TVM - SHARK Conflict

I would like to point out something that seems to be completely ignored to this point. Yes we know that SHARK does not respect Land Claims and they only respect the 10 sq rule. What I find funny is the constant insistence that SHARK is not challenging the land claims. By landing your cities inside a land claim you are directly challenging that alliance to deal with it, one way or the other. I say again, the "We come in peace" message..... No one believes it.

Joda, so if I understand correctly. They ( a military alliance) decided to move to new lands without discussing TVM or land claims ? If that is indeed your story I'm afraid that is not even remotely believable. No alliance especially a military one decides on a new hub without serious forethought. There is no way Shark moved into TVM's land claim with peaceful intentions. If they had, an agreement would have been made before the cities landed. No Shark knew what they were doing, knew TVM wouldn't want a GA alliance in their land claim and that's why they sent military players there with cities full of troops. They knew full well what they were doing and that it would cause conflict.

I think I can clear up the SHARK decision to move to BL's timeline because I am in Newlands and had conversations with both Pico and Bonfyr Verboo around the time the decisions were made because I had actually heard a rumor that SHARK wanted to land claim Newlands prompting my interest:

Lets face it, Shark are the top alliance and feel they can thus dictate whatever they want. Congrats to TVM for standing up to them. Unfortunately there can only be one outcome in this one sided conflict due to the fact that should Shark end up not winning against a much smaller opponent they will probably call in help from their allies.

This conflict seems to be a clear attempt at gaining a Elgean grip on BL, and thus a subtle (well not so much) attempt to bring Elgean politics into our happy little wild west. It had to happen.

Shark would gain more respect by actually admitting that they want to control BL as well, instead of trying to spin the story.

Jane DarkMagic wrote: I think I can clear up the SHARK decision to move to BL's timeline...

is the timeline relevant? SHARK decides to move to Newlands. had TVM decided to blanket Newlands with settlements (as Dungshoveleux proposes above), we are given to understand that SHARK would have adjusted its objectives. because TVM instead chose to make a land claim, SHARK has disregarded it and now mounts a de facto challenge. this is the same argument that coincided with the Stomp action--whether or not the 10-square rule is somehow more fair or deserves more respect than other methods of marking territory.

Dungshoveleux wrote: It is a strategic error to claim as exclusively yours, something that you do not occupy or control.

a single city can only occupy six squares (one on which the town sits and those its five armies an garrison). even the 10-square rule includes many more squares than that. what a town can control is another question, and one upon which, it seems, alliances have yet to agree.