BattleMaster Community
BattleMaster => Locals => Atamara => Topic started by: Maxim on March 19, 2011, 12:19:54 AM
-
A tribute to the Greatest Realm there ever was.
Hail to the Screaming Chicken!
The Phoenix Shall Rise Again!
-
I pray it never does. I have seen too many realms "reborn" in my time playing BattleMaster, and they have all, without exception, been pathetic things.
-
Hail to the Screaming Chicken!
Hail to the Konungr, the Thane Jarl, the Grand Executioner, the Loot and Wealth Overseer!
Hail to Norland.
-
I pray it never does. I have seen too many realms "reborn" in my time playing BattleMaster, and they have all, without exception, been pathetic things.
And Norland was pathetic even while it lived.
-
Norland was the most vibrant, amusing and above all FUN realm I have played in.
Yes it could be silly at times, deadly serious at others, but things happened, memorable characters emerged, insane stories developed and it was always entertaining. The atmosphere encouraged everyone, established and newcomers alike, to join in the fun.
Norlanders loved Norland but were still willing to risk it all to keep things interesting for everyone else, even if that meant fighting apparently hopeless wars (and, for a long time, winning them).
I'd go as far as to say that if it had not been for Norland I might have got bored of BM long ago and packed it in. One of the reasons I keep playing is the hope that I can find a realm like that again. Not necessarily that mad but that interesting and passionate.
-
insane stories developed
Yeah that about did it for me. Hung around for honor/prestige for a while... but eventually got out.
-
I've always like Norland up until the end, both as their enemy and as a Norlander myself. The Viking Wars were fun... great battles, great enemies. After the Wars ended I decided to give Norland itself a go. Lighthearted atmosphere, fun players, and always something to do. I wrote a pre-battle speech as marshal of one of their armies, drunk off my tits, which was nice. I was its general for a while, kicked some MI ass, then got to be ruler for a month after the old one got himself seriously wounded in a lone suicide charge. Good times... But towards the end, I heard people say the atmosphere changed. A lot of the old players were gone, and the new ones didn't have a clue on how to handle things, and ultimately things got as far as Norland being wiped out by its former allies. Not the ending they deserved based on their entire lifespan, IMO.
-
It did get increasingly messy towards the end due to attrition and desperation in some circles but thoe of us from the old-guard who were left did what we could towards the end.
I was a bit dissapointed as to how it all ended TBH but all's fair in love and war (and politics) so can't really complain about MI winning by doing things Norland wouldn't even have contemplated for religious/moral/ethical/cultural reasons. At least Norland kept it's soul to the end.
-
Ah, that's really important. Now your viking souls get to fight in contentment among the Hall of Slain Heroes until the end of Atamara draws. Oh hey, the entire continent minus I think Minas Ithil is at war, against CE. Maybe the end of Atamara has come and the Norlanders need to come back to fight alongside their gods in this epic war? :D
-
Nah. Norland's time came and went. It was good while it lasted but Norlanders just wanted a good, simple, honest fight. Atamara is not the place for that now and has not been since Norland fell.
-
Norland was a funny-hyper active Realm, a lot of people wants to "create" Norland again, but it is impossible, in my opinion.
I was lucky, because I think that I had one character ( even two ) there during the gold days of Norland, and trust me when I tell you that, sometimes .. a lot of times, I cried of laughter reading the news of that mad realm.
But as I said, I think that is impossible to create "Norland" again, and an error. Too much people wants that Realm destroyed. Al we can do ( the former Norlanders ) is to try to bring some fun to the game in Norland costume... ARF!
But Norland means sad things for me too, as player. Those days were my gold days too, and Regulus´ is unable to be the same "viking" now. Also, I failed to create another character with "personality".
About the last days of Norland... I must admit that those were the worst days for me as BM player ( except for those days when some characters were killed or deleted ). Due to a twist of fate... Regulus the Norlander had to make a hard decission, a really hard decission... the fate of Norland was in his hands... when he was the Ruler of other Realm. I realized ( OOC ), in that momment, the difference between the point of view of the things when you are in Norland, and when you are in another Realm, even when you are a former Norlander.
They decided to die fighting, and they died fighting.
-
Bleh, some former Norlanders came to Eston when Norland died, most annoying bunch of characters ever.
-
Bleh, some former Norlanders came to Eston when Norland died, most annoying bunch of characters ever.
Let me guess... Xaphan, Anneliese, Davendrall... aka Dumb, Dumber and Dumbest.
-
Let me guess... Xaphan, Anneliese, Davendrall... aka Dumb, Dumber and Dumbest.
Yes.
-
Yes.
Well, Carelia certainly thanks you for siphoning off this filth towards us >:(
-
Gotta love that vulgarity button!
-
Well, Carelia certainly thanks you for siphoning off this filth towards us >:(
Yeah, I heard they went that way. I'm terribly sorry, really.
Gotta love that vulgarity button!
Yes. Very much so.
Also, once Kerwin became King. The first time they broke a law: BANNED.
-
Let me guess... Xaphan, Anneliese, Davendrall... aka Dumb, Dumber and Dumbest.
I'm pretty sure only one of them was ever a Norlander. The others just pretend to have been.
-
I'm pretty sure only one of them was ever a Norlander. The others just pretend to have been.
Wow... that's even worse! :o
-
I honestly would not wish former Norland nobles on my enemies. You have my condolences. :)
Anneliese and Davendrall are... I suppose they are parodies of Norland nobles. Considering that Norland had a squirrel for a Prime Minister for a while, you'd have to go pretty over the top to parody them.
Having said that, I am sad that there is now one fewer Republic on Atamara.
-
Let me guess... Xaphan, Anneliese, Davendrall... aka Dumb, Dumber and Dumbest.
I would say that the names are in the wrong order but .. ;D
I myself enjoyed Norland a lot, friends made and loads of fun due to Norrland and I must say that putting Norland down was the hardest thing I have been part of during my years in BM :'(
-
Ah, yes, Norland. Us Darkans had much fun using your capital as a training ground for our troops, and we thank you for it.
-
Yeah, I heard they went that way. I'm terribly sorry, really.
Yes. Very much so.
Well, Xaphan died in a battle a while ago, and the two bozos have deleted or paused today, so... you're off the hook, mister.
-
Well, Xaphan died in a battle a while ago, and the two bozos have deleted or paused today, so... you're off the hook, mister.
I've noticed that I don't have 1000 pointless RPs to scan through today... Must be a sign of spring.
-
1000 pointless RPS better than non at all
-
When I very first joined BM, I based my choice of which realm to choose on AT based on their Government type and flag.
I was very tempted by the rising phoenix, however I ended up choosing the CE. Something very regal about that Gold Cagilan lion on a red field.
I'm extremely glad I did not choose Norland now, for I very much doubt I'd still be here today. That kind of RP would have spoiled the whole game for me. Crazy chickens and squirrels and what not? Call me a prude, but I liked the atmosphere of the CE.
In fact, even as ruler of Coria, I still think I enjoyed the CE as a mere Knight just as much. Yeah I didn't have as much power, and the travel times were a pain, but you certainly felt like you belonged there.
-
It helps if you consider that everyone in Norland was pretty drunk most of the time.
-
It helps if you consider that everyone in Norland was pretty drunk most of the time.
Characters or players!? :P
-
Characters or players!? :P
Both sometimes ;D
The zany side of Norland is over-exaggerated, perhaps because it's unusual and so sticks in the mind more than the more mundane things. Most people only occasionally flirted with silliness and most of the silliness could be rationalised as being the sort of army humour used to keep spirits up and encourage a sense of camaraderie. Princess Lucky was probably never actually used as a siege engine and likely didn't really eat an enemy scout when her supper was delayed.. but the thought she might have sure cheers you and your shrinking band of comrades as you march through another cold and muddy field on your way to another brutal battle. I doubt that human nature has evolved so much that people in the middle-ages did not have a sense of humour, and even a dark, silly and bawdy one from time to time.
Sure, the Viking culture in Norland was a caricature (though certain people had enough knowledge to add some authenticity) but most realms are a caricature of medieval culture to some extent due to the limits of players' historical knowledge.
-
Norland was indeed fun.
Towards the end it became a little messy, that´s true...
but I think I would do most things agains if I could (I would definetly execute DA3 again...it was good).
Then it came the promisse to help restoring Norland for a while, but after Eston, I realized that there is no way Norland can be restored...and even if it is, it won´t have the same energy that the golden age of Norland had.
Hail Norland!
Hail the Spoons! (like Gunner liked to add)
-
Characters or players!? :P
To quote a better man than I ; "The characters were drunk. The players were on cocaine"
Valak being the exception of course, he didn't drink but he was addicted to powdered milk.
-
Too much Vulture Spleen Vodka, Shiverwood Squirrel Ale and Melmoor Moonshine can do strange things to a man...
-
I don't think the purpose of this forum is to call out or bash individual players (or characters) for having annoying RP. Just ignore it rather than driving people away from the game because they don't play the way that you want them to.
One of the things that I love most about Battlemaster is that it isn't like the rest of the internet. Is that going to change now that we have a forum?
-
One of the things that I love most about Battlemaster is that it isn't like the rest of the internet.
The annoying and silly RP's are exactly what are attempting to make Battlemaster like the rest of the internet, to me!
Frankly, they sound a lot like the crap that gets produced on a forum! :o
-
I don't think the purpose of this forum is to call out or bash individual players (or characters) for having annoying RP. Just ignore it rather than driving people away from the game because they don't play the way that you want them to.
One of the things that I love most about Battlemaster is that it isn't like the rest of the internet. Is that going to change now that we have a forum?
Better yet, have the judge fine them ("For the love of Magnus, what were you thinking, throwing *food* at your fellow nobles? You will compensate them for the damages, and please reflect on your behavior!") then have your character or a group of characters strict-grandmother them into acting a bit more like proper nobles. If that doesn't work, then I still think it would be better to continue expressing your character's disapproval of this other noble's behavior through RP than to ignore it (it's no good to have the crazy voice be the only voice everyone hears, because then it's not "this character is too silly for me", it's "this realm is too silly for me") But all in all, I think you'd be surprised by how willing people are to play along with you if you take an interest in them.
-
The annoying and silly RP's are exactly what are attempting to make Battlemaster like the rest of the internet, to me!
Frankly, they sound a lot like the crap that gets produced on a forum! :o
The play on Dwilight, the strict SMA island. Otherwise I would say that if one realm doesn't maintain the right atmosphere for you, leave, but don't try to impose your standards on everyone else.
For my part I spent several months in Norland relatively early on in my BM career. It was a fun place. Certainly the atmosphere was at times silly bordering on the ridiculous, but the laughs were genuine.
-
The play on Dwilight, the strict SMA island.
I do. I love it. All islands should be SMA, IMO.
-
I do. I love it. All islands should be SMA, IMO.
bah, people that don't like SMA need somewhere to play as well.
-
bah, people that don't like SMA need somewhere to play as well.
I know, I know.... I just don't get how anyone could not love SMA! :o
-
My family is from Norland! ;D But we stole Melmoor away from them and then got OOC-!@#$ed by Sordnaz in the end. It was super-lame as it was only my second lordship :'(
-
My family is from Norland! ;D But we stole Melmoor away from them and then got OOC-!@#$ed by Sordnaz in the end. It was super-lame as it was only my second lordship :'(
You really need to get your facts straight before whining on the forum like a little child who dropped his candybar!
The reason Sordnaz attacked Norland was known in advance as he warned Norland to go against their own treaty, other realms told Norland the same including Caergoth but the ruler of Norland decided on a gamble that it was just empty words....it was not. It was all talked about infront of ALL the rulers in the council before Norland decided to act so if anyone is to blame for the fall of Norland it was their ruler and no one else.
Norland was a few weeks away from expansion but patience was not a virtue known to them I guess as they had to act premature, the plan was simple and understood by all but in the end discarded by Norland for reasons unknown to all but their ruler.
I doubt you can find anyone involved who support your statement as even norlanders have been cursing the actions taken by the incompetent ruler of Norland.
I have never ever used OOC to gain advantage in BM and I can say that you lost all credibility from my part by accusing me of doing so, you lost so suck it up and move on like any man would and dont use silly made up lies to cover up your own failure.
-
My family is from Norland! ;D But we stole Melmoor away from them and then got OOC-!@#$ed by Sordnaz in the end. It was super-lame as it was only my second lordship :'(
I'm with johnny/sordnaz on this one. He's never done anything like what you accused him of. I was a part of BM at the time in question, and Sordnaz copy/pasted pages and pages of IC ruler channel information to the rest of us, showing us what a fool the ruler of Norland was.
-
When you allow your realm to be run by Archbanes and Vanimedles, it's only a matter of time before they rally everyone against you, including your allies. Stupidity comes at a price. You had it coming. And I say that as a former ruler and big fan of 'old' Norland.
-
You really need to get your facts straight before whining on the forum like a little child who dropped his candybar!
The reason Sordnaz attacked Norland was known in advance as he warned Norland to go against their own treaty, other realms told Norland the same including Caergoth but the ruler of Norland decided on a gamble that it was just empty words....it was not. It was all talked about infront of ALL the rulers in the council before Norland decided to act so if anyone is to blame for the fall of Norland it was their ruler and no one else.
Norland was a few weeks away from expansion but patience was not a virtue known to them I guess as they had to act premature, the plan was simple and understood by all but in the end discarded by Norland for reasons unknown to all but their ruler.
I doubt you can find anyone involved who support your statement as even norlanders have been cursing the actions taken by the incompetent ruler of Norland.
I have never ever used OOC to gain advantage in BM and I can say that you lost all credibility from my part by accusing me of doing so, you lost so suck it up and move on like any man would and dont use silly made up lies to cover up your own failure.
You assume too much. I wasn't talking about the war at all but rather when my character Channing switched Melmoor's allegiance to BoM. The region then went rogue and Sordnaz promised Channing would be lord again. Upon a successful TO of Melmoor, the Marshal of one of your armies was appointed the lord rather than Channing. The Marshal's name started with an "A", I remember this clearly. Upon a heated message sent to you, I received an OOC reply that you had clicked his name instead of mine, in the appoint-lord-page or something, a mistake you claimed because our names were next to each other. But there were a good 5-6 other nobles who were between Channings and the newly appointed lord. I was very taken aback by your excuse as it didn't fit at all.
I certainly am not complaining about the war and how it came to pass nor the fall of Norland.
Also, when I said "We" in my previous comment, I meant we as in my family, not Norland. As well as "them" is Norland.
-
In other words you are whining and assuming things calling me a liar...
-
You assume too much. I wasn't talking about the war at all but rather when my character Channing switched Melmoor's allegiance to BoM.
So YOU are the one who toke my spoons huh? u.u
I think I still hold the title of "the least amount of time as a lord of Melmoor" everytime I was appointed, with two diferent chars, I couldn´t stay more than 2 days as lord.
Hey johnny, one thing that was brought up for us in Norland was that the execution of DA3 was one of the reasons the war against Norland began, how much weight in this(to attack Norland) decision his execution actually had?
-
Hey johnny, one thing that was brought up for us in Norland was that the execution of DA3 was one of the reasons the war against Norland began, how much weight in this(to attack Norland) decision his execution actually had?
It wasn't - as I recall - so much the execution itself, but the manner of execution and treatment of the corpse afterwards.
-
I'm not mad anymore but for a newer-ish player it was somewhat annoying that the reason was OOC. And your answer sounded a bit fishy. So no I didn't believe you.. but I'm not willing to put that between us as players. I'm a pretty easy going player myself and I apologize for my rude comment that was originally taken the wrong way.
I mean who really enjoys being duped for a their 2nd ever lordship with an OOC reason? Just laying down the facts
-
It wasn't - as I recall - so much the execution itself, but the manner of execution and treatment of the corpse afterwards.
So they didn´t like it that I cutted his head, smashed his chest, sent his heart to MI and put his head in Mansbridge as a warning to all infiltrators and burned the rest? I tought it was a good RP (one of my favorites...to bad I lost it)
As noble and former ruler, this was best than just hanging him...
-
So they didn´t like it that I cutted his head, smashed his chest, sent his heart to MI and put his head in Mansbridge as a warning to all infiltrators and burned the rest? I tought it was a good RP (one of my favorites...to bad I lost it)
As noble and former ruler, this was best than just hanging him...
No, no one liked that you desecrated the corpse of a royal. Unless my memory is failing me, the handling of DA3 was thing that finally turned the Barony against Norland.
-
So YOU are the one who toke my spoons huh? u.u
I think I still hold the title of "the least amount of time as a lord of Melmoor" everytime I was appointed, with two diferent chars, I couldn´t stay more than 2 days as lord.
Hey johnny, one thing that was brought up for us in Norland was that the execution of DA3 was one of the reasons the war against Norland began, how much weight in this(to attack Norland) decision his execution actually had?
From Sordnaz side it didnt matter at all, DA3 had turned crazy and became a criminal and criminals who got decapitated or whatever deserved their faith and as an educated enlightened royal he should have known better. I remember saying that if Norland was wrong then any royal can use the escape from execution card. As for the treatment of the body afterwards I can only say what sordnaz thought and that is that it was not the body of the former MI ruler but rather the one of a viscious criminals who had forfeited all respect and former glory by becoming the man he did.
There was one reason for the war and one only, Norland should NOT have attacked MI at that point and they knew it, I heard that many new Norland players lacked patience and wanted more action...combine that with lousy leadership and the outcome was devastating. There was plans for a greater Norland to restore its former glory at that time but I guess stalling for a few weeks was not an option :(
-
I'm not mad anymore but for a newer-ish player it was somewhat annoying that the reason was OOC. And your answer sounded a bit fishy. So no I didn't believe you.. but I'm not willing to put that between us as players. I'm a pretty easy going player myself and I apologize for my rude comment that was originally taken the wrong way.
I mean who really enjoys being duped for a their 2nd ever lordship with an OOC reason? Just laying down the facts
I guess it must have been quite a blow even if the OOC reason was an accident, as for easy going...try being a ruler or a hot headed general arguing for a point for a few months and you will find out what rude comments really are about and you will find ways to take deep breaths while biting your tongue only to hug and kiss the next week :) Your comment was in line with your thoughts and it takes so little to make it written and I do not hold it against you as statements that not is clouded or twisted in fancy words actually show how you really feel about things.
Just noticed that one of my little chars is under your command now :D
Anyway, if it would make you feel better your char is welcome to BoM and I will make sure he and Sordie gets in an old fashioned pub brawl ;)
-
There was one reason for the war and one only, Norland should NOT have attacked MI at that point and they knew it, I heard that many new Norland players lacked patience and wanted more action...combine that with lousy leadership and the outcome was devastating. There was plans for a greater Norland to restore its former glory at that time but I guess stalling for a few weeks was not an option :(
Of course. In the Great Northern Viking Co-prosperity Sphere, all have to march in lock-step with Great Comrade Sordnaz, or else you'll get purged. ;)
-
Of course. In the Great Northern Viking Co-prosperity Sphere, all have to march in lock-step with Great Comrade Sordnaz, or else you'll get purged. ;)
Welcome to the only proper tyrany in the game. I like to call it home.
-
Of course. In the Great Northern Viking Co-prosperity Sphere, all have to march in lock-step with Great Comrade Sordnaz, or else you'll get purged. ;)
Two steps behind if we are to loot and two steps ahead if we are to visit my mother ;)
-
There was one reason for the war and one only, Norland should NOT have attacked MI at that point and they knew it, I heard that many new Norland players lacked patience and wanted more action...combine that with lousy leadership and the outcome was devastating. There was plans for a greater Norland to restore its former glory at that time but I guess stalling for a few weeks was not an option :(
there was some of the old ones impatient too...but we weren´t getting no info about the plans to restore Norland, and the focus was on the agreement that MI should deliver Mansbridge...
-
but we weren´t getting no info about the plans to restore Norland
Actually, you were. At the time Hang was the Barony's general, and he made several attempts to make both Norland's ruler and general see reason. It was very obvious to us what was going to happen, but the ruling class in Norland simply did not care and rejected all the help we were able to offer.
-
Two steps behind if we are to loot and two steps ahead if we are to visit my mother ;)
Isaiah Harte is gonna annoy the piss out of you, then :P
-
Well, speaking as the General in question at the time I don't recall the way forward with the issue of Mansbridge being made clear by anyone that had more substance than "you can trust MI" which had, over years of war, repeatedly been proven not to be true and in any case was being said by Norland's former allies who had recently betrayed them to side with MI against Norland on the flimsiest of pretexts (in a Norlander's eyes a royal loses his status when he lowers himself to murdering nobles in their sleep and should be treated like any other common criminal).
MI had promised to return Mansbridge to Norland once relations improved but were vague about the terms and refused to clarify them before the treaty was signed. Many in Norland wanted to refuse to sign the treaty until that was rectified because they fully expected MI to renage on this deal but the then King signed anyway. Norland repeatedly tried to raise relations, even offering to feed MI's starving regions but were met by silence. As MI started to garrison Mansbride and allow their allies' troops to pass through it (against the terms of the peace treaty which forbade any military forces in the region) it looked like they indeed had no intention of honouring the treaty. Given their history of double-dealing and political treachery there was no reason to trust them to.
MI had failed to honour the treaty so Norland took back what had been promised.
MI's new allies then obligingly wiped Norland off the map for them, incidentally gaining much gold and land in the process.
Whatever else was known, believed or talked about outside of Norland this was all that Norlanders saw.
Sure, we could have waited and unspecified amount of time to see if MI might do an about-face and honour their treaty or, when the threat of war in the south faded, use Mansbridge as a staging post for an attack on Norland but standing idle in the face of treachery and threat because it was safer to do so was not Norland's nature. When the question of taking Mansbridge by force was raised the reply came back from all levels of Norland and that reply was "fight!".
-
Sounds like probably Norland's ruler at the time did a poor job of explaining the political situation to the rest of the realm, including the council. The ruler is the one who should have been aware of what was going on, who would have been warned by other rulers what war with MI was going to result in.
-
Perhaps.
Or maybe Norland simply did not back down to threats, however deadly, if they thought they were right.
That was the soul of Norlanders; better to fight and die than to accept decception out of fear.
-
Well, speaking as the General in question at the time I don't recall the way forward with the issue of Mansbridge being made clear by anyone that had more substance than "you can trust MI" which had, over years of war, repeatedly been proven not to be true and in any case was being said by Norland's former allies who had recently betrayed them to side with MI against Norland on the flimsiest of pretexts (in a Norlander's eyes a royal loses his status when he lowers himself to murdering nobles in their sleep and should be treated like any other common criminal).
MI had promised to return Mansbridge to Norland once relations improved but were vague about the terms and refused to clarify them before the treaty was signed. Many in Norland wanted to refuse to sign the treaty until that was rectified because they fully expected MI to renage on this deal but the then King signed anyway. Norland repeatedly tried to raise relations, even offering to feed MI's starving regions but were met by silence. As MI started to garrison Mansbride and allow their allies' troops to pass through it (against the terms of the peace treaty which forbade any military forces in the region) it looked like they indeed had no intention of honouring the treaty. Given their history of double-dealing and political treachery there was no reason to trust them to.
MI had failed to honour the treaty so Norland took back what had been promised.
MI's new allies then obligingly wiped Norland off the map for them, incidentally gaining much gold and land in the process.
Whatever else was known, believed or talked about outside of Norland this was all that Norlanders saw.
Sure, we could have waited and unspecified amount of time to see if MI might do an about-face and honour their treaty or, when the threat of war in the south faded, use Mansbridge as a staging post for an attack on Norland but standing idle in the face of treachery and threat because it was safer to do so was not Norland's nature. When the question of taking Mansbridge by force was raised the reply came back from all levels of Norland and that reply was "fight!".
I was about to cut your message short but I rather keep it all just to be sure I dont miss out on anything.
Norlanders must have been blind and deaf as the plan was not to have Mansbridge handed over to you but to let the treaty run out and then attack MI in full force making the northern part of MI to fall into Norlands hands once again, MI suspected that and thats why they did fill Mansbridge up with Militia. The time was specified in the treaty but Norland decided to break in and by doing so the guardians of the treaty had no options then to fulfil their duty. There were no backstabbing at all as the discussion in the rulers channel revealed all that happened prior to Norlands attack on MI.
Norland had failed to honour the treaty so the guardians of the treaty acted as promised.
I know for a fact that several Norlander knew what happened outside and what was talked about outside of Norland as they were informed by Sordnaz and the former ruler of Caergoth at the time.
None of the allies told Norland to trust Minas Ithil, it was the other way around as we all told Norland to muster for war.
Minas Ithil had no new allies and BoM never became one as it was not in their interest.
There are no defence for Norlands actions at the time except that the common nobles might have been fooled by their ruler and that those who had facts was ignored, at the begining of the war BoM was dancing around in the north doing as little as possible while trying to negotiate with Norland but as that failed the war then turned even uglier and all because Norland broke the treaty.
If its true that the Norland council was unaware about the plans then we all were deceived as we were told many time to wait for the Althing to discuss things before the ruler came back to us when we made the plans to rebuild Norland into the former self.
-
I was about to cut your message short but I rather keep it all just to be sure I dont miss out on anything.
Norlanders must have been blind and deaf as the plan was not to have Mansbridge handed over to you but to let the treaty run out and then attack MI in full force making the northern part of MI to fall into Norlands hands once again, MI suspected that and thats why they did fill Mansbridge up with Militia. The time was specified in the treaty but Norland decided to break in and by doing so the guardians of the treaty had no options then to fulfil their duty. There were no backstabbing at all as the discussion in the rulers channel revealed all that happened prior to Norlands attack on MI.
Norland had failed to honour the treaty so the guardians of the treaty acted as promised.
I know for a fact that several Norlander knew what happened outside and what was talked about outside of Norland as they were informed by Sordnaz and the former ruler of Caergoth at the time.
None of the allies told Norland to trust Minas Ithil, it was the other way around as we all told Norland to muster for war.
Minas Ithil had no new allies and BoM never became one as it was not in their interest.
There are no defence for Norlands actions at the time except that the common nobles might have been fooled by their ruler and that those who had facts was ignored, at the begining of the war BoM was dancing around in the north doing as little as possible while trying to negotiate with Norland but as that failed the war then turned even uglier and all because Norland broke the treaty.
If its true that the Norland council was unaware about the plans then we all were deceived as we were told many time to wait for the Althing to discuss things before the ruler came back to us when we made the plans to rebuild Norland into the former self.
Shhh you are applying logic and reason to BM. They will burn you as a witch A WITCH.
-
I was about to cut your message short but I rather keep it all just to be sure I dont miss out on anything.
Norlanders must have been blind and deaf as the plan was not to have Mansbridge handed over to you but to let the treaty run out and then attack MI in full force making the northern part of MI to fall into Norlands hands once again, MI suspected that and thats why they did fill Mansbridge up with Militia. The time was specified in the treaty but Norland decided to break in and by doing so the guardians of the treaty had no options then to fulfil their duty. There were no backstabbing at all as the discussion in the rulers channel revealed all that happened prior to Norlands attack on MI.
Norland had failed to honour the treaty so the guardians of the treaty acted as promised.
I know for a fact that several Norlander knew what happened outside and what was talked about outside of Norland as they were informed by Sordnaz and the former ruler of Caergoth at the time.
None of the allies told Norland to trust Minas Ithil, it was the other way around as we all told Norland to muster for war.
Minas Ithil had no new allies and BoM never became one as it was not in their interest.
There are no defence for Norlands actions at the time except that the common nobles might have been fooled by their ruler and that those who had facts was ignored, at the begining of the war BoM was dancing around in the north doing as little as possible while trying to negotiate with Norland but as that failed the war then turned even uglier and all because Norland broke the treaty.
If its true that the Norland council was unaware about the plans then we all were deceived as we were told many time to wait for the Althing to discuss things before the ruler came back to us when we made the plans to rebuild Norland into the former self.
I was not part of the Althing on those days, since my char was new and I wasn´t a lord yet, but from what I can remember, we were informed about was that MI had broken the treaty refusing to hand over the region, and not improving relations. And the guardians of the treaty weren´t going to do ANYTHING to fix that, so either we realized we were never getting Mansbridge and let it be, since MI wouldn´t handle it and the guardians wouldn´t do anything, or we attacked and performed a TO on the region.
That´s why we ended up voting for peace. I believe if there was a plan to wait for the treaty to expire and then attack we would have waited, improved our regions and army.
-
Well sadly enough there was a plan :(
-
To be honest my memory of events is hazy and lacks detail (refer to the "were Norlanders drunk IC or OOC" question) but many were not convinced that any plan that may have been mentioned would be enacted. There was certaintly that MI would back-out of their obligations if they possibly could.
In any case the details are largely irrelevant. Norland thought they had been cheated and, for better or worse, it was not in a Norlander's nature to allow that to pass whatever the consequences. Suicidal, perhaps, but individually and collectively Norlanders would die for the code of honour dictated by their nation, their religion and their hearts.. after all, Valhalla awaited those who followed this code.
That may seem crazy to many realms and religions but that is pretty much the point of this thread. Norland was relatively unique for many reasons, one of which being the view that destruction was better than dishonour.
-
I was not part of the Althing on those days, since my char was new and I wasn´t a lord yet, but from what I can remember, we were informed about was that MI had broken the treaty refusing to hand over the region, and not improving relations. And the guardians of the treaty weren´t going to do ANYTHING to fix that, so either we realized we were never getting Mansbridge and let it be, since MI wouldn´t handle it and the guardians wouldn´t do anything, or we attacked and performed a TO on the region.
That´s why we ended up voting for peace. I believe if there was a plan to wait for the treaty to expire and then attack we would have waited, improved our regions and army.
There was a plan, and Xaphan knew it, but he attacked Mansbridge anyway. Thats why Regulus hates Xaphan. Xaphan is, in the eyes of Regulus, responsible for the destruction of Norland.
-
Pah, Norland was the realm which broke the Protectorate of Hasland. Clearly the realm that spawned Norland was superior in every way, it even managed to hold out against more realms for longer =)
-
Pah, Norland was the realm which broke the Protectorate of Hasland. Clearly the realm that spawned Norland was superior in every way, it even managed to hold out against more realms for longer =)
To be fair, combat has changed a *lot* since 2003...
Edit: And travel...
And the IR...
and the players...
and just about everything else, really. Was population even dynamic that far back?
-
Combat has only seriously changed very recently. Siege engines were around etc. They only thing that wasn't really was equipment was the same value for def. and off. and cohesion didn't exist.
I can recall population, but can't recall if it actually declined.. erm it was 8 years ago! There was an option to call out the militia which gave you 800 man units in the capital when it's threatened (still around? not sure). It was a hell of a fight though.
-
Combat has only seriously changed very recently. Siege engines were around etc. They only thing that wasn't really was equipment was the same value for def. and off. and cohesion didn't exist.
I'm pretty sure equipment damage didn't exist, or was only a fraction of what it is now.
-
Combat has only seriously changed very recently. Siege engines were around etc. They only thing that wasn't really was equipment was the same value for def. and off. and cohesion didn't exist.
I can recall population, but can't recall if it actually declined.. erm it was 8 years ago! There was an option to call out the militia which gave you 800 man units in the capital when it's threatened (still around? not sure). It was a hell of a fight though.
Eh... recently?
There have been changes to combat several times both directly and indirectly during the last 8 years, cavalry with bows is still my dream even if it would be banned in the Barony due to cultural reasons. I remember when they introduced the marshal system and the confusion that followed, a longer chain of command with weary generals who was used to control the battlefield . What confused me was the absence of squirrels in Shiverwood but I guess Tom had killed them to make way for the northern vikings march towards Brackhead.
To be honest I like that the game changes even if I curse most of the time as most changes is a nerf towards my characters not counting when Zortagh become the richest character ever in the BM history (Taxes almost killed him ) ;)
-
Norland for me was always that realm I loved to hate, and allowed me to advance to General and crush vikings when they tried to invade. That was some pretty bitter fighting in the Eston, BoM, Norland vs MI wars. Great RP and char interaction on MI's side. I thoroughly enjoyed it, and was disappointed in Norland's demise... They went out with more of a whimper than a roar.
-
You can thank us Darkans for that. Turned into free training for our troops.
-
I can confirm population was static back then, I was the one who proposed the change in the old wiki, back when it was still the Gomez family. It was implemented around 2007 or 2008.
Anyway, Hail Norland!