So, fun battle in Gor Ault. I missed the taunting when we took the deserted Mhed so had some fun with it this time around. :)
I missed the aftermath due to a wound. When I got better, all the melites had left! Now I just got to read Pavels propaganda, without any chance to respond...
Quote from: Noldorin on June 06, 2014, 07:51:47 PM
I missed the aftermath due to a wound. When I got better, all the melites had left! Now I just got to read Pavels propaganda, without any chance to respond...
Must be frustrating... know that feel bro :P
Quote from: Tandaros on June 06, 2014, 09:52:21 PM
Must be frustrating... know that feel bro :P
Pavel bashes Noldorin's mighty head before running away. Haha
So the lords of Tepmona and Gor Ault have defected from Ar Agyr to Melhed taking their regions and knights with them and creating a massive food deficit for Ar Agyr in the process.
Who could have predicted that Immanuel would change sides? :p
Me. He was always a weaselly one.
Weaselly, maybe. He still killed you in a duel though ;)
I'd like to see a name for this war, like the War of Ice and Sun.
The Great Northern War?
The War of Vozzessdor?
King Fingolfin's War?
Just some ideas. Maybe it's a bit too early to call. And maybe we need some historian guild to figure this crap out for us.
So Fronen is kicking OG's ass or what?
We can't name it yet, we need to know the outcome first. Although I'm leaning towards the War of Thalmarkinian Supremacy or the War for Supremacy.
Goddamn that was close. Good job Melhed. :P
They just stopped the TO of Mhed at 96%.
Quote from: Lorgan on June 08, 2014, 11:50:39 PM
Goddamn that was close. Good job Melhed. :P
They just stopped the TO of Mhed at 96%.
It was all planned and calculated. Haha :p
Quote from: Antonine on June 08, 2014, 11:47:40 PM
We can't name it yet, we need to know the outcome first. Although I'm leaning towards the War of Thalmarkinian Supremacy or the War for Supremacy.
That will only be true if the other realms start to fight. As of now, it is more like War of the Bullies. Hahaha.
Quote from: Antonine on June 08, 2014, 11:47:40 PM
We can't name it yet, we need to know the outcome first. Although I'm leaning towards the War of Thalmarkinian Supremacy or the War for Supremacy.
Well, things are changing quite fast. Melhed ruined some things, so Thalmarkin adapts. It certainly wont be as big a war as it could have been.
Quote from: Disturbedyang on June 09, 2014, 10:48:52 AM
That will only be true if the other realms start to fight. As of now, it is more like War of the Bullies. Hahaha.
Same again, things have changed and the war is currently kinda as big as its gonna get, unless you get others to jump on Old Grehk as well (the more the merrier, right?). :)
And it seems the list of deportations from BT has grown with the Octavius family!
I heard there was a war going on here.
Quote from: Noldorin on June 09, 2014, 12:34:07 PMAnd it seems the list of deportations from BT has grown with the Octavius family!
Well that's not very friendly. Honestly, Outo brought this on himself :p
However, to show who the better family is here, House Octavius will not insist on the deportation of either Fingolfin or Outo once we've won the war and become supreme rulers of BT ;)
Quote from: Antonine on June 09, 2014, 02:26:42 PM
Well that's not very friendly. Honestly, Outo brought this on himself :p
However, to show who the better family is here, House Octavius will not insist on the deportation of either Fingolfin or Outo once we've won the war and become supreme rulers of BT ;)
Well if that happens,
I will insist on our deportation! At least as the war looks now :p And you should have learnt by now that Sartanism is not welcomed... in many places!
Deportation? Gruesome death you mean!
We need more like octavius family especially in the thals faction to win the war. Lol
So far Melhed seems to be doing fairly well: They've sacked Ar Agyr's food producing region of Rengo, ended the takeover of Mhed and refortified it and have just smashed Old Grehk in Yipinalke and ended the takeover of that region. Militarily the war seems to be going far better for them than you'd expect it to be.
Quote from: Lapallanch on June 08, 2014, 11:24:33 PM
So Fronen is kicking OG's ass or what?
I know is a bit late but here it goes. Unless OG acknowledges their crimes and accepts the current borders then the war would continue until they are wiped out. Fronen doesn't seek any outside help to deal with them and neither do we want any realm to help OG either. It is actually two separate wars but got tangled up unfortunately.
Quote from: Antonine on June 14, 2014, 11:25:02 AM
So far Melhed seems to be doing fairly well: They've sacked Ar Agyr's food producing region of Rengo, ended the takeover of Mhed and refortified it and have just smashed Old Grehk in Yipinalke and ended the takeover of that region. Militarily the war seems to be going far better for them than you'd expect it to be.
Unfortunately, nobody seems to want to join in the fun, sitting and watching the show. I guess that is just the nature of the rulers in BM, and the reason why it is going downwards.
Quote from: Cren on June 15, 2014, 07:31:10 PM
I know is a bit late but here it goes. Unless OG acknowledges their crimes and accepts the current borders then the war would continue until they are wiped out. Fronen doesn't seek any outside help to deal with them and neither do we want any realm to help OG either. It is actually two separate wars but got tangled up unfortunately.
That is not actually true. Fronen pressured Melhed to fight alongside them before this whole mess. And Fronen got it very easily because OG thought they can get it easy by attacking Melhed which is being attacked from 3 fronts instead of facing the Fronen's army.
Quote from: Disturbedyang on June 15, 2014, 07:50:15 PM
Unfortunately, nobody seems to want to join in the fun, sitting and watching the show. I guess that is just the nature of the rulers in BM, and the reason why it is going downwards.
Apparently Spearhold wants to join in but doesn't want to fight Old Grehk and so needs to get permission from Nothoi to march through their territory. But since the ruler of Nothoi takes ages to reply to messages nothing has happened yet.
OG has crimes to confess? That's one I haven't heard about.
Quote from: Indirik on June 16, 2014, 03:07:20 AM
OG has crimes to confess? That's one I haven't heard about.
Yup. Plotting against Fronen, seeking destruction of the sovereignty of our realm, stealing more lands all on the excuse that their last war against us was incomplete.
But instead their new Emperor put the blame on us instead. So unless he publicly apologises to Fronen and acknowledges their past crimes then the war shall continue as it is.
Quote from: Antonine on June 15, 2014, 08:43:37 PM
Apparently Spearhold wants to join in but doesn't want to fight Old Grehk and so needs to get permission from Nothoi to march through their territory. But since the ruler of Nothoi takes ages to reply to messages nothing has happened yet.
It would be easier if instead of waiting for Nothoi to declare war Spearhold should do it.
Quote from: Naidraug on June 17, 2014, 01:31:08 AM
It would be easier if instead of waiting for Nothoi to declare war Spearhold should do it.
I believe that Nothoi is busy negotiating peace with Riombara. The back and forth transfer of the city and the issue with IVF is a new addition.
Quote from: Cren on June 17, 2014, 02:07:40 PM
I believe that Nothoi is busy negotiating peace with Riombara. The back and forth transfer of the city and the issue with IVF is a new addition.
Yes and no. Peace is settled.
But Spearhold wants us to declare war against OG first so they can declare war after.
If they just did it already it would be easier for them.
Quote from: Naidraug on June 17, 2014, 04:52:46 PM
Yes and no. Peace is settled.
But Spearhold wants us to declare war against OG first so they can declare war after.
If they just did it already it would be easier for them.
Oh boy, this is turning into a real "jumping on the injured guy laying on the floor"-party! This is the kind of wars Beluaterra needs!
Looks like it's going to be a long war... :)
Quote from: Noldorin on June 17, 2014, 09:13:51 PM
Oh boy, this is turning into a real "jumping on the injured guy laying on the floor"-party! This is the kind of wars Beluaterra needs!
I think OG is sort of the excuse everyone used to be involved in war. I am glad OOC to see that none actually really try to kill OG while it is down, though their inactive nobles are taking its toll on themselves. Come and stop the oppressor of the north!!! Better late than never. :)
Except Fronen who have a valid reason all realms are pretty much going to use the cull the weak policy to get more lands from OG. ;)
The validity of a reason to declare war is relevant only to the one who dreams it up. No one else really cares.
Thus ends the reign of Pavel of House Jeffrey, late king of Melhed. His other character's wounded, and Maya is too.
That went well (for Thal).
Pavel R.I.P
Even thoguht OO and him had some deep disagreements, OO luvd Pavel, he was almost as mad as OO was :)
Now elect Immanuel as King and this war doesnt end until AA or Melhed has been pushed to sea :P
Quote from: Indirik on June 18, 2014, 02:42:03 PM
The validity of a reason to declare war is relevant only to the one who dreams it up. No one else really cares.
I disagree. It absolutely matters how you're perceived in other realms. Maybe no one will speak out against you at the time of their actions but they will not forget either.
That said... R.I.P. Pavel! He was a terrible pain in the ass... kudos. :)
They may remember, but they won't do anything about it unless they are looking for a reason to justify doing some particular action they want to take. At that point, they will either blatantly make something up, or they will completely misinterpret your prior actions to fit the needs of their current schemes. By the time it comes to lining the sides in a war, everyone already knows what the sides will be. In the way, the justifications given are meaningless.
Quote from: Indirik on June 18, 2014, 07:33:15 PM
At that point, they will either blatantly make something up, or they will completely misinterpret your prior actions to fit the needs of their current schemes.
That describes maybe 9 out of every 10 declarations of war I've ever seen in BM.
Well, R.I.P Pavel, without you BT would get really boring! :'(
That was unpleasant. I feel like I just watched the Mountain and the Viper all over again.
RIP King Pavel #neverforget
Quote from: Cren on June 18, 2014, 08:15:11 PM
Well, R.I.P Pavel, without you BT would get really boring! :'(
How d'you figure that? We've still got Fingolfin and OO, don't we?
I don't see how things can
ever get too boring with a Cosula as a ruler ;D
Quote from: Anaris on June 18, 2014, 08:16:47 PM
How d'you figure that? We've still got Fingolfin and OO, don't we?
I don't see how things can ever get too boring with a Cosula as a ruler ;D
Unless they become enemies it'd be safe to assume that BT would become a boring place again once this war subsides. Pavel did orchestrate the Sint war, went on against Enweil, saved Fronen's arse by revealing former Emperor Michael's letter. He did play a great role in keeping the atmosphere fun and interesting. We need some charismatic charries like him on both sides.
It was so ridiculous because the server ruined it up for us again just like the previous war with the Thals. We ordered men to move as late as possible to throw the Thals off with some misdirect to Lloringel, and then the server went down and a few nobles did not manage to move. I hate to say this but this dead is caused by BM itself. Perhaps next time when the server is down, the turn should not run? It is only fair, no?
Regardless, I am actually very glad Pavel die in a glorious dead. Going rambo style against 8 armies before going down. He is getting really old and I was looking to get rid of him for a very long time, hence his crazy decision on a few things. Now let his sister go or Pavel will come back and haunt all you Thals!!! :p
Anyway, his dead spawn lots of claims on his throne(which he has known for very long) and all of a sudden Melhed exploded to live. 56 messages! Imagine that! lol. Good luck and enjoy guys. I won't be bringing anymore character in here apart from Dorothea, but most likely I will send her to the west to bring back some life there :) Caelum - beware! :p
Quote from: Cren on June 18, 2014, 08:43:28 PM
Unless they become enemies it'd be safe to assume that BT would become a boring place again once this war subsides. Pavel did orchestrate the Sint war, went on against Enweil, saved Fronen's arse by revealing former Emperor Michael's letter. He did play a great role in keeping the atmosphere fun and interesting. We need some charismatic charries like him on both sides.
Don't take me wrong, Pavel was a very interesting character to have around but the Sint thing, that was just a very old score being settled. Besides his death won't quite make things as boring as you might think. We didn't just fight our asses off to save this continent to then sit on them all age, especially when there's no end in sight for this one.
Quote from: Disturbedyang on June 18, 2014, 11:20:41 PM
It was so ridiculous because the server ruined it up for us again just like the previous war with the Thals. We ordered men to move as late as possible to throw the Thals off with some misdirect to Lloringel, and then the server went down and a few nobles did not manage to move. I hate to say this but this dead is caused by BM itself. Perhaps next time when the server is down, the turn should not run? It is only fair, no?
Well, it went for us too of course but I guess we had simpler orders, and a head start. Don't quite remember what it was last time but your surrender seemed to be a decision made under pressure of the war as a whole, not one single battle, to me. That said, it always sucks when server issues or such mess with your plans but that's just part of playing a game that's free, and always under development, which is also awesome. It's crappy when it happens, but overall it's negligible. Sorry anyhow.
Quote from: Disturbedyang on June 18, 2014, 11:20:41 PM
Regardless, I am actually very glad Pavel die in a glorious dead. Going rambo style against 8 armies before going down. He is getting really old and I was looking to get rid of him for a very long time, hence his crazy decision on a few things. Now let his sister go or Pavel will come back and haunt all you Thals!!! :p
Yup, gotta say, pretty damn heroic death. :)
Quote from: Disturbedyang on June 18, 2014, 11:20:41 PM
Anyway, his dead spawn lots of claims on his throne(which he has known for very long) and all of a sudden Melhed exploded to live. 56 messages! Imagine that! lol. Good luck and enjoy guys. I won't be bringing anymore character in here apart from Dorothea, but most likely I will send her to the west to bring back some life there :) Caelum - beware! :p
Gonna be interesting to see what happens with Pavel gone indeed. I just know that somehow it's going to blow up in our face.
I blame the Sartanists. They used their Daimon magic to kill their new King so they can seize the throne. Melhed beware!
And worst when you found out that some other islands' turn did not go and hence no movement. Speaking of evil!
Melhed was never surrendering. Haha. Fingolfin got it into his head that we were, but we were only making the best out of the situation. I tried to bring the west to fight instead of sitting around, really, as they seemed idle. In the end, they finally decided to join anyway partly i hope was because i pressured Fronen into it. In fact, Fingolfin's betrayal of sending my letters to Fronen actually backfired. Fronen thought i was doing a truth or dare with them by telling them I am going to join the Thals if they don't fight for us soon, but when Fingolfin sent them the letter, they immediately spring to life. :p
Quote from: Stabbity on June 19, 2014, 12:01:09 AM
I blame the Sartanists. They used their Daimon magic to kill their new King so they can seize the throne. Melhed beware!
Nah, if I was going to kill the king I'd have done it in about a month when I'd be better entrenched. As it is, I'm at a disadvantage and have to play my cards very carefully if I want the throne :p
Quote from: Stabbity on June 19, 2014, 12:01:09 AM
I blame the Sartanists. They used their Daimon magic to kill their new King so they can seize the throne. Melhed beware!
Actually I find it fairly telling that Melhed has Sartan on their side now and server issues mess their battle up. Talk about divine intervention, eh? :)
Quote from: Lorgan on June 19, 2014, 01:00:41 AM
Actually I find it fairly telling that Melhed has Sartan on their side now and server issues mess their battle up. Talk about divine intervention, eh? :)
Too soon bro.
Quote from: Lorgan on June 19, 2014, 01:00:41 AM
Actually I find it fairly telling that Melhed has Sartan on their side now and server issues mess their battle up. Talk about divine intervention, eh? :)
Clearly it is the fault of too few of the heathens in Melhed converting to the true faith - we must burn the infidels and then we will be guaranteed victory :p
This eagerness to blame the server for a lost battle shouldn't be pressed too much. Half of Melhed's army didn't arrive. Half (or more, it's hard to tell since Enzo is never at the front) of Thalmarkin's army didn't arrive. Unless Melhed had managed to recruit 16k in mobile CS, the outcome was more or less ordained. Probably not the death of King Pavel, but a loss.
There should never have been a battle in Marpii - the plan was always to change travel to Lloringel as close to the end of turn as possible in order to catch up with stragglers.
Quote from: Antonine on June 19, 2014, 09:47:44 PM
There should never have been a battle in Marpii - the plan was always to change travel to Lloringel as close to the end of turn as possible in order to catch up with stragglers.
That would've been more interesting, but I'm not sure that they were stragglers so much as snagged by the same server problem that caught Melhed. Thalmarkin's problem is rarely coordinated movement, but we have many others to distract us. :)
And I think this demonstrates one of the various problems with relying on late-turn movement like that—especially late-turn changes in movement.
Ahh... THAT was a good turn.
And Melhed gathers to bury their king and choose a successor in one day. Some awesome realm-wide RPs going down. Anything can happen!
Quote from: Tandaros on June 21, 2014, 11:20:47 PM
And Melhed gathers to bury their king and choose a successor in one day. Some awesome realm-wide RPs going down. Anything can happen!
Becareful while sleeping gentleman, or ladies. :p
Elicia is still wounded, she got seriously wounded the turn after the battle in Yipinalke. Once she recovers expect some serious stuff. Thalmarkin did a great mistake by attacking the Fronen forces.
Quote from: Cren on June 22, 2014, 06:11:04 AM
Elicia is still wounded, she got seriously wounded the turn after the battle in Yipinalke. Once she recovers expect some serious stuff. Thalmarkin did a great mistake by attacking the Fronen forces.
It's quite funny how using obvious lies has become a part of diplomatic strategy. Never really saw it on BT before (except perhaps Chenier), and it leads to some tricky business for the ones trying to avoid it :p
Everyone already knows that Fronen were attacking Thalmarkin, and we beat you to it (though not really, since we attacked Melhed, not Fronen). Question is only which side people will prefer.
How the hell could anyone think Fronen and Thal would not fight eachother. Least of all Fronen's ruler..
Quote from: Noldorin on June 22, 2014, 09:09:03 AM
It's quite funny how using obvious lies has become a part of diplomatic strategy. Never really saw it on BT before (except perhaps Chenier), and it leads to some tricky business for the ones trying to avoid it :p
Everyone already knows that Fronen were attacking Thalmarkin, and we beat you to it (though not really, since we attacked Melhed, not Fronen). Question is only which side people will prefer.
That was what Pavel was going around saying. But the thing is Fronen wasn't going to assault the forces in Jyl. The forces there was to make sure that Thals don't interfere with the TO of Junohep, a sort of scouting party. It failed its purpose as everyone there was more or less inactive (including me).
Quote from: Cren on June 22, 2014, 10:40:11 AM
That was what Pavel was going around saying. But the thing is Fronen wasn't going to assault the forces in Jyl. The forces there was to make sure that Thals don't interfere with the TO of Junohep, a sort of scouting party. It failed its purpose as everyone there was more or less inactive (including me).
Haha, hushhhh. This is suppose to be only OOC, and i hope Fingolfin takes it that way too. :p
Quote from: Noldorin on June 22, 2014, 09:09:03 AM
It's quite funny how using obvious lies has become a part of diplomatic strategy. Never really saw it on BT before (except perhaps Chenier), and it leads to some tricky business for the ones trying to avoid it :p
Everyone already knows that Fronen were attacking Thalmarkin, and we beat you to it (though not really, since we attacked Melhed, not Fronen). Question is only which side people will prefer.
If you keep it OOC, I will tell you that Fronen had no intention to fight the Thals. Pavel knows it since very long ago, and hence have been using numerous ways to bring them into it. The mercenary thing being one of them, knowing very well if Fingolfin accept, good for Melhed. If they don't, doesn't matter because Fronen will be pressured to join in the fight. :) So now the Thals sort of brought it to themselves, because perhaps Nothoi and Spearhold will finally openly join now that the Fronen did.
Caelum could send one noble to join. Maybe two! :)
It was made clear from the start that Thal entered the war for two purposes: defend OG and punish Melhed. Perhaps Fronen tried to keep us off their back but that at least was never seriously considered by Thalmarkin, nor do I believe any indication was given that it would be.
So basically, if you don't intend to fight us, best don't attack our allies and especially don't team up with Pavel. Also, don't sit in a region of a realm we are undoubtedly at war with... ::) :)
If this battle was all the other realms needed to join in on Fronen's side, they're guilty of procrastinating more than anything.
Quote from: Disturbedyang on June 22, 2014, 02:30:45 PM
If you keep it OOC, I will tell you that Fronen had no intention to fight the Thals.
I'm not sure if you're being very careful about your phrasing or not, but Pavel pleaded with Fronen's ruler to come protect Melhed from Thalmarkin. I think the language even started to drift into the realm of (paraphrasing) "come help us fight the Thals". That's where Fronen was headed. To Melhed. Knowing full well that Thalmarkin was in Jyl, that Melhed was leaving Fronepu, and that Thalmarkin would be caught in the middle. This was all discussed between Melhed and Fronen. We don't know this IC, and we haven't acted on it IC. We know it OOC (now), because people chat about this stuff after the fact. IC, we literally bumbled into Fronen's army when we circled back around from looting Melhed to go help OG retake Yipinalke. So please don't take IC propaganda OOC. It's poor form, and it makes the kind of armchair quarterbacking that the forums allows for impossible. :)
Quote from: Solari on June 22, 2014, 11:09:34 PM
I'm not sure if you're being very careful about your phrasing or not, but Pavel pleaded with Fronen's ruler to come protect Melhed from Thalmarkin. I think the language even started to drift into the realm of (paraphrasing) "come help us fight the Thals". That's where Fronen was headed. To Melhed. Knowing full well that Thalmarkin was in Jyl, that Melhed was leaving Fronepu, and that Thalmarkin would be caught in the middle. This was all discussed between Melhed and Fronen. We don't know this IC, and we haven't acted on it IC. We know it OOC (now), because people chat about this stuff after the fact. IC, we literally bumbled into Fronen's army when we circled back around from looting Melhed to go help OG retake Yipinalke. So please don't take IC propaganda OOC. It's poor form, and it makes the kind of armchair quarterbacking that the forums allows for impossible. :)
You might compare me with people that always mix OOCly and ICly. I am not one of those. The way I play my characters, you should know better. I enjoy this game simply because of that. And we were DESPERATE for Fronen's help and tried tons of ways to get them into this war. The fact was, they were indeed rallying in Junohep. I have no idea how they got to Jyl nor their intention. But as far as i know, the way they play it out, it seems like they are only interested in grabbing more lands and fighting OG. Their last promise was only to get OG off our back, not fight the Thals despite Pavel's pleas. And that, i can promise you. However, as i said, these are only explanation OOC. One should never take judgements ICly based on these OOC statements.
And thanks for looking so high up on Melhed's and Fronen's collaboration! Haha. I have no idea if Maya did anything to organize the Jyl thing though, but Pavel certainly did not. And it would look stupid however if they did because Fronen stayed at Yipinalke while Melhed moved into Jyl. Opps, Pavel is already dead. :p And Dorothea is no part of anything in it. She wasn't even in the council for now.
I'm not really going to continue belaboring this point, but just to be clear: Fronen knew what it was doing. Melhed knew what is was doing. I haven't really seen an OOC denial from anyone but you, which is unfortunate, since people involved have directly contradicted what you're saying now. Nothing wrong with a good old fashioned IC propaganda war. Coming onto the forums and either lying to everyone or deluding oneself is another matter. This is a game. Treat it as such, and have a little fun.
Quote from: Solari on June 23, 2014, 01:52:32 PM
I'm not really going to continue belaboring this point, but just to be clear: Fronen knew what it was doing. Melhed knew what is was doing. I haven't really seen an OOC denial from anyone but you, which is unfortunate, since people involved have directly contradicted what you're saying now. Nothing wrong with a good old fashioned IC propaganda war. Coming onto the forums and either lying to everyone or deluding oneself is another matter. This is a game. Treat it as such, and have a little fun.
lol, i didn't know you are exactly the same as your character fingolfin. I did not see anyone post anything contradicted what i said. And I think you are the one taking it more serious than me. Believe what you want, i have no reason to lie especially since the king died. I can post a long post with all the letters here(which the GM won't allow), but it's an OOC post. Disregard or not, nobody cares. I mentioned it before not to take it ICly, and i do not know why you think my statement will affect it in-game. It is meant to be ooc statement and just at that. :) Enjoy the game, mate. I think you have a trust issue. haha
Quote from: Disturbedyang on June 23, 2014, 05:42:41 PM
lol, i didn't know you are exactly the same as your character fingolfin.
Um...dude, you got the wrong guy. Solari plays (oddly enough) the Solari family. Not the Noldorin family.
Quote from: Anaris on June 23, 2014, 05:44:57 PM
Um...dude, you got the wrong guy. Solari plays (oddly enough) the Solari family. Not the Noldorin family.
oh ah, my apologizes. Yeah, the enzo dude. Haha. My sincere apologies. :p
I think some confusion might stem from the fact that my character Selene took certain diplomatic matters into her own hands due to not getting much guidance from Pavel. And after he died she did, for example, ask Fronen to send military aid - that might be how Fronen could be coming to fight Thalmarkin without Pavel having himself asked for it.
Quote from: Antonine on June 23, 2014, 09:15:07 PM
I think some confusion might stem from the fact that my character Selene took certain diplomatic matters into her own hands due to not getting much guidance from Pavel. And after he died she did, for example, ask Fronen to send military aid - that might be how Fronen could be coming to fight Thalmarkin without Pavel having himself asked for it.
Yeap, perhaps Fronen finally listened. But accusing me of throwing off a propaganda OOCly is not cool imo. Regardless, lets drop that so that we don't go back to another flame war. Let's hope now the war will be much more interesting. :)
Things I do not like about this war:
Being marshal of Melhed and having to deal with three invading armies at the same time AND knowing that there's a fourth army liable to invade at any time.
I know one :P Heard rumours about one another... no clue about the rest
Well, AA is in Trottie, OG is in Yipin, the mighty Eagles are in Jyl and the Wolves suck so much they've probably taken a wrong turn somewhere and gotten lost. :)
Quote from: Lorgan on June 28, 2014, 02:49:29 PM
Well, AA is in Trottie, OG is in Yipin, the mighty Eagles are in Jyl and the Wolves suck so much they've probably taken a wrong turn somewhere and gotten lost. :)
I have suspicions about where the Wolves are. If they are where I think they are then I'm in a race against time and, if we lose, then we might as well quit the entire war.
Damn Fronen. Obsessing about taking a few rurals when they could lose their only real ally in the war if they don't pull their finger out.
Quote from: Antonine on June 28, 2014, 04:03:15 PM
Damn Fronen. Obsessing about taking a few rurals when they could lose their only real ally in the war if they don't pull their finger out.
Guess they needed rurals... :)
Whelp, we surrender.
GG, please don't execute me.
Thalmarkin Wall of Meat! Seriously, we really got slaughtered against your army while AA survived without a scratch... That's the last time we let Bob pick our tactics! :P
Yup - I expected to be wounded what with charging head first into enemy ranks but I was quite surprised to see we wounded Enzo and Pyrix *and* made Enzo retreat from the battlefield.
Quote from: Noldorin on June 22, 2014, 09:09:03 AM
It's quite funny how using obvious lies has become a part of diplomatic strategy. Never really saw it on BT before (except perhaps Chenier), and it leads to some tricky business for the ones trying to avoid it :p
Everyone already knows that Fronen were attacking Thalmarkin, and we beat you to it (though not really, since we attacked Melhed, not Fronen). Question is only which side people will prefer.
Chéniers only very scarcely lied. Overglorified themselves, sure. Picked which facts to put emphasis on and which to ignore, always. But straight-out lies, very scarcely.
Their problem was that their enemies' lies were more believable than the truth, and how really everyone with a history on the continent has mud on his name, whether out of malice or by trying to go with the lesser evils during desperate times (which came about routinely on with recurring invasions). Pretty much every realm that endured over the years has plenty of stuff to be called out against them. It's easy to ignore that an evil was really one much lesser than all its alternatives when peacetime has returned and every leader is just too eager to solidify his rule by focusing his nobles on an outside threat. Oldest trick in the book, really.
I tend to consider that the main factors in Chéniers' bad rep on BT were 1) chauvinism 2) arrogance 3) ambition. It's easy to hate a guy that clearly considers you to be inferior, that isn't afraid to be controversial, and who actually manages to wield large influence over (what was) the #1 superpower. They never just picked on anyone for the fun of it, though, their attitude was a nemesis magnet. People would get annoyed with them and try to bring them down. They'd retaliate.
After all, what's to gain by stating obvious lies that nobody will believe anyways? If they cared to influence foreigners, which they scarcely did, they'd only have told believable lies, if lying would have been their intent. Once you make an accusation that sounds too wild to be true, you lose all credibility and influence towards your recipients. Instead, Chéniers (Nicolas and Guillaume, mostly) would simply say the truth, no matter little they expected the others to believe it, because, after all, what did they care if lowly foreigners believed them or not?
Quote from: Chénier on June 30, 2014, 04:10:29 AM
Chéniers only very scarcely lied. Overglorified themselves, sure. Picked which facts to put emphasis on and which to ignore, always. But straight-out lies, very scarcely.
Their problem was that their enemies' lies were more believable than the truth, and how really everyone with a history on the continent has mud on his name, whether out of malice or by trying to go with the lesser evils during desperate times (which came about routinely on with recurring invasions). Pretty much every realm that endured over the years has plenty of stuff to be called out against them. It's easy to ignore that an evil was really one much lesser than all its alternatives when peacetime has returned and every leader is just too eager to solidify his rule by focusing his nobles on an outside threat. Oldest trick in the book, really.
I tend to consider that the main factors in Chéniers' bad rep on BT were 1) chauvinism 2) arrogance 3) ambition. It's easy to hate a guy that clearly considers you to be inferior, that isn't afraid to be controversial, and who actually manages to wield large influence over (what was) the #1 superpower. They never just picked on anyone for the fun of it, though, their attitude was a nemesis magnet. People would get annoyed with them and try to bring them down. They'd retaliate.
After all, what's to gain by stating obvious lies that nobody will believe anyways? If they cared to influence foreigners, which they scarcely did, they'd only have told believable lies, if lying would have been their intent. Once you make an accusation that sounds too wild to be true, you lose all credibility and influence towards your recipients. Instead, Chéniers (Nicolas and Guillaume, mostly) would simply say the truth, no matter little they expected the others to believe it, because, after all, what did they care if lowly foreigners believed them or not?
The fact is, almost all rulers lied to protect their spot. Those who said no here are obviously lying. It is how you portray it and how you put it in perspective. Most tend to amplify the fault of others to cover their own. But i think the downfall of Cheniers was that he does not gather a lot of ally. I lied a lot IC but i also maintain a certain amount of allies regardless of the lies. Chenier due to his arrogance brushed out all allies and head out to achieve his target alone. Pavel despite infamous in the continent, has rather lots of supporters within his own realm, and those tend to spill over as he uses his realm mates to gather support from other realms. Please come back and join thalmarkin. Dislodge King Fingolfin, pretty please. Haha
I'm not too good to call out Andreas on the forums if he were making stuff up. ;) I think folks would be genuinely surprised to learn that Fingolfin very, very, very rarely lies. I certainly can't recall catching him in one. In order to maintain that claim, I think he's just very careful about the course of action he commits the realm to. Sometimes it's a !@#$ty course, and his core advisors raise a stink. He responds by altering the course or convincing us. Other times, the Kin of Thalmar just get to suck it up and trust that he isn't going to get us all killed. But as for the notion that a ruler somehow has to lie to protect their position, Fingolfin is the best anecdotal proof I've encountered that it simply isn't true. It's not the easy way to play a character, but it can be done. There's a reason the character is the longest-serving ruler on the continent, and it isn't because Thalmarkin is full of gullible sheeple. If anything, it's a collection of ambitious and inflated (Jaune) egos that has largely held together because a) winning is fun and b) the ruler doesn't demean the group by ruling as though people can't handle the truth.
EDIT: I am being told on IRC by Lorgan that Fingolfin has, in fact, lied. The instance was so dumb that I'm going to make fun of Lorgan for it right here. Fingolfin said that the occupation of Lastfell would be temporary. Hahahaha. Whoever bought that deserved to be lied to. A fortified town next to our capital, taken by an untrustworthy enemy during an invasion, and then held by a clanner/multi while he plotted a rebellion? Yeah, that's never going to be a tenable situation. Shame, Fingolfin! You're just like all the others! :'(
Quote from: Disturbedyang on June 30, 2014, 10:29:04 AM
The fact is, almost all rulers lied to protect their spot. Those who said no here are obviously lying. It is how you portray it and how you put it in perspective. Most tend to amplify the fault of others to cover their own. But i think the downfall of Cheniers was that he does not gather a lot of ally. I lied a lot IC but i also maintain a certain amount of allies regardless of the lies. Chenier due to his arrogance brushed out all allies and head out to achieve his target alone. Pavel despite infamous in the continent, has rather lots of supporters within his own realm, and those tend to spill over as he uses his realm mates to gather support from other realms. Please come back and join thalmarkin. Dislodge King Fingolfin, pretty please. Haha
Everybody falls eventually.
Chéniers found plenty of enemies, but always managed to find allies, even if it was more of a struggle at the end. Guillaume loathed Nothoi for almost all of their existence, they even executed Miroslav when he tried to join them, and yet, who came to help Enweil in its final days? Nothoi did. And if it weren't for Melhed, I'm convinced Fronen would have as well. The Chénier family, at the peak of The Blood Cult, had influence in pretty much every single realm, save for Sint and maybe Riombara. While openly professing human sacrifice. Chéniers were really only arrogant with those they despised or otherwise considered inferior, I'm convinced a great number of characters who interacted with Nicolas or Guillaume who have had great relations with them. Did it limit the number of potential allies? Maybe. But then again, they managed to befriend realms they had vilified again and again, when circumstances changed. I'd say they were familiar with Game Theory, and would try to assert others' motivations. If the foreigners could be brought on a path parallel to their own, they'd try to make it happen. If it was obvious that the interests were antagonistic, they wouldn't bother unless they had serious reasons to.
What screwed their ambitions was the invasions. It wasn't in their power to significantly alter the courses of the invasions, which hit Enweil hard again and again and again. Enweil used to have the advantage of a lot of nobles and a lot of land, including very wealthy cities. But with every invasion, land was lost, and players quit out of frustration. The opposite was true for Riombara, which basically got wealthier and larger every time. At the end, there was not other possible outcome. Rio was left isolated in a remote corner of the continent. There was nothing else for them to do than to bash at Enweil. Nothoi and Fronen are both a stretch to attack. And the years of rhetoric the leaders used to vilify Chéniers and Enweil did not permit for some kind of cold co-existence. While it may have been in their long-term interests, OOC, to leave Guillaume and Enweil struggle on so that they could eventually have more conflicts that don't take years to march for, the context simply did not allow for that to happen. Any ruler who tried to backtrack on the years of Chénier-bashing would have needed very serious concessions from Enweil to pull it off without losing his seat, and Enweil simply did not have anything left to concede, other than its pride, which the handful of Enweilians had nothing left to gain by conceding.
To be fair, if the situations were reversed, I'm not sure that Chéniers would have allowed for Riombara to survive, though I think Guillaume would have had a lot more leeway than Rio's rulers had. Unlike Riombara, Enweil could reach plenty of other nations, a potential hostile faction in the South-East was not required on the long-run, OOC. And Enweil had no lack of enemies to pick from. The only thing that would have kept Guillaume from ordering the complete destruction of Riombara instead of isolating them to a handful of poor regions, were situations reversed, would have been the fear of a massive migration to an enemy realm where these nobles would be more dangerous.
Guillaume didn't do anything other than be awesome, IMHO. And be a dick about it. That's was precipitated his downfall. But he wasn't some chronic liar. That's Machiavel. :-X
Indeed, there was always a grain of truth in what the Cheniers said. They just always chose to go for and stubbornly hold to their own ludicrous interpretations. :P
Like back when Riombara was having a strong debate between allying with the monsters or not. MR seceded and allied with them, after the invasion they dissolved back into Riombara, which of course made it a plot against Enweil from the get-go since Enweil was allied with the daimons and thus under heavy attack from the monsters. And Riombara was evil for allying with the monsters... :)
But lying is a strong word anyway, good rulers need to be able to bend the truth to their purpose, which of course Fingolfin has done.
If you go out and blatantly lie to someone however, that's just bad diplomacy...
Yes, that's a better word at it. Bending the 'truth'. And the matter of fact is, Fingolfin repeatedly 'lied' by focusing the matter on something else. Such as those lands that were 'loaned' to the Thals by Melhed, where he conveniently chose to declare it his. So that say that he never lies is a bit of a loyal servant, especially OOCly.
Well, Lastfell was actually a bad example, technically he lied or didn't come through but Melhed's conspiring with the undead annulled the earlier agreement in our eyes and that's why we went back on the earlier agreement. Also to provoke Melhed into war, fruitlessly.
It's actually kinda funny when you think of it, it used to be everything North of Winifael was blighted and we were constantly trying to provoke Melhed into war, now we've got everything (sorta) North of it too + an ally in Agyr and now they're going out of their way to war us... :P
Lies!
Fingolfin doesnt lie straight out (not to my memory at least). Sometimes the truth is quite bent, but its not That often, and always with backdoors to return through if it gets called out. One of the fun things about playing this way is that you can always argue for your case, and most often in a much stronger way than your opponents. Obviously its all up to the listeners to make up their own mind about what to think about it, but so far Fingolfin has gotten out of alot of crap by still being the good guy in almost everyone eyes :) (well, except for those directly targetted). Times may be a'changing though.
But well, most of the times we just go straight forward and calling out others lies. Pavel and Elicia came with tons of accusations towards Fingolfin the last weeks, which were all met and countered, and neither of them could back up their accusations. Thats tricksy to do if you are lying to people left and right.
Melhed has now signed a ceasefire with Thalmarkin.
Immanuel Octavius of Melhed has just corrupted the government of Trottie and bought the region, taking it from Ar Agyr to Melhed :p
Quote from: Antonine on July 05, 2014, 07:20:09 PM
Melhed has now signed a ceasefire with Thalmarkin.
Immanuel Octavius of Melhed has just corrupted the government of Trottie and bought the region, taking it from Ar Agyr to Melhed :p
A region Melhed was supposed to take anyway. As we say in a popular Moba. WORTH!
Quote from: Lorgan on June 30, 2014, 03:53:05 PM
Indeed, there was always a grain of truth in what the Cheniers said. They just always chose to go for and stubbornly hold to their own ludicrous interpretations. :P
Like back when Riombara was having a strong debate between allying with the monsters or not. MR seceded and allied with them, after the invasion they dissolved back into Riombara, which of course made it a plot against Enweil from the get-go since Enweil was allied with the daimons and thus under heavy attack from the monsters. And Riombara was evil for allying with the monsters... :)
But lying is a strong word anyway, good rulers need to be able to bend the truth to their purpose, which of course Fingolfin has done.
If you go out and blatantly lie to someone however, that's just bad diplomacy...
Ahem. This is an interesting topic to come about since I remember this quite well, having been brief King of the Dominion of Alluran at the very outbreak of the Invasion and then the person who started negotiating with the monsters.
Enweil sold us out to the monsters. Quite explicitly so. The monsters had a really interesting RP atmosphere going on about trying to stop the daimons destroying everything whilst still being quite savage themselves. When I allied the remnants of the Dominion with them Enweil went all out on calling us out on it, despite having had their own deals from what I could find out. Then they sided with the daimons.
That's an instance of more... blatant lying.
The Octaviuses have arrived back in Ar Agyr to face trial for alleged treason.
*grabs popcorn*
This should be fun.
Trial will be propably short :)
Free Octavius!
Quote from: Lorgan on July 08, 2014, 10:10:28 PM
Free Octavius!
The Sartanists are hunger striking! (jk)
Free the Agyr Two!
Quote from: Tandaros on July 08, 2014, 10:56:02 PM
The Sartanists are hunger striking! (jk)
Then I hope it's a loooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooong trial.
Quote from: Indirik on July 09, 2014, 04:02:50 AM
Then I hope it's a loooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooong trial.
I like the implication that there's even going to be a trial ;D
Quote from: Antonine on July 10, 2014, 12:18:24 PM
I like the implication that there's even going to be a trial ;D
Run to Nothoi! They seem to harbour all kinds of unwanted people :p
And more reasons for war!
Quote from: Noldorin on July 10, 2014, 03:19:15 PM
Run to Nothoi! They seem to harbour all kinds of unwanted people :p
And more reasons for war!
No! Go to Spearhold and Rio instead! Rally the men to get the head of Fingolfin!!! :p Actually, all rulers should be a hero instead. Otherwise, there is no way to get them off :(
Quote from: Disturbedyang on July 10, 2014, 06:05:51 PM
Actually, all rulers should be a hero instead. Otherwise, there is no way to get them off :(
That's actually one of the wilder ideas I've had in the past: All council-level characters are automatically considered heroes for the purposes of death in battle. Easily avoidable, however, by just not fighting. And since rulers and other council members are often older characters, it's not unreasonable that they not march with an army. Many of them just can't keep up.
Quote from: Disturbedyang on July 10, 2014, 06:05:51 PM
No! Go to Spearhold and Rio instead! Rally the men to get the head of Fingolfin!!! :p Actually, all rulers should be a hero instead. Otherwise, there is no way to get them off :(
Well thats not entirely true. I (well, Thalmarkin and allies), have gotten rid of 2 Fronen rulers which opposed us, King Yeux in old Melhed, the ruler of Sint, and Pavel would have (like it or not) been forced out sooner or later, either by treaty or his own people for not signing a treaty. But well, it certainly requires winning the war, or otherwise the position just get even stronger.
As well, those serious/critical wounds or prisons does get people out of rulership, and in need of reappintment. Fingolfin has just been quite lucky with very very many wounds, and still being back in business just before the voting would have started :)
Aside from that, he was quite close to get protested out once, but that was taken care of too! :p
Quote from: Noldorin on July 10, 2014, 07:20:45 PM
Well thats not entirely true. I (well, Thalmarkin and allies), have gotten rid of 2 Fronen rulers which opposed us, King Yeux in old Melhed, the ruler of Sint, and Pavel would have (like it or not) been forced out sooner or later, either by treaty or his own people for not signing a treaty. But well, it certainly requires winning the war, or otherwise the position just get even stronger.
As well, those serious/critical wounds or prisons does get people out of rulership, and in need of reappintment. Fingolfin has just been quite lucky with very very many wounds, and still being back in business just before the voting would have started :)
Aside from that, he was quite close to get protested out once, but that was taken care of too! :p
King Yeux went inactive, ruler of Sint has always been inactive. Only Pavel was actually killed in a glorious(sorry had to add that in :p) battle. Pavel was surprisingly quite famous in the Melhed and i would like to believe a lot of players there rp to get his position, but isn't actually going to do it soon.
Critical wounds is the only way to get a ruler that is not hero out of the position. And even that, it takes another that are willing to step up to take over from the ruler.
Quote from: Indirik on July 10, 2014, 06:08:25 PM
That's actually one of the wilder ideas I've had in the past: All council-level characters are automatically considered heroes for the purposes of death in battle. Easily avoidable, however, by just not fighting. And since rulers and other council members are often older characters, it's not unreasonable that they not march with an army. Many of them just can't keep up.
That's true. I guess that leaves infiltrating the only way to 'kill' the ruler then? But actually, we should probably brainstorm for a way to get rid of a ruler other than becoming more famous than him(via voting). I think it is one of the reason there are stagnation all over the continent. Fingolfin is doing a good job in making the continent fun, but i am referring to the other continents, where the 'older' set of players seem to stayed on. Perhaps if they are unwilling to let the new blood take over, something can be done to make them 'die' or 'leave'?
Well the mechanisms already exist to remove rulers - rebellion and the threat of rebellion. Unfortunately, they're rarely used.
Meanwhile, in recent developments, Selene and Immanuel have been banished from Ar Agyr on pain of death and have returned to Melhed where Immanuel is about to be made Marshal once again.
So the war is over?
Only Melhed is out.
Nothoi! \o/
Quote from: Lapallanch on July 13, 2014, 09:51:55 PM
So the war is over?
Silly Lapallanch. The war is still in its infancy.
The Battle of Junohep!
Quote24 attackers (994 Inf, 86 MI, 621 Arch, 131 Cav, 219 SF), Thalmarkin and Old Grehk
23 defenders (756 Inf, 990 Arch, 117 Cav, 147 SF), Nothoi and Fronen
Total combat strengths: 22156 vs. 20571
Round 1: Total casualties: 143 attackers, 192 defenders
Round 2: Total casualties: 309 attackers, 391 defenders
Round 3: Total casualties: 178 attackers, 268 defenders
Round 4: Total casualties: 148 attackers, 232 defenders
Round 5: Total casualties: 107 attackers, 102 defenders
Round 6: Total casualties: 33 attackers, 142 defenders
Round 7: Total casualties: 6 attackers, 75 defenders
Attacker Victory!
For those unlucky ones who weren't there.
Overall I expected the battle to be closer but even then, it's been a while since we had battles this big, this close on BT and I am *loving* it. :)
Meh, people keeps on calling Fingolfin a liar! This is getting old... they never learn!
But well, I suppose its easier to do when you are one out of 4 aggressing realms :)
And yeah, that was an awesome battle! With our poor movements I started to doubt we would even win it.
Quote from: Lorgan on June 30, 2014, 03:53:05 PM
Indeed, there was always a grain of truth in what the Cheniers said. They just always chose to go for and stubbornly hold to their own ludicrous interpretations. :P
Like back when Riombara was having a strong debate between allying with the monsters or not. MR seceded and allied with them, after the invasion they dissolved back into Riombara, which of course made it a plot against Enweil from the get-go since Enweil was allied with the daimons and thus under heavy attack from the monsters. And Riombara was evil for allying with the monsters... :)
But lying is a strong word anyway, good rulers need to be able to bend the truth to their purpose, which of course Fingolfin has done.
If you go out and blatantly lie to someone however, that's just bad diplomacy...
Haha, Machiavel. He is usually true to his word, at the moment he gives it. But in a way, he's an opposite of Guillaume: whereas Guillaume would have a set agenda and pursue it regardless of everything, Machiavel would be a lot more... flexible. Dedicated to his realm like Guillaume, but not to an ideology. He's befriended people who he could never have put in the same room, made his closest allies people whose downfall he had been working on mere weeks before, and turned on people who trusted him greatly. Whatever circumstances dictated. As soon as an ally became a liability, he was cut. Because, in a way, he always considered "don't be a liability" as a prerequisite for any dealings. The relations with Asylon illustrates this fairly well... D'Hara and Asylon were having a great deal of secret talks and deals together, but as soon as Asylon started becoming unstable... unpredictable... and started unilaterally taking steps Machiavel did not approve of, that was the end of it. Don't try to impose a situation on Machiavel and expect him to stay true to his previous promises to you. If there's one thing he loathes, it's people trying to force his hand. Even (especially) if they do so without realizing it.
He doesn't really do much nowadays. I barely consider myself as a BM player right now anyways. I send out maybe a short message per week, skip over most of the incoming mail.
Quote from: Haerthorne on July 06, 2014, 02:01:05 PM
Ahem. This is an interesting topic to come about since I remember this quite well, having been brief King of the Dominion of Alluran at the very outbreak of the Invasion and then the person who started negotiating with the monsters.
Enweil sold us out to the monsters. Quite explicitly so. The monsters had a really interesting RP atmosphere going on about trying to stop the daimons destroying everything whilst still being quite savage themselves. When I allied the remnants of the Dominion with them Enweil went all out on calling us out on it, despite having had their own deals from what I could find out. Then they sided with the daimons.
That's an instance of more... blatant lying.
It's not lying.
What was happening was that Mordred of Riombara was having discussions with the monsters, without authorization if I recall (but he was judge), to side with the monsters against Enweil. Guillaume knew this, so he also approached the monsters. Enweil offered them some food as gifts, and when asked for a good place to settle, Guillaume told them about how nice and lush the Eno delta was. After a close call (they almost sided with Mordred), there they went. And there they pursued their agenda. Almost immediately, they attacked Enweil to "test" us. We kicked their asses. They didn't like that too much. Things escalated. The alliance with the daimons only came after a serious beating from the monsters, when it was clear we couldn't keep up.
There was no "deal" with the monsters. We sent them bribes and incited that they attack DoA instead of Enweil, but no "deal". The monsters never offered or promised anything to Enweil. We didn't want any invaders, neither with nor against us. But when things started getting heated, it seemed much more reasonnable to call in the daimons so that inhumans killed inhumans, instead of having the monsters kill a bunch of human realms down South, and the daimons kill a bunch of human realms up North. Pitting them against each other made the daimons less effective in their efforts to kill other human realms, and slowed the monsters in their own efforts to kill human realms. Net result was less destruction on human realms, even if some (KoA, Avalon) died and others (Enweil) were left as good as dead.
Things are really spicing up!
Now Riombara are marching up north to join the fight (under the most ludicrous reasons ever, but still).
If OG and Melhed stays on the northern side it can be interesting with Nothoi, Spearhold Fronen and Riombara (3 of the 4 strongest, richest and largest realms on BT ) vs Thalmarkin, Melhed, OG and AA (3 of the 4 weakest, poorest and smallest realms on BT).
I won't be so sure about Melhed! ;)
Quote from: Cren on July 23, 2014, 06:45:50 AM
I won't be so sure about Melhed! ;)
We are quite aware of both the Melite situation and their internal strife. Anyhow they have already been asked to root out the problem or get the f out of the alliance. If they turn against us it is at least a few less coastal regions to defend :)
Just too bad all most rulers on BT are extremely preoccupied with ooc stuff. A single conversation with 2-3 letters back and forth takes at least a week. Or well, if not occ busy they are just ignoring letters in ruler channel, which would be much worse.
They did away with demon and monster invasions so we effectively engineered a human invasion for ourselves. Eff yeah, war to the knife.
Good week for the North, even if Riombara joined against us. Which is what I always wanted anyway, not that that opinion is shared by everyone... :)
The sides have been formed, the stakes have been set, now to battle it out!
Also looks like we've finally reached a point where the war can have a name, I've heard "The War of Thalmarkin Supremacy" so far, and maybe a few others... But suggestions are welcome, I'll get to changing the thread name when I'm back from holiday.
I'd just like to point out that the General of Thalmarkin is the only one that's preparing to lose this war. Damned hubris. :P
EDIT: That said, the campaign did go much better than my pessimistic ass anticipated. Nothoi does a hell of a job recruiting. Not looking forward to seeing what's awaiting us in Reeds.
The Beard Wars.
Wow, Melhed is exactly where Fronen was when I joined the game. Region per region, exactly, or perhaps just one off.
And there Melhed tries again. Not the ideal moment for us, obviously, but we'll see how this goes. :)
I try not to comment on this stuff, but that was exceedingly lame. And dishonest, IC and OOC. Mostly OOC, which is the sad part. The entire realm would've been shamed out of existence if we had half the players of integrity that we used to have. And if we had those players, Rio wouldn't have taken the bait. Alas, we're left with what we have. And that makes me sad. Angry, and sad.
These dark times were foretold by the prophet Red Marlboro!
Sad me too, it could have been great war, now it will prolly be another gangbang... prolly not very quick one since AA & Thalmarkin are pretty good shape, not sure how OG fares. AA & OG will be frontlines...
But to keep things atleast semi fun, OO wont give up a poop for those filthy southeners :P
Quote from: jaune on August 17, 2014, 08:29:28 PM
Sad me too, it could have been great war, now it will prolly be another gangbang... prolly not very quick one since AA & Thalmarkin are pretty good shape, not sure how OG fares. AA & OG will be frontlines...
But to keep things atleast semi fun, OO wont give up a poop for those filthy southeners :P
A gangbang against who? Thalmarkin? Cry me a river. Thalmarkin and AA had absolutely no shame in participating in already incredibly lopsided gangbangs. If they start going on the receiving end, they fully deserve it.
Quote from: Chénier on August 17, 2014, 08:35:16 PM
A gangbang against who? Thalmarkin? Cry me a river. Thalmarkin and AA had absolutely no shame in participating in already incredibly lopsided gangbangs. If they start going on the receiving end, they fully deserve it.
AA has only existed for a year. The only war they've fought besides this one was Fronen vs Melhed and AA.
Thalmarkin has participated in the "gangbang" against Fronen. Thalmarkin was a 5 region realm then, Fronen a behemoth of all the towns and cities near the lake and more. If they hadn't grown complacent and arrogant, they could've actually made a stand.
And if this is about Enweil.... Go around the continent on a crusade for democracy, expect that to be remembered. Just as this King of Kings thing will be remembered. And I sure hope Melhed's treacherous ways will be as well.
Ironically, what we wanted out of this whole charade from the get-go were odds that were
not in our favour. They weren't. Now they're even less. I'm quite ok with that. Bad odds make for interesting wars.
P.S.: Though I agree that without Melhed's betrayal the war would've been much more balanced and thus more fun for everyone. But hey, I'm not complaining if all battles are concentrated on us. I like battles. More fun for me!
Right, I remember you engineering this war, Lorgan, with the explicit idea of having more enemies than friends.
Great success! Beluaterra never fails to amuse me.
Quote from: Solari on August 17, 2014, 08:02:39 PM
I try not to comment on this stuff, but that was exceedingly lame. And dishonest, IC and OOC. Mostly OOC, which is the sad part. The entire realm would've been shamed out of existence if we had half the players of integrity that we used to have. And if we had those players, Rio wouldn't have taken the bait. Alas, we're left with what we have. And that makes me sad. Angry, and sad.
Please enlighten me as to what this OOC dishonesty is. IC dishonesty I'll grant you but I'm not aware of any OOC.
Quote from: Lorgan on August 17, 2014, 09:40:19 PM
AA has only existed for a year. The only war they've fought besides this one was Fronen vs Melhed and AA.
Thalmarkin has participated in the "gangbang" against Fronen. Thalmarkin was a 5 region realm then, Fronen a behemoth of all the towns and cities near the lake and more. If they hadn't grown complacent and arrogant, they could've actually made a stand.
And if this is about Enweil.... Go around the continent on a crusade for democracy, expect that to be remembered. Just as this King of Kings thing will be remembered. And I sure hope Melhed's treacherous ways will be as well.
Ironically, what we wanted out of this whole charade from the get-go were odds that were not in our favour. They weren't. Now they're even less. I'm quite ok with that. Bad odds make for interesting wars.
P.S.: Though I agree that without Melhed's betrayal the war would've been much more balanced and thus more fun for everyone. But hey, I'm not complaining if all battles are concentrated on us. I like battles. More fun for me!
Thalmarkin looted Nothoi for no reason, while it was fighting the continent's strongest realm (at the time, at least).
The gang up on Fronen can't be dismissed as well. It surrounded the lake, sure, but it was hardly a behemoth. A huge portion of its economy had to go into militia because of how little defensable it was, and its leadership was more inactive than arrogant, the northern realms were just jealous of the territory expansion it had.
The war that created Ar Agyr against Melhed was also hardly fair, Melhed never stood a chance.
And a crusade that occurred, what, over 10 real life years ago? Of which none of the actors involved remained? That justifies ganging up on the continent's smallest realm?
Why Riombara's against them I have no idea, but they fully deserve every other enemy they've got. Thalmarkin went out of its way to make them. Ar Agyr was forcefully carved out of most of what was Melhed, Nothoi was looted over no reason, Fronen was attacked and belittled for little reason...
And Thalmarkin has, by far, the most nobles, which is worth a lot more than a bunch of nobles scattered over a huge territory (and thus with low tax efficiency). I'm not even sure the war is even lopsided against them yet.
Thalmarkin is surrounded by expendable allies and has a huge noble count as well as very competent military commanders. Even if they lose this war "defeat" will only mean not getting the fancy title for Fingolfin and maybe losing at most a couple of regions. That's barely anything compared to how much damage pretty much every other participant in this war has taken.
Quote from: Chénier on August 17, 2014, 11:06:36 PM
Thalmarkin looted Nothoi for no reason, while it was fighting the continent's strongest realm (at the time, at least).
That was a one time thing. Aimed at provoking a realm theoretically stronger than us.
Quote from: Chénier on August 17, 2014, 11:06:36 PM
The gang up on Fronen can't be dismissed as well. It surrounded the lake, sure, but it was hardly a behemoth. A huge portion of its economy had to go into militia because of how little defensable it was, and its leadership was more inactive than arrogant, the northern realms were just jealous of the territory expansion it had.
Because it came at a time when
huge swathes of territory had been blighted at the edges of the continent.
Quote from: Chénier on August 17, 2014, 11:06:36 PM
The war that created Ar Agyr against Melhed was also hardly fair, Melhed never stood a chance.
It was 1 vs 1. What more could we do? Besides, it was declared at a time when Thalmarkin had about 70% of it's potential population. That's what more we did.
Quote from: Chénier on August 17, 2014, 11:06:36 PM
And a crusade that occurred, what, over 10 real life years ago? Of which none of the actors involved remained? That justifies ganging up on the continent's smallest realm?
I was referring to previous gangbangs on Enweil when they were still a powerbloc but I guess indeed AA and Melhed participated in the last battle of Enweil... Not that Rio needed them. It's sad to see Enweil die but I guess after a series of bad luck, this was the inevitable result.
Quote from: Chénier on August 17, 2014, 11:06:36 PM
Why Riombara's against them I have no idea, but they fully deserve every other enemy they've got. Thalmarkin went out of its way to make them. Ar Agyr was forcefully carved out of most of what was Melhed, Nothoi was looted over no reason, Fronen was attacked and belittled for little reason...
And Thalmarkin has, by far, the most nobles, which is worth a lot more than a bunch of nobles scattered over a huge territory (and thus with low tax efficiency). I'm not even sure the war is even lopsided against them yet.
Riombara opposes the idea of Fingolfin as King of Kings, probably the entire concept. They've got a legitimate reason to war us. And yes, we've gone out of our way to produce casus belli for other realms against us. That was kind of my point.
Yet still, both treaties with Melhed that have been broken were signed at a position when we could've gone for much, much more. We always said what we wanted and stopped after they gave us that. It may sound arrogant but both treaties were actually very lenient from a Thalmarkin point of view. And I believe the only reason Melhed agreed to them was that they thought so too, considering their options at the time.
And yes indeed, the defensive war is to our advantage, if you block out all of our ambitions and goals. But we have been working on this mountain fortress for years for a reason.
Quote from: Antonine on August 17, 2014, 11:09:47 PM
Thalmarkin is surrounded by expendable allies and has a huge noble count as well as very competent military commanders. Even if they lose this war "defeat" will only mean not getting the fancy title for Fingolfin and maybe losing at most a couple of regions. That's barely anything compared to how much damage pretty much every other participant in this war has taken.
I assume Thalmarkin will take damage before peace is signed. I don't see why else we would sign it. And about expendable allies... The fewer you have, the less expendable they are.
Well, this started as Fronen, Melhed vs. OG then became Fronen vs. OG, Thamarkin, AA and finally this Fronen, Nothoi, Spearhold, Riombara, Melhed vs. OG, Thalmarkin, AA. Give us a little credit in securing alliances, come on! :)
Quote from: Cren on August 18, 2014, 12:08:53 PM
Well, this started as Fronen, Melhed vs. OG then became Fronen vs. OG, Thamarkin, AA and finally this Fronen, Nothoi, Spearhold, Riombara, Melhed vs. OG, Thalmarkin, AA. Give us a little credit in securing alliances, come on! :)
Well most of your allies dont care about you :p
Spearhold attacked us since we (thal) were too impressive and spearhold just wanted a war. Rio (officially) dislikes you but attacks Thalmarkin for the King of Kings thing. Nothoi are sad about the old looting of their mountains and have not dared to attack us alone, but im quite sure they dont care about the fronen-OG war. Melhed just wants more regions, and unless every letter Maya has sent the last 6-7 weeks has been lies, Wudenkin would have been just as good as Agyr. Now Agyr was simply easier to take, and nothing is more shining to a melite than an easy war (might be becqause they loose all the other ones).
Not sure what Solari meant with the OOC, but I would not believe for a second that melheds actions would have been possible SMA. You can only nullify so many treaties and stabb so many backs before all realms would shame you from the continent, but thats the benefit of playing a game i suppose :)
Quote from: Noldorin on August 19, 2014, 12:27:03 PM
Well most of your allies dont care about you :p
Spearhold attacked us since we (thal) were too impressive and spearhold just wanted a war. Rio (officially) dislikes you but attacks Thalmarkin for the King of Kings thing. Nothoi are sad about the old looting of their mountains and have not dared to attack us alone, but im quite sure they dont care about the fronen-OG war. Melhed just wants more regions, and unless every letter Maya has sent the last 6-7 weeks has been lies, Wudenkin would have been just as good as Agyr. Now Agyr was simply easier to take, and nothing is more shining to a melite than an easy war (might be becqause they loose all the other ones).
Not sure what Solari meant with the OOC, but I would not believe for a second that melheds actions would have been possible SMA. You can only nullify so many treaties and stabb so many backs before all realms would shame you from the continent, but thats the benefit of playing a game i suppose :)
Correction, Fronen now is Nothoi's most stable ally, we do care about them and want to make them stronger.
Fronen and Nothoi's geopolitical interests align. It's no chance alliance.
Quote from: Noldorin on August 19, 2014, 12:27:03 PM
Spearhold attacked us since we (thal) were too impressive and spearhold just wanted a war. Rio (officially) dislikes you but attacks Thalmarkin for the King of Kings thing. Nothoi are sad about the old looting of their mountains and have not dared to attack us alone, but im quite sure they dont care about the fronen-OG war. Melhed just wants more regions, and unless every letter Maya has sent the last 6-7 weeks has been lies, Wudenkin would have been just as good as Agyr. Now Agyr was simply easier to take, and nothing is more shining to a melite than an easy war (might be becqause they loose all the other ones).
Good overview - I do agree in very large part!
Indeed, my view is that Rio mainly wants to thwart Thalmarkins 'King of Kings' claim (which is a brilliant ploy! I love it! My personal thanks to those both thinking of it and attempting to push it through). We do find it strange to be aligned with Nothoi - but during these past months Nothoi has stood by its word even when it had ample opportunity to go back on it. We also find it strange - and not to my chars personal liking - to be fighting Agyr...but that is the only real possibility to strike against Thalmarkin other than aiding in defending the central mountains. Lastly, Riombara is quite aware of Melheds course during the past months. Still, the alternative would have been to sit still in our southern parts...not good at all. So I'd like to say that Riombara very much respects Thalmarkin and Ar Agyr....and will not support any significant losses of territory of either.
EDIT: The post below will seem angry. It is, and I still kinda am. It also reeks of a pity party. Sorry for that. I was a) drinking at the time and b) had gotten a good fill of crap on IRC and in-game, and felt like ranting. I've gotten tired of reading things from people on this forum that I know, and they know, to be patently false. I'm not going to call them out, because that devolves into nonsense, but I am going to fume about it. Without further ado...
Here's the problem I have (and to which Fingolfin alluded): a few of you have wandered onto IRC or into the forums and intentionally said the exact opposite of what you've been doing, or intended to do, IC. You also happen to be in positions of authority in the ongoing war. Then you've gone fishing for information about Thalmarkin's IC intentions via OOC means (some of you directly to me). You're playing an OOC game, all the while protesting that you would never do such a thing. Or you used information shared in good humor, OOC, in an IC fashion. The rest of you saw convenience and hopped on board. You think people don't share council deliberations IC? They do. Lord God, how they do. And if it bothers you that they do, you should ask yourselves why. When realms whipsaw between alliances weekly, or come to the party with fully-formed grievances, players notice. Their characters notice. You aren't playing with automatons. You're playing with other people. And people tend to take offense to having their intelligence insulted.
Coming onto the forums and professing otherwise does a disservice to what these forums are supposed to be: a way to dissociate ourselves from our characters. It's pathetic, and if that's how you've come to where you are in the game, I'm sad for you. It takes a day, and maybe two letters, to learn this stuff IC. It takes another day or two to justify the actions IC. But that would require effort, and we've long since dispensed with that in favor of notching up petty victories, haven't we? So do the people on the other end of these forum handles a favor and dispense with the fiction.
All of the above is what I meant by "players of integrity." Because I pity where things have gone, and see no way of reversing the trend. And it's why I'm a hair's breadth from walking away. Now if you'll excuse me, I have a mathematically impossible war to win against children who continue to act as though they're the underdogs, and probably will until the war's won. 100k (and that's conservative) v. 35k isn't evenly matched. If you're too incompetent to make that work, then maybe you should invest a little more time in learning the game and a little less in juvenile politics.
Quote from: Solari on August 19, 2014, 11:05:28 PM
100k (and that's conservative) v. 35k isn't evenly matched.
Yeah, but how much did Overlord bring? Let's stop talking and just embarrass them hard.
Quote from: Marlboro on August 19, 2014, 11:26:10 PM
Yeah, but how much did Overlord bring? Let's stop talking and just embarrass them hard.
That's the spirit!
Ultimately, all wars are local. It is strictly impossible to bring all forces on the same battlefield, so total CS is not the whole picture. However, if we are going to quote these numbers they should be at least accurate:
Thalmarkin+Ar Agyr+Old Grehk: 92k CS, 64 nobles
Nothoi+Fronen+Melhed+Riombara+Caelum+Spearhold: 187k CS, 107 nobles
I'll not argue it's evenly matched, but it's not crazy, and it won't be over in a month. This looks like a fun war with a sound RP basis and potential for long-term grudges. It looks like a good war. Let's not spoil the fun.
Quote from: Solari on August 19, 2014, 11:05:28 PM
Coming onto the forums and professing otherwise does a disservice to what these forums are supposed to be: a way to dissociate ourselves from our characters.
Fully agreed.
Should we add Caelum and IVF to the mix?
Quote from: vonGenf on August 19, 2014, 11:46:07 PM
That's the spirit!
Ultimately, all wars are local. It is strictly impossible to bring all forces on the same battlefield, so total CS is not the whole picture. However, if we are going to quote these numbers they should be at least accurate:
Thalmarkin+Ar Agyr+Old Grehk: 92k CS, 64 nobles
Nothoi+Fronen+Melhed+Riombara+Caelum+Spearhold: 187k CS, 107 nobles
I'll not argue it's evenly matched, but it's not crazy, and it won't be over in a month. This looks like a fun war with a sound RP basis and potential for long-term grudges. It looks like a good war. Let's not spoil the fun.
Fully agreed.
The totals I quoted are mobile CS (potential for one) and actual for the other. I figure the actual mobile totals for the grand unholy alliance are something like 10-13k each for Spearhold, Nothoi, Fronen, Riombara, and 20k for Melhed. If everyone involved tries, 100k actual is doable. We can't match half of that. The stats page reflects Fronen's ridiculous 20-30k militia and OG's similar glut. I'd guess Nothoi as well.
Quote from: Solari on August 20, 2014, 12:33:02 AM
The totals I quoted are mobile CS (potential for one) and actual for the other. I figure the actual mobile totals for the grand unholy alliance are something like 10-13k each for Spearhold, Nothoi, Fronen, Riombara, and 20k for Melhed. If everyone involved tries, 100k actual is doable. We can't exceed 35k, more than likely. I give it two days until that's used IC.
The complaints about the OOC behavior may be legitimate, but not about the evenness of the fight. Thalmarkin actively sought overwhelming odds, it sought to aggravate as many realms as it could. It is in no way poor sportsmanship to take actions following provocation.
Also, I remember the war of Enweil vs. Kingdom of Alluran, Riombara, Mesh, Sint, Nothoi, and maybe Heen too? The odds were ridiculous then too, and we had multiple fronts. Yet, for most of the war, we kept everyone at bay. And in that case, Enweil hadn't even done anything to provoke any of the realms in question, save for Riombara by reclaiming Fwuvoghor before they could do so themselves.
Thalmarkin deserves no pity for its current situation.
Quote from: Chénier on August 20, 2014, 12:37:52 AM
The complaints about the OOC behavior may be legitimate, but not about the evenness of the fight. Thalmarkin actively sought overwhelming odds, it sought to aggravate as many realms as it could. It is in no way poor sportsmanship to take actions following provocation.
Also, I remember the war of Enweil vs. Kingdom of Alluran, Riombara, Mesh, Sint, Nothoi, and maybe Heen too? The odds were ridiculous then too, and we had multiple fronts. Yet, for most of the war, we kept everyone at bay. And in that case, Enweil hadn't even done anything to provoke any of the realms in question, save for Riombara by reclaiming Fwuvoghor before they could do so themselves.
Thalmarkin deserves no pity for its current situation.
My concern isn't for pity, nor is it to lament the odds (in the abstract). It's that the comparison to the invasion wasn't apt. The invasion was run by people who had a healthy respect for the enjoyment of the people playing with them. Taken with the tactics on display thus far, I am less optimistic about the people we're playing with now.
Regardless, it's going to be a good war.
Quote from: Solari on August 20, 2014, 12:33:02 AM
The totals I quoted are mobile CS (potential for one) and actual for the other. I figure the actual mobile totals for the grand unholy alliance are something like 10-13k each for Spearhold, Nothoi, Fronen, Riombara, and 20k for Melhed. If everyone involved tries, 100k actual is doable. We can't match half of that. The stats page reflects Fronen's ridiculous 20-30k militia and OG's similar glut. I'd guess Nothoi as well.
Both sides have very unhealthy CS/noble ratios. There's overall too much militia and too few nobles on Beluaterra; the mobile forces for everyone look weak compared to what I see on other continents.
Quote from: vonGenf on August 20, 2014, 12:58:02 AM
Both sides have very unhealthy CS/noble ratios. There's overall too much militia and too few nobles on Beluaterra; the mobile forces for everyone look weak compared to what I see on other continents.
You're right, of course. And I shouldn't have said your comparison wasn't apt. As usual, your observations are solid. :)
Quote from: Marlboro on August 19, 2014, 11:26:10 PM
Yeah, but how much did Overlord bring? Let's stop talking and just embarrass them hard.
And you are exactly what I needed. <3
I can safely say that the most Melhed can reliably field is maybe 11k CS - you're giving us far more credit militarily than we deserve.
The north is definitely outnumbered in this war but they're fighting close to home while half of the realms fighting them have to travel half a continent to reach them. Only Spearhold, Fronen and Melhed are really on the frontlines in this way and a lot of the fighting so far has taken place in the lands of the latter two. I think, and hope, the south are going to win but it's going to be difficult and we could lose very easily. Thalmarkin also has more nobles than anyone else which will count for a lot as the war drags on and gold reserves get spent.
When it comes to the OOC stuff, in case any of this was aimed at me, I will freely admit that a few days ago it seemed like Melhed would have to join the north despite all my plotting and I came onto chat and bitched about it in frustration. The next day I got a message from Rio's general saying that his army was coming north to join us and would be there in two days and that changed anything - but I was completely honest at the time when I was on chat. For what it's worth, I apologise if that made it seem like I was deliberately misleading anyone.
I think Thalmarkin underestimated how much their aggression could extend before people started to take notice and align against them. Melhed fought against ridiculous odds in the first war of ice and sun when Thalmarkin invaded with 3x as many nobles. We faced extinction often and just had to deal with it. Now we do again... and on our own terms, so I guess that's a bonus!
Melhed was really looking for an ally after being alone and alienated after the reign of King Pavel. Maya had no choice but to sign the Northern Unity (which she composed following Fingolfin's demands and threatening to sack Mhed). She was open to the idea, but quickly lost faith in it, she felt the Northern Unity was being wielded as Fingolfin's personal army. Against all her gut reactions played nice for as long as she could. The return of House JeVondair reminded Maya of how much she missed her erstwhile mentor Kalixta, who Fingolfin banned; she died in exile in Riombara if you don't recall.
And then... Yigna sold Queen Maya the Sacred Warhammer of Betrayal.
I started playing BM with Ismail, who is an idealist and a man of letters, a good strategist but not such a good fighter.
My secondary (now main) Maya was meant to be the opposite, a warrior-woman. She holds a vendetta much more bitterly than Ismail.
IRC and forums are icky to me because it turns into toxic critiques of individuals OOCly. I'm not interested in all that.
Edit: In the end, looking forward to a good war!
I'd just like to say, again, that it was always made very clear IC and OOC that Melhed did not face extinction in the past wars. First we only wanted your capital, then we just wanted you to stick to your word and didn't even have any territorial ambitions, both ambitions are reflected in the peace treaties. Wars should not be fought to extinction by definition.
Anyway, however this situation came to be, I was already having a fun war but I reckon this will be even more so. Looking forward to it as well. :)
Oh and I forgot to say, loved the post-battle taunting in Lloringel yesterday. Always an excellent forum to start an argument with your enemy and spread a little propaganda!
Well, if Melhed wouldn't have agreed to ceding land for Ar Agyr, what would you have done then? Looked a lot like a "submit or die" ultimatum. A leadership just minimally more prideful or arrogant would have sent Melhed down that path.
The peace treaty which saw Melhed lose Agyr very much came with the threat of extinction and, as a bonus, came with forcing the abdication of a ruler who'd only been on the throne for a few days. Which, of course, is how Pavel came to be King and he's the one who seems to have annoyed Thalmarkin so much by being duplicitous.
Realistically, Thalmarkin are currently reaping what they've sowed with Melhed - you cannot expect peace and friendship with a realm which you've kept under your thumb and repeatedly bullied for ages. If Melhed was small enough to be unable to fight back it'd be one thing but as it is no one should be surprised that Melhed was constantly looking for any chance it could to restore what it had lost. And with its new allies it now has this chance.
Thalmarkin's actions have driven all this conflict. I don't mind that - they're top dog and are entitled to throw their weight around - but they certainly shouldn't complain about the response it's gotten :p
Incidentally, in terms of official history of this war, on the Melhed wiki page I'm calling it the War of Sovereignty between the Northern Alliance and the Free Realms.
Quote from: Antonine on August 20, 2014, 10:45:27 AM
Thalmarkin also has more nobles than anyone else which will count for a lot as the war drags on and gold reserves get spent.
And a short look at the gold shows that the 3 defending realms have about 22 200 gold potential income and the south ca 55 100 gold potential income. So yes, when the gold reserves runs low the north will have an extreme advantage! :o
Anyhow, Thalmarkin was obviously aware of that we were irritating most realms. That was the whole idea about it. If we didnt want to aggress people, we simply wouldnt have done it. The
problem (at least for my part), is that none really cares about proper IG actions as long as it gains them momentary wins. Melheds actions the last month would have been completely impossible, but right now it works fine since people find it very easy to just say "oh well" to dishonourable behaviour and false accusations which are very obviously false.
I respect Thalmarkin for trying to aggravate other realms - this was what got things moving. As players we should take care that such risks are (somehow) rewarded and not cause for being crushed.
Now, Riombara is quite aware of Melheds actions - however, the alternative would have been Melhed fighting at Thalmarkins side. So I disagree with the statement that we took an 'oh well' stance - my char did look at the situation and had to chose (or had the opportunity to choose) between two less then ideal choices. Fighting alongside Melhed does not make us the closest of friends.
I also do not agree that Melheds actions during the past month were only possible due to chars not caring enough IC - betrayal did happen quite frequently during the middle ages...even right on the battlefield.
Still, looking at the whole continent ooc I agree that the war is too lopsided - though that is taking an 'absolute' view of only being able to choose between total defeat or totally crushing your enemies. If Old Grehk and Agyr take a defensive stance and Thalmarkin supports them well, then it will be very very difficult for your enemies to reach any decisive victory - even if they/we would be aiming for that.
Lastly: what would be a ooc suggestion to 'balance' this war better - while still keeping actions believably ic?
I know how to balance this war. Huge monster hordes appearing in all the realms so that no one really cares about fighting others.
Quote from: Noldorin on August 22, 2014, 11:12:51 AM
The problem (at least for my part), is that none really cares about proper IG actions as long as it gains them momentary wins. Melheds actions the last month would have been completely impossible, but right now it works fine since people find it very easy to just say "oh well" to dishonourable behaviour and false accusations which are very obviously false.
Be very careful about accusations such as this. In any situation, seen only from one side, it is very easy to see your own actions as perfectly logical and making sense, and the other guy's actions as being nonsensical, random, or untrustworthy. Don't go around trashing everyone else just because the actions they took don't meet your expectations, or weren't what you planned for them to do.
People have been turning a blind eye to what their allies have been doing since forever. There's nothing new there, nor surprising. Any discontent over Melhed's actions will only manifest against them when more convenient to do so.
As for all of these remarks about the odds... Power is the relation of work over time. That's how it is in physics, and I think it applies perfectly to armies. Wiki's example is that a kg of coal has more power than kg of TNT, because of the time over which work is exercised.
Having a total mobile CS of 20000 is nice, sure, much nicer than having a total mobile CS of 5000. But if it takes a week and a half for the first realm to get to the front line, and just as much to get back, then that's 20000 CS of might applied per three weeks. Wheras if it takes 3 days to defend the front line, and another 4 to refit, then the latter realm has 5000 CS over one week. So it's more like 6666 CSw vs 5000 CSw. Yes, the first realm is still noticeably more powerful, but no longer as much, having a 6.6:5 ratio instead of 4:1 ratio. This is because the marching army will accumulate soldier pay and equipment damage before even entering battle, and even a victory is likely to cause problematic equipment damage. The much smaller army, by avoiding the incoming enemy or by siding with militia, can often keep this army in check long enough to force a refit. Far-away armies rarely have much time to loot or do takeovers.
Of course, if all of the armies came to Thalmarkin simultaneously, it would pose a problem. However, organizing such feat is incredibly problematic on its own, and rarely optimal or safe. Enweil managed to fend off almost every single realm of the continent simultaneously for a very long period. Not because it was stronger than all of them combined, it obviously wasn't. Not because all of the enemies were so far off, most were not. But because they weren't coordinated. One army came, we'd defeat them, and then a few days later the next army would come. We were stronger than any one of them alone, and alone is how they came at us.
The odds aren't all that skewed against Thalmarkin.
Quote from: Chénier on August 22, 2014, 07:38:39 PM
As for all of these remarks about the odds... Power is the relation of work over time. That's how it is in physics, and I think it applies perfectly to armies. Wiki's example is that a kg of coal has more power than kg of TNT, because of the time over which work is exercised.
Entirely off-topic comment to come:
Sorry, but that's not how physics works.
Work has the same units as energy, it is usually defined as a change in energy. Power is energy expended per unit of time.
What you call "the power of a kg of coal" is probably the energy content (or heat content). You can measure the total energy content of a kg of coal, which is the potential work (heating) that you could get by burning it. Coal has an energy content of roughly 30-35 MJ/kg, while TNT has an energy content of roughly 3 MJ/kg, which is roughly ten times less than coal.
Power is the energy actually released per second. As such, if you burn a kg of coal over 10 min, it will release 30 MJ of energy at a rate of 50 kW (30MJ / 600 seconds).
Comparatively, if you light a stick of dynamite with 1 kg of TNT and it explodes over 1/10th of a second, it will do so with a power of 30 MW (3 MJ / 0.1 s). So the TNT actually releases more power than the coal, however it does so only over a short period of time. The total energy released by coal is higher.
You can now return to the scheduled discussion, which is emphatically not about physics.
Quote from: vonGenf on August 22, 2014, 07:55:37 PM
Entirely off-topic comment to come:
Sorry, but that's not how physics works.
Work has the same units as energy, it is usually defined as a change in energy. Power is energy expended per unit of time.
What you call "the power of a kg of coal" is probably the energy content (or heat content). You can measure the total energy content of a kg of coal, which is the potential work (heating) that you could get by burning it. Coal has an energy content of roughly 30-35 MJ/kg, while TNT has an energy content of roughly 3 MJ/kg, which is roughly ten times less than coal.
Power is the energy actually released per second. As such, if you burn a kg of coal over 10 min, it will release 30 MJ of energy at a rate of 50 kW (30MJ / 600 seconds).
Comparatively, if you light a stick of dynamite with 1 kg of TNT and it explodes over 1/10th of a second, it will do so with a power of 30 MW (3 MJ / 0.1 s). So the TNT actually releases more power than the coal, however it does so only over a short period of time. The total energy released by coal is higher.
You can now return to the scheduled discussion, which is emphatically not about physics.
You are, of course, absolutely right. I was pressed for time and I did not learn any of these terms in english, and as such used them incorrectly. I'll edit my post shortly.
For the third time in a row Selene Octavius (who is banned from Ar Agyr) has been arrested and thrown in the Agyrian dungeon while trying to religiously takeover or cause unrest in an Agyrian region.
Clearly the game hates my characters :p
Maybe it's a sign that Sartanism doesn't belong on BT? ;)
Quote from: Chénier on August 22, 2014, 07:38:39 PM
*** stuff about proximity to war vs CS ***
The odds aren't all that skewed against Thalmarkin.
Yes, proximity to the fronts is important enough (though I wouldnt see it as a linear scale). Anyhow, the fronts arent where you seem to think. The big front has been in Xerus/Junohep (or even nothois mountains), and a second might now be opened in Melhed.
For the front in Xerus, OG and Fronen are obviously closest, but Spearhold is closer than Thalmarkin and Nothoi is only 1/2 - 1 day further away than Thalmarkin. To Melhed front, Fronen is same distance as Thalmarkin and yet again Nothoi is only ca 1 day slower than Thalmarkin.
Not sure how this argument changes anything, other than that Riombara (who should have more gold stored than most other realms combined and as such can stay in field 3-4 weeks at a time) need a week back and forth every refit.
Quote from: Tan_Serrai on August 22, 2014, 01:18:26 PM
Lastly: what would be a ooc suggestion to 'balance' this war better - while still keeping actions believably ic?
Doubt there is much that can (or should) be done about it ooc. IG Thalmarkin can only hope that Spearhold start making sense (correction: making sense from
our point of view) and see that their reason for warring us has completely vanished.
Quote from: Indirik on August 22, 2014, 06:57:44 PM
Be very careful about accusations such as this. In any situation, seen only from one side, it is very easy to see your own actions as perfectly logical and making sense, and the other guy's actions as being nonsensical, random, or untrustworthy. Don't go around trashing everyone else just because the actions they took don't meet your expectations, or weren't what you planned for them to do.
Well sorry about the hard words. The facts remain though that the BT rulers are completely fine with the riddiculous accusations and constant lies of some rulers, just because they benefit from it right now.
What is truth and what is a lie varies depending on your point of view. It's easy enough to accept something that you want to hear as the truth, when you don't feel especially motivated to look too closely. When it's your buddy saying something about someone you don't especially like, that motivation isn't very strong. Situational morality is the name of the game. And yeah, sometimes people are willing to accept that someone stretched the truth, is that stretching benefits them. And, sometimes, they just don't give a damn.
This isn't limited to the current situation on BT. (Of which I know very little, to tell the truth.) This is a common thread across the entire game. We just had a situation on EC where two people from different realms (let's call them Alice and Bob) were debating the actions of a third person from yet a third realm (who we'll refer to as Zack). "Alice" liked "Zack". She thought his actions were perfectly justified and acceptable, and went to great lengths to explain why. "Bob" thought "Zack" was a scumbag. He thought Zack's actions were dishonorable and reprehensible, and had a very thorough argument to explain why. Same action, two viewpoints, two different conclusions. (And then "Charlie" checked in with "I don't give a damn, I just want to fight the war!")
Who's right? I dunno. Doesn't matter. They are both entitled to their opinions. Coming onto the forums and going non-linear about how you're the only one who's right, and everyone else involved is a dishonest, lying shyster who kicks puppies down the street and ties kittens to clotheslines by their tails doesn't do anyone any good. It just makes everyone defensive and hostile. It generates OOC bad feelings between players.
Also truth is irrelevant. It is perfectly human to accept a lie, even when you know it to be so, in order to push your own agenda. We only have to look at big business to see this time and time again. I don't see why Rulers would hesitate to take advantage of whatever they can in order to press their IG agenda's.
You are generally right, Indirik.
Here the thing is though that Melhed has repeatedly lied to Thalmarkin, broken their word and even a treaty. It's understandable that right now that is ignored by the other realms who are united against Thalmarkin. And that's fine by me as long as this is not forgotten. Because if it is seen as acceptable behaviour, that'd be worse for the game than a frustrated ruler. Victors would have to destroy their enemy since peace treaties can't be trusted.
So basically, it's fine to be an opportunist but if it is widely accepted as appropriate behaviour by our characters, thus if everyone plays opportunists, trust leaves the game and that is the very origin of the us vs them mentality.
That said... Off with her* head!
*Selene
Quote from: Lorgan on August 27, 2014, 11:00:24 AM
Here the thing is though that Melhed has repeatedly lied to Thalmarkin, broken their word and even a treaty.
That's what you say. I don't know that. I know almost nothing about the situation. And if Melhed were to approach me with a story about how Thalmarkin were trying to force them into a vassalage to their "King of Kings", and that they were forced to sign the treaty under duress and threat of destruction, I might very well agree with them and fight on their side. (From what I have seen of the situation OOC, this is pretty close to the truth, from one point of view.) I don't know anything about these supposed Melhed lies. And a treaty signed under threat of destruction ... I may even consider that invalid, so breaking it is no big deal. If Thalmarkin were to then approach me and try to explain all the "lies" that Melhed may have told, I may not believe Thalmarkin. Or I may not care, because I consider the possibility of Thalmarkin trying to vassalize other realms as being a bigger threat.
QuoteIt's understandable that right now that is ignored by the other realms who are united against Thalmarkin.
It's not that other people may ignore it for right now, they may not even believe that Melhed is lying. Thalmarkin is attempting to subjugate the entire island under their rule under some "King of Kings" plot. That sounds kind of shifty to me. Like, maybe I can't trust them. They might lie to me in order to get me to help them in their plan to subjugate the island. Maybe I'm next? Besides, my own character has other reasons to not trust Thalmarkin that have nothing at all to do with Melhed or the current situation. I didn't like them to begin with, even though the reasons would probably make you scratch your head and say "WTF?!"
QuoteVictors would have to destroy their enemy since peace treaties can't be trusted.
Treaties are made to be broken. If they weren't this game would be soooooooo boring. We'd all be living in peace and harmony. Complaining OOC because someone broke a treaty?
QuoteSo basically, it's fine to be an opportunist but if it is widely accepted as appropriate behaviour by our characters, thus if everyone plays opportunists, trust leaves the game and that is the very origin of the us vs them mentality.
Quote from: Lorgan on August 27, 2014, 11:00:24 AM
You are generally right, Indirik.
Here the thing is though that Melhed has repeatedly lied to Thalmarkin, broken their word and even a treaty. It's understandable that right now that is ignored by the other realms who are united against Thalmarkin. And that's fine by me as long as this is not forgotten. Because if it is seen as acceptable behaviour, that'd be worse for the game than a frustrated ruler. Victors would have to destroy their enemy since peace treaties can't be trusted.
So basically, it's fine to be an opportunist but if it is widely accepted as appropriate behaviour by our characters, thus if everyone plays opportunists, trust leaves the game and that is the very origin of the us vs them mentality.
That said... Off with her* head!
*Selene
I don't get why you are making a scene out of this. Melhed broke their treaty... so what? So have countless others, over and over again.
They key to maintaining treaties is not fancy legalese terms, it's making sure that it is in their interests to abide to it. Once any given party of an agreement/treaty no longer considers they benefit from it, or no longer consider the threat of breaking it as being too high, then it rarely lasts much longer at all.
An imperialistic nation that seeks to subjugate others can only expect their vassals to remain compliant for as long as they are threatening and can sanction those who step out of line. As soon as the imperialists seem overwhelmed, then it's perfectly natural to see vassals break rank, as the incentives are higher and the risks are lower.
You say this kind of behavior would encourage people to wage wars of total destruction... But is vassalage that much better? If you step on a realm and make it powerless, how much fun is that for them? Opportunities become limited and the political situation becomes demoralizing. If you destroy the realm, especially in the present context, then you are likely increasing the noble density of an enemy realm and increasing interactions between the defeated enemy and others. Yes, it sucks to lose realms. But realms have always been dying, it's part of the game. And Thal didn't think twice to do it themselves.
Let me say again, I understand completely that this is ignored right now and have absolutely no problem with it from an OOC perspective. I also understand full well that if Melhed ever had an opportunity to get out from under our "yoke", it was now. But that doesn't make it right. And people who'd potentially sign their own treaties with Melhed should not just go "oh well".
I'm not attacking the behaviour of any of BT's realms. What should they do, declare war on Melhed too? Or don't use their help in the war against us? That'd be ridiculous. But to go about it with a nihilistic attitude that words are only words, there's no real truth and everything is just perspective is also definitely wrong. If you play a character you consider honourable and who is aware of the recent diplomatic development, then he should not forget Melhed's betrayal. Just as he should not forget that some King Fingolfin declared himself King of Kings. The things that our characters do need to matter to other characters, also those outside your realm. Else there is no point to this game.
And really, I'm not even attacking Melhed. It's not wrong to be opportunistic. But it is wrong to go "oh well" at opportunism and not incorporate it in your character's attitude towards Melhed. That said, Melhed can definitely make a case for why they have broken the treaty and maybe your character will buy into their explanation. The fact remains though that if your character has been paying attention (and if he's been kept in the loop), he will know that they did break it, and they did lie. Pavel lied his ass off, Maya broke the treaty she signed only 2 months before. You can choose to let your character ignore it but it shouldn't be done with a shrug of the shoulders.
Now as a consequence of this opportunism, the only sensible victory for us has become total destruction. I don't like it one bit, but now that is the only choice they have given us. It's just not possible to justify trusting Melhed again, unless we lose and are stripped of choice. In other words, the extremist 'us vs them' mentality is forced upon us. And if you're all hot about perspectives, that's something that you shouldn't ignore.
PS: Yes, destruction is worse than vassalage. You destroy a realm, you destroy it's culture. You destroy it's history. And you destroy the home of players, you drive them out to a place where they may lose interest in the game. You make them a vassal, you give them opportunities still. Melhed is living proof of that, even if they took the opposite road of opportunity that we had in mind.
If you think that vassalage is a way to "win" and keep out players from enemy realms, I can assure you we would have been much better served with seeing a depopulated AA's flag over Melhed's land now than being backstabbed by a realm this close to our borders. Besides what we are demanding is really the zero version of vassalage.
Well, from my (riombaran) chars viewpoint, a treaty or a given word is viewed thus:
He who keeps his oath - or treaty - when its NOT in his advantage can be trusted. Those that break their word once it is to their own (minor or major) advantage cannot be trusted to keep their word (in the future)
So you need to look at a situation from two viewpoints: One is the question 'Is it to their advantage to keep their word?': The other is 'Have they kept their word even though this not being to their advantage?'
If the answer to both is no, then expect a treaty to be broken. If the first answer is 'no; the second 'yes'...then you will learn about the current worth of an oath.
Again, the real worth of an oath is _only_ visible once it is put 'under pressure'.
Now towards the actual situation: My char would currently not trust Melheds word. He does trust Melhed to act to their own advantage - thus he fights alongside them. He also _does_ trust Nothois word - as they kept to the last peace agreement even though they could have quite efficiently backstabbed Riombara.
So I disagree with the 'Melheds actions are IC unacceptable due to only being ooc motivated'. Melheds actions _are_ a backstab, but (based on the 'I do not want to live under Thalmarkins thumb, no matter how small the pressure) 'logical'. Again, my char actually likes his enemies better than his allies....which I find a lot more interesting then the usual 'the others are the bad guys' black/white papercut.
Quote from: Lorgan on August 27, 2014, 06:34:42 PM
Let me say again, I understand completely that this is ignored right now and have absolutely no problem with it from an OOC perspective. I also understand full well that if Melhed ever had an opportunity to get out from under our "yoke", it was now. But that doesn't make it right. And people who'd potentially sign their own treaties with Melhed should not just go "oh well".
I'm not attacking the behaviour of any of BT's realms. What should they do, declare war on Melhed too? Or don't use their help in the war against us? That'd be ridiculous. But to go about it with a nihilistic attitude that words are only words, there's no real truth and everything is just perspective is also definitely wrong. If you play a character you consider honourable and who is aware of the recent diplomatic development, then he should not forget Melhed's betrayal. Just as he should not forget that some King Fingolfin declared himself King of Kings. The things that our characters do need to matter to other characters, also those outside your realm. Else there is no point to this game.
And really, I'm not even attacking Melhed. It's not wrong to be opportunistic. But it is wrong to go "oh well" at opportunism and not incorporate it in your character's attitude towards Melhed. That said, Melhed can definitely make a case for why they have broken the treaty and maybe your character will buy into their explanation. The fact remains though that if your character has been paying attention (and if he's been kept in the loop), he will know that they did break it, and they did lie. Pavel lied his ass off, Maya broke the treaty she signed only 2 months before. You can choose to let your character ignore it but it shouldn't be done with a shrug of the shoulders.
Now as a consequence of this opportunism, the only sensible victory for us has become total destruction. I don't like it one bit, but now that is the only choice they have given us. It's just not possible to justify trusting Melhed again, unless we lose and are stripped of choice. In other words, the extremist 'us vs them' mentality is forced upon us. And if you're all hot about perspectives, that's something that you shouldn't ignore.
PS: Yes, destruction is worse than vassalage. You destroy a realm, you destroy it's culture. You destroy it's history. And you destroy the home of players, you drive them out to a place where they may lose interest in the game. You make them a vassal, you give them opportunities still. Melhed is living proof of that, even if they took the opposite road of opportunity that we had in mind.
If you think that vassalage is a way to "win" and keep out players from enemy realms, I can assure you we would have been much better served with seeing a depopulated AA's flag over Melhed's land now than being backstabbed by a realm this close to our borders. Besides what we are demanding is really the zero version of vassalage.
Thalmarkin could have decided to vassalize Enweil instead of destroying it. If you sincerely believe destruction to be so bad, then why did you go down that route? You could have asked vassalage of Enweil, and then forced Rio to accept it or fight them to protect your empire. Wars and conflict to be had. But you didn't, instead you decided to loot their allies and join in on the gang bang to put the last nail in the coffin. So forgive me if your speeches of how destruction is so bad and so much worse make me frown. You had your choices, you still have them, and you will have them still. Should you trust Melhed if you defeat them again? Maybe not. But you could still choose to spare them. If you don't, you aren't free of blame. You made a decision. It's too easy to pass on the responsibilities of one's actions to others.
I also wonder who you think you are, to say how others should behave. Others will react to Melhed's actions as they will, I really don't see any justification to OOC judge them on their reaction. Nor really a point to coming over here on the forums to talk about it, because none of us are mind readers, and none of us can really know if their attitude towards Melhed has been altered or not.
Thalmarkin was nowhere around when Enweil was destroyed. We only moved in after the fact and took some rogue regions for food. So what, we should have saved you from our allies after years of animosity?
And I'm not saying what the reaction of your character should be. If you come here as a player and say "so what" to this blatant a breaking of a treaty, I have to point out, as a player, that it actually is a big deal that should be incorporated in your character's view of Melhed. He can go and admire them for it if that's the way you play him, I don't care. It is something that happened and if you're not concerned purely with strategy - which if you were you'd have left the game ages ago - or completely apolitical then it is something that matters in your character's relation to Melhed.
And maybe you should not say "so what" today when yesterday every forum was too small for all the injustices from Riombara or Luria.
Quote from: Tan_Serrai on August 27, 2014, 07:09:04 PM
So I disagree with the 'Melheds actions are IC unacceptable due to only being ooc motivated'.
I should say that I disagree with that as well. Melhed's actions are obviously not OOC motivated. But they do matter.
Quote from: Lorgan on August 27, 2014, 06:34:42 PM
If you play a character you consider honourable and who is aware of the recent diplomatic development, then he should not forget Melhed's betrayal.
You're still approaching this from the viewpoint that the absolute truth of what Melhed did is wrong. That there is no other possible viewpoint, and that *everyone* must see it the exact same way. If they don't then they're dishonorable.
That's just not the way it goes.
QuoteThe things that our characters do need to matter to other characters, also those outside your realm. Else there is no point to this game.
Of course they matter. But they are filtered through what those characters know of the situation, and how they feel about the different factions involved. The result of all those filters and impressions is a multitude of different viewpoints on what is right and wrong. If everyone had the same viewpoint, then there wouldn't be anything to drive the conflict.
QuoteThe fact remains though that if your character has been paying attention (and if he's been kept in the loop), he will know that they did break it, and they did lie. Pavel lied his ass off, Maya broke the treaty she signed only 2 months before. You can choose to let your character ignore it but it shouldn't be done with a shrug of the shoulders.
My character knows that Melhed broke a treaty, a couple details about what that treaty involved, and that Thalmarkin claims they signed the treaty knowing that they would soon break it. She doesn't have any proof about it, other than that Thalmarkin claims that's what happened. She doesn't know anything about any supposed lies that Melhed has told. Or anything about any lies that Pavel may have told. I don't know what anyone else knows, but it's quite possible that the only people that "know" that Melhed lied are people in Thalmarkin, and maybe anyone they managed to convince.
I would imagine the majority of characters know very little about what's been happening between Melhed and Thalmarkin beyond the big things like war declarations. The rulers probably know a few things. Some rulers undoubtedly more than others. But everyone knows that all rulers are biased filters. They present the situation to their realm in the way that they want the realm to see them. Assuming they even present this situation to the people in their realms at all. So, yeah, maybe Melhed lied about something. But who *really* knows, and who only knows because Thalmarkin is making that claim?
QuoteNow as a consequence of this opportunism, the only sensible victory for us has become total destruction. I don't like it one bit, but now that is the only choice they have given us. It's just not possible to justify trusting Melhed again, unless we lose and are stripped of choice. In other words, the extremist 'us vs them' mentality is forced upon us. And if you're all hot about perspectives, that's something that you shouldn't ignore.
If Melhed's actions make it so that you can't trust them again, then don't trust them. If that means you feel that you have no choice but to wipe them out, then go for it.
What I'm saying is that as a player, you have to realize OOC that what other people "know" is likely to be vastly different than what you "know".
Quote from: Lorgan on August 27, 2014, 08:19:15 PM
And I'm not saying what the reaction of your character should be. If you come here as a player and say "so what" to this blatant a breaking of a treaty, I have to point out, as a player, that it actually is a big deal that should be incorporated in your character's view of Melhed. He can go and admire them for it if that's the way you play him, I don't care.
It kinda sounds like you do care. Maybe it's just me, but the majority of your argument here seems to be aimed at convincing people that Melhedis mean and nasty, and that our character's should despise Melhed for breaking the treaty.
If all you're really saying is that character should have an opinion on Melhed's actions ... Then I'm just confused. Of course they will. I don't know what made you think that people's characters would *not* have an opinion.
Quote from: Indirik on August 27, 2014, 08:58:09 PM
What I'm saying is that as a player, you have to realize OOC that what other people "know" is likely to be vastly different than what you "know".
First, your character would know that a treaty was signed and broken within 2 months. Stripped of all player-provided information, that is what he knows.
Quote from: Indirik on August 27, 2014, 08:58:09 PM
You're still approaching this from the viewpoint that the absolute truth of what Melhed did is wrong. That there is no other possible viewpoint, and that *everyone* must see it the exact same way. If they don't then they're dishonorable.
Not the exact same way. But breaking a treaty is at it's very core a dishonourable act. It's going back on the word you gave. You may have a ton of reasons for doing so but then we've left the realm of truth and entered that of perspective.
And seriously, I am not denying the very concept of perspective but it does seem like you're denying convention and truth both. We can mutter about all the details but breaking a 2 month old treaty is exactly what Melhed did. You can say they've heroically risen up against their evil oppressors but if so, they did that through breaking the treaty. And so aside from all perspective and the negative connotation of those words, that is a clear-cut fact. And thus the truth that all of our characters can observe.
What I would hate is for the convention in BM to have become that breaking treaties is all right. Which goes hand in hand with "we're all just realpolitking Machiavellians" and "they backstab eachother on GoT all the time". That is why I do seem to care like you said.
Treaties are broken all the time, it happens, it's a necessity. But that doesn't mean that the IC perception of such events should be that it is all right as long as it benefits you. That's one way to play, not everyone's. And as I tried to show you from giving my perspective, it's one that leads down a path that I believe to be detrimental to the game. Hence why I spoke against this sort of opportunism. Which this also is. It's not because the word "perspective" comes into play that the dictionary is thrown out of the window.
Quote from: Indirik on August 27, 2014, 08:58:09 PM
If all you're really saying is that character should have an opinion on Melhed's actions ... Then I'm just confused. Of course they will. I don't know what made you think that people's characters would *not* have an opinion.
The whole reason for this discussion I thought was Noldorin's post about the rulers being fine with Melhed's actions, as if it did not matter what Melhed did as long as they joined their side. Abandoning their character's personality for a strategical win. You said they had a different perspective, I warned against taking this to the extreme, Chénier threw in a "who cares" and here we are.
Let me make this clear:
If Melhed loses then they're the backstabbing, treacherous realm which has been destroyed because it was dishonourable (see: Enweil).
If Melhed wins then they're the plucky, underdog realm which rose up against oppression and an unjust treaty forced on it my imperialist Thalmarkin after years of bullying and betrayal, and the realm which fought valiantly alongside its allies to win the war.
When the British Empire said that Gandhi should be imprisoned because he broke the law and Gandhi said "there are unjust laws, as there are unjust men" then those were two radically different perspectives on the same facts. Each saw reality differently.
And let me point something else out as well. Melhed had lent some regions north of the river to Thalmarkin while the Blight was in place. After the Blight lifted Thalmarkin decided not to give the regions back and went to war against Melhed to keep them. In Thalmarkin the justification was that Melhed hadn't pulled its weight in the invasions and Thalmarkin deserved the land to make up for the land which had been sunk and for the sacrifices it had made for humanity. In Melhed it probably just seemed that Thalmarkin were lying bastards who'd broken a treaty which Melhed and generously given them in a time of need.
Yet we don't hear Fingolfin or others denouncing Thalmarkin as dishonourable liars for that, do we?
Thalmarkin won, nobody cared enough about Melhed to bat an eyelid that Thalmarkin was technically breaking a treaty and the new status quo became established with any questionable actions quickly being forgotten about because that was what was most convenient for the interested parties - especially as Melhed was then in the middle of making friends with Ar Agyr in order to fight Fronen.
As I said, people have different perspectives of reality. If breaking a treaty really was a cardinal sin and the people complaining about it now actually believed that then they'd have said the same when a treaty being broken worked in their favour. The fact that they didn't (I was in Thalmarkin back then and I didn't care in the least about screwing over Melhed) just shows that this is much more about upset at things not going in their favour rather than some principled stance.
Quote from: Lorgan on August 27, 2014, 08:19:15 PM
Thalmarkin was nowhere around when Enweil was destroyed. We only moved in after the fact and took some rogue regions for food. So what, we should have saved you from our allies after years of animosity?
And I'm not saying what the reaction of your character should be. If you come here as a player and say "so what" to this blatant a breaking of a treaty, I have to point out, as a player, that it actually is a big deal that should be incorporated in your character's view of Melhed. He can go and admire them for it if that's the way you play him, I don't care. It is something that happened and if you're not concerned purely with strategy - which if you were you'd have left the game ages ago - or completely apolitical then it is something that matters in your character's relation to Melhed.
And maybe you should not say "so what" today when yesterday every forum was too small for all the injustices from Riombara or Luria.
I had fun spreading the evils of Riombara, sure. Luria I don't recall doing all that much, save when they express some ridiculous persecution complex. But I do not go about saying "every player should OOC feel this way or that way", or imply that the players who didn't react as I'd want them to were bad players. Riombara broke treaties frequently, and were never held accountable for it. I was never shocked by this, nor by others' reaction (or lack thereof) to it.
If Thalmarkin really wasn't there (I could swear they were, but then again, I have a hard time distinguising Thalmarkin and Ar Agyr), they still could have stopped it. Saved from your allies... like Riombara? How quaint. Melhed wanted us dead too, and though I don't think they sent troops they were vocal in favor of the deed. Surprise! Enweil was replaced by IVF, which just declared war on Thalmarkin... Oops. Looks like most of the people you would have alienated by saving Enweil declared war on you anyways. Going to war to protect Enweil from Riombara could also have yielded a much more evenly-split conflict, something which you seem to have desired, instead of the current alignment of realms. Enweil would have undoubtedly gone through with it, and I'd be surprised if vassalizing a realm with that much history wouldn't have created a ton of interesting twists for Thalmarkin, if it's not just for juggling your vassals (which, besides, having vassals unfriendly to each other is a boon for any imperialist). Now don't get me wrong, I'm happy Enweil is dead and that I got to start anew fresh. It was long due. However, I don't find your stance to be consistent. If you'd think destruction to be so bad, you had all of the reasons and the opportunity to prevent it. But you didn't. You just let your allies go about and do the deed without caring about it in the least. If the death of Enweil, one of the continent's founding realms, once a superpower that actively went out to and started countless wars, home to some of the most infamous characters of the continent, didn't mean anything to you, then why should you care about the death of a realm whose greatest achievement is having succeeded in being the single-most ignored realm of probably the whole game; even the invaders often seemed to forget they existed, having went through one invasion without any more than perhaps one battle with them, and through a few with little involvement.
Realms die. It happens. And in BT's case, it's pretty likely that having a few more realms die would just end up being a good thing, lest the devs implement some kind of new "empire" mechanics that allow for supra-realm communications.
OK well, let's just get this out of the way since you all seem to think that I'm suffering from sore ass syndrome: I actually believe that we will win this war. I'd be willing to bet real money on it.
As for the treaty breaking... That gets brought up by Melhed every conflict we have. It has not been forgotten and it has not been discarded even though you lost. The reason that Thalmarkin has always sustained is that Melhed actively plotted with the Undead against Thalmarkin during the 4th invasion. You on the other hand did sign the same oppressive treaty you now object.
And now Enweil... give me a break Chénier. Enweil had only enemies, maybe a handful of nobles and barely an army. You've got to do some things yourself. That Riombara killed Enweil does not mean that we have to kill Melhed. Which we didn't, repeatedly. Though that feud really isn't the least bit as ancient as Rio vs Enweil.
Quote from: Lorgan on August 28, 2014, 02:49:35 AM
OK well, let's just get this out of the way since you all seem to think that I'm suffering from sore ass syndrome: I actually believe that we will win this war. I'd be willing to bet real money on it.
I wouldn't bet against you.
Quote from: Lorgan on August 27, 2014, 11:01:41 PM
The whole reason for this discussion I thought was Noldorin's post about the rulers being fine with Melhed's actions, as if it did not matter what Melhed did as long as they joined their side. Abandoning their character's personality for a strategical win.
Rulers, often being canny politicians, will rarely let you know how they *really* feel about their allies. They usually don't say things like
"We know Melhed sucks, but, really, we hate you more than them, so we'll fight on their side against you until you surrender, then we'll beat them up." They usually show the poker face so that the enemy has less of a chance of pulling them apart. You probably won't get any clear idea of how they really feel about their allies.
Having just posted in the Memorable Characters and gotten my nostalgia going, I'm reminded of some ancient melite history where Fronen (the first incarnation) subjugated Melhed (far moreso than Thalmarkin ever has) until melite cunningly overthrow the oppressors.
http://wiki.battlemaster.org/wiki/Melhed/History/Age_of_Blood/Mercenaries
Quote from: Vita on August 28, 2014, 08:28:06 AM
Having just posted in the Memorable Characters and gotten my nostalgia going, I'm reminded of some ancient melite history where Fronen (the first incarnation) subjugated Melhed (far moreso than Thalmarkin ever has) until melite cunningly overthrow the oppressors.
http://wiki.battlemaster.org/wiki/Melhed/History/Age_of_Blood/Mercenaries
Maybe Melhed's playing the long game to get Fronen to fully commit to total war against Thalmarkin so they'll commit suicide-by-badass.
Got timed out and original post deleted... anyhow, a summary of it:
For Indrik:
Melhed was lying. There is really noone refuting this. Melhed has confessed to the lies, and anyone who knows anything about the conversations among rulers knows they have lied. Pavel and Maya both, in extreme amounts (as in, not just 1-2 letters, but in every letter sent to the northern rulers for the last... 1-2 months for Maya at least and a similar amount of time for Pavel). Its just a waste of time to discuss wether it was technically a lie and if perhaps not you could in a small sense of thinking from a certain perspective somehow consider it slightly close to truth. Because it wasnt. Tandaros and player of Pavel could surely bring more light to it if you dont believe me.
And yes obviously they are allowed to lie. They may gain something from it and then by all means go ahead. What I said was a problem is that all rulers are without problem accepting that Melhed has lied its ass off for a year or so, and soon it will all be under the bridge and noone will care, just as they dont care now. Indeed they can take advantage of Melheds position in their war, but to accept their IG behaviour and not care 5 cents about how their rulers behave does not rhyme well with supposedly noble and chivalrous rulers that Riombara (and to my knowledge at least Nothoi and Spearhold, and possibly others) claim to be. It least not for me.
For other posts:
There is no longer any sense for Thalmarkin to let Melhed live (should we win...). The have already explained that there can be no peace between Melhed and Thalmarkin under these situations, and one can only manage so many backstabbs, lies and betrayals.
For Octavius:
Thalmarkin followed the treaty of the Lastfell-situation to the dots. The treaty was indeed badly written (for Melhed), but Thalmarkin never broke it by keeping Lastfell. Melhed may feel tricked from it (rightly), but they wrote it and we followed it. Thereafter Melhed tried to attack Thalmarkin (when Thalmarkin had had all our regions genocided to death by the daimons, and literally almost no economy), but we resisted them with our allies. Melheds aggressions did however nullify the treaty, and Thalmarkin attacked Melhed a few months later when a few of our regions had at least 50% population (might exaggerate a little here, but not much).
Thalmarkin didnt break any treaty or lie to Melhed. The rest of the rulers accepted this. Not so strange.
For Chenier:
Why would we ever come to the aid of Enweil? Thats one of the more riddiculous things i've heard (and I've seen tons of letters from Maya and Pavel! :p ). And why would we ever spare Melhed now? Neither makes any sense, but perhaps I misunderstood your conversation with Lorgan.
So what you're saying is that Thalmarkin wriggled out of a treaty on a technical basis, won a short war against the wronged party when they tried to settle the matter militarily and Thalmarkin then started an unprovoked war as soon as they were able to just because they felt like it.
Wow. Truly Thalmarkin is a paragon of honour.
Quote from: Antonine on August 31, 2014, 02:59:30 PM
So what you're saying is that Thalmarkin wriggled out of a treaty on a technical basis, won a short war against the wronged party when they tried to settle the matter militarily and Thalmarkin then started an unprovoked war as soon as they were able to just because they felt like it.
Wow. Truly Thalmarkin is a paragon of honour.
well LOL!
The treaty said what it said... nothing more nothing less. Thalmarkin followed it.
Melhed tried to attack Thalmarkin when thalmarkin had like 10% of their potential military strength and economy. Sure you know this since you were in Thalmarkin at the time??
Unprovoked war?! Melhed tried to attack Thalmarkin when we had 1000 soldiers and 10 000 pesants ( just exaggerated). Sure as hell Thalmarkin got angry, and sure Thalmarkin didnt trust Melhed.
Fingolfin has ruled Thalmarkin for like 3-4 years now and never broken a treaty or said an (official) lie, so I dare you to go burn me on that one.
The line between IC and OOC is getting increasingly blurred, here...
Quote from: Chénier on August 31, 2014, 04:25:05 PM
The line between IC and OOC is getting increasingly blurred, here...
I supose Im getting more and more gulity to that one. I still very much standing behind the statements to Indrik and Octavius.
As for yourself, I understand your personal experience tend to extend towards Enweil, but it has nothing to do with the current subject.
Quote from: Noldorin on August 31, 2014, 05:12:08 PM
I supose Im getting more and more gulity to that one. I still very much standing behind the statements to Indrik and Octavius.
As for yourself, I understand your personal experience tend to extend towards Enweil, but it has nothing to do with the current subject.
My example of Enweil was not to criticize the actions taken towards it. If any of it surprised me, it was how long it took.
It was claimed that realm destructions are always bad, by people who took no issue to it in the past and who express intent to repeat it in the future. It's easy to go about and say "they deserved it", "they forced me to do so", or "there was no reason not to do so", but that's just casting off one's own responsibilities. We always have choices, and if we have convictions, then we are able to make harder choices in order to pursue them. If one only applies a principle when it suits them, and doesn't bother when it doesn't, that's not a true conviction. If one really thought that destroying realms were bad, one would not let one's peers and allies to go about and do it, he'd try to find ways to avoid it. That's what the example of Enweil was for. No effort was done. Did he have to try? Absolutely not. Is he a bad player for not having tried. Not really, no. But if he really thought that realm destructions were universally bad, Enweil would have been a good way to show it. It's not the easy choices that define us, it's the hard ones.
Quote from: Chénier on August 31, 2014, 05:29:07 PM
My example of Enweil was not to criticize the actions taken towards it. If any of it surprised me, it was how long it took.
It was claimed that realm destructions are always bad, by people who took no issue to it in the past and who express intent to repeat it in the future. It's easy to go about and say "they deserved it", "they forced me to do so", or "there was no reason not to do so", but that's just casting off one's own responsibilities. We always have choices, and if we have convictions, then we are able to make harder choices in order to pursue them. If one only applies a principle when it suits them, and doesn't bother when it doesn't, that's not a true conviction. If one really thought that destroying realms were bad, one would not let one's peers and allies to go about and do it, he'd try to find ways to avoid it. That's what the example of Enweil was for. No effort was done. Did he have to try? Absolutely not. Is he a bad player for not having tried. Not really, no. But if he really thought that realm destructions were universally bad, Enweil would have been a good way to show it. It's not the easy choices that define us, it's the hard ones.
Please. It's not because I choose to play a certain way and try not to destroy realms that the weight of all of BM falls on my shoulders and I should press for my conviction through my characters on every occasion. I can however try to convince other players that this is the way to play. Don't go around fighting every war to the death as default, choose your goal in a war and fight till you reach that or lose.
But if the only goal in a war from an IC point of view has become annihilation, then that's just how it is. I'm not going to have my character argue for Melhed to live just to be backstabbed again later. In other words, I'm not going to play my character as a naive idiot because of my OOC conviction, not if he's not actually an idiot.
Not a single ruler who ruled during the invasion would lift a finder to save Enweil. We could just to save "Enweil", but what for?
On the other hand, Thalmarkin has done all it could to preserve Melhed. In the first war we asked the regions we already had. In the second war, after beating up Melhed completely, we asked for one of their cities. In the third war after Melhed betrayed us we asked for 1 regions (which we never got). Why would we let Melhed backstabb us a 4th 5th 6th and second time? If treaties wer honoured and new alliances kept it makes sense to allow new realms (or enemy realms) to prosper and decide their future. Now its just stupid.
Quote from: Noldorin on August 31, 2014, 07:04:35 PM
Not a single ruler who ruled during the invasion would lift a finder to save Enweil. We could just to save "Enweil", but what for?
On the other hand, Thalmarkin has done all it could to preserve Melhed. In the first war we asked the regions we already had. In the second war, after beating up Melhed completely, we asked for one of their cities. In the third war after Melhed betrayed us we asked for 1 regions (which we never got). Why would we let Melhed backstabb us a 4th 5th 6th and second time? If treaties wer honoured and new alliances kept it makes sense to allow new realms (or enemy realms) to prosper and decide their future. Now its just stupid.
You don't have to let them live (should you win). Just as you don't have to destroy them. You could be creative. Giving and taking regions has gone as far as it could? Think of something else.
If treaties were honored and alliances kept, we'd never have any wars.
As for Enweil, that has little to do with the invasion. Enweil was targeted by the daimons, singled out. And Riombara had continued attacking it for weeks, when we all knew the daimons were coming. It had to face the blunt of the invasion in a weakened state. After it was completely annihilated, then, and only then, it capitulated. After which, it just sat by. They never helped the daimons. A great number of realms did far worse and were treated which much greater sympathy. Post-invasion diplomacy was only the progression of pre-invasion diplomacy, with very little changed by the invasion itself. Why save it? Didn't have to. I could easily find excuses to do so, but no obligation for doing so. But for someone who keeps saying how bad destroying realms are, you don't see to really care for it and what it entails.
You continuously took bits and bits of Melhed, and are now frustrated that Melhed aren't great pals. Really, if you didn't expect them to turn on you, it's your fault, not theirs.
This is definitely crossing a line into the OOC. Each time I log in to Maya I have someone calling me a liar or a bitch. I have enough problems in my life, have some sportsmanship for gods sake.
Quote from: Chénier on August 31, 2014, 07:28:34 PM
You don't have to let them live (should you win). Just as you don't have to destroy them. You could be creative. Giving and taking regions has gone as far as it could? Think of something else.
If treaties were honored and alliances kept, we'd never have any wars.
There's a difference in breaking treaties and signing treaties for the sole prupose of breaking them weeks later. I think.
Quote from: Chénier on August 31, 2014, 07:28:34 PM
As for Enweil, that has little to do with the invasion. Enweil was targeted by the daimons, singled out. And Riombara had continued attacking it for weeks, when we all knew the daimons were coming. It had to face the blunt of the invasion in a weakened state. After it was completely annihilated, then, and only then, it capitulated. After which, it just sat by. They never helped the daimons. A great number of realms did far worse and were treated which much greater sympathy. Post-invasion diplomacy was only the progression of pre-invasion diplomacy, with very little changed by the invasion itself. Why save it? Didn't have to. I could easily find excuses to do so, but no obligation for doing so. But for someone who keeps saying how bad destroying realms are, you don't see to really care for it and what it entails.
Most of the alliances and diploacies was made during theth alliance. What happened then sticked on. Enweil died because they lied at the begining of the th invasion and pretended it didnt know where the assault would occur. You personally is at guilt for Enweils death (If you were the ruler, dont remember).
Quote from: Chénier on August 31, 2014, 07:28:34 PM
You continuously took bits and bits of Melhed, and are now frustrated that Melhed aren't great pals. Really, if you didn't expect them to turn on you, it's your fault, not theirs.
Melhed forced us piece by piece. The aggressed US, every single time. What would we do? Let them go on? We see where that leads. Now there is only total destruction left to choose from, or possibly let them live in someone elses lands (and Israel is a great example of how great that works out!).
Quote from: Tandaros on August 31, 2014, 07:43:20 PM
This is definitely crossing a line into the OOC. Each time I log in to Maya I have someone calling me a liar or a bitch. I have enough problems in my life, have some sportsmanship for gods sake.
Im not sure what you are meaning, and its not really ooc-meant, but would you disagree that Maya is a liar and has been acting bitchy? I mean seriously, she has really lied in every single letter to Outo, Marzo and Fingolfin for the last 1-2 months.
If you are gonna go down that road you must accept reprecussions.
Quote from: Tandaros on August 31, 2014, 07:43:20 PM
This is definitely crossing a line into the OOC. Each time I log in to Maya I have someone calling me a liar or a bitch. I have enough problems in my life, have some sportsmanship for gods sake.
Im really sorry if you feel bad about this ooc. Its not at all my intention and if we can talk about it somehow I would be happy to (in a more private forum).
As for IG, You cant be too surprised that Maya is being called bitch (mostly not by me!) and liar. She lied to Outo, Marzo and Fingolfin for the better part of 1-2 months. She has also lied to the "Rulers of Beluaterra" repeatedly since then.
If I can't call out your lies and call you a liar, then what am I supposed to do? :/
Personal OOC attacks aren't okay.
Sometimes someone just wants to roleplay a mean !@#$%^& though (That's me):
Roleplay from Red Marlboro (just in)
Message sent to everyone in your realm (40 recipients)
"Surely no one has more love for Sartanists than I," Margrave Red shouted, kicking a child into a bonfire.
Quote from: Noldorin on August 31, 2014, 08:15:18 PM
There's a difference in breaking treaties and signing treaties for the sole prupose of breaking them weeks later. I think.
Most of the alliances and diploacies was made during theth alliance. What happened then sticked on. Enweil died because they lied at the begining of the th invasion and pretended it didnt know where the assault would occur. You personally is at guilt for Enweils death (If you were the ruler, dont remember).
Melhed forced us piece by piece. The aggressed US, every single time. What would we do? Let them go on? We see where that leads. Now there is only total destruction left to choose from, or possibly let them live in someone elses lands (and Israel is a great example of how great that works out!).
Im not sure what you are meaning, and its not really ooc-meant, but would you disagree that Maya is a liar and has been acting bitchy? I mean seriously, she has really lied in every single letter to Outo, Marzo and Fingolfin for the last 1-2 months.
If you are gonna go down that road you must accept reprecussions.
1) The post-invasion and pre-invasion politics were the same. The alliances of before the invasion returned to pretty much the same when the invasion ended, with Enweil/Fronen vs neighbors, as always.
2) I didn't lie, I actually didn't have eyes beyond my tiny realm's borders (which was IVF, by the way, not Enweil). I did not know where the daimons went. That was also not at the beginning of the invasion. I also wasn't consulted on this move, and repeatedly told everyone not to send troops there. What happened to Fwuvoghor wasn't my fault, it was everyone else's. I wasn't asked if I needed help and I was ignored when I said I didn't. I did not even know any armies were coming until they arrived, because when I had said the daimons were attacking me,
everyone called me a liar. Why on earth should I have expected foreigners to come fight the very menace they denied existed? And how could you seriously expect me to know where the daimons were going?
3) I was the first one to call for humanity to band up against the daimons. I was calling for it weeks before it happened. Riombara's last strike against Enweil happened when it was clear the daimons were coming in full force. Enweil then accepted a very humiliating treaty to get peace with Riombara, and I had to go live there. A treaty which they decided to break when they found out I was leaking information (which I wasn't forbidden to do so by the treaty... I mean, really, did they expect me to stop acting as a consultant for Enweil's new ruler?).
4) It's a nice claim, but it's not true. Nothoi is among the last places I'd have expected for support. Enweil and Nothoi never got along, often fought each other. I had declared war on them and looted them not long before the invasion, too. When IVF died, one of my characters went there to start anew, and they executed him. They both also fought together against Enweil in the past, and Nothoi was perhaps the ones with the most animosities towards Enweil for most of their history. Yet, when Rio came to destroy Enweil, they changed their mind. If Nothoi could do this, why couldn't Thalmarkin? Riombara broke a treaty for the umpteenth time with no provocation at all from Enweil, who had just been continuously asking for peace for ages.
Again, no one says Thalmarkin should have done differently. But they could have. If either realm deaths or treaty breaking was so bothersome for you, either would have been reason enough to act. But it wasn't convenient for you, so you didn't. Others, who had just as little reason as you to support Enweil, decided to fight its destruction. These were choices. Nothoi wasn't forced to oppose Riombara, just as Thalmarkin wasn't forced to ignore it.
As for Melhed, people have repeatedly stated that they did not expect to break it so soon, not believing Rio's armies would come to help them. And so what if they betray you again? The point is not to have permanent allies, these don't exist. The point is to benefit from the peace while it lasts. Are you really so unimaginative that I need to spell out alternatives to further land grabs for a new treaty?
Stop OOC complaining about their behavior, and others' reactions to it. The way they play is no less legitimate than yours.
Hey Cheney, maybe writing several giant effortposts every single page about a war you're not in any way involved in is not helping the atmosphere of the thread.
Something to consider.
As I've explained already, Melhed signed the treaty because they had to. We had no alternative.
Then we started planning for expansion in the rogue regions in the south as a way to find new land - we even negotiated with Thalmarkin to try and work out a joint scheme for the expansion.
Then Riombara, after having betrayed Melhed to Thalmarkin when Pavel was trying to build a coalition against Fingolfin, suddenly decided to go to war in the name of "sovereignty" after discovering that, amazingly, Melhed had only agreed to recognise the King of Kings because they had no other choice.
That stirred things up in Melhed, especially when Thalmarkin demanded that Melhed get ready for war against the south at the same time. So naturally you then had arguments over which side we should join while Maya tried to play for time as much as possible, partly because of pro-southern plots against her.
Eventually it got to the point where the leaders of the south were ignoring Maya's letters and Riombara seemed to be doing nothing. We were just about to throw our lot in with the north when Riombara's general replied to an ultimatum Immanuel had sent him and announced that his army was two days away from Melhed and that the realm itself was just about to finish voting to go to war.
So suddenly Melhed had the option of joining the north and maybe picking up a few more regions from Fronen (which would almost certainly have meant killing a former ally) or joining forces with a massive Riombaran army to try and retake their old capital, their independence and their pride.
It was a no brainer, obviously.
But I don't think any of us could have predicted it until it happened.
Moderator note: This thread isn't going anywhere that could be vaguely construed as "good". Locking it. I suggest having a long think before starting another one on this war.