All I Am Saying Is Give Peace A Chance |
Post Reply
|
Page 123 10> |
| Author | |||||
John Louis
Greenhorn
Joined: 18 Jun 2011 Status: Offline Points: 99 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Topic: All I Am Saying Is Give Peace A ChancePosted: 01 Mar 2014 at 17:59 |
||||
|
All I Am Saying Is Give Peace A Chance (by John Louis)
I should, of course, start by highlighting that this post is entirely my own and is not endorsed by anybody (except me, I suppose). Can there be peace in Illy? Should there be peace in Illy? Will this war ever end? Is surrender the only viable option?...Can we refrain from name-calling and insulting one another? My post on a A Short Treatise on the History of Illyriad was locked by GM Luna because you guys just could not control yourselves... ...if you are going to comment on my comments then please try to behave!! The accusations (and counter accusations, etc) are flying all over the place, is it even possible for the average Joe to make heads or tails of anything on these forums anymore? I will try to start simply – can there be peace? Firstly, we need to ascertain exactly what is necessary for there to be a viable peace. Players need to stop destroying one another is the easy answer, but how can the Illy community bring this about? For ease of reference I will try to simplify matters by referring to the two sides as follows: Harmless? and their allies ("Team A") and vCrow and their allies ("Team B") – this is an oversimplification, I know, but otherwise it becomes too confusing naming and referring to all the different alliances which are (or have been) involved. My understanding of Team B's position is that their main objective was to stop Team A from, allegedly, dominating the server and imposing its 'will' on others (even if some Illy players thought that Team A's actions were for the ultimate good of everybody). Has this not now been achieved? It is humbly submitted that any fair-minded observer would have to conclude that this objective has already been achieved. The facts are that Team A is no longer the No. 1 alliance and Team B has successfully claimed the top 2 spots for themselves. What this means is that Team A can no longer command the authority it once did and therefore their much-criticized alleged 'policing' of Illyriad has come to an end. The balance of power has, in my view, definitively shifted and this is already apparent. So, if the primary objective has been achieved, why has this war not come to an end? Well, Team B may argue that this is because Team A will not surrender and they feel that it must as a prerequisite to any future peace. In my opinion this is stubbornness and not at all how others have been treated in earlier wars. Sure, it is true that Team A has required surrender and war reparations from alliances it has defeated in the past, however, this was limited. Team B is presently carrying out a server-wide extermination of those who will not surrender to them. It is a scorched earth policy tantamount to genocide (if this was a real life war that is). Team A may have done many things (good in some peoples eyes and bad in others), but it is not guilty of mass exterminations as we are seeing today being carried out by Team B. The balance of power has shifted in Illy, Team A is not what it once was. The geopolitical landscape in Illyriad has morphed into something completely different. For better or worse, this is what we have now and for the foreseeable future. Many players have voiced the opinion (and I agree) that Illyriad would be a poorer place without the members making up Team A. Yet their destruction is the only remaining objective for Team B – and this can only be called revenge. So, where do we go from here? The fact is that Team A will not surrender to Team B. Yet, Team B says it is willing to discuss the surrender of Team A and would like to do so as soon as possible to bring an end to this war. It is submitted, therefore, that there are very few options left available – but there still are options. (1) A declaration of an end to this war (as the objectives have been achieved), or (2) a ceasefire with good faith from both sides and genuine negotiations at a permanent resolution. I feel a ceasefire is the best way forward from here as this will allow much needed cooling time and an opportunity for everyone to take a step back and consider where we already are and where we are going as a community (I think certain alliances need to do a little soul-searching as well). I feel it is probably the only viable way for Illyriad to retain the rich tapestry of active players that it has created over the past few years. It will give Team B an opportunity to realize that the war need not go on, their ultimate goal has been reached – or do they hunger for genocide and are happy to justify trying to achieve this by saying Team A could have avoided it through surrender? |
|||||
![]() |
|||||
Halcyon
Forum Warrior
Joined: 17 Aug 2012 Location: Israel Status: Offline Points: 360 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 01 Mar 2014 at 18:16 |
||||
|
I will go with JL's terms for both sides:
To my knowledge past wars - which had been won by Team A - have always ended with surrender and payment of reparations by the losing side. What has changed and why should this war end differently? Just because Team A is too proud? Past wars did not end until one side surrendered and that side continued to be attacked and lose cities until they surrendered - what is different this time? I submit that the claim that Team B is after revenge can't be truely tested with Team A stating that they will continue to fight and not surrender. If Team A offers to surrender and is rejected by Team B it may show that Team B is actually after wanton distruction and revenge. Leaders of Team A stated in other threads that they do not trust the leaders of Team B and I believe that this goes both ways. How do we bridge this lack of trust? Finally, what prevents JL, the writer of this thread, from surrendering in order to end his part in the war?
Edited by Halcyon - 01 Mar 2014 at 18:31 |
|||||
![]() |
|||||
Jenin
New Poster
Joined: 16 Dec 2011 Location: Philadelphia Status: Offline Points: 16 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 01 Mar 2014 at 18:34 |
||||
|
My Dear John Lewis,
Team B's objective is not as you would think. While I am not a genuine representative, I know the spirit of our push for war. I think I can safely say that it is over the rough edge that caused Luna to shut down your previous thread. It has pervaded GC and caused me to report several people for lewd and bigoted comments in the months previous to this war...there has been a lot of assumptions made by both sides which have been quite unfair; as there has not been any seriously direct communication (mostly baiting). There is the whole concept ushered in by Black and continued by NC; of stealing from non-allied newbs to support huge armies; pushing them to move without telling them how to make the best possible use of their city/game & threatening them, attacking them, etc. Then as the lines blurred between newbs and 5+ city players, it became obvious that the nastiness of other on-line games had followed those of us who truly admire what H? had done prior to their support of NC. Given as NC players are skilled warriors who in my opinion took far too much advantage of the newbs around them as evidenced by the strings of complaints about players such as Warren Gabriel and others, and then attacked BANE unmercifully while we were admittedly green horn traders who thought it might be cool to sell T2 Rez w troops attached (after seriously sandbagging II and several smaller alliances as well), it became obvious that no one would be enjoying the game much longer if we did not do a better than "the Consone". Both H & Consone supported the 10 square rule and the latter it seems to me was set up mostly to give a balance of power and did little to help deal with the frustrations of newer players who were frustrated by the overcrowding created by the 10 square rule. It is my belief that this is and should be the ultimate subject of our current struggles. If is seems that "Team B" is going tit-for-tat with a scorched earth policy, I apologize; however since H? stubbornly refuses to admit that supporting NC when other alliances had expressed misgivings for the very reasons I state above; I am not sure there is any other way to make the point: Bullying MUST stop...Illy is not a place where defense is easy, so attacking must have more social deliberation attached. So please, Mr John Lewis, do not generalize about "Team B" motivations...let's have serious communication here, not just a bully pulpit, OK?
|
|||||
![]() |
|||||
Halcyon
Forum Warrior
Joined: 17 Aug 2012 Location: Israel Status: Offline Points: 360 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 01 Mar 2014 at 18:43 |
||||
|
Why is the light at the end of the tunnel never a peace train and always a siege train?
|
|||||
![]() |
|||||
Mahaut
Wordsmith
Joined: 20 Jan 2012 Location: North West UK Status: Offline Points: 173 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 01 Mar 2014 at 19:04 |
||||
As above. Now you have your answer John Louis. it's quite simple really. Please don't compare the razing of pixel cities in a war game to any real life conflicts - its a ridiculous comparison - your children won't be going hungry tonight or hiding in a bunker because someone is catapaulting one of your cities and is easily ended by anyone's personal surrender. |
|||||
|
|||||
![]() |
|||||
Deranzin
Postmaster
Joined: 10 Oct 2011 Status: Offline Points: 845 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 01 Mar 2014 at 21:18 |
||||
You call for serious communication but at the same time you place NC in the same barrel with Black and claim that they stole resources from newbies .?. ![]()
Alas the forum does not allow the publication of IGMs so as to expose that your side considers those accounts fair game (I called my vCrow neighbor out for such a behavior and asked him to attack someone his size and he told me that small account are ok too ), but I do have evidence on the matter. So, if I were in your shoes, I wouldn't be so fast to get on a high moral horse ... ... and unless you consider this account : http://elgea.illyriad.co.uk/#/Player/Towns/164846 a warrior and a "good target" I'd suggest that you be a bit more down-to-earth with your proclamations. There is a good reason why a lot of small T-O accounts flocked around my cities during the war you know ... ![]()
Has BANE been informed of that change in their alliance's purpose .?. ![]()
The change is that when it came to that point, it was the opposing side as a group that was losing cities and there was a general limit on how many cities a particular member of that side could lose. Anyone citing examples will have to admit that they are few and far between and the rare exception of the rule, so I guess that we will at least agree that this was the general code of conduct of those past wars. As on why this war should end differently ... it will end differently because of the aforementioned change is now the RULE and not the exception ... and pride has nothing to do with it ...
You can claim what you want, but there are some facts that cannot be overcome with simple claims ... Edited by Deranzin - 01 Mar 2014 at 21:22 |
|||||
![]() Just like a "before and after" ad ! ahahahaah :p |
|||||
![]() |
|||||
Elmindra
Forum Warrior
Joined: 10 Sep 2012 Status: Offline Points: 464 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 01 Mar 2014 at 21:44 |
||||
This is only true in my past experience because we were willing to surrender before it got to this point. Before finally surrendering to the Coalition at the end of the Consone war, we were told that we would continue to lose cities until we were destroyed unless and until we surrendered. This came from both H? and it's allies, all constantly sending IGMs stating as such. Just because your enemies had the sense to surrender before it came to that point does not mean that it would not have progressed to the same final point that this war is coming to. It would have and in fact has been stated as much in the past.
|
|||||
|
|||||
![]() |
|||||
Deranzin
Postmaster
Joined: 10 Oct 2011 Status: Offline Points: 845 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 01 Mar 2014 at 22:43 |
||||
The day when words would count more than actions has come and noone sent me a memo .?. ![]() I have a small question ... let us say that these warnings were indeed told ... at the time they were given, was anyone violating the rules I mentioned or not .?. This is the answer I'd like to know the answer to and not what "might" have happened, because noone knows that ... for all we all know they might have been bluster to make an war end faster and with less destruction ... or can you tell me that the possibility of a bluff is so outlandish ... ![]() |
|||||
![]() Just like a "before and after" ad ! ahahahaah :p |
|||||
![]() |
|||||
Jenin
New Poster
Joined: 16 Dec 2011 Location: Philadelphia Status: Offline Points: 16 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 01 Mar 2014 at 23:16 |
||||
You call for serious communication but at the same time you place NC in the same barrel with Black and claim that they stole resources from newbies .?. ![]() Yes, NC did a LOT of that - ask anyone who had a city near Warren Gabriel or Pepe, or Samuel Marcos or many others whose names I can not recall now since they are out of that alliance
Alas the forum does not allow the publication of IGMs so as to expose that your side considers those accounts fair game (I called my vCrow neighbor out for such a behavior and asked him to attack someone his size and he told me that small account are ok too ), but I do have evidence on the matter. So, if I were in your shoes, I wouldn't be so fast to get on a high moral horse ... ... and unless you consider this account : http://elgea.illyriad.co.uk/#/Player/Towns/164846 a warrior and a "good target" I'd suggest that you be a bit more down-to-earth with your proclamations. There is a good reason why a lot of small T-O accounts flocked around my cities during the war you know ... ![]() I was ordered to attack a player and after I realized how small he was & that he was part of my neighbor Praetor Augustus' alliance, I asked to be excluded from TO action. we also have a 3 city player called Arimis under attack right now by H? player(s?), so Idk to whom you are referring with regards to "high moral ground" - perhaps you might ASK what is going on so that the smell of blood doesn't turn us all into sharks...after all speech is a human gift, one i think we should not waste...try for facts, please - we don't need to inflame things with conjecture, ok?
Has BANE been informed of that change in their alliance's purpose .?. ![]() Yes we have been now, so please don't be snarky over this...we were hardened by attacks from NC when most of us had never even attacked a live player before...in fact we were specifically ordered NOT to without permission from leadership...that would only be given if the other player was seriously out of line and would not work with diplomacy from ours and their own leadership or if it was to take a tourney spot - remember we were selling T2 rez w troops attached and fighting with them instead of selling them doesn't pay much...we had no idea how to use them in any serious way when the NC war started...and I am flat out serious here - we came from 2 previously failed alliances and few of us knew a thing about how to fight in this game, or even had many troops for that matter - we were just having fun & making gold, til we got scouted every few hours to check our troop/build levels and then sandbagged when we had sold 75+% of our troops - as a military action that was efficient, but pretty un-sportsmanly in my opinion.
The change is that when it came to that point, it was the opposing side as a group that was losing cities and there was a general limit on how many cities a particular member of that side could lose. Anyone citing examples will have to admit that they are few and far between and the rare exception of the rule, so I guess that we will at least agree that this was the general code of conduct of those past wars. As on why this war should end differently ... it will end differently because of the aforementioned change is now the RULE and not the exception ... and pride has nothing to do with it ... Not sure how this got started and I am unclear of any Rules here...we had people seiged out of the game and they got seriously nasty letters from NC players saying "good riddance" when they had only attacked for defensive purposes - shamarra comes to mind...I saw the letter Warren Gabriel sent her...it was very nasty
You can claim what you want, but there are some facts that cannot be overcome with simple claims ... Deranzin, pray tell me why you are making such a connection about 'facts' such as that...this is NOT even about H?, it's about NC and anyone foolish enough to think that the nasty tactics some (not all) of their players got up to that was spoiling the fun of this game - that's all, plain & simple, please stop assuming you know what's going on here when clearly you don't. and if you are going to make such a claim, show me proof at least... instead of the snarky little laughing face... Edited by Deranzin - Oh one last thing, Deranzin: while you were taking my sentences and putting your own comments after them, I do want to thank you for not taking them too far out of context...I do hope you come to recognize that this whole war is about supporting nastiness which we think needs to be stopped and that it got ignored until it built up to unacceptable levels...
Edited by Jenin - 02 Mar 2014 at 17:33 |
|||||
![]() |
|||||
Spheniscidae
Wordsmith
Joined: 01 Mar 2012 Status: Offline Points: 117 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 02 Mar 2014 at 00:28 |
||||
As above. What reparations are paid is probably open to discussion, but if one side thinks the war has been going on for longer than they can handle, then there is always the option to surrender. Till then, this war will drag on till Team A or B or both come to their senses. No need for 27436179469172 posts by the same few people about the same thing. Case closed.
|
|||||
![]() |
|||||
Post Reply
|
Page 123 10> |
|
Tweet
|
| Forum Jump | Forum Permissions ![]() You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |