| Author |
|
LordOfTheSwamp 
Forum Warrior
Joined: 23 May 2011
Location: Swamp of Fyrgis
Status: Offline
Points: 481
|
 Posted: 28 Jul 2012 at 04:14 |
Aquennomi, Quackers, BellusRex, Salararius and The Duke make excellent points. Hereward the Wake has an excellent name. Interesting observations from glorfindel.
 Daufer wrote:
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. Maybe hanging out in global chat all the time really is good for you. |
That is probably the best point made so far.
Rill wrote:
Thanks for clarifying, GD. I support your belief that TLR's demand for what amounted to a prestige payment for peace are despicable. I am ambivalent about whether war is the right response, but I applaud you for standing up for what you believe in. |
Rill, would you be so keen to praise someone for starting a war over this if their name wasn't GD? What if someone called EF, or (dare I say it) _duQ? I fear this response is clouded by personal sentiment.
I considered the peace terms "interesting". The geographical restrictions were harsh. I'd call the Medals part of it "ill considered", and "an unfortunate precedent". But I'm with T_D on this - not liking peace terms between other parties, which both have already agreed to, is it's a sorry excuse to launch a crusade.
Mona Lisa wrote:
I at one point considered splitting off of nCrow to form a mini 2 account alliance with my alt to deal with EF's GC statements below |
Seriously?! Those comments can be described as rhetoric, or perhaps bluster. I'd suggest that a bit more RP-ish bluster in GC would make the place way more interesting. But you thought they warranted military action?! Were you really so keen to find an excuse to start a war?
As a general point...
Ander wrote:
Robber barons masquerading as white knights - ever so common sight in Illy. Always eager to teach justice and code of conduct to players smaller than them. |
Exactly so. Players want to a fight they can win, so they pick someone who has a bad rep, and poor standing in "the community", who is smaller than them, and they start. Their friends in "the community" back them. Seen that before.
In this case, at least, "the community" hasn't swallowed it. At least, not everyone has. Unfortunately, people seem determined to escalate things - e.g. besieging Aesir's cities.
So, suggestions...
1)
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. |
 That is the most constructive post so far. So, "What he said!"
2)
If people wanted to encourage peace talks, people could, for example, offer to break siege camps - from both sides. That would have the effect of reducing the level of threat to players' cities, rather than making the conflict worse. It's what Createure and others did when someone called _duQ was being obnoxious a while ago. It was an excellent strategy then, and could work on a larger scale. |
|
"A boy is building sandcastles on a beach. You go and kick down his castle. You could say that it only reflects how you play with sandcastles. Others may think it reflects who you are." - Ander.
|
 |
abstractdream
Postmaster General
Joined: 02 Oct 2011
Location: Oarnamly
Status: Offline
Points: 1857
|
Posted: 28 Jul 2012 at 03:47 |
Salararius wrote:
In that context, to be noted in Illyriad is dangerous. I can't speak for every "non-aligned" person asking questions, but when I ask questions and seek to probe and understand these disputes I do so to understand the dynamics behind the struggle.
The questions I ask are generally to determine if that is the fatal flaw or if it's a basic mis-understanding of the Illy "mob" think. In other words, does Æsir have a rational that would resonate with the Illy mob if they could express it properly or does Æsir simply not have a resonating rational or etc...?
|
Here we have the reason for third parties to become involved.
In the first degree, asking questions brings light to issues that should be avoided in the future.
In the second degree, expressing opinion not only declares ones intentions and etc. but goes a long way to influence events as they unfold.
In the third degree, making demands (with the power to back them up) steers events in a direction to benefit the player or alliance making them.
These are all legitimate reasons to involve oneself in the conversation,
irrespective of ones proximity to the events at hand.
|
|
Bonfyr Verboo
|
|
Salararius
Postmaster
Joined: 26 Sep 2011
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 519
|
Posted: 28 Jul 2012 at 03:30 |
Every "right" one possesses in the context of any endeavor is predicated on the desire to be part of the endeavor. That is the context for any "right". In the case of this game, the only "right" you have is to the "existence" of one city as well as the rules of the game (what buildings do, what troops do, etc...). Everything else can be taken from you and no appreciable force is pledged to prevent that in a universal Illy manner. So, any supposed "right" to express something is only there if someone does not take offense and send 500,000 (or 1M, 1G, pick a number) knights to destroy your cities. If those cities have no value or if one crippled city is sufficient for you then I do not understand your desire to "participate" in this game and thus do not understand the context of the rights in question?
When you say "no one owes or has any duty to respond, read, or even care what is said about what they do" that is only correct if the person who is "demanding" the response can't convince, conspire, cajole, or otherwise influence the movement of that hypothetical overwhelming force. Everything done here is only in the context of participation in a game that we all do only at the whim of the "masses". In many respects, there are no rules, no laws, no structure. You can see that when the tide turned against TLR because of the post regarding the TLR/TRO peace terms and you can see that again as the "tide turns" against Æsir in this thread. You see it over and over.
In that context, to be noted in Illyriad is dangerous. I can't speak for every "non-aligned" person asking questions, but when I ask questions and seek to probe and understand these disputes I do so to understand the dynamics behind the struggle. I know that no one owes me a response, but I also know that the stakes are raised for those in the spotlight. Sometimes I feel a certain wording has a greater chance of getting the information I seek. I desire to know who made what mistake and at what cost? In my opinion, being unable to express yourself in Illy is extremely fatal. The questions I ask are generally to determine if that is the fatal flaw or if it's a basic mis-understanding of the Illy "mob" think. In other words, does Æsir have a rational that would resonates with the Illy mob if they could express it properly or does Æsir simply not have a resonating rational or etc...?
|
|
Mr Damage
Postmaster
Joined: 01 Jan 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 598
|
Posted: 28 Jul 2012 at 02:23 |
|
BellusRex, wholeheartedly agree with your posts, nice work now lets move on.
|
|
BellusRex
Wordsmith
Joined: 09 Jul 2011
Location: Mountains
Status: Offline
Points: 156
|
Posted: 28 Jul 2012 at 00:13 |
Why not quote this part as well?
" If you dislike something, oppose it in game, or yes, even berate it in the forum because you don't like it or agree, but realize no one owes or has any duty to respond, read, or even care what is said about what they do"
Both replies have no bearing on what I said. Meta game is fine.What I commented on is people with no direct involvement or interest who demand information from the parties involved and act as if it is owed them, or who take a position on how someone else plays the game and then try to tell them how to play it. I do believe by my post you can make no assumption on who I think is right or wrong, because that is irrelevant. Be aggressive, don't be aggressive, the game can handle both.
To say having and holding a right are two different things really makes no sense, If I have something, by definition I hold it. To say by terms of the game there is no right to opinion is ridiculous on it's face. If that were true, you couldn't have said what you did on a game forum, as you have no in game right to opinion. How does that make sense?
To make it very simple, my point was that these threads are generally filled up by comments from people with no involvement at all in the events they post about telling every one else how they should play. The discussions that are the "very substance" of the game are those between the people involved. By all means, post away your opinion on whats going on; we all have an opinion on things that happen around us. They are usually the same people who complain about not enough wars in Illy, then run to the forum when an alliance or player they don't like makes a military move.
It would be a nice change to see them actually send troops or other aid to who ever they support. Meta gaming does actually encompass doing something in game, other than just posting here.
|
|
"War is the father of all things..."
|
|
abstractdream
Postmaster General
Joined: 02 Oct 2011
Location: Oarnamly
Status: Offline
Points: 1857
|
Posted: 27 Jul 2012 at 21:50 |
Salararius wrote:
BellusRex wrote:
Every single one of us has the right to our opinions of how things should be done, or how to play the game. |
Having a right and holding a right are two separate things. By the terms of the game, there is no such right. Wars are fought on many levels and I feel what is said here (and privately) is more important than what is done in the "game".
Put another way, how you present and defend those "opinions" (we all have a right to) is generally as important to the war as moving armies around.
Telling people they shouldn't post their private opinions here is like asking them to fight with one hand behind their back. If you don't want to read people's private opinions, then you probably shouldn't read them. For those interested, read on. It's all part of the game. The only sad part is if players blur the line between games and real life. Everything else is just for fun.
|
Thank You.
These discussions and in-game communications options are the two paths by which things other than simple city building get done. Those that have no interest in the so called meta-game (personally I think uber-game is a better descriptor) who still wish to log in and build, harvest, trade, etc. can do so and easily stay clear of friction and confrontation. There are large areas of Elgea that are under the protective wing of confederations and extremely large alliances.
Those who do not care for that sort of thing can inhabit other large (I would argue larger actually) areas of Elgea where conflict is generally allowed or even (not unheard of) encouraged by third parties. The discussions between them are the very substance of the uber-game. Take that away, Illyriad is Sim-City.
|
|
Bonfyr Verboo
|
|
Salararius
Postmaster
Joined: 26 Sep 2011
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 519
|
Posted: 27 Jul 2012 at 20:07 |
BellusRex wrote:
Every single one of us has the right to our opinions of how things should be done, or how to play the game. |
Having a right and holding a right are two separate things. By the terms of the game, there is no such right. Wars are fought on many levels and I feel what is said here (and privately) is more important than what is done in the "game".
Put another way, how you present and defend those "opinions" (we all have a right to) is generally as important to the war as moving armies around.
Telling people they shouldn't post their private opinions here is like asking them to fight with one hand behind their back. If you don't want to read people's private opinions, then you probably shouldn't read them. For those interested, read on. It's all part of the game. The only sad part is if players blur the line between games and real life. Everything else is just for fun.
|
|
BellusRex
Wordsmith
Joined: 09 Jul 2011
Location: Mountains
Status: Offline
Points: 156
|
Posted: 27 Jul 2012 at 19:39 |
It's going to be very interesting to see the reactions when the full ramifications of the update are understood. I'd be very surprised if the amount of military action doesn't become much more pronounced. You already see in GC statements about parking troops around mines and such. Does this sound like it's going to issue in a golden age of peace?
And on the whole war thing, I understand how everyone always wants information on the why's and wherefore's when ever a war happens, or even any sort of attack that gets publicized. We're all part of a group of people playing the same game, and wanting to know whats up in that game world is only natural.
With that in mind, all of the continual forum posts telling other players and alliances how to play get old. The same old things said in countless threads pages and pages far removed from where we are now.
Every single one of us has the right to our opinions of how things should be done, or how to play the game. Play it exactly as you like, and take what comes from what you do. Alliances act in the way they see best suits their own interests and those of their members, and I don't think any alliance owes an explanation of their actions to anyone but those alliances they have diplomatic ties to. Nor does any player owe anyone here an explanation of their actions. Wanting one and being entitled to it are two different things.
I, like all of you, have my biases in who I like, support, or dislike in our world. I personally don't care for certain parties based on how they play, but they have every right to play that way. If you dislike something, oppose it in game, or yes, even berate it in the forum because you don't like it or agree, but realize no one owes or has any duty to respond, read, or even care what is said about what they do. Any action that is allowed by the rules is a valid choice.
Let me end the text tsunami by saying again that even though I have a set of ideals that guide my own behavior in the game, I don't expect everyone to agree or play the same way. Truthfully, that would be boring.
|
|
"War is the father of all things..."
|
|
geofrey
Postmaster General
Joined: 31 May 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 1013
|
Posted: 27 Jul 2012 at 18:02 |
|
sandbox... now lets go dig!
Edited by geofrey - 27 Jul 2012 at 18:02
|
|
|
|
Ander
Postmaster General
Joined: 24 Apr 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 1269
|
Posted: 27 Jul 2012 at 17:46 |
|
Robber barons masquerading as white knights - ever so common sight in Illy. Always eager to teach justice and code of conduct to players smaller than them.
|
|
Tweet
Æsir's Crusade vs. TLR
Topic Options