This ****ing war

Kumomoto wrote: Not to contradict you, Deranzin, but even if Consone had some sort of singular leadership, or if they delegated such, they would be still disfunctional. The bottom line is that this group of alliance leaders that started Soup to dominate the server are either leaving, were not included in the initial conversations (and therefore rightfully indignant), or are trying to continue to hold the wool over their members' eyes....

IMHO best and most honest post so far in these war forums.  +1

Ossian wrote: ^^ Reading Kumomoto's post above is astonishing.  Nowhere have I read, heard or seen anything which remotely indicates that Consone was established to dominate the server.   The initial statement of Consone seems to indiciate the opposite as does almost all subsequent posts. Including posts, I might add, from players who have left the game because of this War!.

Not to contradict you, Deranzin, but even if Consone had some sort of singular leadership, or if they delegated such, they would be still disfunctional. The bottom line is that this group of alliance leaders that started Soup to dominate the server are either leaving, were not included in the initial conversations (and therefore rightfully indignant), or are trying to continue to hold the wool over their members' eyes.

The simple fact is that a group of folks decided to join together to try to be the dominant power in Elgea. There is nothing nefarious about that. It is common in every game. They did it and then it became the worst thing you could imagine. The power group (Consone) which had a far higher population than either the Crows or the H? Coalition telling folks what to do. And the problem was, when people tried to deal with these folks, they got the response: "we are part of Consone, you'd better do it, or else...".

Crows never had that problem. H's Confeds never had that problem.

So... The problem continuued and persisted and persisted and it became patently clear that this Mega Coalition that was far in excess in size of either the Crows or the H? Coalition would basically allow its disparate members to act in pretty horrible ways with no repercussions. What would Illy become then? A field of folks who are bullies who only have to say "I'm part of Consone" to get what they want?

So, when push came to shove, Consone pushed again, and, to their utmost surprise (they were used to no resistance), someone pushed back...

I do not doubt that Consone had zero interest in engaging H? in a war when they did. I'm absolutely sure they thought they would grow to 3 or 4 times the H? Coalition size before doing that. That was the plan. After burying the dissenters in more players/population/troops than H? (or anyone else) could ever field, Consone would be left as the de facto Illy standard.

The problem is that other people don't necessarily like to lie down and subject themselves to your vision. Even if H? hadn't stood up, I'm sure others would have.

The bottom line is that Consone had a vision of making this game their own, we got to see some of the ramifications of that vision, and many, many people (including tons of folks who are not in this war) believe it is a very good thing that your vision is not being realized.

So... There are lots of folks in Consone that I personally like and how great they are is really not the issue here. Let us put to bed, once and for all, the Illy Forum Debate.

The Coalition will never negotiate in these Forums. Ever. So stop trying.

We have decided to negotiate in the H? Forums. If you do not know how to do that, then please contact Starry in game. Most of you are already registered.

If you choose to make statements about this war and how The Coalition are being tough, or hurting you, or unfair, we will not respond. You are getting your just deserts in our book.

There will never, ever, be a Forum negotiated or discussed peace between and Consone Member Alliance and The Coalition.

On the other hand, The Coalition has been incredibly lenient with some allies of Consone who have wished to leave the war. We may continue to be so at our discretion. But "first come first serve" does come to mind.

In summary, unless you want a long, dreary, drawn out experience of losing your cities, I suggest you contact us in the H? Forums.

Obviously, as we have shown with the several alliances who have come to terms to date, we have been exceedingly nice and lenient. So there is a definite advantage to being earlier rather than later.

But, if you choose to espouse the principles of the folks who got you into this, then, by all means, we shall oblige you...






Edited by Kumomoto - 14 Feb 2013 at 08:47

Hadus wrote: EvilKatia wrote: Well I think you got what he said wrong Hadus : no matter what he says  it wont really stop the war or change it. Same for what I say or what you say or what unnivolved others say.  It is up to those at war to decide to end it or not to.  That doesn't mean nothing interesting get said or that you won't have interesting conversation. It just mean that its not very probable anything that get said here (on this thread or the next one to be created ) will change the course of the war or will get the feuding alliances to make peace. Well, that's certainly part of it, and I agree. Our opinions mean very little and can do very little when we are outside the scope of the conflict. But scottfitz seemed to be using that as rationale for not posting at all, based on his quote, which I don't agree on.

Grego wrote: Let me remind you what was our bullying: one player sent army to allied mine two squares from allied city, and announced it five days before arrival. Occupant broke agreement and didn't withdraw on time. Apart that mine square there was no hostility from our side against anyone, military or diplo.

You persist in looking only at the single straw that finally ended the camel without considering the many bales loaded previously.  Maybe you should try to widen your viewpoint.