StA lays claim to Farra Isla

Brids17 wrote: Llyorn Of Jaensch wrote: Brids all due respect but the devils advocate act grows a little thin at times. Lets TRY and look at apples and apples eh? Harmless are NOT claiming ANY SPECIFIC mapped named area as our exclusive domain. We (if we MUST compare) simply ask for a small distance for practical reasons surrounding each city. Perspective eh. I'm not saying they were both perfect examples but they do have a lot of similarities. H? isn't telling people they can't move to X province but they are saying they don't want you within 10 squares of any of the roughly 700 cities they have unless they give you permission. I just find it a little hypocritical for you to back up your own claim but then say a smaller (and still very similar) one is invalid.

You find it hypocritical? Then you simply don't have a grasp of the issue.

'Similar claim' Honestly mate.

Claiming a whole region for your alliance or requesting dialogue before moving within an irrational distance to a city is as about as similar as you and I. 

And I think you know that.

Good chat though.

Brids17 wrote: Llyorn Of Jaensch wrote: Brids all due respect but the devils advocate act grows a little thin at times. Lets TRY and look at apples and apples eh? Harmless are NOT claiming ANY SPECIFIC mapped named area as our exclusive domain. We (if we MUST compare) simply ask for a small distance for practical reasons surrounding each city. Perspective eh. I'm not saying they were both perfect examples but they do have a lot of similarities. H? isn't telling people they can't move to X province but they are saying they don't want you within 10 squares of any of the roughly 700 cities they have unless they give you permission. I just find it a little hypocritical for you to back up your own claim but then say a smaller (and still very similar) one is invalid.

I can tell you this, if someone moves within 10 squares of me I would siege them as well. The 10 square rule is being polite but really it gives both towns the distance they need to grow using the sov around them.

When a town goes within 10 squares of another city, it most likely means that the city will be trying to gain sov that belongs to the other town. And instead of having to fight for that sov later on, its best just to siege them and not have to worry.

So please do not try to say that the 10 sov rule is like what StA is doing. What StA is doing, is saying that most likely they will be sieging all towns that are within their region if it hampers them from claiming the spot as theirs later on, or if they start to run out of good room and need to expand.

Edit: I'd also like to note that once pathfinding comes in to play, and we are not allowed to cross oceans with armies, it will be wise to move out of that area. Once that area is locked off and only accessible by boat, then you will have little chance of defending yourself.


Edited by Quackers - 06 Feb 2012 at 00:23

Llyorn Of Jaensch wrote: Brids all due respect but the devils advocate act grows a little thin at times. Lets TRY and look at apples and apples eh? Harmless are NOT claiming ANY SPECIFIC mapped named area as our exclusive domain. We (if we MUST compare) simply ask for a small distance for practical reasons surrounding each city. Perspective eh.

Jane, Ryelle has a city in Keppen.  Do you mind if she stays there?

I said very little about H? in my initial post, was just using it as a point of comparison... I don't understand your need to turn everything into a conversation about H?.  My post was about making land claim and the need to be able to back them up.  I'm done arguing with trolls.  The world does not, in fact, revolve around you.