Play Now Login Create Account
illyriad
   New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Actions against Myll of [Wave]
   FAQ FAQ   Forum Search    Register Register   Login Login

Actions against Myll of [Wave]
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 7891011>
Author
   Topic Search Topic Search   Topic Options Topic Options
Zarhunt View Drop Down
New Poster
New Poster


Joined: 03 May 2014
Location: Melbourne, Aust
Status: Offline
Points: 39 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Zarhunt Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Jul 2014 at 20:46
Originally posted by nighthawk7 nighthawk7 wrote:

Originally posted by Aquennomi Aquennomi wrote:

Did they not offer Myll's cities to [WAVE] members?   Did they not offer to leave "violating" cities in place and help them grow?  Did they not offer a way to avoid future conflicts and even need to Sov?  Seems like they made it easy for the new members and alliance to grow, without impeding on their own growth potentials.   With out a NAP, neither side can bring new cities in without the expense and time of Sov,  Seems logical to this orc.  

In my opinion all those were good.  However, its the main requirement that we would not like in that it involves the 10 square "rule".  Its not our rule so why would we agree to that?  My opinion only I'm not a leader.

The only problem with your argument Nighthawk it that it can easily be turned around. Fairy can as easily say your policy is not theirs so why should they agree to it. That is the purpose of dialogue and negotiation. Fairy have offered to help you find places to grow and expand, yet all we have heard from your side is we don't like the 10 square rule. 

With the opening of BL the crowding issue has been alleviated for a while, as a fairly new player myself, (I started about 2 weeks before LoU closed), I too was rather worried about how I was going to grow or find anywhere to carve out a spot for myself especially with the 10 square rule.
I too thought I would never gain access to any worthwhile resources when they all seemed to already be occupied.

However, you can't realistically expect to have this when you are a new player, unless you are at there for the start of a game established players are always going to have the better spots when you arrive and the resources and knowledge to secure them for themselves. To expect to be on an equal footing or to be the ones making and enforcing policy is perhaps a trifle ambitious.

If you are really that opposed to the 10 square rule and negotiation because of it, I would recommend taking up Fairy's offer taking the time to grow and when you have gathered strength and influence, then try and make a change from within, this may take 12 months or more but you can continue to try and change people's minds whilst you are growing through dialogue.

This would appear to me to be a much more pragmatic way of trying to achieve your goals as opposed to a futile military stance you are in no position to support.
Back to Top
Loredena View Drop Down
New Poster
New Poster
Avatar

Joined: 28 Sep 2013
Status: Offline
Points: 7 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Loredena Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Jul 2014 at 20:49
Originally posted by nighthawk7 nighthawk7 wrote:


I would personally do it more of a courtesy but if its a spot I really wanted then I'd still go there.  If we were a larger alliance and able to defend ourselves this wouldn't be an issue.

/disclaimer I'm a member of Fairy

I don't think that that is true NightHawk - Fairy is good sized, yet I was asked to move my town when I had settled my third city within the 10 of another player (and just barely within 10 at that, not within 6!) and I know others within Fairy have done so as well.   I've been involved in several 'you're too close, oops sorry! conversations from the side of the town whose 10 squares were moved in on as well.   In one or two cases we assisted in a move because the spot was already being held for an alliance member, in others we agreed to leave the town in place.

The alliances have varied in size, but I know when it happened to a friend the alliance was *much* smaller than Tsunami (about 5 members) and after some back in forth she agreed to allow the town to stay, with agreement that they could claim the food sov they had  settled next to, but that they would not dispute ownership of the herb spots they had also settled by that were in her 5.  

The difference is that they didn't try to claim that the player-rule was one that could be flouted at will, without repercussions.  In other words - you can do whatever you want within 5 or 10 squares of someone else, but don't be surprised if they take offense and retaliate!  While I and others in Fairy tend to play it as an online Civ game (I primarily harvest and trade) it IS still a game that supports and encourages pvp.
Back to Top
Aquennomi View Drop Down
New Poster
New Poster
Avatar

Joined: 26 Jul 2012
Location: IN
Status: Offline
Points: 32 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Aquennomi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Jul 2014 at 20:52
Originally posted by nighthawk7 nighthawk7 wrote:



Infact I harvest regularly inside the "5 tile rule" or whatever you call it.  I did have someone destroy my caravans and send spies to my city... warning received and I stopped around that person.. asked another for permission as well.  

I would personally do it more of a courtesy but if its a spot I really wanted then I'd still go there.  If we were a larger alliance and able to defend ourselves this wouldn't be an issue.


Harvest vs sov/settle are 2 different things.


And it would be an issue , the size of the alliance is not an issue,  especially since the action was taken against the informed person who was ill advising.   And if you learned to ask on the harvesting, perhaps you and others will learn to ask before settling so close as well.   That is all the [FAIRY] alliance has asked for is this courtesy.   And asking for a NAP,  even alleviates the need for sov first, and makes it unrestricted, for both parties (per game mechanics),  though the newcomers should still out of courtesy consult with those that are established there.
Back to Top
nighthawk7 View Drop Down
New Poster
New Poster


Joined: 11 Jul 2014
Status: Offline
Points: 5 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote nighthawk7 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Jul 2014 at 21:07
The size is very much the issue.  If we were as large as they were then they wouldn't be able to do what they are doing now.  We have no chance to defend against them so they can attack at will.
Back to Top
Angrim View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar

Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Location: Laoshin
Status: Offline
Points: 1173 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Angrim Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Jul 2014 at 21:30
Originally posted by Ista Ista wrote:

Some people say that’s a common rule and it’s convention/policy....what makes 10-tile ”rule” to a convention? Some vets have years ago made that kind of ”rule” – is that a convention? How do you measure anything as a convention in this kind of play?
i would measure it against the outrage that it generates. if the server regards the incident as "play as usual", it is a convention. if other alliances flock to your defence, then it would be time to reexamine its importance.

Originally posted by Ista Ista wrote:

Is it any more a convention (or has it ever been) if some big players decide to wipe out tiny new alliance which just want to play by the game rules developed by devs – not by players?
yes, of course. i have heard of other games of this type where wiping out tiny new alliances is the convention. if it's "play as usual" and it's not a rule implemented by the devs, that is to me the very definition of a convention.

Originally posted by Ista Ista wrote:

Where is my right to make decisions about that matter?
what decision of yours has been prevented? you decided to settle an area in protest of a convention with which you disagree. you may defend yourself and your alliance as you can. the right to make a decision is not the right to avoid the repercussions of it.

Originally posted by Ista Ista wrote:

Are you really going to say it’s still a convention – after wiped all tiny newbies away? Do you wipe out ALL incoming new players who desagree your so called convention?
melodramatic, much? you're not even being attacked (yet).

Originally posted by Ista Ista wrote:

You can see the paradox and you need to continue life here in Illyriad and give space people to play as devs wanted game to be played. AND don’t forget – there’s more newbies coming.
no, no one "needs" to give space. the way the devs want the game to be played is for players to make their own decisions. you have made one. TanyaFairy has made one. voila, the sandbox.

Originally posted by Ista Ista wrote:

It seems to me that all this fuss about one little tile is only and excuse to get Myll.
well, i do rather hope that Fairy will leave Myll's cities now that you've confirmed your intent. but as that intent seems to have been to provoke a fuss about one little tile as a means to draw attention to your position...mischief managed.
Back to Top
Aquennomi View Drop Down
New Poster
New Poster
Avatar

Joined: 26 Jul 2012
Location: IN
Status: Offline
Points: 32 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Aquennomi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Jul 2014 at 21:39
Originally posted by nighthawk7 nighthawk7 wrote:

The size is very much the issue.  If we were as large as they were then they wouldn't be able to do what they are doing now.  We have no chance to defend against them so they can attack at will.


If other alliance had survived long enough to get large,  the incident would never have happened.  And if it did,  [FAIRY] not being a small alliance,  I am sure could handle it,  against most larger alliance leaders as well.  Myll's size was not a factor in determining [FAIRY]'s actions.   His stance and poor leadership decisions were.  If size were a factor, I am sure it would of been a [WAVE] wide tsunami on the little alliance.   Wink
Back to Top
nighthawk7 View Drop Down
New Poster
New Poster


Joined: 11 Jul 2014
Status: Offline
Points: 5 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote nighthawk7 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Jul 2014 at 21:44
Either way... taking out all of the cities belonging to a person seems excessive to me.  Ok destroy some, attack, or whatever but wiping him out completely seems more to it to me.
Back to Top
Brids17 View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar

Joined: 30 Jul 2010
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 1483 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Brids17 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Jul 2014 at 22:13
People go to GC about things all the time. People have done it countless times about me. And you know what happened? Nothing. I didn't explain myself or try to defend my actions, I just went about my business and all that would happen was someone would demanded my cities be sieged, which never happened. 

I understand wanting to be clear to everyone about your position but you should have simply sent a message to every member in WAVE instead. Everyone else is going to criticize you and pick you apart despite having nothing to do with the matter and are unwilling to get involved anyway, short of complaining about you in the forums. Thread or no. 

As I said, nothing good will come of this thread. 
Back to Top
Aquennomi View Drop Down
New Poster
New Poster
Avatar

Joined: 26 Jul 2012
Location: IN
Status: Offline
Points: 32 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Aquennomi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Jul 2014 at 22:18
Well he, quit,  if he had said lets work things out, then it MIGHT of been possible for his total destruction to be averted.   But as most cowards he bailed, took easy way out and left it to his successor to work it out.
Back to Top
Hora View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 10 May 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 839 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote Hora Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Jul 2014 at 22:19
I really get annoyed by the "OMG they are taking out all the cities!" sentence...

...  hey, they offer you to stop the attacks as soon as you agree to move one little silly town, which might, perhaps, loose some 10 pop... if the smaller side is too stubborn to accept this "kind" offer, ehm, bad luck for Myll?...

And about game rules: As this is a sandbox, you're all fully allowed to annoy your neighbour, as well as he is fully allowed to squash you without even telling you why!

The 10 square rule is a really nice offer to tell smaller alliances (and also diplomatic bigger alliances): "Hey, I'm fully OK with anything outside the 10 squares, and please ask if closer..."

And listen to a former Ogame player: It could be far worse!
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 7891011>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

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