| Author |
|
Llyorn Of Jaensch 
Postmaster
Joined: 31 Mar 2010
Location: Sydney
Status: Offline
Points: 924
|
 Posted: 03 Nov 2011 at 04:30 |
 StJude wrote:
This is one of the daftest arguments I continue to hear. Abandoning my account due to bullies would actually be me not lying in the bed I made or not reaping what I have sown. |
Reaping what is sown means accepting the consequences of your actions. It does not mean invoking heroic martyrdom and then whinging when said consequences come a calling.
StJude wrote:
I am still at 2k pop, despite being attacked by 8 different alliances with at least 4 of those being page 1 alliances in size. (RES, Chimps, H?, mCrows) |
Simple Judy. Then dont declare war on them.
Honestly mate you made much more sense when claiming 'asshattery' as your 'logic' than playing the ethical card.
Edited by Llyorn Of Jaensch - 03 Nov 2011 at 04:37
|
|
"ouch...best of luck."
HonoredMule
|
 |
Qaal
Wordsmith
Joined: 29 Jan 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 115
|
Posted: 03 Nov 2011 at 02:34 |
geofrey wrote:
BUT, that larger army must be careful not to upset the hundreds of smaller armies, else they might combine forces to overthrow the tyrant.
|
I genuinely wish it were that easy. We can all probably think of examples from history--or, maybe stories we were told about history--where many small groups joined together to form a single force that beat a much larger attacker. Unfortunately, online games such as Illy don't work that way. Forty armies of 500 troops each from small players may total 20,000 troops, but they'll always be individual armies of 500. You can't join them together under a single command structure to coordinate an attack. Using them to attack an army of 20,000 is the equivalent of hurling a handful of pebbles at a house. You might chip a little plaster and crack a window or two, but in the end you'll just irritate the crap out of the owner. On defense, using the 40 armies to defend one town leaves 39 towns completely vulnerable. When push comes to shove, the underdog has a seriously tough row to hoe in this game. Not too different from RL, I guess. Make your choices, take your chances.
|
|
geofrey
Postmaster General
Joined: 31 May 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 1013
|
Posted: 02 Nov 2011 at 17:48 |
Kilotov of DokGthung wrote:
geofrey wrote:
This is a free land we live in. If someone wants to mark territory as "theirs" they are welcome to do that using sovereignty. 1
If they do not claim sovereignty over the land, it is open for settlement, or for someone else to claim sovereignty over it. This is not merely guidelines, it is the war the world works.
Being a free land, Lords and alliances are welcome to engage in war to remove cities that they do not like, for one reason or another. However, this is a form of tyranny, and there could be consequences for such tyranny. 2
If H? wishes to remove towns that they previously had no claim over, they are setting themselves up to be tyrants. If they truly want to "reserve" land, it should be done officially with sovereignty. Any turf war dispute not involving canceling sovereignty on a square becomes bullying. Except in the case of smaller towns who have not the resources nor the research to claim sovereignty on so many squares. 3
StJude seems to have a righteous cause, and I would not be surprised if many like minded righteous and justice seeking Lords come to his aid. |
1
not only that sir.
there is no sov border, yet i dare you settle in the heart of foreign land whit but enemy towns around you.
there are areas claimed by some alliances.
this land is not a free one.
you better watch out for the local feudal lords that own the region you are in before starting "sov tag" the neighbourhood..
2
of course some are tyrants. .. hahaha.. really... some of the noblesse have nasty habits of torturing, besieging and so on. you can't boost rights and such about their lands.
the one that holds the land is the one that crushes all opposition. again. the land is not for free.
3
that island is owned by H?.
Dont like it? who cares? make them surrender it , and THEN you can call it your turf.
Sov is just a fancy way to say "hey, look, i spend tons of cash to highlight this land as mine" which is useless. you keep pointing out that sov is = possession. false. more than sov a land, you need to be able to back your claims up.
That or whit huge alliance, or whit superior fire-power.
and lastly..
StJude is death seeker, and leaks respect , cant distinguish rank carefully and has somewhat inflated ego.
He masks himself as the "champion of people" which is rubbish, since lowly peasants have just the right their lord gives them.
his good cause would be... what exactly? be a pain in H? sophisticated butt? or maybe just wreak havoc? so long so far, resistance is futile.
|
You are very wise Kilotov. I agree that the larger army has more power. BUT, that larger army must be careful not to upset the hundreds of smaller armies, else they might combine forces to overthrow the tyrant.
|
|
Kilotov of DokGthung
Postmaster
Joined: 07 Jun 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 723
|
Posted: 01 Nov 2011 at 18:18 |
|
lol
in peaceful times i am the first one to scream for H? conspiracy.
yet the one thing is, H? methods are the result of Judes attitude.
|
|
Gilthoniel
Forum Warrior
Joined: 11 Oct 2011
Location: Cuiviénen
Status: Offline
Points: 211
|
Posted: 01 Nov 2011 at 18:13 |
Southern Dwarf wrote:
Kilotov of DokGthung wrote:
just give up.
|
Nah, it's like in "Tangled": "Stop fighting me!" "I will fight you every moment for the rest of my life!" |
I am going to go with Southern Dwarf on this.
Harmless? are a big alliance who have helped many alliances in the past. Also they have contributed so much to the game like their work on the Arcanum Illyria. All that should never be forgotten.
But in a 15 round mismatch where the little guy should have been put away in round one yet is still on his feet fighting on - I'll shout for the underdog everytime. I got to say that their players like Zork, AB, Venita and whoever must have nerves of steel.
Harmless? have many smart players but that StJude has put them in a position where they are beginning to look more and more like the Sheriff of Nottingham with each passing day.
Hope this comes to a sensible end though.
Edited by Gilthoniel - 01 Nov 2011 at 18:14
|
|
Kilotov of DokGthung
Postmaster
Joined: 07 Jun 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 723
|
Posted: 01 Nov 2011 at 17:52 |
geofrey wrote:
This is a free land we live in. If someone wants to mark territory as "theirs" they are welcome to do that using sovereignty. 1
If they do not claim sovereignty over the land, it is open for settlement, or for someone else to claim sovereignty over it. This is not merely guidelines, it is the war the world works.
Being a free land, Lords and alliances are welcome to engage in war to remove cities that they do not like, for one reason or another. However, this is a form of tyranny, and there could be consequences for such tyranny. 2
If H? wishes to remove towns that they previously had no claim over, they are setting themselves up to be tyrants. If they truly want to "reserve" land, it should be done officially with sovereignty. Any turf war dispute not involving canceling sovereignty on a square becomes bullying. Except in the case of smaller towns who have not the resources nor the research to claim sovereignty on so many squares. 3
StJude seems to have a righteous cause, and I would not be surprised if many like minded righteous and justice seeking Lords come to his aid. |
1not only that sir. there is no sov border, yet i dare you settle in the heart of foreign land whit but enemy towns around you.there are areas claimed by some alliances. this land is not a free one. you better watch out for the local feudal lords that own the region you are in before starting "sov tag" the neighbourhood.. 2of course some are tyrants. .. hahaha.. really... some of the noblesse have nasty habits of torturing, besieging and so on. you can't boost rights and such about their lands. the one that holds the land is the one that crushes all opposition. again. the land is not for free.3that island is owned by H?. Dont like it? who cares? make them surrender it , and THEN you can call it your turf. Sov is just a fancy way to say "hey, look, i spend tons of cash to highlight this land as mine" which is useless. you keep pointing out that sov is = possession. false. more than sov a land, you need to be able to back your claims up. That or whit huge alliance, or whit superior fire-power.and lastly.. StJude is death seeker, and leaks respect , cant distinguish rank carefully and has somewhat inflated ego. He masks himself as the "champion of people" which is rubbish, since lowly peasants have just the right their lord gives them. his good cause would be... what exactly? be a pain in H? sophisticated butt? or maybe just wreak havoc? so long so far, resistance is futile.
Edited by Kilotov of DokGthung - 01 Nov 2011 at 18:08
|
|
Kurfist
Postmaster
Joined: 14 Apr 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 824
|
Posted: 01 Nov 2011 at 17:32 |
|
so its a sense of the big football player junior shoving freshmen in the hall, then comes along a senior who shoves the junior, to the rejoice of the freshmen, then the senior continues to shove the junior even days after the incident.
Just because H? or whatever stopped a bit of their actions that could have or would have caused harm, it does n';t give them the right to keep shoving. And no im not saying it as a supportrer of Jude, im saying it from RL experience, everyone just stop shoving.
|
|
Patience is a virtue, resource giving is a sin
|
|
Lord Loss
Wordsmith
Joined: 29 Dec 2010
Location: Ireland
Status: Offline
Points: 143
|
Posted: 01 Nov 2011 at 16:59 |
I admire your fighting spirt in difficult cricumstances, however I fear if you don't get the support you need it will all be in vain 
|
|
Have a nice day :)
|
|
SunStorm
Postmaster
Joined: 01 Apr 2011
Location: "Look Up"
Status: Offline
Points: 979
|
Posted: 01 Nov 2011 at 16:58 |
|
(^_^)
|
"Side? I am on nobody's side because nobody is on my side" ~LoTR
|
|
StJude
Postmaster
Joined: 12 Jun 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 568
|
Posted: 01 Nov 2011 at 16:43 |
SunStorm wrote:
I really feel the point is lost in here. Jude fried his account by his own actions... He made his bed, now he must lie in it. His best hope would be to create a brand new account and dump this one. It has a stigma that will stay with it until the very end.
I regret trying to point out the error of his ways - obviously, people will make their own decisions as to his post based on their opinions and personal bias. My opinion/bias is that Jude has reaped what he has sown. And with that, I will not debate this any longer...
Have a great day! (^_^)
|
This is one of the daftest arguments I continue to hear. Abandoning my account due to bullies would actually be me not lying in the bed I made or not reaping what I have sown.
I continue to play my account and I continue to reap what I sow. However, that does not mean that I simply give up and say, yeah, you won. Because, no, they have not.
I am still at 2k pop, despite being attacked by 8 different alliances with at least 4 of those being page 1 alliances in size. (RES, Chimps, H?, mCrows)
So in short, do not expect me to continue to fight and claim I am not "lying in the bed I made" because that is simply shortsighted and narrowminded.
Edited by StJude - 01 Nov 2011 at 16:44
|
|
Tweet
The Mighty Underdog
Topic Options