Should Harmless get involved

Grunvagr wrote: What don't I like? I don't like that this top alliance feels it even has to ask for public opinion before it can attack someone.  If you want to protect newbies then do it.  Be strong and decisive and others will respect your strength and your decisiveness. Polling is wrong.  What does it matter what global chat thinks? It makes me think about future wars, any wars to come, in Illyriad.  Will H? have a poll then?  Either jump into a war because you have a strong sense of pride or purpose, or stay uninvolved because it doesn't concern you or your interests. That is my point. I don't want to be starting any trouble so I'll go ahead and shut up for now.

H does protect newbies, they were the first major alliance to support and protect the new players in Toothless, where have you been?   Toothless is a sister alliance to Harmless.   Honestly, they can't win, if they jumped in without discussing it, they would be criticized, now they are criticized because they asked the players.  From the very beginning, Harmless has championed and helped new players, I know because I was in Harmless during those days.

This entire issue involved H? from the start, Toothless members  have been threatened and attacked by TMM  (see my topic in this same forum).   I was also very concerned that any help we received from H would be perceived as H policing the server.     Frankly, I think HM did a great job of going public with their dilemma and taking a stand on this.

You may want to read the other topics about TMM including the topic involving Toothless before you continue your comments against H, Grunvagr.


Edited by Starry - 20 Nov 2010 at 23:00

CranK wrote: Acutally, TMM attacked so much new players that are now in all different alliances, I'm not even surprised that so much alliances band together against TMM as they are ALL involved in some way. TMM has called this upon themselfs. It was just a ticking timebomb to explode.. And that time has now come. They pissed off too much players in Illyriad, inculding me.

I totally agree with CranK here, to go even go further into this, attacking new players as to the extend TMM has done and is still doing will affect the game.
This game is at all times depending on new players to have a future at all.
By making new players leave this game the future of this game is at stake.
More over the main reason why also WOTP has joined in this fight, it doesn't have to affect an alliance directly but also indirect far stretching consequences are a driving motive in this issue.

@Brids17:  People might criticize us (and we do our best to avoid that criticism) because:

1) TMM haven't started hitting Toothless players yet, but are hitting other alliances with whom we have no affiliation.  Attacking now would render our own motives unclear, to others if not to ourselves.

2) We have an opinion regarding the broader concerns surrounding TMM's behavior, and it is those concerns we are addressing by getting involved on behalf of the others under attack.  Therefore we do need the community's blessing, else by acting unilaterally we are policing the server.

3) We could just pre-emptively attack anyway, and even break TMM sieges for our own benefit.  If that were our choice, we'd execute it un-apologetically--some would accept that as a reasonable way to protect our sister alliance.  But while we don't mind the inevitable cadre of haters that crop up no matter what we do anyway, we do particularly hate accusations of policing the server.

It's a tired and baseless political attack to be used by simpletons.  Were there any validity to the premise, one could equivalently say that any action we take is wrong on the grounds that we're bigger than everyone else.  It's like saying being #1 is the root crime.  And if that's what you're saying, then just come out and say that you're jealous of our position and want it for yourself.  Better yet, try to take it.  Just spare us all the moral outrage and alternate justifications.

The server is still young and--believe it or not, I'm still on track with point #3--given a reasonable alternative, we will try to step lightly instead of steamrolling any detractors.  We want our next big enemy to be competent and challenging, not an army of inexperienced dupes sacrificing themselves for all the wrong reasons and taskmasters.  We don't want our success to be in conflict with the good of the game.


Edited by HonoredMule - 23 Nov 2010 at 04:58

We don't militarily support NAPs.  We just don't attack them either.  Some may treat it differently, but that's all a Non-Aggression Pact is.

Generally speaking, we prefer and promote ad-hoc diplomatic relationships that take into consideration the dangers of nth-degree relationships.  If you want to get really technical, you can check out this page.


Edited by HonoredMule - 23 Nov 2010 at 06:27

Part of me say's yes, but another part of me say's that it's kind of cool to have a hostile, player faction, limited to a certain area. Could we perhaps just really hurt their leadership as a message, say one major city each and petition the GM's to dis-allow newbie spawning in the area.