Play Now Login Create Account
illyriad
   New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Non-Aligned Alliance Movement
   FAQ FAQ   Forum Search    Register Register   Login Login

Topic ClosedNon-Aligned Alliance Movement
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 7>
Author
   Topic Search Topic Search   Topic Options Topic Options
Kumomoto View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General


Joined: 19 Oct 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 2224 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Oct 2012 at 18:17
Originally posted by Faenix Faenix wrote:

Quote Non-Aligned Alliance Movement

The problem that I see with this is .. If you align yourself with this movement, then you're no longer a Non-Aligned Alliance .. So perhaps you should refer to yourselves as the "Movement of Previously Non-Aligned Alliances?"    Or maybe ..  Tenuously Aligned Potentially Defensive Agreement of The Autonomous Sovereign Subjects?


LMAO. Clap
Back to Top
ES2 View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 25 Sep 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 550 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Oct 2012 at 18:35
Originally posted by BlindScribe BlindScribe wrote:

I like the goals set forth here, but feel that the best way of dealing with such things is down at the local level.  

What I mean is this:

Let's say you're a small alliance based largely in Middle Kingdom, and I'm a small alliance based largely in Kumala.  

You get bullied.

Exactly what can I do to assist you, other than make a few rumblings in the forums?

Small alliances are (by their very nature as, well...small) limited in their response options to begin with, and would find mounting a credible response to an infraction half a world away to be daunting indeed.

Instead of having an overarching system that covered the whole of Elgea with a blanket of protection for small alliances, I feel that perhaps the best response would be to move in a different (more localized) direction.

True...there are some wampum big alliances out there.

True, they sometimes throw their weight around, but I do not believe it to be a radical concept that a small, highly localized alliance can be quite effective at holding its own IN that localized area.  If the small alliance is relatively tightly clustered for mutual defense, and ardent about standing up for its rights in the region they operate in, most larger alliances (all the "big boys" are far flung affairs, with interests scattered all over the map) would probably find it too thorny an issue to be profitable tackling.  (not to say that the sheer weight of the larger alliance *couldn't* crush the small, tightly defended group...they very likely could, but the effort required to do so would be far greater than the effort needed to swat at 30 widely scattered towns that had little hope of actually helping one another in times of genuine trouble or need).

$0.02


Hey buddy, thats what they get for joining a small alliance. want real protection? join an established one. 
Eternal Fire
Back to Top
Janosch View Drop Down
Wordsmith
Wordsmith
Avatar

Joined: 19 Oct 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 169 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Oct 2012 at 19:08
Originally posted by Kumomoto Kumomoto wrote:

Originally posted by Faenix Faenix wrote:

Quote Non-Aligned Alliance Movement

The problem that I see with this is .. If you align yourself with this movement, then you're no longer a Non-Aligned Alliance .. So perhaps you should refer to yourselves as the "Movement of Previously Non-Aligned Alliances?"    Or maybe ..  Tenuously Aligned Potentially Defensive Agreement of The Autonomous Sovereign Subjects?


LMAO. Clap


The idea of a non-aligned movement is to be not aligned formally with or against any major power bloc. This might or might not be a fitting comparison for the political world of Illyriad. It is created because of the desire not to be aligned within a geopolitical/military structure and therefore itself does not have a very strict organizational structure, which is why we choose the name.
You like Democracy? Join the Old Republic!
Back to Top
Brids17 View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar

Joined: 30 Jul 2010
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 1483 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Oct 2012 at 19:10
Originally posted by Janosch Janosch wrote:

Strange comment from a Crowalition member, I thought this would be also the aim of Crow policy, not to let conflicts escalate to something seriously violen, if possible.

I don't particularly like how stagnant the crow alliances are and how fearful people are to get involved in a conflict with one due to the chance they'll all get involved, so it's really not as strange as you might think. 

The aim of your non-aligned alliance movement seems to be to prevent war whenever possible. This is silly. Newbies of all people are the single best suited players to go to war. Unlike many of the vets, they don't have a whole lot to lose. So what if they lose their 750 man army? So what if their 2k city with 200 cows and 10 saddles get's sieged? It's not a lot to lose. And while you may not stop them, the fact that they're in the huge confed of alliances is enough to stop it alone. Inter-confed conflicts are obviously going to be pressured to stop because that would defeat the purpose of it. So the entire thing is anti-war and I just want to know specifically:

Why?
Back to Top
ES2 View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 25 Sep 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 550 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Oct 2012 at 19:25
They desire to be anti war because this game has turned itself into a "everything has to be fair" mindset. Therefor alliance A can defend itself but alliance B can't therefor alliance B should receive the help "it deserves".

In my opinion it's high time there should be consequences to being a part of a newbie alliance as compared to an established one, for starters, not having someone bail you out should someone decide to annex you. 
Eternal Fire
Back to Top
Naxos View Drop Down
New Poster
New Poster


Joined: 18 Dec 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 20 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Oct 2012 at 19:42
Originally posted by ES2 ES2 wrote:

In my opinion it's high time there should be consequences to being a part of a newbie alliance as compared to an established one, for starters, not having someone bail you out should someone decide to annex you. 

Interesting as almost a year ago you started your own alliance.  All alliances had newbie beginnings and to state that all newbie alliances should just be absorbed by established ones sounds a bit arrogant.  How would you feel when you started your alliance and let's say Big Alliance A comes over and says, "you are weak, join us or we'll stomp you." Personally I would be irritated at the attitude of it all.  This game runs on alliances, alliances which come from humble beginnings, and then become great.  You eliminate the creation of new alliances the game will stagnate like many other games online.  

I feel new alliances help add flavor to the melting pot that is Illyriad.  I have heard "this isn't fair mindset" from the Aesir and TLR war plenty of times (not saying you personally but others threw it around).  Due to everyone believing that there rose a coalition against Aesir to stop them from "picking on the little guy".  
Back to Top
ES2 View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 25 Sep 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 550 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Oct 2012 at 20:00
Originally posted by Naxos Naxos wrote:

Originally posted by ES2 ES2 wrote:

In my opinion it's high time there should be consequences to being a part of a newbie alliance as compared to an established one, for starters, not having someone bail you out should someone decide to annex you. 

Interesting as almost a year ago you started your own alliance.  All alliances had newbie beginnings and to state that all newbie alliances should just be absorbed by established ones sounds a bit arrogant.  How would you feel when you started your alliance and let's say Big Alliance A comes over and says, "you are weak, join us or we'll stomp you." Personally I would be irritated at the attitude of it all.  This game runs on alliances, alliances which come from humble beginnings, and then become great.  You eliminate the creation of new alliances the game will stagnate like many other games online.  

I feel new alliances help add flavor to the melting pot that is Illyriad.  I have heard "this isn't fair mindset" from the Aesir and TLR war plenty of times (not saying you personally but others threw it around).  Due to everyone believing that there rose a coalition against Aesir to stop them from "picking on the little guy".  

Interesting as almost a year ago you started your own alliance.  All alliances had newbie beginnings and to state that all newbie alliances should just be absorbed by established ones sounds a bit arrogant.

I know when I started my alliance, of course all alliances had newbie beginnings and read what I wrote. 

How would you feel when you started your alliance and let's say Big Alliance A comes over and says, "you are weak, join us or we'll stomp you." 

Well I can say that no doubt I'd attempt to fight the opposition then if winning looked impossible I'd consider serving that alliance, I've come across people who have fought against TLR, lost and then entered in my alliance. 

 Personally I would be irritated at the attitude of it all.  This game runs on alliances, alliances which come from humble beginnings, and then become great.  You eliminate the creation of new alliances the game will stagnate like many other games online.  

I doubt I will ever gain enough power to enforce my opinions, so your fear of newbie alliances having to forge it on their own won't ever become reality. 

I feel new alliances help add flavor to the melting pot that is Illyriad.  I have heard "this isn't fair mindset" from the Aesir and TLR war plenty of times (not saying you personally but others threw it around).

Your feelings are noted, as that may be seeing as this is Eternal Fire typing out these comments on his forum account, we can note that these are my thoughts and therefor what someone else says does not mean I said it. 

Due to everyone believing that there rose a coalition against Aesir to stop them from "picking on the little guy".  

I believe there was a coalition rising because there widespread thinking that Aesir was attacking TLR for resources and therefor a coalition rose to protect their economic interests. Happens all the time, I believe STEEL for example has had quite a hand in trading and some are protecting them because they are holding desirable items. 
Eternal Fire
Back to Top
Naxos View Drop Down
New Poster
New Poster


Joined: 18 Dec 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 20 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Oct 2012 at 20:17
Hmm I'm sorry if you took my reply as an insult.   I merely wanted to point out the holes in your argument, just as you pointed out the holes in my argument.

But getting back to the subject at hand, NAAM is a movement geared toward smaller alliances.  My alliance has been around for well over a year and is still growing but it can not compare to any of the Crow alliances or Consone alliances.  While NAAM is currently tooled for smaller alliances there will come a time that larger alliances will be welcomed into the organization, shoulder to shoulder with smaller alliances and bigger alliances alike.  

NAAM's foreign policy can be compared to the League of Armed Neutrality of old.  We will not seek out conflict but we will defend ourselves if conflict seeks out our members (support by choice of member alliances)
Back to Top
ES2 View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 25 Sep 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 550 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Oct 2012 at 20:26
Originally posted by Naxos Naxos wrote:



NAAM's foreign policy can be compared to the League of Armed Neutrality of old.  We will not seek out conflict but we will defend ourselves if conflict seeks out our members (support by choice of member alliances)
No hostility meant by this comment but isn't that what is advertised by easily half of Illyriad's alliances? "We are peaceful but do not seek conflict". If so many are peaceful do you need a union?


Eternal Fire
Back to Top
Naxos View Drop Down
New Poster
New Poster


Joined: 18 Dec 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 20 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Oct 2012 at 20:35
Originally posted by ES2 ES2 wrote:

 
No hostility meant by this comment but isn't that what is advertised by easily half of Illyriad's alliances? "We are peaceful but do not seek conflict". If so many are peaceful do you need a union?

Might as well make a club for them right? XD

But back to a serious note, this movement was created to help keep it peaceful (for smaller alliances at least).  Many larger more aggressive alliances tend to shake off the rules (no written law but law of GC mob rule to not pick on the "little guy") and target smaller alliances to push around especially over resources.

Through this movement smaller alliances can help keep everything peaceful due to having other alliance to help support them if the occasion does arise that military forces are put into the field.  Illy is based around a peaceful mentality but it is an aggressive peace when you whittle down to it.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 7>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

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