Play Now Login Create Account
illyriad
   New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - A Short Treatise on the Early History of Illyriad
   FAQ FAQ   Forum Search    Register Register   Login Login

Topic ClosedA Short Treatise on the Early History of Illyriad

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 45678>
Author
Halcyon View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 17 Aug 2012
Location: Israel
Status: Offline
Points: 360
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 Feb 2014 at 17:04
Originally posted by Sisren Sisren wrote:

 
It was you and Dumiel's alt that made mention that I lost touch with what is good for Dark, which left me to first stand aside, and when I could no longer abide what was going on in-alliance leave.

False. It was you yourself who chose to step down from Dark's leadership after the only thing I said to you was "I don't like this Sis" - I said this btw after you agreed that Dark must lose a mining city to NC just because they didn't feel like sharing. After saying that I didn't like it, I nevertheless supported your decision and allowed NC to capture a Dark town without resistance.

Originally posted by Sisren Sisren wrote:

 
I worry for your current allies.  Dark has a history of breaking confederations...
Nightbringers
Wheel of Time (since reforged)
Harmless...
I guess Valar Crow and EE are next?

Damn, you found us out. After this war ends Dark will immediately move on Vcrow and EE.
You hear that Ditto and Hath?
The Dark is coming...
Back to Top
Deranzin View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 10 Oct 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 845
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 Feb 2014 at 17:08
Originally posted by Halcyon Halcyon wrote:



False. It was you yourself who chose to step down from Dark's leadership after the only thing I said to you was "I don't like this Sis"


Now there is something unbelievable ... if people stepped down that easily there wouldn't have been any alliance leaders left in the game ...  LOL
Back to Top
Rill View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar
Player Council - Geographer

Joined: 17 Jun 2011
Location: California
Status: Offline
Points: 6903
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 Feb 2014 at 17:30
DARK is coming???

/me checks cities

phew, at least it will take them a long time to get here
Back to Top
Tamaeon View Drop Down
Wordsmith
Wordsmith
Avatar

Joined: 19 Dec 2011
Location: Centrum
Status: Offline
Points: 152
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 Feb 2014 at 17:35
Since this conversation appears to have some semblance of honesty, I'll pitch in and offer some sincere thoughts on how this whole war developed. The opinions/perspective are my own...

Originally posted by HonoredMule HonoredMule wrote:

Originally posted by Halcyon Halcyon wrote:


When H? leadership declared war on EE they did so in support of NC and TVM and were beginning to make good upon that promise/threat.

Indeed we did declare on EE in support of NC, because we were mediating and had just finished hashing out a peace agreement, which EE's actions intentionally destroyed.  And even without that, nothing NC did deserved 25 accounts (at the highest point) getting dogpiled by literally hundreds of accounts.

You perceived the situation differently than us, and it was apparent you were subject to some ground-level bias and opinions borne of incomplete (one-sided, and anecdotal) evidence, but maybe that's fair.  No one can claim to have the whole story for sure anyway.  However, it's one thing to deem the situation unworthy of your support and end the treaty.  It's entirely another to join the dog pile under the flimsy excuse that Harmless shouldn't be trying to prevent NC's utter destruction.

Here's a review of some key events which led to the conflict...
  • March 2013 to May 2013 - Sir Bradly sends various diplo attacks against Crows, myself included.
  • April 2013 - NC sieges a HUGcr town and continue to do so despite being asked many times to stop. uCrow/vCrow lose 50k+ cavalry defending the town.
Various Crowfed rooks approached H? with concerns regarding NC's behavior, while asking for help in mediation. Unfortunately our requests were not taken seriously and there was no mediation.
  • May 2013 - NC declare war on BANE over nonsense. They expected BANE to rescind sovereignty for a new NS player who had spawned in the noob ring and had 120 pop at the time. Ironically BANE had actually decided to accept NC's unreasonable request in an effort to avoid a conflict.
  • June 2013 - TCol declare war on Insanity Inc and launch various sieges against players who had no involvement whatsoever in the NC vs. BANE conflict. At least 2 players lost towns for actions that were not their own.
We approached H? again expressing strong reservations about NC's actions. Sadly we were turned down yet again, and this became the turning point for vCrow/uCrow as we saw that H? had turned their backs on us in refusing to acknowledge our concerns, and did nothing to help ease the rising tensions. A major war was inevitable...
  • August 2013 to October 2013 - H? directors go on GC and state repeatedly that large confederations are quote "smothering the game". We had seen this kind of talk before in the weeks leading up to the Trove War, and given our recent experience with H? it only deepened our concern about an inevitable war.
  • October 2013 - The great war begins.
So these are just some of the crucial events which triggered the current war. I'm still 100% convinced that it could have been avoided, had H? simply helped ease tensions or distanced themselves from NC. 


Originally posted by HonoredMule HonoredMule wrote:

Originally posted by Halcyon Halcyon wrote:


They actively supported NC and TVM aggression and have no real cause to claim the high moral ground.
They expected to win this war as they did all those who came before it. They were wrong.
...
Arrogance fueled by past victories led them into very poor choices.


Spending months in 3rd party talks trying to prevent escalation and diplomatically mediating almost to a successful resolution while our ally is under excessive attack is not the mark of an arrogant alliance presuming victory nor of one that had no care for what's right or where fault truly lay.

When was this exactly, and which of your allies was under excessive attack?
"How happy is the blameless vestal's lot! The world forgetting, by the world forgot. Eternal sunshine of the spotless mind! Each prayer accepted, and each wish resigned."
Back to Top
Halcyon View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 17 Aug 2012
Location: Israel
Status: Offline
Points: 360
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 Feb 2014 at 17:59
I beleive he means that NC was under excessive attack. I already stated that I disagree with that and consider that NC was not under enough attack when H? chose to join on their side.
Back to Top
Sisren View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 03 Feb 2012
Location: PA, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 446
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 Feb 2014 at 18:29
Originally posted by Halcyon Halcyon wrote:

Originally posted by Sisren Sisren wrote:

 
It was you and Dumiel's alt that made mention that I lost touch with what is good for Dark, which left me to first stand aside, and when I could no longer abide what was going on in-alliance leave.

False. It was you yourself who chose to step down from Dark's leadership after the only thing I said to you was "I don't like this Sis" - I said this btw after you agreed that Dark must lose a mining city to NC just because they didn't feel like sharing. After saying that I didn't like it, I nevertheless supported your decision and allowed NC to capture a Dark town without resistance.

Originally posted by Sisren Sisren wrote:

 
I worry for your current allies.  Dark has a history of breaking confederations...
Nightbringers
Wheel of Time (since reforged)
Harmless...
I guess Valar Crow and EE are next?

Damn, you found us out. After this war ends Dark will immediately move on Vcrow and EE.
You hear that Ditto and Hath?
The Dark is coming...

last 2 things before I stop reading this...
1 - we have your altered reality of the events, and we have the truth.  
You are right, it would surely have taken me something as simple as 1 town in question to step down.  You got me there I guess....  sorry, i guess i should go back to sipping your cool aid.  is it still laced with LSD?  cuz laddy you are seeing things that aint there.

2 - the record stands on it's own.  Dark has made those confederations and then broken them for stupid and petty reasons.  so suck it up buttercup.  ;)

For the record, you have said some rather harsh things in the past about hath.  maybe he should be concerned about the backstabbing, lying partner he has...  /shrugs

do sveedanye e sbasibo bolshio
Back to Top
Angrim View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar

Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Location: Laoshin
Status: Offline
Points: 1173
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 Feb 2014 at 18:58
Originally posted by Tamaeon Tamaeon wrote:


  • August 2013 to October 2013 - H? directors go on GC and state repeatedly that large confederations are quote "smothering the game".
this is misleading. one director was involved...one, i might add, who has previously retracted things said in gc that got somewhat out of hand. perhaps you mean to give Sir Bradly a directorship in H?? his was the other supporting voice.
Back to Top
Chaos Armor View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 07 Feb 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 213
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 Feb 2014 at 19:06
Originally posted by Tamaeon Tamaeon wrote:

Various Crowfed rooks approached H? with concerns regarding NC's behavior, while asking for help in mediation. Unfortunately our requests were not taken seriously and there was no mediation.
Originally posted by Tamaeon Tamaeon wrote:

We approached H? again expressing strong reservations about NC's actions. Sadly we were turned down yet again, and this became the turning point for vCrow/uCrow as we saw that H? had turned their backs on us in refusing to acknowledge our concerns, and did nothing to help ease the rising tensions. A major war was inevitable...

It seems to me that H? followed their policy here. They saw no reason to interfere, so they kept out of it. This policy has been preached by many to have been broken consistently. The H? Police, as many of you say. Yet here you stand marketing that H? did not wish to police another alliance? Even entering into third party negotiations would have meant that H? would have had a hand in the conflict. I'm sure if they had someone would be accusing them of having their harmless snoot (see what I did there?) in business where it doesn't belong. It's hard to have a fun party when the said participants are set against having fun. Meaning, H? will never be the good guy because many players have been brought up to dislike them.

When I first joined Illyriad (back in 2011), I was under the impression that all games were like Stronghold Kingdoms. I had finally had enough of playing it. In Stronghold Kingdoms, there was several worlds and on each world there was always one dominant house that controlled the server. On World 2, my parish was destroyed simply because we were an easy parish to take in a largely fortified Yorkshire. When I joined Illyriad, I immediately began reading the forum. I was interested in the history of Illyriad and the world that it was outside of what I had heard from the Dwarf Fortress forums. I took a disliking to H? because they appeared, from reading the forum posts at the time, to be the same as House 2 in World 2 of Stronghold Kingdoms. They were repressive (think Monty Python and the Holy Grail) and had the most power. That opinion changed after I read more into the annals of Illyriad's history and talked to many players. I think a great many new players were also influenced by the anti-Harmless? rhetoric going on at the time and have since grown comfortable with the knowledge. Not daring to challenge the status quo.

Make note, I do not believe that H? is perfect or blameless? (see what I did there?). I do, however, fear change. I've been comfortable with H? in "rule" and would really not like to see them go. I think, that if the... (whatever you call the forces against H?) ... were to offer peace without any conditions then all would be well. But rarely in war is the winner going to offer fair terms.

And lastly, Praise be to Armok!

[Many many's were used in the creation of this post.]
Back to Top
KillerPoodle View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar

Joined: 23 Feb 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 1853
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 Feb 2014 at 19:19
Originally posted by Halcyon Halcyon wrote:

Originally posted by HonoredMule HonoredMule wrote:

Originally posted by Halcyon Halcyon wrote:

Before the war Dark and Harmless were still allies and we conveyed to H? leadership our unwillingness to stand by while NC continued their campaign of aggression. The answer was always the same: any action against NC will result in full support to them by H? and The Coalition.

That latter statement is patently false.  Perhaps you forget we still have complete records of our conversations with you regarding the matter.


Search your records again, you'll find KP and Kumo stating quite clearly that H? and The Coalition will back up NC.


Only after you made it clear you were going to escalate.  As we've discussed (and I proved with quotes plus dates and times) the sequence of events was as follows:

1) Dark decided to side with Bane.
2) Dark came to H? with their decision already made and demanded that we do something about NC "or else".
3) H? tried to negotiate, Dark refused to budge.
4) Dark confirmed they were going to escalate.
5) H? responded that we would have no choice but to defend our ally.
6) Dark wimped out and Bane surrendered.




"This is a bad idea and we shouldn't do it." - endorsement by HM

"a little name-calling is a positive thing." - Rill
Back to Top
HonoredMule View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar

Joined: 05 Mar 2010
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 1650
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 Feb 2014 at 19:19
The conversation has shifted to bickering over details which we're mostly prevented from putting to rest by publicly sharing factual evidence, and started to become just another argument.  This is my queue to withdraw.

Cheers, all.
"Apparently, quoting me is a 'thing' now."
- HonoredMule
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 45678>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

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