The arguments here are quite funny, since I wrote that Caligus treaty now.
All I can say is that Caligus was offered a treaty which would have made them equal strong in terms of territory and economically even favored them.
And in the process forced them to turn and attack the only realm that has been a steadfast ally to them for how long now? This is a perfect example of providing a perfect example of a treaty that is so unpalatable that the defeated realm would rather die than agree, Think of how it would be right now if Perdan got beaten so bad by Sirion that the peace treaty Perdan was given was
"Give half your land to Eponllyn, then join us in destroying Westmoor and Perleone. And you have only 2 days to give us your answer." Do you think that Perdan would agree, or would they refuse and choose to die first?
They would have just to become the "old" Caligus again
And maybe that's not what they want to be?
, the one before Dobromir ruled for 7 years and made Caligus
And do you think that anyone on Caligus remembers that time? Maybe one player? Two, tops?
Humiliating terms are something else - like those who got Eponllyn (which I wrote as well) and exiled it into the corner of the map and which again deserved it this way.
Humiliating is whatever the offended party says it is. As a player of a game, you have to realize that, and make some allowances for it. If not, then the other party is free to just up and leave. And then the game has less players.
And it is laughable that such wars kill EC.
It is the opposite.
We create new realms and replace those which are stuck in their RP because when certain key players leave, the RP never evolves on (e.g. Dobby, Doc etc).
Have you looked at our player count lately?
Have you been listening to anything that anyone has been saying on the forums?
Were you on the ruler's channel when all the rulers on EC were complaining about this very thing happening? Oh and look, here it is happening again.
Replace Caligus?
It seems it will become harder to replace realms. We will eventually run into point where simply destroying realms won't get the result we desire.
We past the point where simply destroying a realm and replacing it with a client state was a viable option, a long, long time ago.
We are losing people fast. We are down to 867 people. EC has 251 nobles. I don't know how many doubles we have but seeing Perdan, many realms have players with double characters in one realm.
That is really the way that the powerful realms are operating these days. Doubled-up characters.
To be honest, I don't mind realms being destroyed and replaced.
It's the nature of the game. Realms are destroyed and replaced on a semi-regular basis. Oddly enough, it happens more now that we have a small player base than it did when we had a huge player base. The problem is that we no longer have the players/characters to support it.
Eventually, Perdan will not have enough manpower to create another realm while characters from realms they've destroyed will join their enemies to help them grow in size.
They already don't have the characters to be creating client states. Have you seen how anemic Perleone is? A sizable fraction of those characters are Armonian refugees, too.
Also, it is not like Perdan+allies are outnumbering their enemies. At the moment, Perdan's side has 76 nobles while Caligus' side has 90...
I don't think that the sides are as firmly lined up as you think they are.
