The reason I used the Caligus/Perdan comparision is because the terms were very similiar at their core - "accept drastically reduced territory and turn on your ally". In the case of Caligus, we got considerable OOC public outcry on the forum and elsewhere that Perdan was imposing unreasonable and humiliating terms on Caligus and damaging the game as a result of it. So that pressure eventually made Perdan modify its terms.
I should be absolutely clear that this isn't directed at you personally, Velax, but we now have a situation that's pretty similar on FEI. But we have deafening silence about the surrender terms here on the forum and everywhere else. This is really a criticism of the community, because we seem to be employing considerable double-standards to what we see as reasonable and unreasonable. Why the public outcry when Caligus was given terms its nobles said were unreasonable, but not when another realm is given terms its nobles say are unreasonable? I'm genuinely interested to hear from the community why that is? It seems to me that we either shrug and say "realms fall". Or we go for an approach that we prefer realms to be given face-saving surrender terms that allow them to live on in dignity. But which ever path we take has to be applied universally or it looks like we're all being hypocrites.
It isn't a double standard, because the terms you were offered weren't unreasonable. You've twice mentioned the "betray Cathay and attack them" term, but there are two things wrong there. First, you ignore the other three sets of terms you were offered beforehand. Second, you misrepresent the actual terms you were offered. You were not told you had to betray Cathay and attack them. You were told you had to give back territory claimed by Zonasa, but given you had lost most of your territory to the glacier, if you wanted more regions we'd help you take them from Cathay if you wished. How terribly evil and unreasonable of us. Why would we bother trying to force you to fight with us? We didn't do that with Ohnar and, frankly, we don't need the help of a crippled realm to win the war.
I should be absolutely clear here: if Kindara has an issue with the terms it was offered, then you are the unreasonable ones. It is the utter height of arrogance to claim that because there's no outcry over terms you personally think are unreasonable, there must be a double standard in the BM community.
No, it's a problem for everyone on FEI. Like I said, the subtext running under it all is that the players on the island are deeply polarized into two groups - those who see your new empire model as a way they want to play; and those who are strongly opposed to it as a playing form. If I read his comment right, Anaris also recognised that as a problem for the island. As the Empire gained ground, the players who didn't want to play in it were pushed into Kindara. As you might remember, I initally thought your Empire idea was a good one and supported it through Rosalind in the Kindaran council, but I've since seen how many people are opposed to it. That's why Kindara lost half its noble count overnight when the glacier really started advancing - loads of people left the island because they didn't want to move to Imperial realms and no longer saw a way of fighting the Empire. Others quit, but that's a different story and more the fault of the glacier event than other factors.
Again, I'm not painting you personally or anyone in the Imperial realms as bad guys, but you need to know that there are a lot of players in the south who won't play under the Imperial model for the island. So if the Empire claims the entire island, players will move characters elsewhere or start new characters elsewhere. So the noble/player count on the island will fall. Maybe new nobles will come in to compensate to experience the Empire model of play, or maybe they won't. Who knows. Again, I'm not calling you a bad guy (and I don't know how much more I can emphasise that without putting it in big bold letters). But you need to be aware that there's a big group of players in the south who don't like the Empire model. I know you feel the Empire model will help the game, but I'm just being honest in telling you there are a lot of people who disagree.
And again, you make generalisations based on nothing. Most of those who are supposedly against the Empire likely aren't against "the Empire" at all. They're against Arcaea, or Sorraine, or Coralynth, or Zonasa, either because we defeated them or because they're of that group of people who will always hate the strongest force on any island, for no reason other than because they're the strongest. Of the 46 non-Empire nobles left, I'd say the number of players whose sole reason for being in Kindara or Cathay is that they "hate the Empire model" make up a bare handful. And those who do likely do so despite the fact that they have no idea what the so-called Empire model even is. For that matter, do you?
Rosalind's bottom line on surrender terms has always been to have a south free of the Empire, assurances that Kindara and Cathay won't be the perpetual target of one-sided wars by the whole of the Empire, and - since the glacier - enough territory to make Kindara a viable realm. When Rosalind first got elected she offered to return all Zonasan territory except Batesoar, Alanurs, and the region east of Masahakon (forgotten it's name), but Velax refused to settle on that because he wanted to fulfill his promise to Zonasa to give them all of their territory back.
No, Rosalind's bottom line on surrender terms has been that you won't given back all the territory taken from Zonasa. That's been the one constant thread in all talks with Rosalind.
- To Ohnar West, join the Empire, keep your current regions (after losing some to the Empire), you don't have to fight your former allies, but you can't rejoin this war before its end.
- To Greater Aenilia, no terms; they were destroyed utterly due to serially pissing off Velax.
I believe Velax has mentioned terms to Kindara and Cathay earlier in the thread:
- To Kindara, a variety of degrees, but including, more or less, "give back the regions you took from Zonasa and we'll call it even", and, more recently, "you can't have any of Zonasa's regions, but if you want, we'll help you take regions from Cathay."
- To Cathay, again, a variety, but also including "you give up claim on one region you don't currently hold, and don't get any more regions back, and we'll call it a day."
The terms to Kindara and Cathay have also included some specific provisions to banish nobles that have taken especially egregious or highly targeted actions against the Empire in general, or Velax and his family specifically.
Again, this is my recollection off the top of my head, so it may not be 100% accurate—but I think it is important that it's my perception, as a leader of one side, of the terms that have been offered to our enemies in this war.
Aenilia were offered several sets of terms, but all were rejected. Even when Ironhorse, a family Velax can't stand, was ruler, he still tried to negotiate a surrender.
