BattleMaster Community
BattleMaster => Locals => Dwilight => Topic started by: Foundation on June 15, 2012, 03:46:29 PM
-
Someone organize a war... Aurvandil is becoming too political now. :P
-
Good. Let them collapse in on themselves, letting all the clan-power go to waste.
-
Ive promised (/threatened) to send a char to any realm which promises a war with Aurvandil (if Corsanctum should decide to attack them, ::). I will keep my ears sharpened!
-
Someone organize a war... Aurvandil is becoming too political now. :P
Join in on the war Against Asylon
-
Join in on the war Against Asylon
What would make it interesting is if they did but on Asylon's side.
-
just do a civil war
-
What would make it interesting is if they did but on Asylon's side.
Please, no. I have had all of the experience I ever want in fighting wars against those players. It's about the least fun thing I can imagine doing, and I wouldn't wish it on anyone.
Except the Cagilan Empire.
Just kidding. Seriously, I wouldn't wish it on my characters' worst enemies.
-
Someone organize a war... Aurvandil is becoming too political now. :P
Are you referring to Barca not declaring war, or the Grand Duchy handing back Madina city?
-
I don't know... I like them in their little nest. I don't want them to spread out and give us all problems...
-
In their current size they are already problematic enough. Threatening them with war in order to get Barca's lands back won't do much I fear.
-
Asylon has very good relations with Aurvandiil as of late... I will say nothing more.
-
Asylon has very good relations with Aurvandiil as of late... I will say nothing more.
If that's a joke, it's not funny. Those people are absolutely miserable to deal with. :(
-
I dont see Astrum rushing to help Asylon. :(
-
I dont see Astrum rushing to help Asylon. :(
Fair enough. IC you certainly have some reasons to seek their aid. On the other hand, has Glaumring considered the possible consequences of their involvement?
-
Fair enough. IC you certainly have some reasons to seek their aid. On the other hand, has Glaumring considered the possible consequences of their involvement?
Besides the fact that it will never work?
If anything just have Aurvandil declare war on the Zuma. They're likely the only ones capable of winning that war without complaining anyway.
-
On the other hand, has Glaumring considered the possible consequences of their involvement?
Glaumring.... considers consequences?
I DON'T BELIEVE IT!
-
Heh. At this point Glaumring is going to do anything to save his hide. Good thing Auravandil is a bit far away to be a constant player in the field.
-
Even the holy prophet supports Lady Kabrinski. The church is dead eyes now. Asylon is the last force of strong goodness in the west land willing to stand against tyranny. Even Terran folds before it. We will fight for freedom and a just land against fundamentalism and homogenization.
As of now none will help us. The Zuma are useless. Summerdale betrayed, Iashular,Astrum,Corsanctum and Kabrinskia essentially the same kingdoms. Morek inconsquential, D'Hara saving their own ass. Terran has bowed to Kabrinskia in a peace treaty. The Lurias far away and useless... Which leaves Aurvandiil and their nuclear navy... A vast army that seeths for vengeance against Astrum and the Astroist realms. If Asylon is to be used as a cutting board... Perhaps it is best if we at least choose what type of knife used on cutting up this land...
Aurvandiil probably wont join the war.. It is merely a dream.
-
Even the holy prophet supports Lady Kabrinski. The church is dead eyes now. Asylon is the last force of strong goodness in the west land willing to stand against tyranny. Even Terran folds before it. We will fight for freedom and a just land against fundamentalism and homogenization.
As of now none will help us. The Zuma are useless. Summerdale betrayed, Iashular,Astrum,Corsanctum and Kabrinskia essentially the same kingdoms. Morek inconsquential, D'Hara saving their own ass. Terran has bowed to Kabrinskia in a peace treaty. The Lurias far away and useless... Which leaves Aurvandiil and their nuclear navy... A vast army that seeths for vengeance against Astrum and the Astroist realms. If Asylon is to be used as a cutting board... Perhaps it is best if we at least choose what type of knife used on cutting up this land...
Aurvandiil probably wont join the war.. It is merely a dream.
Just wondering, but on an OOC basis, do you believe this to be true?
-
It is not a matter of winning or losing... Its a matter of chaos.
-
It's a matter of it being an extremely bad idea...
-
Only because your kingdom for a change would be the one under the boot since the begininng of Dwilight. It would be a great time for reflection in Astrum.
-
Glaumring, stop being such a sore loser. Besides, you, as a true Thulsoman, not one of those Saxons, should know better than to let that clan have power.
-
I'm just waiting for when the next wave of Astrum/Kabrinskia completely destroys the Asylon army and takes over Itau. Most of the Asylon nobles are blindly following Glaumring's propaganda that Asylon can withstand a simultaneous attack from the north and east.
*preps the "I told you so!" plans*
-
With nobles like Halleria who needs enemies.
Im not being a sore loser? im being attacked by 4 realms I considered friends up until a while ago. I considered the prophet my friend. I was an elder in the church for a time. Aurvandiil is the only way to stop Allison from taking over the church. The prophet has shown he is irrelevant. He has bowed to every snub that Allison has given him. Its over, its done. The church is infected by evil.
You guys have been hunting me since Virovene.
-
Terran has bowed to Kabrinskia in a peace treaty.
If by "bowed" you mean achieved every goal we set out to achieve when we declared war on Kabrinskia PLUS having Allison step down... then okay, we "bowed."
-
Glaumring, stop being such a sore loser. Besides, you, as a true Thulsoman, not one of those Saxons, should know better than to let that clan have power.
Why are you guys so worried? I was merely expressing an idea. Aurvandiil can do whatever they want. I dont control them.
-
If by "bowed" you mean achieved every goal we set out to achieve when we declared war on Kabrinskia PLUS having Allison step down... then okay, we "bowed."
Yes it was the wrong wording and you are right Terran did well. For now.... Once Asylon is gone, they will come for you next.
-
Yes it was the wrong wording and you are right Terran did well. For now.... Once Asylon is gone, they will come for you next.
First they came for the mad kings,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a mad king...
-
Yes it was the wrong wording and you are right Terran did well. For now.... Once Asylon is gone, they will come for you next.
We're still supporting Asylon defensively. No will cross Asylonian borders without meeting Terran troops as well.
-
With nobles like Halleria who needs enemies.
Im not being a sore loser? im being attacked by 4 realms I considered friends up until a while ago. I considered the prophet my friend. I was an elder in the church for a time. Aurvandiil is the only way to stop Allison from taking over the church. The prophet has shown he is irrelevant. He has bowed to every snub that Allison has given him. Its over, its done. The church is infected by evil.
You guys have been hunting me since Virovene.
You considered them friends and yet they have been hunting you since Virovene? What?
I did warn you, IC and OOC, that attacking Kabrinskia would have massive (SA) repercussions. It's nice to see you cast blame on everyone but yourself.
-
With nobles like Halleria who needs enemies.
Im not being a sore loser? im being attacked by 4 realms I considered friends up until a while ago. I considered the prophet my friend. I was an elder in the church for a time. Aurvandiil is the only way to stop Allison from taking over the church. The prophet has shown he is irrelevant. He has bowed to every snub that Allison has given him. Its over, its done. The church is infected by evil.
You guys have been hunting me since Virovene.
I'm afraid you have quite an inflated sense of self-importance. Asylon is nothing in the wider scheme of things. It's a realm with a few temples and a handful of followers, with half it's regions run by the remnants of hated Caerwyn. The only character of Church-wide importance is Glaumring, who was/is already regarded as raving mad, and who has a history of switching between rabidly pro-Allison to rabidly anti-Allison whenever it suites his purposes.
At the end of the day, whether Asylon falls or not is irrelevant to the wider controversies within the Church. Mathurin and other anti-Allison types have nothing to gain from defending Asylon, especially when your justification for the war boiled down to "we want this region" and the only claims you have to back it up are Caerwynian claims, which for obvious reasons no one in SA is going to recognize.
I'm sorry but Asylon is really nothing more or less than yet another realm that bit off more than it could chew. There is no church-wide conspiracy and Allison has not "taken over", you just very very badly misread the diplomatic situation.
-
There are only 3 or 4 nobles from Caerwyn in Asylon. Hardly half. Most of Asylon is new nobles.
-
I'm afraid you have quite an inflated sense of self-importance. Asylon is nothing in the wider scheme of things. It's a realm with a few temples and a handful of followers, with half it's regions run by the remnants of hated Caerwyn. The only character of Church-wide importance is Glaumring, who was/is already regarded as raving mad, and who has a history of switching between rabidly pro-Allison to rabidly anti-Allison whenever it suites his purposes.
At the end of the day, whether Asylon falls or not is irrelevant to the wider controversies within the Church. Mathurin and other anti-Allison types have nothing to gain from defending Asylon, especially when your justification for the war boiled down to "we want this region" and the only claims you have to back it up are Caerwynian claims, which for obvious reasons no one in SA is going to recognize.
I'm sorry but Asylon is really nothing more or less than yet another realm that bit off more than it could chew. There is no church-wide conspiracy and Allison has not "taken over", you just very very badly misread the diplomatic situation.
Touche touche. I am only as important as those who need my support. Asylon attacked Kabrinskia because we perceived the Daimons were going to enter the war on Kabrinskias side. We decided we would damage their economy and food production.
-
There are only 3 or 4 nobles from Caerwyn in Asylon. Hardly half. Most of Asylon is new nobles.
ah, my bad then- I assumed that many would have stayed in their regions.
Touche touche. I am only as important as those who need my support. Asylon attacked Kabrinskia because we perceived the Daimons were going to enter the war on Kabrinskias side. We decided we would damage their economy and food production.
The thing is that this is not the impression most characters would have got from the letters sent in game. Most of them were concerned with regions and the daimons were already leaving at that point. So while you might see it as a preemptive strike in the face of a daimon invasion, most others in game saw it as a land grab hence why you got the reaction you did from other realms.
-
It also does not reflect the IG claims for why Asylon started the war, nor is it supported by the IG actions taken by Asylon at the start of the war. But whatever...
-
All I'm saying is that you don't appear to have even considered the other consequences of allying with Aurvandil beyond the slim possibility that their big shiny army might bail you out of the hole you're digging yourself into. It's that kind of planning that got you into this position in the first place.
-
We arent digging any hole. I have diplomats out trying to make peace and communicate. Kabrinskia wants Itau and Astrum took Waleshire. The only land grabs have been your own realms. It has been stated to me even before this war that Allison wanted Itau. Its always been a sore spot for you guys. Asylon has renounced claims to Mech Alb and ceased takeovers. We are not in Astrum lands attacking, we only attack Kabrinskia, yet everything we do is ignored as the full thumb screws pf destroying our realm like Thulsoma/Averoth or Caerwyn. Its funny how quickly Asylon has been convienently turned into the newest pariah state.
You are welcome to try to get Itau... It wont happen. Asylon will be a quagmire. A diversion that will one day turn your own people against you.
-
Asylon will be a quagmire.
*Has a flashback to the Iraqi minister of information before the American invasion*
*spasms*
STAY AWAY FROM ASYLIRAQ!
-
"There are no Asylonian regions under attack!"
-
*Has a flashback to the Iraqi minister of information before the American invasion*
*spasms*
STAY AWAY FROM ASYLIRAQ!
10 years of Mission Accomplished...
-
10 years of Mission Accomplished...
Off-topic warning.
-
Oh so its ok for them to mention Iraq but when I do it its bad.
-
There is no church-wide conspiracy and Allison has not "taken over", you just very very badly misread the diplomatic situation.
If this is true, then...
attacking Kabrinskia would have massive (SA) repercussions.
...why is this so?
Just curious.
-
Glaumring mishandled the SA card very, very badly. Instead of isolating Kabrinskia, he gave the SA a common enemy to deal with - himself. He's taking down Asylon with him.
Kabrinskia will take Itau. Major Reasons Why This Will Happen:
1) A quarter of the Asylonian army is south dealing with monsters.
2) Another quarter of the army is/was sitting in Elets. They just got clobbered.
3) The last half of the army is either sitting around Via or in their own regions tending to administrative stuff.
4) Three regions - Kybcyell, Uppervia, and Itaufield - are open to attack. If they are taken, Asylon is cut in two/three.
5) Glaumring isn't doing himself any favors by calling the Auravandil/clan card or by being stubborn.
-
Its funny how quickly Asylon has been convienently turned into the newest pariah state.
You're the one that put on the red shirt.
-
Glaumring mishandled the SA card very, very badly. Instead of isolating Kabrinskia, he gave the SA a common enemy to deal with - himself. He's taking down Asylon with him.
So, just to repeat, this actually is about SA against Asylon? More or less how Glaumring's been saying all along but been dismissed as a crazy man for it?
-
So, just to repeat, this actually is about SA against Asylon? More or less how Glaumring's been saying all along but been dismissed as a crazy man for it?
If this was SA vs Asylon, you would be seeing Morek as well. Only a crusade can truly call all of SA realms. Glaumring changed his words several times before finally attacking Kabrinskia. He just played his cards badly and now he is paying the price.
-
For argument's sake, I'm sure there are a bunch of non-SA realms who'd like to kick Glaumring in the teeth just the same :p
-
The line between political and religious gets hazy with SA (theocracies being realm = religion), Right now it's politically SA vs Asylon (Corsanctum, Astrum, Kabrinskia, and Iashalur), but not (yet) a religious crusade.
EDIT: Glaumring is still probably a mad man, since he's switched from War With Kabrinskia By Defending Terran -> (Zuma jump in to defend Kabrinskia) -> Ceasefire with Kabrinskia -> War With Kabrinskia for Mech Alb / Elets -> (he's reminded that he ceased claims on Mech Alb as per Astrum) -> War With Kabrinskia For Pride's Sake.
-
The war is not, and has never been, "SA". It is several allied/federated realms dealing with the random acts of a Mad King.
-
Halleria you dont know !@#$, you are not on any of the military councils. Shut up already.
One guy was attacked in Elets, we told him to get out ge said he would take his chances.
The hilarity of how little you know of our military tactics only goes to show how well my plans to isolate you has worked. You are a general of a 3 man courtier army... Pleaser shut up.
It is a common tactic in propaganda to paint one as insane or mad... I am not mad. I am fighting a just fight against Kabrinskia, agsinst evil and corruption. One that many here are cowards to face. The behemoth of Astroism is rotten to the core.
Trust me you guys are more worried than we in Asylon are. The nobles in Asylon asides from Halleria are all very calm and following orders. We are enjoying this thoroughly.
-
If you're enjoying it that much, then cut out all the OOC bitching and propaganda, and get on with enjoying the game. That is, after all, why we all play.
-
So, just to repeat, this actually is about SA against Asylon? More or less how Glaumring's been saying all along but been dismissed as a crazy man for it?
No, it's realms that happen to be SA against Asylon. Astrum defending their colony (Kabrinskia) from a war of aggression (and defending their land claims, which were challenged by Glaumring at the start of the war; that, by the way, was a hell of a diplomatic insult to Astrum) and calling in support from their other colony (Iashalur), + Corsanctum who I'm pretty sure just did it because they were bored (their "Defender of the Faith" CB not jiving at all with the CB's of everyone else).
If it *is* just a big disguised Crusade against Asylon then it's been hid very well from my character.
-
If you're enjoying it that much, then cut out all the OOC bitching and propaganda, and get on with enjoying the game. That is, after all, why we all play.
Can't agree more. Don't know why you are complaining if you are enjoying this so much Glaumring.
-
Ya'll come to every dance I throw and then bitch the next morning about the hangover.
-
Ya'll come to every dance I throw and then bitch the next morning about the hangover.
Well stop slipping us roofies.
Oh, who am I kidding. Never stop, G.
-
Go epic or GTFO...
-
Glaumwin's law: As a thread in Dwilight grows longer, the probability of a discussion about Asylon or its Mad King approaches 1.
-
Glaumwin's law: As a thread in Dwilight grows longer, the probability of a discussion about Asylon or its Mad King approaches 1.
Our troll panda Foundation ftw.
What was this thread even about again? lol. This thread is turning into an Asylon thread I think...
-
So, just to repeat, this actually is about SA against Asylon? More or less how Glaumring's been saying all along but been dismissed as a crazy man for it?
No. Neither Glaumring nor Feylonis really know anything, they're both just seeing what they want to see and neither one has any evidence to back up their claims. They are making assumptions that are driven by their respective biases. That or Glaumring is just making things up for fun, I can never tell with him.
All it really boils down to is that Glaumring's character got overconfident, raised the ire of the wrong people, and made several mistakes. Those people then exploited his mistakes to organize the current war. There's no conspiracy, it's not a religious thing, and Allison actually had very little to do with it beyond baiting Asylon in the first place. She probably assumed that if she could provoke either Terran or Asylon into going too far, Astrum would intervene, and she assumed correctly. Terran was too smart to fall for it, as evidenced by their careful diplomacy with Astrum, but Asylon walked right into it. That's Allison for you. She's very crafty.
-
Or this is exactly what I wanted... You never know... You will soon... Muhahahahagdsghjjghhj
-
Or this is exactly what I wanted... You never know... You will soon... Muhahahahagdsghjjghhj
Interesting. If Glaumring can make this war bigger, I welcome that!
-
Indirik is also talking out his ass... His little formula applies to everyone.
-
I didn't know I had a formula.
-
You don't thats the point.
-
Terran was too smart to fall for it, as evidenced by their careful diplomacy with Astrum, but Asylon walked right into it. That's Allison for you. She's very crafty.
"Careful diplomacy" is the real religion of Terran, and we are definitely a theocracy.
-
"Careful diplomacy" is the real religion of Terran, and we are definitely a theocracy.
That is why Terran has survived for so long.... lol
-
The war is not, and has never been, "SA". It is several allied/federated realms dealing with the random acts of a Mad King.
Mad King? Pfft. How many of his own children has he personally slaughtered? You know, back in MY day, we had to earn our Mad King titles. Now it's just a cheap label slapped on any old ruler with a bit of cranky disposition.
But seriously, I would say it is SA inasmuch as SA is being used for a vehicle for propaganda and alliance-making in this particular war. Allison did openly call for rebellion against Asylon in SA discussions. Magistratum and counter-Magistratums were made by opposing sides. Now obviously there's nothing official, no 'crusades' declared, the Prophet is silent... but official-ness doesn't mean so much when it comes to grinding a realm into the dirt by any means possible.
-
This is what they do. And this is why one must stand up and fight against it.
-
In this case, the only thing SA had to do with it was to provide a vehicle for Glaumring to show his irrationality to everyone else concerned. So, sure, it provided the vehicle for the alliance-making to stand against the source of instability for the whole region. Because the alliance standing against Asylon is 75% regional, plus Corsanctum who was probably mostly bored and looking for something to do.
-
Well if making Dwilight a safe and boring place to live i'd have joined Astrum. :P
-
Sour grapes. ;)
-
You'll miss Glaumring!
-
Well, it looks like Kabrinskia just hit Kybcyell, as predicted. I may not be in any of the military councils, but so far close to all of my predicted movements have happened. I don't think I am "making !@#$ up", heh.
-
Mad King? Pfft. How many of his own children has he personally slaughtered? You know, back in MY day, we had to earn our Mad King titles. Now it's just a cheap label slapped on any old ruler with a bit of cranky disposition.
But seriously, I would say it is SA inasmuch as SA is being used for a vehicle for propaganda and alliance-making in this particular war. Allison did openly call for rebellion against Asylon in SA discussions. Magistratum and counter-Magistratums were made by opposing sides. Now obviously there's nothing official, no 'crusades' declared, the Prophet is silent... but official-ness doesn't mean so much when it comes to grinding a realm into the dirt by any means possible.
In that sense, all SA has done is provide a way for people to make connections with each other. Which has always been a big part of what makes it great. It's huge. You can talk to half the island if you're a member, and if you're a good politician or diplomat you can leverage that into an enormous amount of power. That doesn't mean that what's happening is Church policy, either officially or unofficially.
-
Well, it looks like Kabrinskia just hit Kybcyell, as predicted. I may not be in any of the military councils, but so far close to all of my predicted movements have happened. I don't think I am "making !@#$ up", heh.
So what, we were in Mech Calen for a week and Kyb is a !@#$hole full of potato eaters anyways.
-
That !@#$hole divides Asylon into two, with Itau on one side and the rest of the realm on the other. You're saying Itau is going to remain Asylonian? This is not the brightest way of achieving that goal.
-
Its still a !@#$hole. Oh and we generally dont talk realm strategy on the forums.
-
I do enjoy reading Glaumrings posts and IG letters that get passed to me. He believes the lies others tell him or he makes stuff up or he really is mad. Im not sure which. In the past the character was overly calculating which leads me to believe this is all just an act.
-
Oh dustole I love thee :'(
-
Oh dustole I love thee :'(
Great. Brom has competition. lol
-
No. Neither Glaumring nor Feylonis really know anything, they're both just seeing what they want to see and neither one has any evidence to back up their claims. They are making assumptions that are driven by their respective biases. That or Glaumring is just making things up for fun, I can never tell with him.
All it really boils down to is that Glaumring's character got overconfident, raised the ire of the wrong people, and made several mistakes. Those people then exploited his mistakes to organize the current war. There's no conspiracy, it's not a religious thing, and Allison actually had very little to do with it beyond baiting Asylon in the first place. She probably assumed that if she could provoke either Terran or Asylon into going too far, Astrum would intervene, and she assumed correctly. Terran was too smart to fall for it, as evidenced by their careful diplomacy with Astrum, but Asylon walked right into it. That's Allison for you. She's very crafty.
D'Hara was too smart for all of it. Terran was too smart for only part of it. Apparently, Asylon wasn't too smart for any of it. :-[
-
D'Hara was too greedy and risk averse for all of it.
Fixed it for you ;)
-
D'Hara knew that ex-queen Katayanna was in Kabrinskia. They didn't want that mess to come back :p
-
Boredom breaks all.
The northerners are warmongers.
Therefore, refuse to give them war against you, and their boredom will break their alliances.
That's what guides D'Hara. Why give them a target, like Terran and Asylon did, when you can just sit back and wait for them to club each other themselves?
-
D'Hara is just lucky that Terran/Asylon stepped up to be the next target. If they hadn't, then D'Hara would have been volunteered for the role. ;)
-
D'Hara is just lucky that Terran/Asylon stepped up to be the next target. If they hadn't, then D'Hara would have been volunteered for the role. ;)
And we'd have been a clear-cut victim.
-
Makes a good epitaph, eh?
-
Makes a good epitaph, eh?
We are more than ready for war. And while the ports aren't as good for defense as they used to be, with delayed travel and all, you still have to take on our walls to hit any region. And we wouldn't have painted a big target on our heads as Asylon did.
That we don't want war doesn't mean we don't think of it every day. Our lack of warmongering drive is replaced by high levels of paranoia.
-
It's not paranoia if they really are out to get you!
Well, eventually, maybe all those preparations will pay off. You can't be free of war forever.
-
Its not anywhere done yet... This is just the empire strikes back part... We haven't even got to Return of the Jedi yet.
-
It's not paranoia if they really are out to get you!
Well, eventually, maybe all those preparations will pay off. You can't be free of war forever.
I'm happy to know that my paranoia is indeed well-founded.
Just doesn't seem normal to watch one's back so much. :P
-
I'm happy to know that my paranoia is indeed well-founded.
Just doesn't seem normal to watch one's back so much. :P
Perhaps you shouldn't just wander into Aurvandil uninvited then ;)
-
One does not Simply walk into Aurvandiil!
-
One does not Simply walk into Aurvandiil!
One does not simply sail into D'Hara.
-
One does not simply sail into D'Hara.
Sure one does, if one's holds are filled with food.
-
Sure one does, if one's holds are filled with food.
In that case, one does not simply sail out of D'Hara with food.
-
Was this thread ever on topic after like, the first page? :o
-
Most of threads are like this :p
-
Sure one does, if one's holds are filled with food.
Foreign traders? What next? Pink dragons and flying turtles?
Surely you've consumed too much blood fruit.
-
Rabisu will taste of this blood fruit he has heard so much about.
-
Just wait till Aurvandil does go to war again, everyone will start complaining about our gigantic military CS and you all know the rest.
-
Was this thread ever on topic after like, the first page? :o
Shhh... don't tell Gustav.. he'll have a hissy fit!
-
Shhh... don't tell Gustav.. he'll have a hissy fit!
Please, so I ask for moderation once on a post that takes up half the page and is mostly song lyrics, and suddenly I am the bad guy. Jeesh.
-
Just wait till Aurvandil does go to war again, everyone will start complaining about our gigantic military CS and you all know the rest.
Truth.
You should go to war with each other. 8)
-
Okay, ladies, play nice or this topic is gonna get locked too. And if you can't play nice, kindly remove yourself from the sandbox :)
-
So only the ladies have to play nice? ;)
On the topic of large military CS, is it surprising after months of peace, without any threats of wealth/property taxes, full RCs, that realms can instantly raise almost max (honour/prestige bound) armies when war starts?
-
Depends on the depth of the RCs.
-
What about lords who are very willing to draft? In many cases, just one or two margraves drafting regularly seems enough. :)
-
That helps.
-
Things are stirring up in the south 8) Too bad I'm not with the main force scoping out Barca
-
It just remains to be seen whether Aurvandil has any honour or not.
-
Honour in the traditional sense, or honour in the "nicest guy around" sense?
-
Honour in the traditional sense, or honour in the "nicest guy around" sense?
Neither, considering they 1) disrespected their border treaty with Barca and 2) are declaring war against them for no reason.
-
World domination isnt a good enough reason?
-
Neither, considering they 1) disrespected their border treaty with Barca and 2) are declaring war against them for no reason.
Clearly, Barca is too weak to defend their cities from foreign attack, as demonstrated by Aurvandil's invasion. So obviously, Aurvandil needs to step in and establish a protectorate over the area, in order to prevent Barca from being overrun by an expansionist foreign power.
-
Clearly, Barca is too weak to defend their cities from foreign attack, as demonstrated by Aurvandil's invasion. So obviously, Aurvandil needs to step in and establish a protectorate over the area, in order to prevent Barca from being overrun by an expansionist foreign power.
+1
-
It just remains to be seen whether Aurvandil has any honour or not.
The war is entirely about honour, Barca dishonoured Aurvandil in the very heart of our Commonwealth, so Mendicant had his Knight Hausos At Arms suitably dishonour Barca in the heart of their republic, the Senate, which in turn obligates war between us as a matter of honour, which is also why the Knight Hausos rather declared it to be a "duel" in his speech to the Barcan Senate.
Neither, considering they 1) disrespected their border treaty with Barca and 2) are declaring war against them for no reason.
Well, it's not nothing is it? I don't know what Barca expected when they threatened Aurvandil with possible future war, lied, tried to manipulate us, insulted us, dishonoured us and treated us so poorly. Basically, Barca pissed in our cereal one to many times and Aurvandil isn't going to continue putting up with it.
Also, Aurvandil has no border treaty with Barca to disrespect, we only had a verbal agreement of non interference, unless you count the treaty of Evanburg, which doesn't count anyway.
-
The war is entirely about honour, Barca dishonoured Aurvandil in the very heart of our Commonwealth, so Mendicant had his Knight Hausos At Arms suitably dishonour Barca in the heart of their republic, the Senate, which in turn obligates war between us as a matter of honour, which is also why the Knight Hausos rather declared it to be a "duel" in his speech to the Barcan Senate.
Well, it's not nothing is it? I don't know what Barca expected when they threatened Aurvandil with possible future war, lied, tried to manipulate us, insulted us, dishonoured us and treated us so poorly. Basically, Barca pissed in our cereal one to many times and Aurvandil isn't going to continue putting up with it.
Also, Aurvandil has no border treaty with Barca to disrespect, we only had a verbal agreement of non interference, unless you count the treaty of Evanburg, which doesn't count anyway.
I'd be very curious to know the story behind this if anyone feels like sharing. ;D
-
unless you count the treaty of Evanburg, which doesn't count anyway.
lol. So much for honor.
-
The Treaty of Evanburg governs only Evanburg, so I suppose it really doesn't count when you consider the switch of the two regions (which I assume is the center of this war).
Time2lure the Zuma against Auravandil?
-
lol Zuma against Aurvandil. That would be something to see indeed. But the Saxons are not known for their courage. I haven't seen any saxons on BT.
-
lol Zuma against Aurvandil. That would be something to see indeed. But the Saxons are not known for their courage. I haven't seen any saxons on BT.
Weren't they in Thalmarkin for a bit?
-
Weren't they in Thalmarkin for a bit?
From what I have heard they were, but I was not under the impression that it was during an Invasion.
-
Would have been interesting to see how their tactics worked against Overlord & Co. Or the Zuma, in Dwilight's case.
-
World domination isnt a good enough reason?
Not unless you are an Astroist realm, no. ;)
-
Also, Aurvandil has no border treaty with Barca to disrespect, we only had a verbal agreement of non interference, unless you count the treaty of Evanburg, which doesn't count anyway.
I was referring to the Treaty of Evanburg, which I don't get why it wouldn't count. When I look at the map, Aurvandil has it. When I look at the treaty, Barca should have it.
-
The Treaty text in question: http://wiki.battlemaster.org/wiki/Barca/Treaty_of_Evanburg
The Treaty only covers Evanburg, and under the text of the Treaty, Barca 'owns' the region and 'rents' it out to Auravandil. Evanburg will return to Barca's rule if/when one or more of the following things happen: 1) Auravandil loses Evanburg (did not happen), 2) Barca decides to terminate the treaty (unsure if it happened), and 3) the Civil War ends (did happen).
In theory, Barca can demand Evanburg back from Auravandil. That won't be possible, though, because Evanburg (now) does not border Barca, and the Treaty only governs Evanburg, not the regions surrounding it.
-
So Barca can demand it back, and it's up to Aurvandil to figure out how. If they fail to do it, then they are, technically, in violation of the treaty.
-
So Barca can demand it back, and it's up to Aurvandil to figure out how. If they fail to do it, then they are, technically, in violation of the treaty.
I am sure they haven't been able to sleep due to how much they worry about it.
-
You never know. It could offend their Saxon sense of honor. ::)
-
I know. Aurvandil's dying to give a thousand+ gold to Barca every week.
-
I'd be very curious to know the story behind this if anyone feels like sharing. ;D
After the regions defected to Aurvandil, Barca demanded them back simply out of friendship and expedience, so Mendicant replied with "Well no, we're not just going to hand them over because it's easier to do that and not consider the consequences". The defecting lords all told a story of corruption and tyranny in the Republic, such as what the original Aurvandilan's had to put up with in Madina, so we decided to hear them out the lords, and demand that Barca tell us their version of the story. Considering it more important to take the honourable path over the regions rather than the expedient path based solely upon the friendship between Aurvandil and Barca, and the personal relationship held between Mendicant and other nobles of Barca. Eventually, after much talk and consideration, Aurvandil was able to conclusively determine the accusations to be true with the Barcan Ambassador only able to try and justify them as the right thing to have done. To which Aurvandil then gave them a compromise, if they make change of consequence in the realm their realm operates, to tackle the problems Aurvandil listed in their Republic then we would hand back the lands without an issue and return to the once amicable state of affairs. However, the Barcan Senate proffered nothing, but eventually offered Aurvandil a fairly meaningless extension to the treaty of Evanburg that could only really come into effect after we handed back the lands, and since then said and did nothing to further the talks.
This wouldn't be justification alone for war; however the Barcan Ambassador levied quite a few insults and dishonours against the High Sovereign, such as calling a liar, a traitor, a manipulative politician, an opportunist and so forth, and even went so far as to state that Aurvandil owes its existence to Barca and is obligated to live in a shadow of gratitude to Barca. Which didn't sit well at all, and it was made worse by the severe breach of etiquette during the talks, such as the Ambassador turning his back on the High Sovereign, snubbing him, trying to correct him, cutting him across and otherwise treating Mendicant like a mere ambassador, and not "the Highest of Sovereigns", etiquette/decorum is everything in the Aurvandilan royal court, and breaches of it are a great dishonour and slight. In response to multiple such slights, insults and dishonours, Mendicant ordered his Knight Hausos to suitably dishonour Barca in return, so the Knight Hausos (In a fairly epic Roleplay) sharpened his sword on the stones of the Barcan Senate before their Senators, which was the absolute worst form of dishonour in the eyes of Aurvandil, not just to the Senate, or Barca, but to their very peoples, honour and dignity, to which the Knight Hausos then stated that due to such dishonour Barca are now obligated to offer Aurvandil terms for war, under the threat of war and had a day to do so. Equating the war to a duel, merely fought to gain satisfaction in combat, not to win, or to expand, but for both parties to consider their honour suitably defended. This war is entirely about honour, though foreign intervention promises to force this war not to be one for satisfaction, but victory merely for victories sake, a war fought because it is a war, not for any higher purpose.
-
Boy doesn't that bring back the memories. 8)
Can I ask what exactly you were asking Barca to do in terms of meaningful reforms to end the corruption?
-
Boy doesn't that bring back the memories. 8)
Can I ask what exactly you were asking Barca to do in terms of meaningful reforms to end the corruption?
I gave them free mandate, Mendicant said in these exact words "change of consequence" which was deliberately vague, maximising their options and avenues to take on the issue, and minimising any arbitrary conditions on the part of Aurvandil which may do more damage than good. Barca knows how it runs better than anyone, and they knew what Mendicant saw as wrong in their realm, so we left it up to them to decide what to do, and Aurvandil would only provide input on their suggestions.
What I specifically wanted to do, was to tackle the culture of political cliques, the willingness of nobles to offer gold for the deaths of their political enemies, and the intra realm agreements to distribute power amongst certain nobles in a certain fashion. There were other lesser things as well but I'd have to dig up the messages to find them.
-
Aurvandil heavily reminds me of the mongols, with their "Highest of the Sovereigns" and horribly efficient army.
-
I gave them free mandate, Mendicant said in these exact words "change of consequence" which was deliberately vague, maximising their options and avenues to take on the issue, and minimising any arbitrary conditions on the part of Aurvandil which may do more damage than good. Barca knows how it runs better than anyone, and they knew what Mendicant saw as wrong in their realm, so we left it up to them to decide what to do, and Aurvandil would only provide input on their suggestions.
What I specifically wanted to do, was to tackle the culture of political cliques, the willingness of nobles to offer gold for the deaths of their political enemies, and the intra realm agreements to distribute power amongst certain nobles in a certain fashion. There were other lesser things as well but I'd have to dig up the messages to find them.
Yeah, Barca/we was/were really stupid to send down Julius as negotiator. *Sigh*
As for the claims, while not fabricated, it is clear that only one side of the story was presented (and see above comment for why the other side was not).
I really wish that I got my character got involved in the issue - I am sure that most of this could have been avoided in that instance. But trying to do anything in Barca is like trying to wade through quicksand.
I suppose I just didn't give credence to the claims, because they were a bit silly, and answers were all within reach.
-
I'm glad to see I am not the only master of diplomacy out there. 8)
-
You sent a Galvez as a negotiator, and didn't expect it to result in war?
That's like throwing a rock into the air and not expecting it to fall back to the ground.
-
You sent a Galvez as a negotiator, and didn't expect it to result in war?
That's like throwing a rock into the air and not expecting it to fall back to the ground.
So it seems.
-
This brings back memories of people reappointing Brom after his first exile from Luria ;)
-
You sent a Galvez as a negotiator, and didn't expect it to result in war?
That's like throwing a rock into the air and not expecting it to fall back to the ground.
That's our child Barca, always being louzy at diplomacy and bringing the wrath of superpowers against us.
Helps keep us all united. We have a lovely family. 8)
-
This brings back memories of people reappointing Brom after his first exile from Luria ;)
To be fair, Brom did a great job on his return as Banker for quite a while. Granted, he can't play the good guy forever, but its not like that wasn't known.
At least when Brom causes wars to happen with his realm, he leaves them with one region. With Aurvandil attacking you, that may not happen.
-
That's our child Barca, always being louzy at diplomacy and bringing the wrath of superpowers against us.
Helps keep us all united. We have a lovely family. 8)
Yup.
I gave them free mandate, Mendicant said in these exact words "change of consequence" which was deliberately vague, maximising their options and avenues to take on the issue, and minimising any arbitrary conditions on the part of Aurvandil which may do more damage than good. Barca knows how it runs better than anyone, and they knew what Mendicant saw as wrong in their realm, so we left it up to them to decide what to do, and Aurvandil would only provide input on their suggestions.
What I specifically wanted to do, was to tackle the culture of political cliques, the willingness of nobles to offer gold for the deaths of their political enemies, and the intra realm agreements to distribute power amongst certain nobles in a certain fashion. There were other lesser things as well but I'd have to dig up the messages to find them.
So what you mean is: you demanded they do as you say, but then you didn't say and, when they didn't do, you got mad?
And by intra-realm agreements: you mean... elections?
-
Yup.
So what you mean is: you demanded they do as you say, but then you didn't say and, when they didn't do, you got mad?
And by intra-realm agreements: you mean... elections?
Mendicant demanded they do "something" and they did nothing, and Mendicant didn't get mad as a result, he decided to get proactive.
And no Velax, I don't mean elections.
-
Mendicant demanded they do "something" and they did nothing, and Mendicant didn't get mad as a result, he decided to get proactive.
And no Velax, I don't mean elections.
Vellos, not Velax. ;)
I'm just curious on an OOC basis what kind of reforms you had in mind. Demands for internal reforms in BM have generally boiled down to 3 things that I know of: changes of government style (becoming a theocracy, or republic, or monarchy, etc), changes of ruler/council members (create a puppet state), banishment of nobles. I'm hard pressed to think of other internal changes that have been demanded.
OOCly, what did you think they could even hypothetically have offered you?
-
Vellos, not Velax. ;)
I'm just curious on an OOC basis what kind of reforms you had in mind. Demands for internal reforms in BM have generally boiled down to 3 things that I know of: changes of government style (becoming a theocracy, or republic, or monarchy, etc), changes of ruler/council members (create a puppet state), banishment of nobles. I'm hard pressed to think of other internal changes that have been demanded.
OOCly, what did you think they could even hypothetically have offered you?
From my understanding of it Barca was asked to become a Monarchy.
-
From my understanding of it Barca was asked to become a Monarchy.
lulz.
And there you have it.
-
Yeah that didn't happen.
-
Yeah that didn't happen.
Then I reiterate, out of curiosity:
I'm just curious on an OOC basis what kind of reforms you had in mind. Demands for internal reforms in BM have generally boiled down to 3 things that I know of: changes of government style (becoming a theocracy, or republic, or monarchy, etc), changes of ruler/council members (create a puppet state), banishment of nobles. I'm hard pressed to think of other internal changes that have been demanded.
OOCly, what did you think they could even hypothetically have offered you?
-
You sent a Galvez as a negotiator, and didn't expect it to result in war?
That's like throwing a rock into the air and not expecting it to fall back to the ground.
Well he sort of just threw a rock into the air and hit Mendicant on the head with it.
-
Well, interestingly none of the reforms I had in mind were the three you stated as most common. Barca is evidently enamoured with their Republic, for whatever insane reason that is, so Mendicant rather decided it would be a bad idea to try and force them to change, since they wouldn't accept, and making them a Monarchy, whilst still being tyrannical and corrupt would only exacerbate the problem. For banishing nobles, well of all the nobles mentioned to Mendicant, it would require banishing quite a few, since there were no clear ring leaders, also unpreferable. For changing members of the government, well that would be a pointless, temporary measure since Barca is a Republic, one that doesn't tackle the actual problems but instead is a token gesture that ultimately achieves nothing.
So in lieu of the three most obvious game mechanic supported options, we would have to choose largely player driven ones. Firstly, legal reforms to how Barca is run, and new laws enforced to prevent new occurrences of corruption and tyranny, secondly, an investigation and trial into the bounties Barca levies against its own nobles for political disputes, and thirdly, putting an end to clique mentality of the "old guard" as Julius put it, which saw newer nobles ostracised as troublemakers and traitors and had other ramifications to life in Barca.
-
Well, interestingly none of the reforms I had in mind were the three you stated as most common. Barca is evidently enamoured with their Republic, for whatever insane reason that is, so Mendicant rather decided it would be a bad idea to try and force them to change, since they wouldn't accept, and making them a Monarchy, whilst still being tyrannical and corrupt would only exacerbate the problem. For banishing nobles, well of all the nobles mentioned to Mendicant, it would require banishing quite a few, since there were no clear ring leaders, also unpreferable. For changing members of the government, well that would be a pointless, temporary measure since Barca is a Republic, one that doesn't tackle the actual problems but instead is a token gesture that ultimately achieves nothing.
So in lieu of the three most obvious game mechanic supported options, we would have to choose largely player driven ones. Firstly, legal reforms to how Barca is run, and new laws enforced to prevent new occurrences of corruption and tyranny, secondly, an investigation and trial into the bounties Barca levies against its own nobles for political disputes, and thirdly, putting an end to clique mentality of the "old guard" as Julius put it, which saw newer nobles ostracised as troublemakers and traitors and had other ramifications to life in Barca.
So...Barca should ban all nobles who would stand up to Aurvrandil, leaving a puppet state in its place with too few nobles to withstand the army of Aurvrandil?
-
Isn't that the hope of most ambitious realms? ;)
-
So...Barca should ban all nobles who would stand up to Aurvrandil, leaving a puppet state in its place with too few nobles to withstand the army of Aurvrandil?
Well, they could. But that would only provoke Aurvandil further in war, I mean that would just be the height of cowardly surrendering. We would have to fight for the honour of the nobles they unjustly banned in our name. Aurvandil has respect for nobles who will fight us, but not for nobles who would ban members of their realm for daring to in some sort of slimy obsequious begging for mercy.
-
Well, they could. But that would only provoke Aurvandil further in war, I mean that would just be the height of cowardly surrendering. We would have to fight for the honour of the nobles they unjustly banned in our name. Aurvandil has respect for nobles who will fight us, but not for nobles who would ban members of their realm for daring to in some sort of slimy obsequious begging for mercy.
So Aurvandil was going to war Barca no matter what? :P
-
Well, they could. But that would only provoke Aurvandil further in war, I mean that would just be the height of cowardly surrendering. We would have to fight for the honour of the nobles they unjustly banned in our name. Aurvandil has respect for nobles who will fight us, but not for nobles who would ban members of their realm for daring to in some sort of slimy obsequious begging for mercy.
Just so we're clear:
Casus belli: We're gonna do whatever we want.
-
Just so we're clear:
Casus belli: We're gonna do whatever we want.
That's kinda what I'm getting.
"We're attacking you because we didn't get what we want. But if we got what we wanted, we'd attack you because we got it too easily."
-
Look, their reasons for war are obviously stupid. "We took three regions from you and won't give them back until you fix what we say is wrong with your realm! What? You don't want to? ATTAAAAAAAACK!"
But at the same time, isn't this what people keep saying to do, to create more war? If you can't find a reason to declare war, make one up?
-
Any reason you use to go to war is going to be considered poor by the other side.
-
I just want to see the D'haran sneak attack on Madina. First BM amphibious assault?
-
"Aurvandil has respect for nobles who will fight us," :o I never read something so funny! Aurvandil, respect? he,he,he...
Iin the end the Barca pirates will be exterminated!!! but with respect! ...and a bit of steel! ;D
-
Any reason you use to go to war is going to be considered poor by the other side.
Look, their reasons for war are obviously stupid. "We took three regions from you and won't give them back until you fix what we say is wrong with your realm! What? You don't want to? ATTAAAAAAAACK!"
But at the same time, isn't this what people keep saying to do, to create more war? If you can't find a reason to declare war, make one up?
Personally, I think its a great reason for war. (Making something random up like they have).
The game is about war anyway. I'm just tired of the propaganda trying to convince everyone that their casus belli is reasonable. It doesn't matter. If you win the war, then you make that argument. Before the war is over, its just useless anyway, unless you really need allies or want to keep allies away from your opponent. Even then though, sometimes just saying you want to go to fight for some time, will earn you more respect than lying about reasons.
-
It was certainly a creative way to turn the situation into a war. Better than many reasons I've seen. It definitely seems intentionally impossible to fulfill. But, hey, war is the point of the game.
-
It's not all too different from the impossible terms imposed against PeL not too long ago, which, surprise, only upset those it was used against :P
-
It's not all too different from the impossible terms imposed against PeL not too long ago, which, surprise, only upset those it was used against :P
To be fair, most of those terms were actually fulfilled...
-
Most, but not all ;)
-
Most, but not all ;)
Duh, Brom can't die. That was just a stupid thing to ask. He's immortal!
-
Oh, I think it's a very creative reason to. I'm fine with it OOC.
I just get the impression that the Aurvandil players also believe OOCly that they are in fact on a moral high ground. As an excuse for naked aggression and bullying, it's quite beautiful.
-
Self-confidence is everything :P
-
Oh, I think it's a very creative reason to. I'm fine with it OOC.
I just get the impression that the Aurvandil players also believe OOCly that they are in fact on a moral high ground. As an excuse for naked aggression and bullying, it's quite beautiful.
+1
-
So Aurvandil was going to war Barca no matter what? :P
You've misunderstood me, Aurvandil wouldn't war with Barca no matter what, but if they tried to employ cowardly tactics to try and supplicate themselves and appease Aurvandil (In this context being the blanket banishment of nobles they think we don't like), we wouldn't tolerate such dishonourable actions.
That's kinda what I'm getting.
"We're attacking you because we didn't get what we want. But if we got what we wanted, we'd attack you because we got it too easily."
No, that isn't even close to what I said.
"Aurvandil has respect for nobles who will fight us," :o I never read something so funny! Aurvandil, respect? he,he,he...
Iin the end the Barca pirates will be exterminated!!! but with respect! ...and a bit of steel! ;D
Well, Aurvandil always treats its foe with respect and chivalry. Unless you listened to Abbot's old propaganda regime when he tried to plug us as baby eating barbarian's out to murder every noble everywhere, kind of a similar tactic used by Helm actually... Didn't work well for either of them.
-
The fact that you keep on talking about nobles, in the plural, is pretty much an assurance that the nobles who left got you hook line and sinker with their misinformation.
-
I just want to see the D'haran sneak attack on Madina. First BM amphibious assault?
Hardly. You're forgetting the attacks between Candiels and Tower Fatimak. And way in the past, when Madina and D'Hara fought over Paisly:
http://wiki.battlemaster.org/wiki/D%27Hara/History#The_War_for_Paisly (http://wiki.battlemaster.org/wiki/D%27Hara/History#The_War_for_Paisly)
-
The fact that you keep on talking about nobles, in the plural, is pretty much an assurance that the nobles who left got you hook line and sinker with their misinformation.
I'm not entirely sure what you mean by that.
But what the nobles who defected said wasn't really that important or decisive, it was the subsequent discussion with Barca as to their claims. The nobles didn't convince me, it was Julius who convinced me.
-
I'm not entirely sure what you mean by that.
But what the nobles who defected said wasn't really that important or decisive, it was the subsequent discussion with Barca as to their claims. The nobles didn't convince me, it was Julius who convinced me.
Ah, my apologies. I misread your original post and took it for a different meaning.
-
So, one group held power in Barca (the "tyrannical and corrupt" "old guard" with a "clique mentality"), Aurvandil wanted a different group to have it (the "newer nobles ostracised as troublemakers and traitors"), the current Barcan leaders refused it, and war. Sounds legit.
-
So, one group held power in Barca (the "tyrannical and corrupt" "old guard" with a "clique mentality"), Aurvandil wanted a different group to have it (the "newer nobles ostracised as troublemakers and traitors"), the current Barcan leaders refused it, and war. Sounds legit.
Absolutely; it's one of the more nuanced war reasons around.
But it's still no moral high ground. ;)
-
Aurvandil wanted to remain vague in their demands so that Barca could think of their own solutions to satisfy them, but that vagueness is the precise reason that no treaty could be established.
-
Honestly I think it's a cool idea in principle. I wish more players were equally as willing to push the bounds with creating interesting reasons for conflict. The only thing I wonder about is whether Aurvandil would have really accepted anything Barca might have done. I suspect they were looking for a good excuse to go to war. Barca via Julius was apparently happy to provide, but even if they'd bent over backwards not to, something tells me it would have eventually gone down one way or another ::)
-
Aurvandil wanted to remain vague in their demands so that Barca could think of their own solutions to satisfy them, but that vagueness is the precise reason that no treaty could be established.
Rather because Barca didn't even try to do anything about it, that's why no treaty was established.
-
So, one group held power in Barca (the "tyrannical and corrupt" "old guard" with a "clique mentality"), Aurvandil wanted a different group to have it (the "newer nobles ostracised as troublemakers and traitors"), the current Barcan leaders refused it, and war. Sounds legit.
Who said anything about changing who had power? I've said more than once on this thread I didn't want to change who had power, but reform the way that power worked.
Aurvandil wanted to remain vague in their demands so that Barca could think of their own solutions to satisfy them, but that vagueness is the precise reason that no treaty could be established.
Well, as DoctorHarte says, the reason a solution wasn't was that Barca wasn't bothering, we literally gave them a mandate to do "anything" that had a consequence and we'd accept it, within reason. But really compounded this, was the fact they just turned around with some irrelevant treaty that presupposed the territorial dispute wouldn't be an issue, sort of making it clear they weren't doing anything for a real treaty or that interested.
-
But really compounded this, was the fact they just turned around with some irrelevant treaty that presupposed the territorial dispute wouldn't be an issue, sort of making it clear they weren't doing anything for a real treaty or that interested.
Ask a vague question and get a vague answer :P
You're leaving out the part where Aurvandil was asked to clarify what sort of reforms they wanted.
PS: I can honestly say that no one in Barca had any idea what you were driving at. The most that I could think of was perhaps some laws to do with fining and banishment.
-
Who said anything about changing who had power? I've said more than once on this thread I didn't want to change who had power, but reform the way that power worked.
And yet you didn't propose any reforms.
-
Ask a vague question and get a vague answer :P
You're leaving out the part where Aurvandil was asked to clarify what sort of reforms they wanted.
PS: I can honestly say that no one in Barca had any idea what you were driving at. The most that I could think of was perhaps some laws to do with fining and banishment.
I didn't get a vague answer, I got a very clear one. But the answer itself was meaningless and irrelevant, nor even an answer within itself. The point was, Barca would talk amongst themselves and decide what they thought was best for change in their realm and run it by Mendicant, Mendicant can't know 100% from the outside what means you should use to change the way your government operates, it's not like I asked for any sort of gargantuan amount of discussion or creativity.
And yet you didn't propose any reforms.
Yes, as I keep saying, that was deliberate. It's not like Barca need me to hold their hand every step of the way and hand it to them on a platter; Mendicant wanted them to choose the reforms, to discuss the reforms, and to come up with the reforms they thought were best, which would achieve a lot more than Mendicant handing down arbitrary reforms from his perspective. As opposed to Barcan's seeing what is wrong with their realm, Barcan's deciding on how to deal with it, Barcan's resolving their own problems and not just having Mendicant doing it all for them.
-
As opposed to Barcan's seeing what is wrong with their realm, Barcan's deciding on how to deal with it, Barcan's resolving their own problems and not just having Mendicant doing it all for them.
The issue is they don't know what problems need to be fixed and thus can't fix them. Did you want a change in goverment type? Did you want lords to be appointed not elected? Did you want the general to act differently? I am just throwing out random crap because how the heck are they supposed to know what you think is wrong. If you want their lords to be appointed not elected and they told their general to act differently which wasn't the problem in your mind but they didn't know what was then they are going to be "fixing" things that don't need to be changed.
-
The issue is they don't know what problems need to be fixed and thus can't fix them. Did you want a change in goverment type? Did you want lords to be appointed not elected? Did you want the general to act differently? I am just throwing out random crap because how the heck are they supposed to know what you think is wrong. If you want their lords to be appointed not elected and they told their general to act differently which wasn't the problem in your mind but they didn't know what was then they are going to be "fixing" things that don't need to be changed.
I had an extensive conversation for over a month with their Ambassador about the problems in their realm, if they didn't know they could have asked their Ambassador, in fact I was under the presumption he would say to Barca "The High Sovereign wants change of consequence in order to hand over the regions due to these different problems". Failing that, Barca could have asked Mendicant exactly what was the problems with Barca, there's no justifiable excuse for Barca not knowing.
You need to make a distinction here as well, it's not about what individual changes Mendicant wants implemented because there aren't any as such, but he wants some form of change to occur. The distinction being, Mendicant hasn't gone into this thinking "Right, I want this that and the other to be replaced", but he has gone in into thinking "I want to Barca to to recognise the problem, and offer their solution to it". Which is key to this entire thing, It's not about Mendicant telling them the changes he wants, it's about Mendicant telling you what is wrong, and leaving you to decide what change is required.
You need to think less of this as "What would Mendicant want in change?" or "What can we do to appease Mendicant?", but rather "Mendicant has listed the problems, now what can we do to change them". It's not about appeasing Mendicant, Mendicant would accept just about any form of change, it's about deciding on what change you think is best then informing Mendicant of it.
-
The "change you think is best" presupposes that Barca actually *wants* to change. Apparently, though, they don't, so therefore "no change" is best for Barca. So the true question really is "What can we do to appease Mendicant?"
-
The "change you think is best" presupposes that Barca actually *wants* to change. Apparently, though, they don't, so therefore "no change" is best for Barca. So the true question really is "What can we do to appease Mendicant?"
Ask for vassalage?
-
Not from the way I read NoblesseChevaleresque's posts. Begging for vassalage indicates cowardice and weakness, and would provoke an attack. In fact, I can't really see anything Barca could have done to stop the attack. Which is fine, really. Aurvandil wanted a war, so they picked a decent provocation (insults from the Barcan ambassador) and went in with guns blazing. +1 for Aurvandil.
-
Not from the way I read NoblesseChevaleresque's posts. Begging for vassalage indicates cowardice and weakness, and would provoke an attack. In fact, I can't really see anything Barca could have done to stop the attack. Which is fine, really. Aurvandil wanted a war, so they picked a decent provocation (insults from the Barcan ambassador) and went in with guns blazing. +1 for Aurvandil.
That's my perception too. And I'm fine with that; clever aggression is neat.
I'm just OOCly confused about why the players in Aurvandil are OOCly insisting otherwise.
-
I had an extensive conversation for over a month with their Ambassador about the problems in their realm, if they didn't know they could have asked their Ambassador, in fact I was under the presumption he would say to Barca "The High Sovereign wants change of consequence in order to hand over the regions due to these different problems". Failing that, Barca could have asked Mendicant exactly what was the problems with Barca, there's no justifiable excuse for Barca not knowing.
You need to make a distinction here as well, it's not about what individual changes Mendicant wants implemented because there aren't any as such, but he wants some form of change to occur. The distinction being, Mendicant hasn't gone into this thinking "Right, I want this that and the other to be replaced", but he has gone in into thinking "I want to Barca to to recognise the problem, and offer their solution to it". Which is key to this entire thing, It's not about Mendicant telling them the changes he wants, it's about Mendicant telling you what is wrong, and leaving you to decide what change is required.
You need to think less of this as "What would Mendicant want in change?" or "What can we do to appease Mendicant?", but rather "Mendicant has listed the problems, now what can we do to change them". It's not about appeasing Mendicant, Mendicant would accept just about any form of change, it's about deciding on what change you think is best then informing Mendicant of it.
So there is some big problem you are saying that you want fixed but can be fixed many ways, what is that?
-
The "change you think is best" presupposes that Barca actually *wants* to change. Apparently, though, they don't, so therefore "no change" is best for Barca. So the true question really is "What can we do to appease Mendicant?"
Well, if Barca don't want to change. Fine, they don't have to, but if they want Mendicant to hand them their lands, they will. Of course, Mendicant was lead to believe they were discussing possible change, and wasn't informed of any reticence to enacting policy reforms.
Not from the way I read NoblesseChevaleresque's posts. Begging for vassalage indicates cowardice and weakness, and would provoke an attack. In fact, I can't really see anything Barca could have done to stop the attack. Which is fine, really. Aurvandil wanted a war, so they picked a decent provocation (insults from the Barcan ambassador) and went in with guns blazing. +1 for Aurvandil.
Naturally, why would Aurvandil seek a weak and cowardly vassal? One that would debase itself so thoroughly as to beg? We would only defame ourselves by association.
Barca could have avoided the war, there are other realms we could have fought, since it's not really a fair war, Aurvandil vs Barca (which is also why we aren't taking regions, that would just be boring for everyone and ruin the possibility of future conflicts)... But yes, Aurvandil wanted war and Barca handed us one when their Ambassador invested so much into insulting the High Sovereign; we can't just sit around doing nothing but collecting tax gold, that is just... complacent mediocrity, something I/we (Same thing when your a King using the royal we) have to do something unless we want Aurvandil to become a realm that just exists because they exist, not because they do anything or have any worth or impact to the entertainment of the game. With any luck Barca and Aurvandil will agree to peace so we can find something even funner to do.
That's my perception too. And I'm fine with that; clever aggression is neat.
I'm just OOCly confused about why the players in Aurvandil are OOCly insisting otherwise.
I'm arguing our IC reasons, which wasn't just "We want a war", but OOC we did want a war, and Barca basically obligated us through our own Roleplayed culture and honour to fight a war.
So there is some big problem you are saying that you want fixed but can be fixed many ways, what is that?
That is correct, there are many ways to fix it, we'll let them pick which way they want, and which way they think is best for Barca.
-
That is correct, there are many ways to fix it, we'll let them pick which way they want, and which way they think is best for Barca.
I think Penchant meant "What is the the thing that they need to fix?" i.e. what is it about Barca to which you object?
-
I think Penchant meant "What is the the thing that they need to fix?" i.e. what is it about Barca to which you object?
Oh, politically - their dukes conniving to distribute the regions amongst themselves despite previous oaths and fealty, and punishing lords who refuse to comply in breaking oaths, as well as banning nobles without a trial or sufficiently justifiable reasons, as well as their "old guard" mentality which influences banishing Frederick, by Old Guard I don't just mean old nobles by the way, since as Julius pointed out it also had some young ones as well. Further, to stop their political culture of offering large amounts of gold for the deaths of political opponents (Which interestingly shortly after Mendicant expressed his displeasure to this, a large amount of gold in the form of a bounty was placed on his head, amusingly). I'm quite sure there are a few lesser reasons as well, but they don't come to mind.
As for why we declared war, it was mostly due to the slights against Mendicant rather than the lack of progress in the talks, but Mendicant rather became of the opinion of "Well maybe they will be more inclined to take negotiations seriously when I'm occupying Rettleville, we don't want to be dicked around any longer".
-
Oh, politically - their dukes conniving to distribute the regions amongst themselves despite previous oaths and fealty, and punishing lords who refuse to comply in breaking oaths, as well as banning nobles without a trial or sufficiently justifiable reasons, as well as their "old guard" mentality which influences banishing Frederick, by Old Guard I don't just mean old nobles by the way, since as Julius pointed out it also had some young ones as well. Further, to stop their political culture of offering large amounts of gold for the deaths of political opponents
Why are those of any concern to Auvrandil? Why do you care?
-
Why are those of any concern to Auvrandil? Why do you care?
I'm glad you asked, because that is quite important.
Aurvandil considered Barca to be its closest friend, we weren't allies, but Aurvandil keeps its relations entirely professional and practices relative isolationism. So when this conflict in Barca spills over into Aurvandil, our first reaction is "We don't want to deal with this crap", but then we get fairly convincing stories from multiple lords in Barca attesting to tyranny and corruption, to which they can support it with transcripts of letters, the list of bounties placed on their head, so then Aurvandil says that it will listen to both sides of the story before we do anything. Aurvandil was trying to take the more honourable path in the fate of these regions, than the most politically expedient one. It would be dishonourable and even hypocritical for Aurvandil to be seen as publicly supporting a Republican tyranny, such as what we had to deal with in Madina, and if its the case, how are the lords defecting from Barca any different to the lords who founded Aurvandil to escape Republican Tyranny?
Aurvandil couldn't by its honour or morals return tens of thousands of peasants, near 40,000 square miles of territory back under what could very well be a tyranny.
With Barca on the northern borders, Aurvandil could not stand by and allow another tyrannical Republic to grow out of hand on our very borders, it would be a bad investment, and in the end if it came to pass, Aurvandil would have to send a military expedition to put an end to it. So we decided, the honourable thing to do would be to hand back the lands, but only the condition that we see the impetus for change, and a degree of sincerity in the Barca Republic to assure us, that whilst they had been left astray, they had every intention of returning to being a Republic of benevolence, such as what we cite D'Hara as being. Which is why my demands were so minimal and vague, it's a case of "Do something, anything to change the course you're heading down, and it will convince me Aurvandil can still rely upon Barca to be a stable, honourable and free realm".
-
So...
You did not want to return those regions and decided to beat Barca so they won't ask Aurvandil to return those regions? A good way to start a war. :)
Anyway, wars are always good. Keep it up.
-
Yeah, but then again these defecting players/character (edit: with the exception of Tostig) made the realm so unpleasant to play in, I am almost inclined to say that the current situation is worth it, just so that we could get rid of them. Its very hard to feel at all inspired to do anything in a realm when you know that there are several nobles that are actively hostile and don't give a damn. It totally squashes realm morale and discussion, because as soon as anything is brought up you know that they will become pissy about it, regardless of what it is. No such thing as a logical or pleasant discussion.
Sure, Barca has declined greatly from what I hoped it would be when I first joined (back when it was only one region). It is quite dull (refer to above paragraph). Hard to break the habit of apathy. Rather focus on other characters (effort not equal to possible return, if any). And my character is/was one of the more active nobles.
So...
You did not want to return those regions and decided to beat Barca so they won't ask Aurvandil to return those regions? A good way to start a war. :)
Anyway, wars are always good. Keep it up.
Yeah..."this is an honour duel" - march in with totally overwhelming force, crush the army, tear down the walls that cost thousands of gold (when Aurvandil has gained thousands of gold from the loan of Evanburg).
Sounds about right ::)
-
Oh, politically - their dukes conniving to distribute the regions amongst themselves despite previous oaths and fealty, and punishing lords who refuse to comply in breaking oaths, as well as banning nobles without a trial or sufficiently justifiable reasons, as well as their "old guard" mentality which influences banishing Frederick, by Old Guard I don't just mean old nobles by the way, since as Julius pointed out it also had some young ones as well. Further, to stop their political culture of offering large amounts of gold for the deaths of political opponents (Which interestingly shortly after Mendicant expressed his displeasure to this, a large amount of gold in the form of a bounty was placed on his head, amusingly). I'm quite sure there are a few lesser reasons as well, but they don't come to mind.
So in other words this crap about there being many different ways to fix it it really not true. The dukes need to let lords choose who to have their oath to, they need to have fair trials, I really don't completely understand what you are saying with the "Old Guard" thing, and unless they are sending letters and sending the money through the bank, you have no proof who put the bounties on people and thus can't prove payment for attacking politacal oppenents.
-
So in other words this crap about there being many different ways to fix it it really not true. The dukes need to let lords choose who to have their oath to, they need to have fair trials, I really don't completely understand what you are saying with the "Old Guard" thing, and unless they are sending letters and sending the money through the bank, you have no proof who put the bounties on people and thus can't prove payment for attacking politacal oppenents.
Yeah, I certainly didn't expect Aurvandil to take their claims seriously...several times I was on the verge of writing a letter to Mendicant, explaining the entire saga, but it seemed unnecessary and silly to have to do so. (Also, see prior post about apathy ::))
-
I can't imagine Mendicant demanding fair trials for nobles, though. I was under the understanding that what Mendicant says goes, period. I.e. if Mendicant thought there was some valid reason to get rid of the lords, they would be out on their ears in seconds, without any kind of trial at all, let alone a "fair" one.
-
I can't imagine Mendicant demanding fair trials for nobles, though. I was under the understanding that what Mendicant says goes, period. I.e. if Mendicant thought there was some valid reason to get rid of the lords, they would be out on their ears in seconds, without any kind of trial at all, let alone a "fair" one.
He said that was an issue in Barca so it would be rather hypocritcal of him to do it but I wouldn't be too surprised.
-
I can't imagine Mendicant demanding fair trials for nobles, though. I was under the understanding that what Mendicant says goes, period. I.e. if Mendicant thought there was some valid reason to get rid of the lords, they would be out on their ears in seconds, without any kind of trial at all, let alone a "fair" one.
It's more like everyone in the realm agrees with Mendicant's choices, not just because he is High Sovereign but because he explains everything in a logical and reasonable fashion. As for your example, there are a few Lords who consistently cause trouble or rather question the choices of almost all of our governing body. Mendicant also allowed for some of the last Pirates of Madina to come clean and join Aurvandil instead - even allowing them to keep their regions.
-
Allowing them to stay around is not the same as giving them a fair trial. Nor is the fact that people agree with him.
(FWIW - I'm not a big fan of IC trials. Just ban the guy and move on.)
-
Does Mendicant need to hold a fair trial?
That would almost imply that Mendicant himself isn't fair, or needs a joint verdict to add legitimacy to the conclusion he comes to. Though, Aurvandil has never needed to hold a trial, the only time we've banned nobles is when it's been a clear act of treason, and a trial wasn't required, and hopefully it stays in that way.
As for our enemies, well again, a trial has never been needed. We give them the chance to accept the High Sovereign's mercy, to lay down their arms and either desist their campaign, join us, or leave the area of conflict entirely, anyone who doesn't, well, has forfeited the High Sovereign's mercy and chooses to fight on accepting the possibility of consequences for their action, which to this point in time has not required a trial to determine what to do with them, it's always clear cut by Aurvandilan standards. Such as when we captured the Grand Doge of Madina, he had forfeited the the High Sovereign's mercy but we released him from prison since he recognised Mendicant as the rightful sovereign of Madina and the Madinian Republic both as illegitimate, and an illegal rebellion against the Monarch of the Madina Territory.
-
So in other words this crap about there being many different ways to fix it it really not true. The dukes need to let lords choose who to have their oath to, they need to have fair trials, I really don't completely understand what you are saying with the "Old Guard" thing, and unless they are sending letters and sending the money through the bank, you have no proof who put the bounties on people and thus can't prove payment for attacking politacal oppenents.
No no, there were many different ways.
They could have done literally anything under the sun that somewhat affected the internal mechanism of Barca, and within reason Mendicant would have agreed it was fine. Words can scarcely express just how disinterested Mendicant was in the whole northern marches affair, especially when we had our own Madina City problems to deal with.
-
The war has already started. Time to focus on beating each other down. Enough talk! ;)
If you have problems, call more allies, talk to other rulers, convince them to aid you.
Good luck to both realms.
-
Huh? I thought the war was already over, Zak... :P
-
Huh? I thought the war was already over, Zak... :P
Where did you get that information Peter. I thought it was supposed to remain secret! ;)
-
I assumed that since Aurvandil is involved, and it has been more than two days, they aught to have won by now.
-
I assumed that since Aurvandil is involved, and it has been more than two days, they aught to have won by now.
You are in Aurvandil so yeah. They will either win easily or go broke. I bet your character is stashing gold away! ::)
-
Where did you get that information Peter. I thought it was supposed to remain secret! ;)
Nothing is secret on the forums! Indeed Barca already wants a peace treaty, so we are currently discussing what it is Aurvandil wants.. quite some creative ideas, too ;D
-
Make them pay tributes for a year. 500 gold a week for 52 weeks. That should teach them a lesson 8)
-
What does Canada want?
We want more money! x3
Replace Canada with appropriate realms.
-
Make them pay tributes for a year. 500 gold a week for 52 weeks. That should teach them a lesson 8)
I considered demanding a tribute of 50 gold every month, a humiliatingly low tribute for Barca, just an excuse for their Suffete to come to the Imperial City to pay an obeisance to the High Sovereign and to make it clear where they kneel.
But then, I also considered demanding a thousand gold for every gold coin offered for Mendicant's death, which right now would be 350,000 Gold. We could go either way really.
-
I considered demanding a tribute of 50 gold every month, a humiliatingly low tribute for Barca, just an excuse for their Suffete to come to the Imperial City to pay an obeisance to the High Sovereign and to make it clear where they kneel.
But then, I also considered demanding a thousand gold for every gold coin offered for Mendicant's death, which right now would be 350,000 Gold. We could go either way really.
I suggested we make them a vassel state, forbid they accumulate any large force of men, pay a fair ammount of there tax gold in tribute, leave the moot, be unable to build fortifications wihtout writen permission, change government to a monarchy and have an aurvandilian proxy ruler.
But that didn't go over too well with the rest of Aurvandil :(
-
I considered demanding a tribute of 50 gold every month, a humiliatingly low tribute for Barca, just an excuse for their Suffete to come to the Imperial City to pay an obeisance to the High Sovereign and to make it clear where they kneel.
But then, I also considered demanding a thousand gold for every gold coin offered for Mendicant's death, which right now would be 350,000 Gold. We could either way really.
I would see that as one you are be kind of dishonourable as you are making terms they cant fufill and you know it. It would take about 3 years if they gave you all of their money from every tax until its paid. You say you consider that to be humilatingly low price which it would be if it was a realm of your size but anymore than 1000 would be a lot for their realm as 1000 gold is a tenth of their income for the month. Also your reasoning behind the 350k is kinda not valid as you can't assume its Barca. Any of the moot could have and not just the top people as its not a lot, really any of a lot of realms could have since plenty of realms members are wealthy and Aurvandil was being badmouthed in SA for the whole anti-religion thing.
-
I suggested we make them a vassel state, forbid they accumulate any large force of men, pay a fair ammount of there tax gold in tribute, leave the moot, be unable to build fortifications wihtout writen permission, change government to a monarchy and have an aurvandilian proxy ruler.
But that didn't go over too well with the rest of Aurvandil :(
Yes, well that would imply we don't want them to build up a strong army, economy and back it up with high level fortifications, whereas by all accounts we will encourage them to do so. It isn't fun fighting a cripple, or having a cripple for a neighbour, it's to emasculating.
-
350 is an insultingly low bounty really.
-
I would see that as one you are be kind of dishonourable as you are making terms they cant fufill and you know it. It would take about 3 years if they gave you all of their money from every tax until its paid. You say you consider that to be humilatingly low price which it would be if it was a realm of your size but anymore than 1000 would be a lot for their realm as 1000 gold is a tenth of their income for the month. Also your reasoning behind the 350k is kinda not valid as you can't assume its Barca. Any of the moot could have and not just the top people as its not a lot, really any of a lot of realms could have since plenty of realms members are wealthy and Aurvandil was being badmouthed in SA for the whole anti-religion thing.
You realise this is all just meaningless OOC conjecture, not actually representative of our in game, roleplayed characters?
-
350 is an insultingly low bounty really.
That was the consensus in Aurvandil, but we had to realise not every realm had an eternal treasury.
-
That was the consensus in Aurvandil, but we had to realise not every realm had an eternal treasury.
That's because most realms aren't a clan....
-
Yes, well that would imply we don't want them to build up a strong army, economy and back it up with high level fortifications, whereas by all accounts we will encourage them to do so. It isn't fun fighting a cripple, or having a cripple for a neighbour, it's to emasculating.
Just think of them as a decapitated corpse on our gate. They'd be like a "Mind the dog, trespassers you've been warned!" sign.
350 is an insultingly low bounty really.
I'm suprised Mendicant / Aurvandil didn't bump it up for ego reasons...
-
That's because most realms aren't a clan....
Nor is Aurvandil :)
-
That's because most realms aren't a clan....
Irrelevant.
And I knew some one wouldn't be able to make such a petty snipe when I used that reference.
-
Nor is Aurvandil :)
I'm sorry, "Saxon."
-
Yes, well that would imply we don't want them to build up a strong army, economy and back it up with high level fortifications, whereas by all accounts we will encourage them to do so. It isn't fun fighting a cripple, or having a cripple for a neighbour, it's to emasculating.
Were you not surprise-attacking them and destroying their fortifications?
-
I'm sorry, "Saxon."
Don't waste our time with that bull!@#$, if you please.
It's already been thoroughly disproved.
-
I'm sorry, "Saxon."
Aurvandil may contain a few "Saxons", but Aurvandil isn't Saxon.
...Saxon here meaning someone whom has had a character previously in Astrum, Thulsoma, Summerdale, Averoth and then went to Aurvandil according to the magistrates...
-
Were you not surprise-attacking them and destroying their fortifications?
It's not surprise if you warn them in advance.
I did tell Barca over a week ahead in time that the Knight Hausos was going to their capital, and I gave them a days forewarning to pick the terms and location of the confrontation. It didn't have to be in Rettleville, but as they refused, we decided to be quick and decisive.
-
I suggested we make them a vassel state, forbid they accumulate any large force of men, pay a fair ammount of there tax gold in tribute, leave the moot, be unable to build fortifications wihtout writen permission, change government to a monarchy and have an aurvandilian proxy ruler.
But that didn't go over too well with the rest of Aurvandil :(
Just saying those are the stupidest peace terms in my opinion because you want them to let you takeover their realm and change it a ton without a fight, its like it couldn't be worse since what else could they lose from going to war? Also several other issues too, like Aurvandils being total hypocrites by saying honor is important but then tell Barca to leave their federation they are in because you guys say so.
-
Just saying those are the stupidest peace terms in my opinion because you want them to let you takeover their realm and change it a ton without a fight, its like it couldn't be worse since what else could they lose from going to war? Also several other issues too, like Aurvandils being total hypocrites by saying honor is important but then tell Barca to leave their federation they are in because you guys say so.
Well, that is Sidonie, the mad eastern Ducessa.
-
Just saying those are the stupidest peace terms in my opinion because you want them to let you takeover their realm and change it a ton without a fight, its like it couldn't be worse since what else could they lose from going to war? Also several other issues too, like Aurvandils being total hypocrites by saying honor is important but then tell Barca to leave their federation they are in because you guys say so.
...It wasn't exactly a serious suggestion...
Also how is it dishonouralbe to not like ALL our neighbors being part of an alliance of dishonourable cowards, if nothing else, we are removing barca from there stain
-
You realise this is all just meaningless OOC conjecture, not actually representative of our in game, roleplayed characters?
My point being of the dishonorable thing is if Aurvandil actually offered those terms not about you saying it on the forums. If you are not saying that because of my dishonorable remark, then what are you talking about with what I said?
-
My point being of the dishonorable thing is if Aurvandil actually offered those terms not about you saying it on the forums. If you are not saying that because of my dishonorable remark, then what are you talking about with what I said?
We haven't offered terms yet, we were jokingly discussing possible terms.
-
...It wasn't exactly a serious suggestion...
Also how is it dishonouralbe to not like ALL our neighbors being part of an alliance of dishonourable cowards, if nothing else, we are removing barca from there stain
How is the moot a bunch of dishonourable cowards?
-
How is the moot a bunch of dishonourable cowards?
You've opened a can of worms there...
-
You've opened a can of worms there...
I am not asking for you to just say there are a bunch of reasons, I would like to actually here your reasons for calling them a bunch of dishonourable cowards.
-
I am not asking for you to just say there are a bunch of reasons, I would like to actually here your reasons for calling them a bunch of dishonourable cowards.
I didn't.
That was DamnTaffer. I could answer for Taffer, but I'm not even going to try.
-
I am not asking for you to just say there are a bunch of reasons, I would like to actually here your reasons for calling them a bunch of dishonourable cowards.
I wouldn't worry about that, he is probably about to post a neverending tirade explaining how.
Also, I'm guessing your a Barcan?
-
Also, I'm guessing your a Barcan?
D'haran actually.
-
How is the moot a bunch of dishonourable cowards?
Frankly this is the only post I"ve read in a bit, but how about this: They didn't want to fight the Zuma?
-
I didn't.
That was DamnTaffer. I could answer for Taffer, but I'm not even going to try.
..Or not.
Well then, the answer to your question is obvious. Aurvandil went to war with Madina, whom were members of the moot. Madina is no longer with us. The moot didn't really help them.
Aurvandil went to war with Barca, whom were members of the moot, the moot doesn't seem to be helping them.
Everytime I think of the Moot now i just think of the poem "First they came"
-
Frankly this is the only post I"ve read in a bit, but how about this: They didn't want to fight the Zuma?
My answer is, who does? Because really how do we know that because of Tom wanting them to be there he might allow the GM to just keep pumping out units of 10k cs even if game mechanics wise it shouldn't be possible. Plus they have perfect cooridination since its all the same guy controlling the units.
-
D'haran actually.
Then out of interest, why havn't you already attacked Aurvandil?
-
..Or not.
Well then, the answer to your question is obvious. Aurvandil went to war with Madina, whom were members of the moot. Madina is no longer with us. The moot didn't really help them.
Aurvandil went to war with Barca, whom were members of the moot, the moot doesn't seem to be helping them.
Everytime I think of the Moot now i just think of the poem "First they came"
Well, Madina did a good job of pissing of the 'Moot and having bad relations, they had people like Abbot as their chief progagandist after all, can't blame the 'Moot for not supporting them.
-
My answer is, who does? Because really how do we know that because of Tom wanting them to be there he might allow the GM to just keep pumping out units of 10k cs even if game mechanics wise it shouldn't be possible. Plus they have perfect cooridination since its all the same guy controlling the units.
Just because you'd lose a duel doesn't make turning down a challenge any less cowardly.
-
My answer is, who does? Because really how do we know that because of Tom wanting them to be there he might allow the GM to just keep pumping out units of 10k cs even if game mechanics wise it shouldn't be possible. Plus they have perfect cooridination since its all the same guy controlling the units.
For the thrill, the challenge, and the bragging rights.
After all, if you win, you would hold the highest reputation of any realm on Dwilight, and you can R.P. stuffing Haktoo and keeping her stuffed body standing next to your Throne, or whatever you want.
-
For the thrill, the challenge, and the bragging rights.
After all, if you win, you would hold the highest reputation of any realm on Dwilight, and you can R.P. stuffing Haktoo and keeping her stuffed body standing next to your Throne, or whatever you want.
If you defeated the Zuma you'd be more feared than Aurvandil. I mean really, Aurvandil are just men the Zuma are ...more
-
If you defeated the Zuma you'd be more feared than Aurvandil. I mean really, Aurvandil are just men the Zuma are ...more
They're women.
-
..Or not.
Well then, the answer to your question is obvious. Aurvandil went to war with Madina, whom were members of the moot. Madina is no longer with us. The moot didn't really help them.
Aurvandil went to war with Barca, whom were members of the moot, the moot doesn't seem to be helping them.
Everytime I think of the Moot now i just think of the poem "First they came"
As far as I know since I joined while Madina was basically already dead, Madina was only allied with 1 member of the moot, not a member of the moot and I thought I heard a good reason of why they didn't help Madina but I don't remember. For the Barcan war, I will not comment on whether or not they will be helping as I am not the leadership of Terran or D'hara so I don't know what they are planning though if they don't ever help in the war then I could see how you are calling them dishonourable cowards.
-
Just think of them as a decapitated corpse on our gate. They'd be like a "Mind the dog, trespassers you've been warned!" sign.
The problem with that is then who do you fight? Far better (from a purely OOC perspective) to leave your enemies alive to fight another day, otherwise you'll eventually have to turn on your allies/vassals in order to create conflict. This is the future that will probably confront SA at some point. I just hope the Dev team implements schism mechanics in time for us to epically implode and start killing each other :)
-
As far as I know since I joined while Madina was basically already dead, Madina was only allied with 1 member of the moot, not a member of the moot and I thought I heard a good reason of why they didn't help Madina but I don't remember. For the Barcan war, I will not comment on whether or not they will be helping as I am not the leadership of Terran or D'hara so I don't know what they are planning though if they don't ever help in the war then I could see how you are calling them dishonourable cowards.
If they were honourable and not cowards, there participation wuoldn't even be in question
-
For the thrill, the challenge, and the bragging rights.
After all, if you win, you would hold the highest reputation of any realm on Dwilight, and you can R.P. stuffing Haktoo and keeping her stuffed body standing next to your Throne, or whatever you want.
Sure a group that thought they had the chance at surviving but the moot isn't known for its military cooridination.
-
If they were honourable and not cowards, there participation wuoldn't even be in question
Well, Madina did a good job of pissing of the 'Moot and having bad relations, they had people like Abbot as their chief progagandist after all, can't blame the 'Moot for not supporting them.
You can't expect to piss off the realms and expect support.
-
The problem with that is then who do you fight? Far better (from a purely OOC perspective) to leave your enemies alive to fight another day, otherwise you'll eventually have to turn on your allies/vassals in order to create conflict. This is the future that will probably confront SA at some point. I just hope the Dev team implements schism mechanics in time for us to epically implode and start killing each other :)
Aurvandil doesn't have a single ally /forever alone/.
-
Aurvandil went to war with Madina, whom were members of the moot.
What?
Who ever told you that? Madina was never a member of the 'Moot. In fact, there were the exact opposite. They were enemies of the 'Moot and we fought several wars against them.
The founding members of the 'Moot are Terran, D'Hara and Barca. Those are the only members now. And those are the only members there ever have been.
-
Aurvandil doesn't have a single ally /forever alone/.
Yes, but under DamnTaffer's proposal you'd have had a puppet. Same difference for the purpose of my statement.
-
..Or not.
Well then, the answer to your question is obvious. Aurvandil went to war with Madina, whom were members of the moot.
False. Madina were enemies of the Moot.
Madina is no longer with us. The moot didn't really help them.
No. We hurt them. Because we didn't like them at all. They tried to conquer Paisly, and didn't finally formally relinquish claim until very late in the affair. Barca lent you Evanburg (a fact Aurvandil has dishonorably ignored), while, after Madina pillaged Candiels for the first time, back when Aurvandil was weak, Hireshmont went to Madina and threatened to bring an army to besiege Madina City if the pirates didn't back off and work for peace. We secured a brief peace, which was eventually abandoned when we had other things to be doing. We eventually soured on Aurvandil because of how wretchedly rude and uncouth your nobles were in every interaction, and how expansionistic and aggressive you became. But for quite a while, we were actively intervening on your side: and that was when you were weak, not the Aurvandil of today that anybody would like to have as an ally.
It's amazing how short the institutional memory of Aurvandil is. You'd think a monarchy would do a better job remembering its friends.
Aurvandil went to war with Barca, whom were members of the moot, the moot doesn't seem to be helping them.
Let's be clear: it's been less than a week since you hit Barca. Even if we wanted to march down, guns a-blazin', for a full-bore war... we'd still be marching now, based on where your armies were. You make hasty conclusions based on insufficient evidence.
-
The problem with that is then who do you fight? Far better (from a purely OOC perspective) to leave your enemies alive to fight another day, otherwise you'll eventually have to turn on your allies/vassals in order to create conflict. This is the future that will probably confront SA at some point. I just hope the Dev team implements schism mechanics in time for us to epically implode and start killing each other :)
I think the worst thing about dwilight is that Aurvandil and SA can't realisticly fight, the distance is too great.
OOC is irrelevant utterly to our options of making vassel states, we arn't game masters so we do what our realms and characters would do IC which most certainly isn't putting our enemies on the naughty step for a while for the sake of OOC amusement. And anyway, apparently we're evil saxons even if we did start doing OOC things for other peoples amusement someone would complain.
-
What?
Who ever told you that? Madina was never a member of the 'Moot. In fact, there were the exact opposite. They were enemies of the 'Moot and we fought several wars against them.
The founding members of the 'Moot are Terran, D'Hara and Barca. Those are the only members now. And those are the only members there ever have been.
My bad, I wasn't playing then, so my history is... patchy.
-
I think the worst thing about dwilight is that Aurvandil and SA can't realisticly fight, the distance is too great.
OOC is irrelevant utterly to our options of making vassel states, we arn't game masters so we do what our realms and characters would do IC which most certainly isn't putting our enemies on the naughty step for a while for the sake of OOC amusement. And anyway, apparently we're evil saxons even if we did start doing OOC things for other peoples amusement someone would complain.
You can do things consistent with both principles you know. Noblesse-whatever has already outlined perfectly good IC reasons for not doing what you suggested, which also happen to jibe well with OOC considerations about making sure you still have enemies left to fight after the dust settles.
And that's my point. If you make your victories too complete you'll run out of things to fight, and then the game lapses into complete boredom.
-
False. Madina were enemies of the Moot.
No. We hurt them. Because we didn't like them at all. They tried to conquer Paisly, and didn't finally formally relinquish claim until very late in the affair. Barca lent you Evanburg (a fact Aurvandil has dishonorably ignored), while, after Madina pillaged Candiels for the first time, back when Aurvandil was weak, Hireshmont went to Madina and threatened to bring an army to besiege Madina City if the pirates didn't back off and work for peace. We secured a brief peace, which was eventually abandoned when we had other things to be doing. We eventually soured on Aurvandil because of how wretchedly rude and uncouth your nobles were in every interaction, and how expansionistic and aggressive you became. But for quite a while, we were actively intervening on your side: and that was when you were weak, not the Aurvandil of today that anybody would like to have as an ally.
It's amazing how short the institutional memory of Aurvandil is. You'd think a monarchy would do a better job remembering its friends.
Let's be clear: it's been less than a week since you hit Barca. Even if we wanted to march down, guns a-blazin', for a full-bore war... we'd still be marching now, based on where your armies were. You make hasty conclusions based on insufficient evidence.
That's interesting, in my experience it was only ever Madina who were rude and uncouth, Aurvandil went to great lengths to be exaggeratedly polite when the situation called for it, and it was only ever Madina that kept trying to call us out for post battle spitting contests.
As for "expansionist" do you mean when we were forced to expand over Madina because Madina refused to surrender, or accept unconditional peace?
As for aggressive, do you mean after Madina declared they would purge us from existence and execute our government and nobles, whereas Aurvandil would repeatedly offer peace to Madina, and to show mercy to their nobles? Which we did regardless of whether or not they accept.
Aurvandil has scarcely been aggressive, or expansionist, and only ever in response to Madina.
-
You can do things consistent with both principles you know. Noblesse-whatever has already outlined perfectly good IC reasons for not doing what you suggested, which also happen to jibe well with OOC considerations about making sure you still have enemies left to fight after the dust settles.
And that's my point. If you make your victories too complete you'll run out of things to fight, and then the game lapses into complete boredom.
Aurvandil has planned for that, sort of, we can always fight what new realm we create in Madina City.
We won't sit in boredom doing nothing like S.A. and we won't shy away from weakening ourselves, reducing our land or nobles in order to give them purpose, and something fun to do.
-
That's interesting, in my experience it was only ever Madina who were rude and uncouth, Aurvandil went to great lengths to be exaggeratedly polite when the situation called for it, and it was only ever Madina that kept trying to call us out for post battle spitting contests.
As for "expansionist" do you mean when we were forced to expand over Madina because Madina refused to surrender, or accept unconditional peace?
As for aggressive, do you mean after Madina declared they would purge us from existence and execute our government and nobles, whereas Aurvandil would repeatedly offer peace to Madina, and to show mercy to their nobles? Which we did regardless of whether or not they accept.
Aurvandil has scarcely been aggressive, or expansionist, and only ever in response to Madina.
Wow....I don't think even CE can spew that much propaganda.
"scarcely been aggressive, or expansionist, and only ever in response to Madina." (Barca?)
"We had to expand, I mean they just wouldn't surrender, we felt bad about it though..."
-
You can do things consistent with both principles you know. Noblesse-whatever has already outlined perfectly good IC reasons for not doing what you suggested, which also happen to jibe well with OOC considerations about making sure you still have enemies left to fight after the dust settles.
And that's my point. If you make your victories too complete you'll run out of things to fight, and then the game lapses into complete boredom.
Aurvandil still has the rest of the moot, the luria and the zuma, we are certianly not short of enemies, crippling one realm utterly as a show of force would serve a purpose, will Aurvandil do it? Probably not.
And as for boredom? Even if Aurvandil destroyed all our local enemies, i'd still rather sit in the wasteland surrounding aurvandil and twiddle my thumbs than move to SA
-
Wow....I don't think even CE can spew that much propaganda.
"scarcely been aggressive, or expansionist, and only ever in response to Madina." (Barca?)
"We had to expand, I mean they just wouldn't surrender, we felt bad about it though..."
Oh, I was replying to the time frame posed, unless it encompassed the past week, which I was under the impression it wasn't. Since Vellos was talking in the past tense about things that turned them against Aurvandil.
-
As for "expansionist" do you mean when we were forced to expand over Madina because Madina refused to surrender, or accept unconditional peace?
Not trying to argue on this, but I am curious, what were the terms for peace?
-
Not trying to argue on this, but I am curious, what were the terms for peace?
The first four times I offered peace, it was unconditional. A "you leave me alone, I'll leave you alone, and preferably for this amount of time at least".
-
The first four times I offered peace, it was unconditional. A "you leave me alone, I'll leave you alone, and preferably for this amount of time at least".
Ok, so what were they the fifth time then?
-
And as for boredom? Even if Aurvandil destroyed all our local enemies, i'd still rather sit in the wasteland surrounding aurvandil and twiddle my thumbs than move to SA
??? Did I say anything about joining SA?
-
Ok, so what were they the fifth time then?
I offered to be merciful, but not unconditional, this was after Tower Fatmilak had fell.
-
That's interesting, in my experience it was only ever Madina who were rude and uncouth, Aurvandil went to great lengths to be exaggeratedly polite when the situation called for it, and it was only ever Madina that kept trying to call us out for post battle spitting contests.
As far as Moot observers ever saw, Madinans typically made rational arguments (and Madinans were civilized enough to send real delegates to the Moot, while Aurvandil ignored us). Madinans seemed to want us to be their friends; Aurvandil just insulted the Moot's delegate repeatedly when he arrived (that being Hireshmont). I don't know what insults were flung back and forth; but from Moot observers' perspective: Madina cared about the opinions of nobles abroad, cared about their reputation, cared about responding to arguments with rational arguments, cared about negotiation– Aurvandil did not display any of these. For a diplomacy-obsessed group like the Moot, Aurvandil's aloofness is offensive. Like the US invasion of Iraq from the perspective of most of Europe, for example.
As for "expansionist" do you mean when we were forced to expand over Madina because Madina refused to surrender, or accept unconditional peace?
Yes. ICly, none of the Moot (or at least very few of them) were ever aware that Madina was offered any reasonable peace terms. OOCly, I didn't even ever know that. I am almost sure I remember Aurvandil demanding their total, unconditional surrender during battles in Fatmilak; but maybe I'm wrong. But beyond that, the map of Orvandeaux Candielia was exceptionally offensive to the Moot, as well as many of Mendicant's claims to absolutist sovereignty. Mendicant's language about himself is, by and large, unnacceptable to the Moot, as it implies claims which we would contest. And also...
As for aggressive, do you mean after Madina declared they would purge us from existence and execute our government and nobles, whereas Aurvandil would repeatedly offer peace to Madina, and to show mercy to their nobles? Which we did regardless of whether or not they accept.
Again, that's not how it looked to the outside world. If by "mercy" you mean demanding that they all surrender their autonomy, destroy their culture, and pay obeisance to Mendicant– that is not very impressive mercy. Maybe our perception was false; but Aurvandil never bothered to work on its friendships abroad. Indeed, it usually seemed like you worked very, very hard to pointedly offend every Moot official you talked to, even the ones ya'll supposedly liked or respected.
Aurvandil has planned for that, sort of, we can always fight what new realm we create in Madina City.
And this. We've been hearing about this for a while. You've had quite a few opportunities. But it hasn't happened. Most who know about it in the Moot have, I believe, concluded it was always a lie Mendicant was using to make his grasp for more personal power appear less dangerous.
-
And this. We've been hearing about this for a while. You've had quite a few opportunities. But it hasn't happened. Most who know about it in the Moot have, I believe, concluded it was always a lie Mendicant was using to make his grasp for more personal power appear less dangerous.
I am the Dutchess of the Madina dutchy, there are two reason i've not already made a new realm. Firstly i've not enough nobles, secondly, the button is bugged.
Oh and we're not food efficient, i've not thought of good RP for it and we're poor. There are probably more reasons but the button not being there is the most crippling,
-
Nothing, I was just using S.A. for comparison to a possible similar situation in the south, such as you posed.
...Now I'm twice as confused. I was responding to DamnTaffer, not to your earlier comment. ???
As for SA, I do think we've been too successful to sustain over the long term. Eventually we will fight each other.
-
As far as Moot observers ever saw, Madinans typically made rational arguments (and Madinans were civilized enough to send real delegates to the Moot, while Aurvandil ignored us). Madinans seemed to want us to be their friends; Aurvandil just insulted the Moot's delegate repeatedly when he arrived (that being Hireshmont). I don't know what insults were flung back and forth; but from Moot observers' perspective: Madina cared about the opinions of nobles abroad, cared about their reputation, cared about responding to arguments with rational arguments, cared about negotiation– Aurvandil did not display any of these. For a diplomacy-obsessed group like the Moot, Aurvandil's aloofness is offensive. Like the US invasion of Iraq from the perspective of most of Europe, for example.
Oh, that nonsense, that was Aurvandil saying "Yeah, we're not going to debase ourselves spinning tall tales and trying to win favour by verbally sucking you/ourself off for attention". Which, in our perspective is showing a lot more respect to the Veinsormoot delegates, we don't lube them up with bull!@#$ basically. That is all it was.
Yes. ICly, none of the Moot (or at least very few of them) were ever aware that Madina was offered any reasonable peace terms. OOCly, I didn't even ever know that. I am almost sure I remember Aurvandil demanding their total, unconditional surrender during battles in Fatmilak; but maybe I'm wrong. But beyond that, the map of Orvandeaux Candielia was exceptionally offensive to the Moot, as well as many of Mendicant's claims to absolutist sovereignty. Mendicant's language about himself is, by and large, unnacceptable to the Moot, as it implies claims which we would contest. And also...
Well, why would Aurvandil keep the Veinsormoot in the loop? The Veinsormoot never asked, and it would just seem like he was seeking their approval or attention by constantly pestering them with letters, if the Veinsormoot were interested, they would have asked simply. Mendicant made it clear he's a minimalist on foreign relations, but at the same time he's never refused to answer questions, or reply to letters sent to him, the option was always there for the Veinsormoot to speak to him. Also, what exactly was offensive about his claims to absolute sovereignty? And even more importantly, why does the Veinsormoot consider their own opinion on that important and relevant enough to pass judgement on the matter?
Again, that's not how it looked to the outside world. If by "mercy" you mean demanding that they all surrender their autonomy, destroy their culture, and pay obeisance to Mendicant– that is not very impressive mercy. Maybe our perception was false; but Aurvandil never bothered to work on its friendships abroad. Indeed, it usually seemed like you worked very, very hard to pointedly offend every Moot official you talked to, even the ones ya'll supposedly liked or respected.
Well, Mendicant's mercy was largely expended when they refused unconditional peace four times, and the offer of the High Sovereign's prerogative of mercy, something they even mocked and ridiculed him for. Open scorn and contempt.
And this. We've been hearing about this for a while. You've had quite a few opportunities. But it hasn't happened. Most who know about it in the Moot have, I believe, concluded it was always a lie Mendicant was using to make his grasp for more personal power appear less dangerous.
Which, even now is amusingly wrong. Mendicant considers his power completely secure and unchallengeable in the Orveandeaux Candiela alone, he doesn't need to spread it further. He's a God in his Commonwealth and Imperial City. He's also made it very clear, he sees Madina as dead weight dragging down his Chevaliers, but the problem is the secession coding is broken right now, with the new estates, so we actually can't secede. And there is the fact Madina City kept revolting, but I don't imagine the Veinsormoot had the presence of mind to consider that.
-
...Now I'm twice as confused. I was responding to DamnTaffer, not to your earlier comment. ???
As for SA, I do think we've been too successful to sustain over the long term. Eventually we will fight each other.
Yes apologies, I realised my mistake after I posted and edited it out of my original.
-
I offered to be merciful, but not unconditional, this was after Tower Fatmilak had fell.
Just saying thats not terms, but your opinion on the terms you gave. I was and still am wondering what the terms actually were
-
Oh, that nonsense, that was Aurvandil saying "Yeah, we're not going to debase ourselves spinning tall tales and trying to win favour by verbally sucking you/ourself off for attention". Which, in our perspective is showing a lot more respect to the Veinsormoot delegates, we don't lube them up with bull!@#$ basically. That is all it was.
Yeah, but... It kinda sounds like all that lube is important to them 8)
-
Just saying thats not terms, but your opinion on the terms you gave. I was and still am wondering what the terms actually were
Well, that's because we never even got to the stage of giving terms, Madina was telling Mendicant to go to hell the moment he wrote to them to discuss it.
Yeah, but... It kinda sounds like all that lube is important to them 8)
When Mendicant takes you from behind, you'll get neither lube or a reach around, as Barca can accurately attest to.
-
You know what they say, create crows and they'll eat your eyes...
Btw, I'm dying to see a Madina-based realm ruled by DamnTaffer. It will be the southern Kabrinskia!
-
Oh, that nonsense, that was Aurvandil saying "Yeah, we're not going to debase ourselves spinning tall tales and trying to win favour by verbally sucking you/ourself off for attention". Which, in our perspective is showing a lot more respect to the Veinsormoot delegates, we don't lube them up with bull!@#$ basically. That is all it was.
You're a medieval noble for cryin' out loud. This is why the Moot sees Aurvandil as uncivilized. Because you are incompetent at diplomacy, but excessive in violence. More like monster-spawns than men. "Your perspective" doesn't matter in diplomacy; at least not in isolation. The Moot has clearly defined, and quite obvious, expectations and ways of doing things. You can ignore them, certainly: brashly ignoring the social norms of your neighbors is uncouth and barbarous (in fact, I would argue that's the precise definition of barbarism, but that's just etymological quibbling). You can do that if you want. But just fess up to the fact that you're an uncivilized barbarian. There are lots of them in BM. I'm looking at you, Norland/BoM. It's the simultaneous pretensions at high culture with the actuality of rapacious tyranny that is bothersome.
When Hireshmont came to Aurvandil, the Moot was considering military intervention in the war. On which side was not determined, but the Moot was leaning towards intervention on behalf of Aurvandil. Aurvandil's conduct turned the tide towards a supporting Madina; now, we detested Madina too much to do anything about it, so you didn't really suffer too much for it, but diplomacy isn't just bull!@#$, either in RL or BM. In RL, many countries have believed that: some have gotten away with it (North Korea, arguably the US), while others have not (Iraq, Libya, Iran quite recently with serious sanctions, possibly Syria in the near future).
Well, why would Aurvandil keep the Veinsormoot in the loop? The Veinsormoot never asked, and it would just seem like he was seeking their approval or attention by constantly pestering them with letters, if the Veinsormoot were interested, they would have asked simply. Mendicant made it clear he's a minimalist on foreign relations, but at the same time he's never refused to answer questions, or reply to letters sent to him, the option was always there for the Veinsormoot to speak to him. Also, what exactly was offensive about his claims to absolute sovereignty? And even more importantly, why does the Veinsormoot consider their own opinion on that important and relevant enough to pass judgement on the matter?
And then you turn around and say this, which is full of falsehoods. The Moot sent 3 separate delegations to Aurvandil. 2 were just ignored flat out. Most messages to Mendicant were greeted with the same, "We're not talking to you, but let me declare my Right to Rule the World, and insult your system of government a few times." As for why you would want the Moot in the loop: maybe there's no reason. Perhaps Aurvandil is truly powerful enough that you genuinely do not need, and will never need, allies. Maybe. But unless Aurvandil changes its ways, you'd better hope that remains true forever: because you're not winning many friends. Again, the US parallels are uncanny.
Claims to absolute sovereignty over the continent of Anhangphalia (which is almost an exact quote), over all the Orvandeaux (which your royal cartogrophers have including several Moot-controlled regions), and quite a few other specific titles mentioned at various times, all indicate claims on Moot territory. Given your imperialist rhetoric and apparent take-no-prisoners, war-to-destruction mentality, as well as the long and glorious Saxon history of violence, the logical leap is an easy one to make.
Still, it is amazing to me how Aurvandil has turned on the only people who ever tried to help them. Realms like Fissoa that actually sent armies to fight Aurvandil get ignored, while Barca, a realm that actively lobbied for Aurvandil and ceded lands to you, gets attacked. The power block that saved your ass when you were weak gets disparaged, and is repaid for practically guaranteeing you a stable, peacable backyard with invasion. Crazy.
-
And even more importantly, why does the Veinsormoot consider their own opinion on that important and relevant enough to pass judgement on the matter?
Doesn't this kinda sound like what Aurvandil is doing right now with Barca except you guys are declaring war because of it and the moot never did.
-
i definitely would not want to play monopoly or risk with these aurvandil fellows
-
i definitely would not want to play monopoly or risk with these aurvandil fellows
"Double sixes again! Cmon guys, why so sad? Y'all can roll 12's everytime as well, you're just not getting it."
-
"Double sixes again! Cmon guys, why so sad? Y'all can roll 12's everytime as well, you're just not getting it."
Ahahahahahahahahaahahahahahahahahahahhahaahahahahhaahaha
Ahahahahahahahahhahaaha
Funniest thing I've read on these forums in a while. ;D
-
Ahahahahahahahahaahahahahahahahahahahhahaahahahahhaahaha
Ahahahahahahahahhahaaha
Funniest thing I've read on these forums in a while. ;D
+1
-
Epic 66
-
i definitely would not want to play monopoly or risk with these aurvandil fellows
We'll just play without you then! :(
-
"Ok, so what were they the fifth time then?
I offered to be merciful, but not unconditional, this was after Tower Fatmilak had fell."
I'll make a translation from Aurvandil-language to human-language: ;D
Aurvandil's conditions:
You are PIRATES, not noblemen, and you will be treated as such, as vulgar commoners. You must surrender, and put yourselves, your titles and your lifes at Mendicant mercy. He will take them or respect them as he pleases. You can chose this, or be destroyed! 8)
-
"Ok, so what were they the fifth time then?
I offered to be merciful, but not unconditional, this was after Tower Fatmilak had fell."
I'll make a translation from Aurvandil-language to human-language: ;D
Aurvandil's conditions:
You are PIRATES, not noblemen, and you will be treated as such, as vulgar commoners. You must surrender, and put yourselves, your titles and your lifes at Mendicant mercy. He will take them or respect them as he pleases. You can chose this, or be destroyed! 8)
Actually the "We will not negotiate with pirates" thing was while Madina were sacking candiels, we still offered you the high sovereigns mercy, which is less disturbing then you seem to think it would have been.
-
Madina sacked Candiels? and I didn't saw it! :'(
I only saw a disastrous attack to Candiels, and then, the fall of tower fatmilak and the big genocide of Madina City.
About the Mendicant 'mercy', If you let someone to put a sword in your throat, to see how merciful he can be... good for you, but for me... no Thanks! :P
-
Actually the "We will not negotiate with pirates" thing was while Madina were sacking candiels, we still offered you the high sovereigns mercy, which is less disturbing then you seem to think it would have been.
The thing is if they are winning since they are sacking your city it seems more like you want peace because you are losing and not because you are so merciful. I wasn't there so I can't say thats exactly what happened but its what it sounds like.
-
Madina sacked Candiels? and I didn't saw it! :'(
I only saw a disastrous attack to Candiels, and then, the fall of tower fatmilak and the big genocide of Madina City.
About the Mendicant 'mercy', If you let someone to put a sword in your throat, to see how merciful he can be... good for you, but for me... no Thanks! :P
You very briefly got a little looting and sent out a sortie into Aurvandil lands.
I think the mercy is some chivalry / honour metaphor crap or something and not just putting your dick in a vise and hoping mendicant doesn't twist the handle.
-
The Royal Prerogative of mercy is a matter of honour.
An enemy who lays down his arms is the same as a noble who can no longer raise his sword, it would not be honourable to continue the fight against them.
Not just a case of, as DamnTaffer says, putting your dick in Mendicant's vice and hoping he doesn't twist.
-
What is the difference?
-
The Royal Prerogative of mercy is a matter of honour.
An enemy who lays down his arms is the same as a noble who can no longer raise his sword, it would not be honourable to continue the fight against them.
Not just a case of, as DamnTaffer says, putting your dick in Mendicant's vice and hoping he doesn't twist.
And Mendicant would never demand harsh or intolerable terms.
-
And Mendicant would never demand harsh or intolerable terms.
Harsh is a very subjective term, and intolerable varies quite a lot per person.
But Mendicant would never demand anything the other person cannot reasonably do, stand, or deserves to have demanded of them.
-
Harsh usually implies something that if imposed to you, you would consider intolerable.
-
Harsh usually implies something that if imposed to you, you would consider intolerable.
Your arguing pedantics now really...
-
Your arguing pedantics now really...
Really? I didn't bring the subjectivity of the term to discussion. Instead, offered a pretty simply definition. Or at least that is what it seems to me but feel free to correct me otherwise.
-
Harsh is a very subjective term, and intolerable varies quite a lot per person.
But Mendicant would never demand anything the other person cannot reasonably do, stand, or deserves to have demanded of them.
The problem is Mendicant will find totally reasonable to demand you to cut your right hand (or both, if he had a bad day). Obviously, you can stand it. And if you have fight against the mighty Aurvandil, there is nothing undeserved for you! ;D
-
The problem is Mendicant will find totally reasonable to demand you to cut your right hand (or both, if he had a bad day). Obviously, you can stand it. And if you have fight against the mighty Aurvandil, there is nothing undeserved for you! ;D
"the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must." -Thucydides
-
"the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must." -Thucydides
Nice webdip quote.
-
webdip? I've known this qoute for years bud. I love Greek history.
-
webdip? I've known this qoute for years bud. I love Greek history.
I remember reading it on the R:TW loading screen ;D
-
I remember reading it on the R:TW loading screen ;D
R:TW for life!
-
webdip? I've known this qoute for years bud. I love Greek history.
Ah, well I realized I was mistaken now that I googled the name. I am not a greek history buff so didn't know the name was an actual guy so I thought of a guy from a site that might have said who has that as a username.