And when the going gets tough......

jcx wrote: IMO - Epidemic thought of TVM, TCOL, DLORDS, H? and NC as peaceful alliances.. lol.

TVM, TCOL DLORDS and H? are peaceful alliances.  As peaceful as Vcrow, Ucrow, Ncrow, VICX, DARK, SOON, SHADE. and so on.  If you suggested alliances like NC, BANE or BSH are not peaceful I would agree. 


Edited by bansisdead - 28 Feb 2014 at 22:09

Warfare is just one aspect of illy, it is also a social game, a diplomatic game and a farming game.  These aspects are just as large as the warfare.  Illyriad is a blend of styles, a sandbox game which allows players to choose how they wish to play the game.  It's like saying i'm capable of murder so I must be a murderer...

Illyriad might be a military-oriented strategy game, but the community adopted the position that this was a more peaceful MMO. That isn't artificial, because it's a sandbox, but that position has eroded badly in the present server war. People who have read my other posts know that I believe this kind of conflict was inevitable. If Illyriad changes, so be it. I don't think you can prevent that kind of change when the game mechanics clearly support it, and are intentionally biased in that direction.

I will comment that there are two sets of people that got wiped out. People who refused to surrender were the first. However, I watch the siege list daily, and it was quite obvious that there were also accounts that got kicked from their alliances due to inactivity (or whatever reason), and the sieges continued even though the account wasn't fighting back. I consider that unsportsmanlike, because that's razing the account of an inactive or infrequently active player, who is not actively fighting in the war.

They might have all been permasat accounts, but I thought it was poor form. Absent players can't even surrender, so unless they had sitters, the accounts were doomed.

Mr Damage wrote: Those against sitting will say that's a good thing, the inactive accounts well they were doomed anyway once the number of days arrive for the inactivity clause.

Which brings the question that always pops in my mind while reading Twilights in GC ... how on earth can someone distinguish a perma-sat account for someone that went a trip, has a RL problem, had a kid or is for some time away from the game for whatever other reason .?.

Do not get this wrong, this is not an accusation ... if a person announces that he is not coming back or that his account is up for grabs, then ok, but on any other case I just cannot see how such a decision is being made so easily and I'd really like to know it ...

I agree with Brandmeister...the sad thing is most of these players who are affected arent the perpetrators of this war but victims.  A hand full of players are responsible for this war yet the whole of the server pays the consequences.  Who are those players? well it depends on which sides spin you believe, but hath is as much of a saint as I am, and i'm a fracking atheist.


Edited by bansisdead - 28 Feb 2014 at 22:30