Talk:Beluaterran Observer/Issue 2
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
No mention of daimons occupying Cteduul when RoF declared war, that Avalon looked lost when peace was signed, that RoF also had another realm, Valhus, help on the gang bang? Nice job painting Avalon and Enweil as a bunch of greedy bastards. -Chénier 20:02, 2 November 2010 (CET)
- Which, of course, is an accurate portrayal. Vellos 21:58, 2 November 2010 (CET)
- Or rather, a gross oversimplification and misunderstanding of motives and context. -Chénier 00:10, 3 November 2010 (CET)
- You can find more details about Enweil's entrance into the war from this Republic of Fwuvoghor/The Enweil Situation. If you think Enweil is greedy with just the information you've got, wait till you see this. Ceorl 05:45, 3 November 2010 (CET)
- Nothing about greed there. We just really didn't like you, and considered your rule illegitimate. -Chénier 06:49, 3 November 2010 (CET)
- You can find more details about Enweil's entrance into the war from this Republic of Fwuvoghor/The Enweil Situation. If you think Enweil is greedy with just the information you've got, wait till you see this. Ceorl 05:45, 3 November 2010 (CET)
- Or rather, a gross oversimplification and misunderstanding of motives and context. -Chénier 00:10, 3 November 2010 (CET)
Heh, well, didn't take long for this paper to lose any credibility it started with. The latest article is completely biased against Enweil, reporting only for one side, misrepresenting facts, and poorly understanding the roots of the wars. May as well be called the "Anti-Enweil Observer" instead. -Chénier 13:19, 3 November 2010 (CET)
- I'm sorry you dont like it Chénier. We gathered information for a long time before starting the article, and invited people to share the reports they had. Anyway, you should read our disclaimer again, and of course, if you have facts to dispute, they are welcome. As far as I know, everything in the article itself is true, and I am investigating what you say below. If its found to be false, it will be removed. Beluaterran Observer 15:50, 3 November 2010 (CET)
- Everything I have written has been discredited or omitted. The propaganda of the Herald is taken as truth, and only what is written there is reported. I'm not sure anymore where the events of Fwuvoghor are recorded, but I know that I wrote a lot on the matter when it happened, and repeated the same thing in multiple places ever since. Might have been on the wiki, or on the d-list, or the bugtracker. Riombara had not declared war on Enweil, and one or two of their nobles arrived before Enweil. They were therefore considered the "defenders" as there was no RoF noble present, so when Enweil arrived, the would-be "attackers", no battle occurred since the two were not at war. It was then decided, by myself and the council, that we would not let Riombara's cheap diplomacy move (not declaring war until their full force was ready behind the walls) to ruin our mission which we considered would have succeeded had battle occurred, so I started the takeover myself. I recognised that starting a takeover with militia present was cheap, but I deemed that considering the circumstances, denying us the ability to a takeover was much cheaper and the situation was not of our making, bur of Riombara's, so I accepted the option the game presented to me. War had been declared while we were still in Villriil, while Riombara declared war on us after we started the takeover. And for the record, the Enweil-RoF war takes root in Fwuvoghor, when Mordred organized a rebellion to take power (and Nicolas' pre-emptive rebellion to kick him out). What happened later was forged by this, Enweil would have followed a drastically different path had events in Fwuvoghor not evolved as they had. -Chénier 16:36, 3 November 2010 (CET)
Taking Fwuvoghor
"Enweil declared war after its forces entered the city gates under the guise of neutrality": That's a lie. Enweil declared war on Fwuvoghor before entering the city. *Riombara* is the one to have no declared war in time to defend the city, having only one or two nobles arrive at the same time as Enweil and the rest of their army arriving a turn too late. Riombara is to blame for battle not taking place, but since their army was too late it wouldn't have changed anything, the RoF forces present when Enweil's armies arrived were ridiculously small, and purely militia. The walls would have been overtaken with ease. -Chénier 12:51, 3 November 2010 (CET)
- Actually, Chenier is the one wrong on this. It is true that Riombara did not declare war (they were, after all defending, not attacking) at that exact time. However, Enweilian forces had in fact entered the city prior to declaring war, and thus were able to begin their TO without the normal difficulties, as RoF was honorable and did not desire to start a war. I do not get this from the Riombaran Herald, as Chenier would like to believe, but rather from my own experience, as I was involved in the affair. On another note, what is a "d-list"? And what is a "wiki"? This must be some new Enweilian devilry; indeed, elsewhere Chenier has spoken of a cryptic device known as a "hard drive," undoubtedly some daimonic mind-control device, I should expect.Vellos 21:09, 3 November 2010 (CET)
- Vellos. I clicked the "start takeover" button myself, I ordered the army into the region, and I organized the war. I think I'd know such details. You were not in Fwuvoghor, you are relying on inaccurate reports sent by people who also weren't there and who had every interest in painting Enweil as a bunch of meanies. There are often too many people who can't keep their mouth shut on matters that don't concern them, and as such that they don't master. The declaration of war was made as Enweil's armies were in Villriil. I've also seen such behaviours repeat themselves under similar circumstances elsewhere since, but didn't make any stir as it was for mere rurals/woodlands. I love how you portray yourself as a person of reference on the matter, when you were nowhere near the events nor in either of the realms involved. You make your opinion based on what others have said. I think the declaration was not long before the turn change, after movement was ordered (though I'm not sure for this), which might have been cause for confusion. Rest assured, though, that the declaration did come before the arrival. You were precisely *not involved* in the affair, by the way. Interested, affected, sure, but not involved. -Chénier 00:05, 4 November 2010 (CET)
- How did a button start a takeover? Truly, Enweilians are full of foul necromancy! For I had though that it was soldiers that conquered regions, not "buttons"? And I would think it strange that you should say you were there. For surely you are either Guillaume or Jeanne who speaks? And surely it was Nicolas who commanded the invasion? And surely Nicolas is dead? And surely no man can speak from the grave? But I am Irasteos, a representative of the estate of the late Count Hireshmont Vellos, and I have been a retainer in his company now for many years, and in fact was in Fwuvoghor when the city fell, delivering a message to certain friends of my now-dead master. Therefore, most strange and anonymous sir, it would seem strange that you should claim the clearly impossible, for it was Nicolas who began a takeover, and yet Nicolas is dead, so surely you cannot claim to have begun the takeover.Vellos 02:47, 4 November 2010 (CET)
- I recall Enweil did not declare war until after it entered the city. I even recall some Enweilian nobles saying something to that effect, gloating over their victory. Ceorl 08:35, 4 November 2010 (CET)
- You "recall" wrong. The "gloating" you are thinking of is probably Nicolas's RP about having some old monarchist supporters open the gates to the Enweilian armies without a battle, which was really just a really short message to give a basic RP description of why things occurred like that, because we considered it a bug that would not have occurred in normal circumstances. But let me clarify this for you, because I know you'd get eternal enjoyment out of misquoting and misunderstanding that: We always considered the fact that there was no battle a bug, not the fact that we were able to start a takeover. The justification for acting in these special circumstances always was that was it not for the bug/unexpected behavior, caused by Riombara not declaring war on us, we would have easily overcome the walls and then defeated the Riombaran army, and the TO would have succeeded anyways. Believe it or no, I'm not some cheater who seeks to game the system wherever he can. I considered the issue lengthily, and decided that the issue was not of our doing and that action did not result in a change of outcome while inaction did. So I opted for action, the option that less diverged from what I considered would have been normal circumstances (in other words, facing a little less losses than we would have instead of facing extremely high losses and having to postpone the takeover). We *wanted* to fight the militia in Fwuvoghor. We knew Riombara was coming, and wanted to make sure the fight occurred before they could arrive. And Vellos, I think you know full well that I do not consider wiki talk pages to be IC, unless specifically stated so. Here, I even did a little modification to my user settings to prevent any such confusion in the future, just now, just for you. -Dominic 01:38, 5 November 2010 (CET)
- If this is OOC, not IC, then do not use words like "I" and "We" in reference to characters. You are not your characters. Your characters enemies are not (or at least should not be) your enemies. The Beluaterran Observer is obviously IC: so maybe they're lying. Trying to OOC undercut them on the talk page is poisoning the well. If a character is lying about your character (perfectly plausible), you have no grounds to, as a player, be defensive on an OOC level. I observed no OOC comments from anyone on the "other side" of the argument, so clearly there was no OOC attack being made which merited an OOC response. I can only hypothesize then that you either had a momentary lapse and allowed yourself too much liberty in defining character knowledge vs. player knowledge, or else you are a poor RPer. I have played alongside you long enough to know that you are not a poor RPer, you are one of the more entertaining players out there, IMO. Therefore, you had a momentary lapse, a thing which I pointed out more subtly at first, but which I am now attempting to clearly spell out. This will be my last comment as, when once an OOC discussion has begun, the fun has left the game. Vellos 06:37, 5 November 2010 (CET)
- The propagandist in me likes to distort reality IC, but the historian in me likes to put things straight OOC. When history presented publicly does not conform with what I have lived/observed/understood, and this no matter where, I feel that people deserve clarifications/corrections. Some of the allegations would push players who weren't in the situation to judge those who were for certain actions. I do not want to be judged, as a player, for something I have not done. -Dominic 13:46, 5 November 2010 (CET)
- If this is OOC, not IC, then do not use words like "I" and "We" in reference to characters. You are not your characters. Your characters enemies are not (or at least should not be) your enemies. The Beluaterran Observer is obviously IC: so maybe they're lying. Trying to OOC undercut them on the talk page is poisoning the well. If a character is lying about your character (perfectly plausible), you have no grounds to, as a player, be defensive on an OOC level. I observed no OOC comments from anyone on the "other side" of the argument, so clearly there was no OOC attack being made which merited an OOC response. I can only hypothesize then that you either had a momentary lapse and allowed yourself too much liberty in defining character knowledge vs. player knowledge, or else you are a poor RPer. I have played alongside you long enough to know that you are not a poor RPer, you are one of the more entertaining players out there, IMO. Therefore, you had a momentary lapse, a thing which I pointed out more subtly at first, but which I am now attempting to clearly spell out. This will be my last comment as, when once an OOC discussion has begun, the fun has left the game. Vellos 06:37, 5 November 2010 (CET)
- You "recall" wrong. The "gloating" you are thinking of is probably Nicolas's RP about having some old monarchist supporters open the gates to the Enweilian armies without a battle, which was really just a really short message to give a basic RP description of why things occurred like that, because we considered it a bug that would not have occurred in normal circumstances. But let me clarify this for you, because I know you'd get eternal enjoyment out of misquoting and misunderstanding that: We always considered the fact that there was no battle a bug, not the fact that we were able to start a takeover. The justification for acting in these special circumstances always was that was it not for the bug/unexpected behavior, caused by Riombara not declaring war on us, we would have easily overcome the walls and then defeated the Riombaran army, and the TO would have succeeded anyways. Believe it or no, I'm not some cheater who seeks to game the system wherever he can. I considered the issue lengthily, and decided that the issue was not of our doing and that action did not result in a change of outcome while inaction did. So I opted for action, the option that less diverged from what I considered would have been normal circumstances (in other words, facing a little less losses than we would have instead of facing extremely high losses and having to postpone the takeover). We *wanted* to fight the militia in Fwuvoghor. We knew Riombara was coming, and wanted to make sure the fight occurred before they could arrive. And Vellos, I think you know full well that I do not consider wiki talk pages to be IC, unless specifically stated so. Here, I even did a little modification to my user settings to prevent any such confusion in the future, just now, just for you. -Dominic 01:38, 5 November 2010 (CET)
- I recall Enweil did not declare war until after it entered the city. I even recall some Enweilian nobles saying something to that effect, gloating over their victory. Ceorl 08:35, 4 November 2010 (CET)
- How did a button start a takeover? Truly, Enweilians are full of foul necromancy! For I had though that it was soldiers that conquered regions, not "buttons"? And I would think it strange that you should say you were there. For surely you are either Guillaume or Jeanne who speaks? And surely it was Nicolas who commanded the invasion? And surely Nicolas is dead? And surely no man can speak from the grave? But I am Irasteos, a representative of the estate of the late Count Hireshmont Vellos, and I have been a retainer in his company now for many years, and in fact was in Fwuvoghor when the city fell, delivering a message to certain friends of my now-dead master. Therefore, most strange and anonymous sir, it would seem strange that you should claim the clearly impossible, for it was Nicolas who began a takeover, and yet Nicolas is dead, so surely you cannot claim to have begun the takeover.Vellos 02:47, 4 November 2010 (CET)
- Vellos. I clicked the "start takeover" button myself, I ordered the army into the region, and I organized the war. I think I'd know such details. You were not in Fwuvoghor, you are relying on inaccurate reports sent by people who also weren't there and who had every interest in painting Enweil as a bunch of meanies. There are often too many people who can't keep their mouth shut on matters that don't concern them, and as such that they don't master. The declaration of war was made as Enweil's armies were in Villriil. I've also seen such behaviours repeat themselves under similar circumstances elsewhere since, but didn't make any stir as it was for mere rurals/woodlands. I love how you portray yourself as a person of reference on the matter, when you were nowhere near the events nor in either of the realms involved. You make your opinion based on what others have said. I think the declaration was not long before the turn change, after movement was ordered (though I'm not sure for this), which might have been cause for confusion. Rest assured, though, that the declaration did come before the arrival. You were precisely *not involved* in the affair, by the way. Interested, affected, sure, but not involved. -Chénier 00:05, 4 November 2010 (CET)
- ... No one judges you as a player for whats written here, only as a character. Writing OOC notes against whatever is written here makes it look like *you* want the player of the character reading this paper to have a ooc doubt about the content, which may influence his characters perception of the written piece. Rather a lame way to attack content which you dont like. Ceorl 14:27, 5 November 2010 (CET)
In General
My thanks for creating this newspaper - it is very refreshing to see someone attempting to take in the overall picture. I as player am very much looking forward towards how politics will develop on Beluaterra now...TanSerrai 17:04, 3 November 2010 (CET)
- You're welcome :) Beluaterra has never been quite so interesting before. With any luck, Beluaterra will survive, and we will get to find out for ourselves how diplomacy will shape up. Beluaterran Observer 06:08, 5 November 2010 (CET)
This is a fun "newspaper" and the only active one from Beluaterra worth reading. Keep up the good work, and I look forward to your continued satirical "reporting." Things only look to get more interesting now that the daimons are turning some of the human realms against the human realms that have the Temples of Light. El Roy 16:24, 8 November 2010 (CET)
