| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
Khells 
Wordsmith
Joined: 12 Oct 2012
Location: New Mexico
Status: Offline
Points: 103
|
 Posted: 14 Oct 2012 at 11:23 |
Dear Rasak, You and I have discussed this before, so I will try and keep it short. I know you think that reinforcing siege camps is the same as defending Rhy from aggression. But look at what those siege camps are doing? Destroying player cities. And why, over troop loses over some dumb mine. Shoot, loses in Tourneys are far greater and we voluntarily do that FOR FUN (or try to have fun, combat in this game needs a LOT of development). The term to understand is "Measured Response". You are an American, you know what I mean.
This game is complicated, so it is reasonable that folks would want to convince other players that their actions are reasonable. This is how alliances are made and I don't fault you for that. But it would be better for those siege forces to withdraw and for us to sort this mess out rather than to reinforce them. The time is past arguing who started what. As an adult, I don't let my kids point fingers and start in on that, I just want them to be quiet and we work out a solution. Same thing here. We need to try and preserve some of those Absa cities so we have something left over when peace returns.
Good luck to you and Harmless? Khells
|
 |
Rasak
Wordsmith
Joined: 26 Nov 2011
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 140
|
Posted: 14 Oct 2012 at 11:20 |
 Mogul wrote:
"H? did not choose to start this war." are you sure? |
If you have some evidence to the contrary I am listening.
Mogul wrote:
"They are helping allies that are being attacked." are you referring to confed with RHY created 2 days ago? and of course with "being attack" you mean removing their siege camps, right? |
How they choose to help isn't under issue here. And how long they have held an alliance with Rhy is also not an issue here.
Mogul wrote:
"Absa because they started this" no, RHY started this - by occupying SkB owned square and breaking agreements after |
This isn't about the mine... this is about Absa attacking Rhy. If this was about the mine then Absa shoulda spoke to Rhy first. Mines never go away after all. Since they did not speak to them in hopes to settle the matter diplomatically we can only see their attack as the first strike. This is hard to dispute.
|
|
Mogul
Forum Warrior
Joined: 23 Sep 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 233
|
Posted: 14 Oct 2012 at 10:49 |
Rasak wrote:
H? did not choose to start this war. They are helping allies that are being attacked. You are upset with the wrong people. If you disagree with H?'s involvement you need to discuss that with either Rhy or Absa or Vic. Absa because they started this and later called in Vic. Vic for getting involved. Or Rhy for being wrong in defending themselves. Take your pick. H? is not the target of your frustration I think.
|
"H? did not choose to start this war." are you sure?
"They are helping allies that are being attacked." are you referring to confed with RHY created 2 days ago? and of course with "being attack" you mean removing their siege camps, right?
"Absa because they started this" no, RHY started this - by occupying SkB owned square and breaking agreements after
|
|
Rasak
Wordsmith
Joined: 26 Nov 2011
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 140
|
Posted: 14 Oct 2012 at 08:19 |
Rill wrote:
5) I think the war H? is pursuing is a mistake in that its unintended consequences, as I have outlined elsewhere, will not be to H?s liking.
|
I was unaware of H? pursuing a war. It seemed to me that war came to their ally. Their ally attempted to stop the warwith discussions not armies. The people that attacked their ally chose to not respond to those discussions (leaving out the part where they sent mail that was in poor taste). Their ally sent attacks to get a response from the attackers. The attackers chose to call in their allies (If anything this was the part that brought all this to happen). H?'s allies called in H?. H? deemed their ally deserving of help and chose to help.
H? did not choose to start this war. They are helping allies that are being attacked. You are upset with the wrong people. If you disagree with H?'s involvement you need to discuss that with either Rhy or Absa or Vic. Absa because they started this and later called in Vic. Vic for getting involved. Or Rhy for being wrong in defending themselves. Take your pick. H? is not the target of your frustration I think.
|
|
Rill
Postmaster General
Player Council - Geographer
Joined: 17 Jun 2011
Location: California
Status: Offline
Points: 6903
|
Posted: 14 Oct 2012 at 05:20 |
KillerPoodle wrote:
Rill wrote:
Drejan, I do disagree with folks, but for the most part I try to remain civil and avoid name-calling. I do not always succeed, and when you find specific instances where I do not, I'd appreciate it if you'd send a forum mail or an in-game mail to help me amend my ways. |
There are many way to trash talk - I prefer to be blunt and honest when I do it rather than those who do it sideways and judgmentally so as to preserve the *appearance* of civility.
|
I am confused ... are you suggesting that I should speak my mind more openly and bluntly? Do you feel that I have somehow failed to share any iota of my opinions? It seems to me that the concerns expressed were mainly with me talking too much and expressing myself too freely, rather than the reverse.
I am going to be blunt and honest.
1) I don't believe Harmless? are amazing angels. They have their own goals and agendas and often give little thought to the effects of their actions on others. They are not demons either, and often do good, either deliberately or unintentionally. 2) Same with Consone 3) I don't believe that H? has been completely honest about its reasons for pursuing this war. I honestly don't believe it is all about protecting RHY. I could be wrong, but I don't find the arguments convincing. 4) I have found some of the spin (on both sides) to be irritating and disingenuous. When I do, I have said so. Frequently someone from H? beats me to it on the Consone stuff, so I can see where in my effort not to be redundant my criticisms might seem one-sided. 5) I think the war H? is pursuing is a mistake in that its unintended consequences, as I have outlined elsewhere, will not be to H?s liking. 6) I am perfectly willing to have people call me names and berate me for expressing these opinions. 7) I have no intention of involving myself in this conflict; I am not "rooting" for either side. (refer to items 1 and 2 above).
There you go, blunt, honest and thorough. Hopefully also civil.
Edited by Rill - 14 Oct 2012 at 05:25
|
|
KillerPoodle
Postmaster General
Joined: 23 Feb 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 1853
|
Posted: 14 Oct 2012 at 04:56 |
Rill wrote:
Drejan, I do disagree with folks, but for the most part I try to remain civil and avoid name-calling. I do not always succeed, and when you find specific instances where I do not, I'd appreciate it if you'd send a forum mail or an in-game mail to help me amend my ways. |
There are many way to trash talk - I prefer to be blunt and honest when I do it rather than those who do it sideways and judgmentally so as to preserve the *appearance* of civility.
|
|
"This is a bad idea and we shouldn't do it." - endorsement by HM
"a little name-calling is a positive thing." - Rill
|
|
Llyorn Of Jaensch
Postmaster
Joined: 31 Mar 2010
Location: Sydney
Status: Offline
Points: 924
|
Posted: 14 Oct 2012 at 03:33 |
Drejan wrote:
In EVERY SINGLE reply you keep judging others. |
Yup.
|
|
"ouch...best of luck."
HonoredMule
|
|
Gnorfum
New Poster
Joined: 13 Oct 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 30
|
Posted: 14 Oct 2012 at 03:29 |
Not a particularly great way to announce your departure from
your previous alliance, The Old Republic University/TOR-U. Maybe you are safer
in a larger alliance but currently VIC players might be less save compared to
TOR players (and maybe also H? players, who knows). Anyway, in TOR-U we never
had troubles defending any of our members from unprovoked attacks. And if a
large alliance starts picking on newbies/a training alliance (I am not aware of
any such things) it would probably be easy to organise whatever support is
necessary. I think, if a training alliance remains neutral and forbids attacks
on active members it is perfectly save to be in such an alliance. Maybe things
will or do change in Illy but I do not expect that to change.
However, the condition to be aided as an alliance member is
to inform your alliance (and that is the case in all alliances unless you are
sieged). All of the leadership is totally unaware of what attack you are
talking about. Not that somebody may think TOR-U does not protect its members or
it would be a risky thing to join. But members are free to leave if they do not
like it with us so I wish you all the best.
|
|
Rill
Postmaster General
Player Council - Geographer
Joined: 17 Jun 2011
Location: California
Status: Offline
Points: 6903
|
Posted: 13 Oct 2012 at 18:42 |
Drejan, I do disagree with folks, but for the most part I try to remain civil and avoid name-calling. I do not always succeed, and when you find specific instances where I do not, I'd appreciate it if you'd send a forum mail or an in-game mail to help me amend my ways.
Edited: I am baffled by your edited-in reference to me frightening newbs. I did growl at a newb in global chat a few days ago, but I apologized to him afterwards. Do you perceive I am somehow threatening toward newbs?
Edited by Rill - 14 Oct 2012 at 05:27
|
|
Drejan
Forum Warrior
Joined: 30 Sep 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 234
|
Posted: 13 Oct 2012 at 18:39 |
Rill do you realize you are one of the top trashtalker here? In EVERY SINGLE reply you keep judging others.
Noobs are protected a lot in this game, do not scare them to make your point.... Lyr you might have been in one of the few small-alliance war, i'm sorry, but even in large wars small players will never be the target, and almost always, as a small player, you will find protection in other alliances if needed.
Edited by Drejan - 13 Oct 2012 at 18:40
|
|
Tweet
Thoughts From A New Player On Current Controversy