
|
Posted By: Jane DarkMagic
Date Posted: 29 Jan 2016 at 17:38
| @Dive, it is not ridiculous for the side that is winning the war to offer lenient terms to those who surrender at any given point. If anything it is gracious of SIN to offer the option, not indicative of "bloated egos". |
Posted By: Diva
Date Posted: 29 Jan 2016 at 17:40
|
"Well yeah Diva. We know you like to comment on things you are not part of, so I suggest you join either Shark or VIC and then comment." I don't speak for either btw. and of course, my opinion or yours speaks only to ourselves. Why you arguing with ME? rofl.
------------- "Um diva.... you are sort of acting like a .... diva...." - PhoenixFire |
Posted By: Jane DarkMagic
Date Posted: 29 Jan 2016 at 17:53
| It would be more indicative of bloated egos to do what SHARK threatened at the beginning of the war. They said that surrender would not be an option for SIN. Offering surrender with few terms when SIN is clearly winning, and not by small margins, is much more reasonable and even, dare I say, kind. The level of sportmanship it indicates far surpasses what would be allowed under an alliance that actually had bloated egos. So Diva, please find someone else to troll. |
Posted By: Lord_Johnny
Date Posted: 29 Jan 2016 at 18:01
|
I'd like to see if there is something that I can do. I have a somewhat small alliance in High Hills. We do, at times, offer refuge for players whose alliances are engaged in wars that they do not wish to participate in, with some specific requirements of our own. I would ask if SIN would be accepting of changing the requirement to move back to Elgea to moving to High Hills instead (which would still vacate the land claim area) conditioned to the member of SHARK accepting refugee status. That would be the only change we would ask (again just for those that would take refuge with Aldkeep.) of the terms of surrender. Should SHARK players then accept Aldkeep's offer of refuge, we would have our own terms for accepting that refugee status within our ranks; those terms however, while in addition to those required by SIN for surrender, do not conflict in any way other than the specific placement of cities required to move. |
Posted By: Tink XX
Date Posted: 29 Jan 2016 at 18:59
|
|
Posted By: Brandmeister
Date Posted: 29 Jan 2016 at 19:02
|
Forcing a move back to Elgea is an expensive surrender term, particularly for players who have many cities in the Broken Lands. However, I don't see any other terms that have been traditional in Illyriad wars, like losing 1-2 cities and paying large amounts of gold and advanced resources. So in most respects, these terms seem much more lenient to SHARK than the ones they themselves have imposed on others. Both sides made it clear that this is a war to control a strategic region. I suppose this is one way to consolidate long term power in the central Broken Lands. |
Posted By: GM Rikoo
Date Posted: 29 Jan 2016 at 19:50
|
I am already deleting off-topic posts. Any more and I will just delete the player. :) Rikoo ------------- Illyriad Community Manager / Public Relations / community@illyriad.co.uk |
Posted By: asr
Date Posted: 29 Jan 2016 at 20:20
| I decided to delete my post. For purity of this thread and not interfering important matters. |
Posted By: Adrian Shephard
Date Posted: 29 Jan 2016 at 23:39
| SIN makes a good offer.........and the elgan trolls come out of the woodwork |