Play Now Login Create Account
illyriad
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Æsir's Crusade vs. TLR
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedÆsir's Crusade vs. TLR
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345 15>
Author
 Rating: Topic Rating: 5 Votes, Average 5.00  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Gilthoniel View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 11 Oct 2011
Location: Cuiviénen
Status: Offline
Points: 211 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Jul 2012 at 17:06
Everybody wants to give their two cents and /or wave thier woodens swords in the forum. It would be sensible for GD and BV to get together. Call a ceasefire and return all units  to their bases and work out a pact. Like it or not Aesir may have more in common with TLR than they have with other alliances.
 
Outsiders have been posting on this thread about the need for machismo which is rubbish; or they claim that a peace settlement between TLR/TRO was unjust and a cause for war- when:
  • the poster has got nothing do with either party;
  • the thing they complain about was never implemented anyway;

I as far I can see there has been a lot of personal abuse hurled about in this forum which even the GM's have let continue.

Neither side are the villians here. If there have been any villains in this thread , to my eyes, it is not the people from TLR or Aesir but those who keep trying to stoke up the war for either there own amusement or their own advantages.
 
Common lets just have some plain old common sense.  Call off the sieges,raids or whatever and let GD and BV work something out because it feels like we ar getting past the point of no return here.


Edited by Gilthoniel - 27 Jul 2012 at 17:08
Back to Top
SugarFree View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 09 Feb 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 350 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Jul 2012 at 17:00
haha really really good, glorfindel. you hit the nail spot on and hammered it in all the way with one hit. 
Back to Top
glorfindel View Drop Down
Wordsmith
Wordsmith
Avatar

Joined: 02 Sep 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 129 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Jul 2012 at 16:34
Like it or not, Aesir, but the reason behind going to war means something, both in real life and in this game. And for all of your efforts, you have not managed to get the consensus of Elgea to buy into your "casus belli." (And I hate to break it to you, but telling everything that they should back off and it's none of their business is never going to work.) Some people here have said that you have no right to go to war because you dislike EF or resent the ToS. I for one am not one of those people; I agree with Kumomoto, HonoredMule's past comments, and H?'s overall sense that fighting over those issues is fine. I even think that there need not be a blanket rule for small players being attacked. 

I just don't believe that the "unfair ToS" is really why you attacked TLR in the first place. I firmly believe that Thordor accepted those terms knowing full well that his cohorts would help him exact revenge, and that's what this is about; it was merely the end of "act 1" in this war. 

Now, your altruistic explanation for waging war with TLR is damage control. You are in total damage control mode. 

You complain that the other alliances who are aiding TLR are interfering with a mano e mano war between Aesir and TLR on account of many in Elgea getting into business that they have no stake in. Well, what stake did Aesir have in the ToS of the TRO/TLR war? You had no stake in it. You started this war, and you did so by violating the same principles that you are now trying to discredit TLR's alliance with. 

You claim that you're trying to "save the game" by protecting small alliances like TRO from losing wars and having to pay tribute with prestige. Did you ever think that the coalition that marches against you is trying to "save the game" from the likes of you, protecting players and alliances from being attacked by larger alliances in retribution for winning wars?

Aesir, I urge you and your cohorts to end this war. You tried and failed to embarrass EF and TLR, and if you really want to diminish his influence in Elgea, then you should stop fighting and losing to him. Do you realize that this war is over already? The question is, how far are you going to take it?

I have no great love of Eternal Fire -- I recognize that he is a controversial figure in Elgea at best. But the game has to face the fact that he is formidable. He was attacked by TRO and humiliated them. Now, he has been attacked by a much larger alliance and has outfoxed them as well, mostly through diplomatic wrangling. You make not like him, but he's here to stay. Might as well call it a day and live to fight another day. 
Back to Top
Wolfgangvondi View Drop Down
Wordsmith
Wordsmith
Avatar

Joined: 04 Sep 2011
Location: Orc Grand Arena
Status: Offline
Points: 106 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Jul 2012 at 13:38
Originally posted by Ossian Ossian wrote:

 

Of course I know a thing or too about who sits what account at different times, for instance I know who sits Wolfgangvondi Wink



What are u talking about? What does my sitters have to do Whit anything? By the way, both are the Leaders from SCH. 

Back to Top
Endrok View Drop Down
Wordsmith
Wordsmith
Avatar

Joined: 12 May 2012
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 104 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Jul 2012 at 12:53
Originally posted by Juswin Juswin wrote:

 
As stated in that post:

"To limit the threat that TRO presents to The Long Road by prohibiting all TRO cities of three thousand population and higher within 700 squares of the coordinate 610, 891 in diameter."

There you go. That is unacceptable, imo.

I do find it strange that so few reacted to this surrender term. I know, all that shiz about the terms being agreed on blah blah. But we all know that TRO has no choice but to accept them since they lost. The winner, imo, should be reasonable in their demands. Limiting TRO city sizes? 700 squares radius is a pretty large area. Basically, TLR is prohibiting TRO cities of 3000 pop and above in a 1,538,600 square area. That is a huge area. Not all of that is within the existing map, but you get my point. 

Aesir acted strongly on their convictions, and Endrok showed one clear reason why. Let em have a go at it.

Juswin,
Thanks for your thoughts on this.  Glad it's not just me who finds this particular term to be unacceptable.   Much has been said about the right, wrongs and reasons for this war, but few have chosen to actually criticise and perhaps more importantly none have chosen to defend it  ......  Maybe it's a Dwarf thing!

Me finding this unacceptable is NOT intended as direct criticism or TLR, EF or TRO (for accepting it). It is the general principle of that kind of condition and the long term limitations it puts on ANY alliance or players ability to enjoy and explore this game to its full extent that I see as a cause for concern.  It adds limitations to peaceful game play as well as war fighting. 

Diplomatically things seem to be improving and hopefully will continue to do so, so to avoid any misunderstanding, I will stress again that this is just MY view and does not represent any statement from the AEsir alliance / leadership.   

E.
Back to Top
Tordenkaffen View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 821 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Jul 2012 at 12:43
My mistake then - I always assumed EF and Abstract were the same.
Back to Top
Ossian View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 12 Oct 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 456 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Jul 2012 at 12:16
Originally posted by Gemley Gemley wrote:

Originally posted by Tordenkaffen Tordenkaffen wrote:

Abstract, was Hannibal Foul Wind correct when he assessed that you previously played the account Attila the Hun?

Lol, EF is ATH not Abstract.


Of course I know a thing or too about who sits what account at different times, for instance I know who sits Wolfgangvondi Wink

..and I know thing to about dolphins as well. I also happen to know that Lady Xaylia of Dlords, if you'll pardon the expression, does it standing up Big smile

...but Tord...my friend... you have been in this game long enough not to have to rely on the word of Hannibal Foul Wind aka Belladonna ( wolfwhistles  LOL)

There's no point trying to spread false rumours about abstract dream . As Gemley says EF was ATH. Everybody knows that.




Edited by Ossian - 27 Jul 2012 at 13:35
Back to Top
abstractdream View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar

Joined: 02 Oct 2011
Location: Oarnamly
Status: Offline
Points: 1857 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Jul 2012 at 12:13
I have only played Bonfyr Verboo and Wilberforce.
Bonfyr Verboo
Back to Top
Gemley View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 20 Feb 2011
Location: Ralidor
Status: Offline
Points: 586 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Jul 2012 at 11:55
Originally posted by Tordenkaffen Tordenkaffen wrote:

Abstract, was Hannibal Foul Wind correct when he assessed that you previously played the account Attila the Hun?

Lol, EF is ATH not Abstract.
�I do not love the bright sword for it's sharpness, nor the arrow for it's swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend� - J.R.R. Tolkien
Back to Top
Tordenkaffen View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 821 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Jul 2012 at 11:27
Abstract, was Hannibal Foul Wind correct when he assessed that you previously played the account Attila the Hun?
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345 15>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

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