Play Now Login Create Account
illyriad
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Siege Breaking Defence or Offence?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedSiege Breaking Defence or Offence?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345 9>
Author
Shadar Logoth View Drop Down
Wordsmith
Wordsmith
Avatar

Joined: 03 Mar 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 127
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 Apr 2013 at 22:31
Sorry DD, 

Know your own alliance history a bit better. Or please do not talk about it untill you do. 

There is no misunderstanding about that. 

I am sure many people will try to make it seem so. But there isn't. 

If years ago I would have told you 1 + 1 = 2 . Then it should be the same today. 



Now... apparently it is not. Fine... you guys won, big pat on the back. And yes, lets get over with it. But I, and many other people, do want to know how they don't get involved in the same predicament next time. 

Shadar Logoth
ps. You might notice I don't post to often. Reason is that the more people post, the bigger the chance is that they actually make a mistake. 


More Orc, less talking!

All that is said is my own opinion. I am not a leader nor voice for Invictus. I will always abide by Invictus's rules.
Back to Top
DeathDealer89 View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster


Joined: 04 Jan 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 944
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 Apr 2013 at 22:21
If your trying to say who started the war, please go read up on the 9M other posts about it.  So please read up on the current events and then make an actual argument.  Which to date i still haven't seen an argument, or a point to any of your posts.

As has already been said whether siege is defense or not is purely academic no one cares.  

You have came in here and said everyone go read up on the past, but it appears you haven't even read up on current events.  Or your just here to troll which seems to be 50% of forum population.  
Back to Top
Shadar Logoth View Drop Down
Wordsmith
Wordsmith
Avatar

Joined: 03 Mar 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 127
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 Apr 2013 at 21:57
Hiya DeathDealer89,

I am sure you did not take the time to look into your own alliance's history. 

That part is basically fine with me. 

What I do mind is when war is declared for false reasons. 

Now, if you had read the history, we wouldn't be having this discussion. 

The only discussion, wich Hath really wants to know about, is ,..... what excuses will we be able to stick to, now and in the future. 

I am sure you still won't like the message. But these are the facts. Again, please do read up on the past.

Shad

ps... the thing i mentioned above will apply to numerous people who will try to reply to my message. If u don't mind. I will just skip those replies by pointing out the obvious... see above!

Pps... i could anticipate a lot more arguments, but I am only going to respond to the reasonable once if you don't mind. 

One more ps, all these edits u see, it´s cause I am not native English. 


Edited by Shadar Logoth - 20 Apr 2013 at 22:00
More Orc, less talking!

All that is said is my own opinion. I am not a leader nor voice for Invictus. I will always abide by Invictus's rules.
Back to Top
DeathDealer89 View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster


Joined: 04 Jan 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 944
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 Apr 2013 at 21:37
So I read through the entire msg.  And at this point i'm completely clueless as to what the hell you point was. 

I got some semi-anti H? sentiment about sieges and H? flip-flopping but nothing that made any sense.  
Back to Top
Shadar Logoth View Drop Down
Wordsmith
Wordsmith
Avatar

Joined: 03 Mar 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 127
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 Apr 2013 at 19:34
Sorry T_D .

There was a time I had expected more from you. But lately I have lost all respect for you.

Please, ones you have learned some self-reflection, try and talk to me again. Because if you really want me to tell people about what the past was like, you might look a bit silly.
Shad
More Orc, less talking!

All that is said is my own opinion. I am not a leader nor voice for Invictus. I will always abide by Invictus's rules.
Back to Top
The_Dude View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General


Joined: 06 Apr 2010
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 2396
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 Apr 2013 at 19:30
Excessive obliqueness in writing will conceal the message beyond detection.
Back to Top
Shadar Logoth View Drop Down
Wordsmith
Wordsmith
Avatar

Joined: 03 Mar 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 127
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 Apr 2013 at 19:25
Hi, 

I will try keep this short and to the point. 

As we all know, H? has had a big influence on how this world was changed, some of which has also been positive. But it is also right to conclude what other effects it has had on this world. 

Reason I say this is because of this topic. 

Now, regardless what people feel/think. There is one simple fact. The biggest alliance in this game-world has always operated by the idea that removing a siege was a DEFENSIVE act. Rill didn't just come up with what she wrote on a whim, that came from H? and what the community at that time decided to accept as trueth. 

All older players should be able to remember, and certainly confirm this. 

For those that would like to dispute this. Go look up the discussions about the Valar and TMM war (no reference to current TMM alliance). As back then Killerpoodle, specifically mentioned that members of H? had a lot of autonomy to basically do as they liked. And protecting/killing a siege, was one those rights. 

I am sure some people would like to start picking on what I said now, please, first do u homework and read those posts. And no, I am not going to give u links, I know it has been said in the past, consider it the benefits of being a player who has been a bit longer in this game. 

Hath's question was very valid, though I am sure people would love to ignore it, when they have been on one side, and the neutral people would like to ignore that it will ever happen to them off course. 

Fact is, H? did, numerous times, decide that they could enter into some disagreement, based on these facts. Now, to all rational people, that should have also meant that they should have kept out of the latest Consone dispute with some other alliance. 

I am not going to open up that discussion. 

But along with Hath, I would like to know, how we will be safe from H?, or any other alliance for that matter, from enterring disputes that they never had any right to enter into anyway. 
How can any confederation/alliance be sure that others won't use a cheap excuse to interfere?

I don't mind that people change their minds. But i do mind if they do it multiple times, to suit their needs. Cause if that is how it's going to be these days, then it also means we can't trust anyone anymore.

Shadar Logoth

Ps... the last sentence might not mean a lot to a lot of new players anymore, but trust me, ones that last part is lost, u will suddenly, quite quickly, find out what u lost. 



Edited by Shadar Logoth - 20 Apr 2013 at 19:27
More Orc, less talking!

All that is said is my own opinion. I am not a leader nor voice for Invictus. I will always abide by Invictus's rules.
Back to Top
The Duke View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 22 Jul 2011
Location: Indiana
Status: Offline
Points: 464
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Apr 2013 at 22:56
Originally posted by KillerPoodle KillerPoodle wrote:

Originally posted by The Duke The Duke wrote:

The Duke notices a seige coming to his city. The seige would be the first hostile act. 


What if that siege is in response to earlier actions by 'The Duke' in attacking the alliance of the player sending the siege?  Maybe that siege is an action to defend alliance mates by shifting focus of the aggressive party off the attacks on their cities and onto a siege on The Duke's city?

In that case the siege is a defensive action and an attack on it an offensive action...

A seige would be taking offense into his own hands, rather than just defending.It could be veiwed as a strategic move, but still would be offensive. 

"Our generation has had no Great Depression, no Great War. Our war is spiritual. Our depression is our lives."
Back to Top
The_Dude View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General


Joined: 06 Apr 2010
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 2396
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Apr 2013 at 05:32
The only justification that matters is that for which a player will lose cities supporting.  And that is nothing in these forums.  That is in Elgea and Elgea alone. Beer
Back to Top
KillerPoodle View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar

Joined: 23 Feb 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 1853
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Apr 2013 at 05:17
Originally posted by The_Dude The_Dude wrote:

I can out justify your justification, justifiably so!


You can't fool me - it's turtles all the way down.
"This is a bad idea and we shouldn't do it." - endorsement by HM

"a little name-calling is a positive thing." - Rill
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345 9>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.03
Copyright ©2001-2019 Web Wiz Ltd.