War declaration

Did i say you are not allowed to voice your opinion?
I didnt and i dont know where you get that from.

I am saying you are making this thread into a White vs H thread.
You may give an example offcourse, but you are going way to deep with your posts.
Maybe you should make a own thread about what you posted in this thread.

Mmm.
To be honest the war began before military units (big armies) were bashing eachother HM.

It began when both parties were sending diplomatic attacks to eachother.
And H? began a magic offensive against White.
We were watching the Magic ranking and few members of H? were getting higher and higher and our private forums were filled with Magic "attacks".

It seems like your post are saying it all started suddenly, White attacking H?
Just stating the facts here.

HonoredMule wrote: I still have yet to decide how I personally feel about many of the participants in this war, let alone what public influence I should exert against them.  So if my public prodding feels deceptive or manipulative, I apologize.  My past experience with opponents in war has primarily involved raving mouth-breathers more comparable to deductively-challenged conspiracy theorists than anyone deserving of professional courtesy...this is not a line I've previously needed to identify, and that sentence was not used with great care.

You are putting too much of your personal feelings about the war in this thread.
This already caused a derailing of the thread a bit too much.

I am not saying that some things you are saying isnt true.
But you are giving your feelings too much of a go in this thread.


Edited by Wuzzel - 12 Jun 2010 at 02:24

HonoredMule wrote:  and ultimately those among us who felt particularly passionate about cultivating server growth and helping newbies split off to form Toothless.  The one thing White has, to its credit, done honorably is leave Toothless alone.  (The peace hasn't been perfect, though, has it CranK? )

What do you mean with that? peace hasn't been perfect? I know what you are saying,, but is this meant to personally attack me on forum, or did I just misread your intentions on this....

Well spoken HonoredMule - personally I think someone in the White Company or Harmless? should make it official - seeing as there's been  massive sieges and everything, it really isn't very neutral. 

It is entirely reasonable and realistic for there to be secret/unofficial wars.  In the case of White vs. Harmless, that war began before White existed.  It all began with Danger declaring a frivolous war on Harmless while White's core players were bunkered there.  When leaders in Harmless and Danger attempted to do the whole "official stance" thing, declaring our intentions and bawling each other out to the court of public opinion, the now leader of White very flippantly and transparently derailed all conversation by spamming misdirection and gibberish.

Then White formed and in short order began a loosely concerted effort against Harmless and in particular our smallest/newest players or otherwise low-hanging fruit (still long before military gameplay was developed to the point of useful purpose or even financial advantage over economic focus), White never bothered to actually declare war.  Given their leadership's past lack of respect for public process, and also that these forums were at the time stuffed mostly with White members, it hardly seemed worth Harmless' effort to respond differently.

We also told our potential recruits exactly what they were getting into (it would be indeed very shameful to do otherwise), and ultimately those among us who felt particularly passionate about cultivating server growth and helping newbies split off to form Toothless.  The one thing White has, to its credit, done honorably is leave Toothless alone.  (The peace hasn't been perfect, though, has it CranK? )

----

It is worth noting that lack of war declaration can work to both participants' detriments as well.  For example, an organized alliance like Harmless might very well have accepted methods for alliances or individuals to sue for peace or otherwise ending a conflict, but an unofficial conflict is not entitled to official exit strategies.  In the case of a decisive ending, lack of public process can make it very unclear which players running from the wreckage are considered war criminals, why, and how far they will be pursued.  This can lead the victor into future conflicts with alliances that unwittingly harbor said cowards, or without full knowledge of the circumstances perceive the victor as a bully exacting too great a punishment.

Furthermore, the losing players themselves may not know how condemned they are--whether they are "fully" guilty just by association with their warring alliance, how carefully their personal contributions to war are tracked by the enemy, or how serious the enemy will be about following through with post-war punishment.  Lack of such knowledge can pressure players into unwilling participation or continued involvement, leading to otherwise unnecessary consequences and also prolonging the war for the eventual victors when individual losers don't know whether they can escape either the wrath of the enemy alliance or that of their own alliance when they depart.