Why are we fighting?

Ok. Here's one thing I don't understand: People keep talking about the number of players in an alliance to show the odds in a fight. Why?
There are things more important then the number of members when it comes to fighting a war. It makes a big difference if all your players are active and prepared for war. Let's say 20 prepared players can take on 50 semi-active players without any trouble. Now if those 20 are all prestige buying players and the alliance of 50 has only 10 prestige buyers, that is another advantage they have. 20 players with a few years experience are easier coordinated then an alliance of 50 that have to explain a lot of the warfare to their newer player. An alliance of 50 could theoratically have no experience in war at all. 20 players with strategic located towns on 7 food tiles have a great advantage to an alliance that's spread over spread all over the map. 20 experienced players have more equipment and more experienced commanders then an alliance that needs to help out their newer members with resources. But most importantly is the time one puts in the game. 20 players who are unemployed and can spend all day playing illy have a huge advantage on players who only have time to log in for little over an hour a day. Player numbers and town sizes are only a small part of the things that make an aliance stronger or weaker then another. NC may have small numbers, but we all have seen they are pretty good at fighting wars. I don't see how any alliance of their own size could step up to them. They should feel flattered their opponents only dared to gang up on them with so many, not whine about it. But I didn't hear them whine. I only hear H? players use these numbers to enter the war and to claim NC was treated unfair. Numbers can always be explained in multiple ways. Depending on how you form the sentence and which numbers you choose to use and which numbers you choose to ignore.

ALL-- I don't seem to have the ability to post a new post... I guess Luna removed it, not sure.

THIS IS AN HONEST REACH OUT FOR PARLEY.

We have had a good conversation in GC and the bottom line is that most of the people in this war have an issue with NC.

Ok. Let's talk about how small alliances fight. or Medium ones. Because almost everyone agrees that this game shouldn't stifle the ability for small or medium alliances to have fun wars?

I'm suggesting a parley to avoid the holocaust that is facing us. And I suggest Angrim as the mediator. (sorry for not asking you first, but you are the most neutral person I can think of that everyone respects!).

If this is truly about NC and people's impression of them as bullies, then let's get this all out on the table. In H?, we've always seen NC as a small ally who is having fun playing the game, and do not understand the huge backlash, but we want to listen to everyone's comments.

Can we not come to some sort of agreement where small/medium (and perhaps large) alliances can sometimes play the war aspects of this game without causing Armageddon.

Because, make no mistakes... if we go down this path without any diplomacy, we are going to be a perpetual bloodbath for the indefinite future... And I'm not sure that most of us want that...

Elmindra wrote: especially when H? is so quick to threaten us with total destruction if we don't stop attacking TVM.

Please try to spin a little harder - the only people who threatened to eliminate anyone is CK's leader against RE.

Halcyon:   H? has been involved with NC's little wars exactly once. When Bane refused to surrender as they should have done and decided to call in two much larger alliances to gang up on NC.  At no other time have we told or even implied that we would get involved in NC disputes (other than as a mediator).

So all your talk of H? doing this and H? doing that is exactly that - talk with no substance. 

Regarding the Bane war - you didn't come to us trying to seek a solution, you came already decided you were going to act before you even started talks and your 2nd post was "if they don't do X then we will do Y" .  So a pre-decided position and a bunch of threats and then you wonder why the talks did not go the way you wanted.

If this was really about standing up for the little alliances (and BTW I love that again you've lumped Bane in as a "weaker" alliance) then you should have encouraged CK to accept that peace offer rather than continuing the war.

Regardless if that's really what it's all about then come back to the forum and discuss it. This time without the pre-decided positions and all the threats and bluster - or find someone who can talk in a reasonable way about the situation because neither you, Hath nor Ditto can seem to get over your personal issues with NC to discuss it reasonably.

And it's one, two, three, four...

The first entry in any of these threads is about as close as you are going to get to anything resembling the truth. The first post is DARK's viewpoint, all the responses and counter-responses are like tv commercials, fillers. Thanks Halcyon for your post, the rest I have not bothered with reading.