| Author |
|
Wolfgangvondi 
Wordsmith
Joined: 04 Sep 2011
Location: Orc Grand Arena
Status: Offline
Points: 106
|
 Posted: 27 Jul 2012 at 03:36 |
This Orc just got two things to say.
One, i have always see G0ds take action on what he feelt it was right thing to do.
Two, Even if "The Horde" does not, I am joing Him. Cuz he was there when i need help.
And for an Orc that's all that is need.
Edited by Wolfgangvondi - 27 Jul 2012 at 03:38
|
|
|
 |
Juswin
Wordsmith
Joined: 04 Aug 2011
Location: Philippines
Status: Offline
Points: 119
|
Posted: 27 Jul 2012 at 04:06 |
 Endrok wrote:
However, for me the main problem with the TRO/TLR surrender terms was limitations put on players city populations - I genuinely believe these will have a far reaching effect on TRO members ability to play the game (peacefully or otherwise) - It is essentially a game killer for anybody subject to those terms.
Items 3 and 4A
I know the 10k pop cap (item 4a) was an option , however limiting TRO cities to 3k population (item3) within 700 squares of EF's capital. This 3K cap was a demand not an option! Have a look to remind yourself of the distance 700 squares represents.
Those sort of terms would have a crippling effect on any alliance. Who would really argue that these conditions would not damage your enjoyment of the game if they were applied to yourself. And if the only way to avoid those conditions is to leave an alliance ..... that is in effect the destruction of an alliance by proxy!
People only need to look around their own cities to see the impact that would have.
And anything that has the effect of damaging a persons/alliances ability to enjoy the game should be challenged. If these 'game killer' demands/conditions were not in place I would be less convince about our reasons for being in the fight ..... but they are, so I am!
This 3k/700 sq limit doesn't seem to get mentioned much & I am a little surprised that people seem to think it is acceptable ..... maybe it is just me!
|
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.
And finally, Daufer makes a good point:
Daufer wrote:
I don't really care one way or the other what happens, but this feels a bit unfair the way people are jumping all over Aesir. I quote from HonoredMule back in Sept. 2011:
"Azreil believes that he has toed some political line that gives him the upper hand PR-wise should we attack first, that he is orchestrating a clever balance of warmongering and disassociation. If you believe we're wrong to attack him simply because we're tired of his attitude and the sensibilities of his crew, perhaps he's a little right.
Were Valar a peaceful alliance, Harmless would feel much greater onus to justify "starting" a conflict with them. But given their taste for blood and our similar size, I firmly believe that "because we don't like you" ought to be wholly sufficient motivation--understanding of course, that our distaste is not some random happenstance but rather a reaction to real attitudes and behavior toward us.
KillerPoodle posted our reasons for going to war (aptly summarized as "we don't like you") and that, along with the fact that they're entrenching themselves in conflict with our confederate partners, is what we deem wholly sufficient justification so far as the public need be concerned."
No, I didn't care about that war either. Is this really that much different though, because I don't remember people lining up to help VALAR to kick H?'s butt. Quite the opposite in fact... I Just don't understand the mentality. |
|
It may be that you are right. Then again, you may be wrong. 
|
|
SugarFree
Forum Warrior
Joined: 09 Feb 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 350
|
Posted: 27 Jul 2012 at 04:35 |
let it burn then! let illy burn a cleansing fire , the flames will destroy both sides in the end. i see the valar story is again a reference in this.. yea.. it will end just like that.
|
|
The_Dude
Postmaster General
Joined: 06 Apr 2010
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 2396
|
Posted: 27 Jul 2012 at 04:42 |
Meagh wrote:
I would have expected Aesir's allies to step up.
|
Aesir shot first. And for dubious reasons.
Lemme think....
someone important in history said something like this...
These are the times that try men's souls.
|
|
Gemley
Postmaster
Joined: 20 Feb 2011
Location: Ralidor
Status: Offline
Points: 586
|
Posted: 27 Jul 2012 at 04:52 |
|
/me puts away the disco ball and pancakes
Gods I do not know you well but I honestly wish you and Asir good luck.
|
|
�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
|
|
Aurordan
Postmaster
Player Council - Ambassador
Joined: 21 Sep 2011
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 982
|
Posted: 27 Jul 2012 at 05:23 |
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. |
Except, as they stated, they were going to attack before the terms even existed.
And they did indeed have a choice in accepting them. If they had fought on, TLR would have given different terms, until they accepted. they made the concessions they did to end the war quickly, and that is their decision, but they didn't have to take any terms they didn't want to.
As an aside, TRO seems to have no cities in that area, and it's not clear they want any there. Maybe they took that term never intending to settle there anyway and it just isn't an issue for them?
(Also, the term is a 700 space diameter, so that's 350 from the given spot.)
|
|
SugarFree
Forum Warrior
Joined: 09 Feb 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 350
|
Posted: 27 Jul 2012 at 05:37 |
|
now it's to late, aurordan, you can not stop it with reason anymore. heh.. the sides are both acting with the genuine idea of being righteous. nothing can stop this anymore, and it will be a bloodbath of the likes we have rarely seen... at least, it will be me first one to experience live.
|
|
Fromfrak
New Poster
Joined: 30 May 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 35
|
Posted: 27 Jul 2012 at 05:43 |
I am glad to be part of one of the most interesting alliances in Illy. Never a dull moment..
Edited by Fromfrak - 27 Jul 2012 at 05:45
|
|
LostEros
New Poster
Joined: 25 Jul 2012
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 46
|
Posted: 27 Jul 2012 at 05:56 |
Having started this thread, I would like to submit that both (all) sides call a cease-fire and negotiate a simple peace treaty. Perhaps both sides could approach the table on equal terms, being neither a winner nor a loser, and simply decide to settle for peace, terms be damned. Perhaps I am naive.
My initial reaction instigating this thread was the forwarding of an IGM message from a TLR player, sent by member of Aesir, without authorization it would seem. The stated concept of destroying the alliance (TLR) is what alarmed me. G0DsDestroyer has made it clear that this is/was not the goal, and it is very easily understandable that communications between people in an alliance can be... challenging, in the best of times. My original intent was more along the lines of an old-tyme "public shaming" intending to stop aggression, not to escalate it. I sent out messages to various alliance leaders asking for opinions before starting this post, hoping to gather enough consensus to apply peaceful political pressure in order to prevent an escalation of hostility. That didn't exactly work.
I believe previous posters have a strong point in that the new trade implementation should probably be everyone's focus for the near future. As detailed as it seems to be, it is going to be a battle in itself to grasp it all, and all of its implications.
|
|
SugarFree
Forum Warrior
Joined: 09 Feb 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 350
|
Posted: 27 Jul 2012 at 06:06 |
LostEros wrote:
Having started this thread, I would like to submit that both (all) sides call a cease-fire and negotiate a simple peace treaty. Perhaps both sides could approach the table on equal terms, being neither a winner nor a loser, and simply decide to settle for peace, terms be damned. Perhaps I am naive.
My initial reaction instigating this thread was the forwarding of an IGM message from a TLR player, sent by member of Aesir, without authorization it would seem. The stated concept of destroying the alliance (TLR) is what alarmed me. G0DsDestroyer has made it clear that this is/was not the goal, and it is very easily understandable that communications between people in an alliance can be... challenging, in the best of times. My original intent was more along the lines of an old-tyme "public shaming" intending to stop aggression, not to escalate it. I sent out messages to various alliance leaders asking for opinions before starting this post, hoping to gather enough consensus to apply peaceful political pressure in order to prevent an escalation of hostility. That didn't exactly work.
I believe previous posters have a strong point in that the new trade implementation should probably be everyone's focus for the near future. As detailed as it seems to be, it is going to be a battle in itself to grasp it all, and all of its implications. |
best thing ever written in this tread. now that could prove me wrong about the bloodbath i referred earlier.
|
|
Tweet
Æsir's Crusade vs. TLR
Topic Options