Play Now Login Create Account
illyriad
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - TRIVIUM
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

TRIVIUM

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 34567 9>
Author
Angrim View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar

Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Location: Laoshin
Status: Offline
Points: 1171
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (3) Thanks(3)   Quote Angrim Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Nov 2013 at 06:21
Originally posted by abstractdream abstractdream wrote:

your side thinks NC should not be allowed to make war AT ALL because they are just too good at it.
i don't think anyone on the side in opposition to you believes that to be the reason.  there are some who would say that they should not be allowed to war against an unwilling opponent, and many who would say that their opponent should be allowed recourse to its friends and confeds in its defence--a right H? was widely perceived to discourage during the BANE conflict.  (H? has since denied that their postings were intended to have that effect, but where intimidation is concerned, perception is truth.)
Back to Top
Darkwords View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar

Joined: 23 May 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 1005
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Darkwords Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Nov 2013 at 10:28
Originally posted by abstractdream abstractdream wrote:



Darkwords
You can solve all of this by posting a list of who it's okay for other alliances to declare war on.

EDIT: grammatical correction


How on Elgea would this resolve any of the issues I have addressed here?  You mean that if we published a list of alliances which included the coalition alliances that were attacking our allies, then the coalition leaders would not have declared that we have 'no right' to fight?

Somehow I do not believe that to be true?

Maybe you should actually read my posts before trying to fob me off with gibberish.

Or has Kumo made some 'global law' that non-coalition alliances must publish some such list?
Back to Top
Halcyon View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 17 Aug 2012
Location: Israel
Status: Offline
Points: 360
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Halcyon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Nov 2013 at 15:06
Originally posted by abstractdream abstractdream wrote:


Halcyon
I won't speak for NC but I am curious why Bane should be considered simultaneously a softer target and the wrong choice for an easy target.


NC thought that Bane was a soft target because Bane participated heavily in the tournament and was low on troops. When they found out that they were wrong and the war was not going easy enough (NC like easy wars) the NC reserve alliance (TVM) was called in to the rescue. You are now paying for it. Surrender like Bane, or face the consequences of fighting till the bitter end.

Edited by Halcyon - 27 Nov 2013 at 15:07
Back to Top
The Electrocutioner View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 09 Sep 2012
Location: Arran
Status: Offline
Points: 234
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote The Electrocutioner Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Nov 2013 at 15:34
Originally posted by Halcyon Halcyon wrote:

 
NC thought that Bane was a soft target because Bane participated heavily in the tournament and was low on troops. When they found out that they were wrong and the war was not going easy enough (NC like easy wars) the NC reserve alliance (TVM) was called in to the rescue. You are now paying for it. Surrender like Bane, or face the consequences of fighting till the bitter end.

NC never considered BANE a soft target. We have always had more respect for them than that. They were a challenge, and we love a challenge. 3 or 4 players from TVM joined NC in response to BANE adding far, far more than than from II. (For the second time!) At all times, we were outnumbered and out gunned. That didn't stop us from razing 45 BANE cities during wartime plus another 22 in the post war settlement, and ultimately securing BANE's surrender.

We were grateful for the 2 weeks or so that the TVM players helped us out, but it did not mean the difference between success and failure. They supported us but never razed a single city themselves. If you think they deserve the "bitter end" for their actions, I think that is heavy handed but you are entitled to seek that if it suits your character.

I find it interesting to see how just like NC you all want to be. You're a vengeful lot, seeking the destruction of players and alliances if they don't surrender. Although I hate to see our friends be the targets of your vitriol, I do find the irony to be delicious. To punish NC, you're actions are the same as the worst of what you ascribe to us.

Kudos!
Back to Top
Darkwords View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar

Joined: 23 May 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 1005
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Darkwords Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Nov 2013 at 15:57
Originally posted by The Electrocutioner The Electrocutioner wrote:



I find it interesting to see how just like NC you all want to be. You're a vengeful lot, seeking the destruction of players and alliances if they don't surrender. Although I hate to see our friends be the targets of your vitriol, I do find the irony to be delicious. To punish NC, you're actions are the same as the worst of what you ascribe to us.

Kudos!


Lol... better vengeful than delusional.

Back to Top
Sir Bradly View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 12 Sep 2012
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 228
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote Sir Bradly Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Nov 2013 at 16:22
Halcyon,

Bane MERGED with Insanity Inc mid war.  They add 11 military players to Bane.  Keep in mind at the beginning of the war Bane had at least twice as many players (all mercenaries) than NC had.

As a result a few members of TVM offer to help NC.  Its funny how you had no issue with Venita and her group.  However, Mckenna and others have to pay the price.  Why is that?  Oh, I get it.  Because you don't like them and therefore they should be punished.

Lets face it.  You are a complete hypocrite and are just using an extremely weak excuse to punish (and perhaps eliminate) a friend to NC.

Bane is running around attacking whomever they want right now under the guise of being "under contract".  That is okay, because they are on your payroll (or ditto's).  Slightly hypocritical?

Because TVM sent 3 players to NC during the war the entire alliance must surrender and be under the control of the enemy OR be wiped out.  I have seen dittobite's individual surrender terms.  Part of the terms is to have a player in vCrow sit the account during the duration of the war.  I am sorry but players are never going to agree to such a thing.  The option is 1) lose control of your account and 2 cities)  and your freedom to play or 2) get wiped out.     

When I heard Dark had an issue with NC during the Bane war, I sent an igm to you to discuss.   I was very open to discussing with our allies.  You did not respond to me and several weeks later you sent me a mail basically threatening us to end the war or else Dark would join.

In the end, you have offered zero diplomacy and have apparently out to seek revenge on NC and whomever they are friends with.  

War can be alot of fun.  NC enjoys the challenge of war, however complete destruction of alliances is not cool.  We would never do it to anyone and I would hope our enemies would never resort to such an action.  If you choose to go down that path, so be it.  NC will not follow you.  I have alot of respect for our enemies and would never treat them in that manner.  

Remember, if you war with respect for each other if can be enjoyable and challenging.  If you war with hatred in your heart and seek the total destruction of your enemy, the game is no longer enjoyable.  Pick the right path.

SB


[04:46]<HATHALDIR> okay,I'm a bully
Back to Top
Darkwords View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar

Joined: 23 May 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 1005
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Darkwords Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Nov 2013 at 16:32
Electro Let me talk you through this as simply as I can, because you have read it before and clearly not understood and you continue to moan about what you imagine to be true rather than reality itself;

We DO NOT consider surrender terms to be a bad thing, we NEVER have.

We think they are a positive thing for a few reasons:

1 - They allow people a way out of the war if those people wish for that.
2 - They enable people that have exhausted their own armies against us to avoid destruction, therefore limiting damage to the player-base in this game.
3 - It means that an alliance leader can not necessarily treat a small member of theirs as cannon fodder.

We DO NOT stand against H because they have used such conditions in the past, we have many varied reasons for this war and most have been expressed (clearly enough for you to understand) in previous posts.

I have 2 questions for you;

If you support such conditions (and ours atm are far more lenient than those placed on consone players) then why do you moan about our use of them so much?

If you don't support such things, then why do you support a coalition that uses them?
Back to Top
Janosch View Drop Down
Wordsmith
Wordsmith
Avatar

Joined: 19 Oct 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 169
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Janosch Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Nov 2013 at 16:48
Again the fact that TCol in adition to NC and TVM was involved in the war against BANE and II is not mentioned.

And that SB talks about "positive" diplomacy and to spare alliances that do not surrender, I also find a bit strange. Confused

Anyway...


You like Democracy? Join the Old Republic!
Back to Top
Sir Bradly View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 12 Sep 2012
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 228
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Sir Bradly Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Nov 2013 at 16:55
Janosch, 

Tcol did not go to war with Bane.  Nor did TVM.  Like I said, 3 players from TVM wanted to join NC during the war.  No different than player like Aurordan leaving PLAN to join EE.  Or Subotoi leaving mCrow to join the war.  

I just don't see the outrage from the community when these players do it.  But when 3 TVM players do it, it seems to be a different story.  Do you not see the hyprocrisy in that?

Furthermore, you have not been privy to terms from NC (yet).  However when the day comes you will see how benevolent our group can be.  Wink
[04:46]<HATHALDIR> okay,I'm a bully
Back to Top
Ander View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar

Joined: 24 Apr 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 1269
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Ander Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Nov 2013 at 17:00
War is not enjoyable for the side which doesn't want it. 

"That didn't stop us from razing 45 BANE cities during wartime plus another 22 in the post war settlement". 

That must be one third of BANE's cities? I dont know what they ever did to you to deserve such treatment. 


Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 34567 9>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.03
Copyright ©2001-2019 Web Wiz Ltd.