TVM - SHARK Conflict |
Post Reply  |
Page <1 45678 11> |
| Author | |||
Jane DarkMagic 
Postmaster   Joined: 10 Sep 2011 Location: Tennessee Status: Offline Points: 554 |
 Post Options
 Thanks(0)
 Quote Reply  Posted: 18 Sep 2015 at 04:04 |
||
Maybe, maybe not. I just saw misinformation and chose to correct it.
|
|||
 |
|||
| Binky the Berserker
Forum Warrior   Joined: 19 Jul 2011 Status: Offline Points: 257 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply Posted: 18 Sep 2015 at 09:42 |
||
|
I don't believe alliances who made a landclaim thought everyone would accept it and that they would live happily ever after in a peacefull land. The point of landclaiming is fighting for your territory, otherwise it's just empty words.
When someone enters that teritory and you don't want him in you have to kick him out. If that's a problem cause the other side is to strong you maybe claimed more then you were able to defend. When you claim a central area that has strategic importance then offcourse it's only a matter of time before the bigger alliances will try to settle there. I don't know any details, but as I see it this tvm can't be surprised by shark settling there. if shark didn't attack tvm for that they've only be lucky to this moment that the bigger side was willing to live together. Again, i don't know details, so it's very well possible shark never meant to live together in the area. But that's what you get when claiming territory. Did you really expect that syaing the area is yours would have everyone in the game aggreeing with that? That's hard to believe for me. I think claiming is like saying: "fight me for it!" You can't ask for a fight and expect only weaker opponents to answer the call. |
|||
|
|||
| Jejune
Postmaster General   Joined: 10 Feb 2013 Status: Offline Points: 1015 |
Post Options
Thanks(2)
Quote Reply Posted: 18 Sep 2015 at 14:39 |
||
I think it depends on the situation. If you're a small alliance and you can deal with 99% of the interlopers in your claim, but then a player like He-Man comes along and puts one city in your claim that you could never forcibly remove, I don't think that totally negates your claim. It just shows to what extent you can enforce it.
In the case of TVM and SHARK, both alliances are vying for Newlands, and the use and enforcement of the claim is rightly doing exactly what you said, Binky: it's enhancing the issue into a point of real contention in the game. By claiming lands and enforcing the claims, it forces alliances to address territorial disputes and control of regions in ways that didn't happen before.
Alliances who are against claims can say they don't believe in them and therefore ignore the policies and settle inside claims. However, ignoring them or not doesn't change the fact that settling in them will force a conflict. This is why I contend that claiming alliances -- even small ones -- are in strong political positions, and because of the widespread reluctance for war in the game, are in a better position to hold on to their claim than lose it. Really, the only way to break a land claim is to decimate the claiming alliance in a war to the point where they must conditionally surrender and take down their claim as a bargaining chip. We haven't even been close to that yet.
|
|||
|
|||
|
|||
| Pellinell
Forum Warrior  Joined: 08 Apr 2012 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 298 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply Posted: 18 Sep 2015 at 14:43 |
||
|
Binky, you seem to be missing the fact that nearly all BL alliances have a land claim. They all seem to be quite happy with it and work with one another. Where the issue arises is a certain group of Elgean alliances who think it's their right to dictate to everyone else how to play the game.
In my honest opinion the BL land claimers should form a coalition and remove these Elgean alliances from BL before they get a foot hold and are able to challenge the LC alliances. It's obvious by their proxy Stomp and now Shark that they mean to use military force to dominate BL. Why give them that chance ? |
|||
|
|||
| Angrim
Postmaster General  Joined: 02 Nov 2011 Location: Laoshin Status: Offline Points: 1173 |
Post Options
Thanks(1)
Quote Reply Posted: 18 Sep 2015 at 16:10 |
||
|
|||
|
|||
| Stukahh
Forum Warrior  Joined: 03 Feb 2015 Location: Fellandire, BL Status: Offline Points: 266 |
Post Options
Thanks(1)
Quote Reply Posted: 18 Sep 2015 at 16:40 |
||
I will go on record here and say we have ZERO interest in this.
We have plenty of neighbors that are mainly Elgean based and we get along just fine with them. Just because all the LC alliances are located in BL doesnt mean we are all aligned.
SIN has zero interest in defending Land Claims of other alliances. We are only concerned with our own.
|
|||
|
I don't always drink. But when I do, I prefer the blood of my enemies.
|
|||
|
|||
| Jejune
Postmaster General Joined: 10 Feb 2013 Status: Offline Points: 1015 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply Posted: 18 Sep 2015 at 17:15 |
||
Regardless of whether the solution turns out to be diplomatic or military in scope, the DSD is clearly the premier land claiming entity in the game. If you
look at the land claim map, the land that TVM, RE and T-O's sister alliance T-SC have claimed are among the most substantial in the Broken Lands.
In addition, enforcement of a claim is not an offensive operation -- it is a defensive reaction to an insurgent city or group of cities.
My point is to say that I don't think that DSD being pro-actively involved in this conflict is anything like "Elgean interference;" DSD is as much a BL organization as it is an Elgean one.
And the same can be said for SHARK, who is an Elgean alliance with a growing presence in BL.
To me, DSD and SHARK dealing with one another for either control of or cooperation within Newlands is very appropriate. And if it comes to military action, wielding Elgean forces to me would seem more than appropriate, given that both groups occupy both sides of the map.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|||
| Pellinell
Forum Warrior Joined: 08 Apr 2012 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 298 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply Posted: 18 Sep 2015 at 17:30 |
||
|
Stukahh, noted
|
|||
|
|||
| Pellinell
Forum Warrior Joined: 08 Apr 2012 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 298 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply Posted: 18 Sep 2015 at 17:51 |
||
|
Like I stated before in this thread, the DSD will respond to threats against member alliances proportionately.
|
|||
|
|||
| Roman Empire
New Poster   Joined: 18 Sep 2015 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 2 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply Posted: 18 Sep 2015 at 18:08 |
||
|
Roman empire wishes for a diplomatic solution to the problem, Rome has had people come into our land claim and we have managed to always fix it in a diplomatic way. However those players did not have 50-100k troops in the cities with over 300 catapults in them and neither were they aggressively seeking to settle in our land claim.
Rome watches with concern at the aggressiveness of SHARK we must take note that TVM claims a small portion of Newlands in which they have a heavy presence in why SHARK is looking to settle in TVM land claim while space is available in the rest of newlands. With a heavy military presence also in my opinion SHARK is picking a fight with TVM as they wish for TVM to relinquish total control of newlands so SHARK can completely dominate that region.
Edited by Roman Empire - 18 Sep 2015 at 18:08 |
|||
|
|||
| Post Reply |
Page <1 45678 11> |
Tweet
|
| Forum Jump | Forum Permissions
You
cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
Topic Options
Angrim wrote: