Play Now Login Create Account
illyriad
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - So we are at war, is it honorable....
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedSo we are at war, is it honorable....
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345 6>
Author
 Rating: Topic Rating: 1 Votes, Average 2.00  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Mahaut View Drop Down
Wordsmith
Wordsmith
Avatar

Joined: 20 Jan 2012
Location: North West UK
Status: Offline
Points: 173 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29 Dec 2012 at 15:07
and as a follow up and to clarify matters... when Rhea first messaged Ahaliel she hadn't joined her new alliance. He and others in Vicx on line at the time simply saw a reappearing enemy player, or a sitter, trying to stop a siege which was very near to completion by any means possible. I believe one siege was recalled in fact. 
Nevertheless this entire issue is hardly worthy of a forum thread started by one of the leaders of the alliance that kicked her out in the first place...which makes me wonder how much of this is concern for an ex comrade or an attempt to make propaganda out of her misfortune.
It is nobody else's business, apart from the leadership of Vicx, the leadership of TO and Rhea herself.
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: 29 Dec 2012 at 15:26
Mahaut, we all do hope she comes back to Illy soon, and we would like to afford her the opportunity to do so without being sieged out at a potentially rough point in her life. No violins, just showing a little sensible consideration.

Just focus on something else please, if Rhea returns we will impress on her that she moves her towns to someplace relatively safer so surely you can afford to wait a while and see if she returns? If she doesnt the towns will dissappear anyway.
I've let plenty of Consone players off clean simply because they left the opposing alliance, surely you can show us the same consideration in this case.
Back to Top
Mahaut View Drop Down
Wordsmith
Wordsmith
Avatar

Joined: 20 Jan 2012
Location: North West UK
Status: Offline
Points: 173 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29 Dec 2012 at 15:34
We have done. We aren't attacking her at all and have no intention of doing so whilst she is active and in an alliance we have peaceful relations with. When we attacked she was innactive and an ex H? player
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: 29 Dec 2012 at 15:41
Was updated just now. Ah excellent! Disregard my previous contribution to the thread.
Back to Top
RugRat View Drop Down
New Poster
New Poster
Avatar

Joined: 11 May 2012
Location: U.K.
Status: Offline
Points: 17 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29 Dec 2012 at 15:46
Sorry, I got my info wrong about her being asked to move.  My mistake
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: 29 Dec 2012 at 15:50
Originally posted by Mahaut Mahaut wrote:

****
It is nobody else's business, apart from the leadership of Vicx, the leadership of TO and Rhea herself.

It's everyone's business since Rhea came on to GC asking the community for help.  At the time, she was unaligned, had not participated in war, and just returned from a period of inactivity to see that was she was being attacked.  When Rhea advised the attackers she had just returned from inactivity, fresh attacks were launched against her city.
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: 29 Dec 2012 at 15:53
Originally posted by Mahaut Mahaut wrote:

***

When we attacked she was innactive and an ex H? player

Rhea was not actually inactive, she had simply been away for a while.  Inactives do not actually resume play.  However, these sorts of mistakes in identifying inactives do happen and most attackers immediately stop attacks and offer assistance to the victim.  As I saw, Consone accelerated attacks against Rhea upon learning of their mistake.

"ex-H? player" is irrelevant in this case since Rhea had taken no action in the war.
Back to Top
Anjire View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 18 Sep 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 688 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29 Dec 2012 at 15:55
Further comment:

Unfortunately, H? did not have a sitter to watch the account.  This makes it pretty much impossible to defend or save a city when it comes under fire due to their locations and travel time involved.  Before Rhea's inactivity there was a request to assign a sitter and/or even leave the alliance during the war.  Due to the abruptness of RL, this was not accomplished so it was decided to keep the account with H? as long as possible so that it wouldn't be immediately besieged out of existence for assumption of "inactivity."  

When the account came under fire, it placed us in a damned if we do damned if we don't situation. We could no longer let the account idle.  After further discussion, we decided that if we kept the account in H? it would be the more harmful course of action since there would be almost no way to mount any effective defense.  And, remaining a part of H? while that vulnerable would probably draw a more concentrated and focused series of attacks on her cities.  

I will state again just so that it is clear:  The only reason Rhea was kicked from H? was due to the belief it would be the most beneficial to her account since we did not have a sitter to help defend verse a siege.  As it stands, I believe we made the correct decision kicking Rhea from H? and I, personally, thank both Vicx and T-O for their quick negotiations ending the attacks against Rhea.  

Back to Top
Mahaut View Drop Down
Wordsmith
Wordsmith
Avatar

Joined: 20 Jan 2012
Location: North West UK
Status: Offline
Points: 173 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29 Dec 2012 at 16:00
And at that time she was still, as far as anyone in Victrix who was on line at the time knew, alligned with an enemy alliance. The relevant words in your post are "returned from a period of innactivity". We were sieging innactive ex enemy accounts.   Twist it however you want, that is what was happening. here was nothing personal going on and we have stopped all operations against Rhea now she is again active and in a friendly alliance.
Back to Top
Deranzin View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 10 Oct 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 845 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29 Dec 2012 at 16:14
Originally posted by Aurordan Aurordan wrote:

Well, the answer to number one is yes.  Members of belligerent alliances are pretty much fair game, you don't have to wait until they attack you.  That would be kind of stupid actually.  

Stupid .?. What exactly is stupid about not harming people that can do you no harm or cannot really retaliate .?. 

Is a war to be used as an excuse for EVERYTHING .?. 

Personally, when settling a new city recently, I asked for the permission of a nearby ABSA member, and took the trouble of getting the V level sov needed when, in fact, I could have actually sieged him and taken the plot in a much faster and efficient way or taken his town and save me even more trouble. But I did not, because I find attacking smaller player's towns repulsive and I do not use as an excuse that I have been attacked by people that have 40000+ population than me (ergo I cannot really counter-attack).

Also, when at some point it was raining blights at one of my cities I attacked the most possible culprit and when his sitter said that he didn't do it, I didn't ask for any "proof" and what-not, but I believed him because it was the right thing to do. Maybe it sounds "stupid" to you too, but later I discovered that he was telling the truth ... imagine if I had been "suspicious" and continued ... how would I have repaid the damage and how "nice" would my neighbour feel after the war was ended to be attacked only because he showed red in the map and someone else was being sneaky about his spellcasting .?.

If people want to hide behind their alliances and shout like kids "niah niah niah, but you did this and that" and have no shame of their OWN PERSONAL actions, this is not anyone's problem, but everyone should be reminded that the players and their alliances (leadership excluded) are not one and the same and you cannot hold one player accountable for whatever a whole alliance does and that you shouldn't attack others simply for their color on a map.

So, if some of you feel good about themselves about winning over a player that wasn't even there to use its own defenses, then what can I say other than suggesting you similar "entertaining" and "challenging" activities like : stealing candy from kids, playing basketball  against people on wheelchairs and maybe stomping anthills in your back-yard. 

Congratulations for your victory over a missing opponent :p 

Originally posted by Ander Ander wrote:

Coming to your side, if you are talking about Rhea/Yahweh/Denver, Denver was a spy in invictus, sat by H member Yahweh (who signed an IGM with the wrong name at the wrong time). 

Well, I do not know about spies and what-not Anderrent, but imho a smart spy wouldn't break cover like that and a clever alliance would have planted said person aaaages ago and without any suspicious previous affiliations (preferably none). 
 
But this is a game, not a James Bond film ;) 
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345 6>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

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