Talk:Itorunt Informer/Special Issue 3

Aurum, while I appreciate your plans for peace, perhaps you could wait and see some plans be enacted. I have my own plans that entail slightly more than just asking the other realms to give up their regions. --The1exile 29 April 2006 10:29 (CEST)

In the case of Avamar, there is no reason Perdan should give it's territiory to revive a failed realm. Perdan re-establishing Avamar in Aix duchy doesn't make any more sense than Itorunt giving up Xavax duchy or Sirion just giving back Avamar itself. Or they could just take the Kalmar Islands. - Thray Walsh

That is an interesting Idea. All nations enter into a Federation.

Now look at the bigger picture. What would others have to do before agreeing to Federate with each other? The list goes on and on if you start to think about it...so many realms have soveriegn interests...but in /my/ humble opinion, the best way to Peace and Prosperity, is for Perdan to give back lands taken to Ibladesh, for Ubent to call it quits as she stands and not lose/gain anything, for Oligarch to cease to exist for the sake of Fontan/Old Rancagua/ Sirion, for Caligus to cease to exist for the sake of LoF and Yssaria, and that is it.

The Island could be in complete harmony in one month's time if Peace and Prosperity is /truely/ what the majority of the peoples want...but why must there be death? Because it is a part of life. Do those two realms wish to "perish" for the sake of the Island? Probably not. Will Perdan surrender for the greater good? Who knows. Will the Peace last forever? Nothing Gold can Stay, as Mr. Frost puts it. --Primus Family

AKA Doc. --The1exile 30 April 2006 09:43 (CEST)

Anyway you want to look at it. What I say is true. Name a quicker resolution that makes sense, and can have a sense of true permanence, and I'll be the first to say "Incredible. It is true."

Brilliant, Doc, brilliant! The eradication of two sovereignties! Excellent roadmap to peace! I personal prefer the capitulation of Old Rancagua to reform Omsk, the neutrality of LoF functioning as a deterent continent-wide against any and all agressive actions, the return of Oligarchian lands(Poitiers, Ashforth, Oberndorf, Tabost, Greatbridge, Bruck, Morshes, Hagley, to name a few.), so that we may dwell in peace. Oh, dont forget the elimination of Ibladesh, assimilating Al Arab into Perdan, and Ibladesh city into Itorunt. Oh, dont forget the last bit: The execution of about...8 different world figures. Oh, dont worry Doc, they arent all in realms that are allied with you. Just most of them are. You, actually, get to be drowned in a bucket of dog urine, THEN beheaded. (OOC- If only Sirion had an active paper to wage war with!)Vellos 30 April 2006 20:40 (CEST)

Yes it IS Brilliant, isn't it? Your proposal, Vellos, is complicated...and pointless. MY proposal, on the other hand, is the fastest and most efficient route TO Peace and Prosperity. I ask anyone to come up with a better solution which offers PERMANANCE like mine, and I will be the first to applaud it. 3 Regions of Oligarch Fall. A handful of other regions in the South...that is it...in theory, my proposal is the best for the goal in mind. Find a better way that will work, and you will have my attention haha! -Doc

Yes, see, mine isnt the most EFFICIENT. I didnt say it was. I just said it was the BEST. Yours involves, well, things that are blatantly and entirely wrong and morally objectionable. Its like killing babies, its wrong. Of course, I doubt if elves object to killing babies, but thats besides the point, its still wrong. Its the same thing with destroying realms, dont do it. Of course, I suppose I cant convince you, you'll already destroyed any last vestige of morality and conscience you and/or the entire elven race ever had. -Hireshmont Vellos 1 May 2006 00:41 (CEST)

While I agree with your point, you might have used a better example. You are equating babies with your realm. - Aurum

Realms are Born, realms Die...not without reason. You see the Oligarchians have no real sense of honor, they are a realm that--and Lysander publicly said this, so don't call me the bad guy--that Oligarch did in fact make a handful of DIFFERENT agreements with Sirion at DIFFERENT points and times in History with ABSOLUTELY NO INTENTION of keeping them. A realm that does that, has no honor. The worst was when he said Oligarch would help us do something, we move in, get wiped out because the vermin fail to show up, and they in turn, send their army straight through Tabost into Trinbar...yes, the Oligarchians sold their souls a long time ago, and their dead corpse is stinking up the Island. Dead things should be buried immediately, but Oligarch...they are dead...but refuse to act dead. They keep leeching on to other realms to survive, they are the most evolved form of parasites...but this time, their tricks and lies won't buy them anymore time. Their day was marked years ago by the gods, but absolute evil is difficult to vanquish, it is a stain that must be washed...and scrubbed...many, many times, before all signs and traces of it are truely gone. - Doc

OOC comments

omg.. there is a reason this game is called BATTLEMASTER instead of PEACEMASTER. War is what makes this game fun. Does a BM without war sound fun..? Eirik felde 30 April 2006 21:04 (CEST)

This is my character's viewpoint. I was challenged by rl friends to play a peacenik because they didn't think I could do it. I'm a very political person who supports war for protection of a nation so they didn't think I could pull it off. --Bishamon Family April 30, 2006 22:29 (CEST)

Yeah, war is fun. BM would be boring without it(actually, not really. Religion is changing that somewhat), but we're still gonna negotiate for peace. Someone else will start a war after the current one ends. Vellos 30 April 2006 23:09 (CEST)

I think what no-one plans for is when the HRA falls to the NA and SA. then they're all going to have to l;ive in peace... hopefully religion comes by then. --The1exile 30 April 2006 23:18 (CEST)

I'm probably going to retire Aurum when/if the war ends. Need to free up room for another without donating. If I had the money I would. --Bishamon Family April 30, 2006 23:22 (CEST)

BM was quite fun well before war was even introduced in the later version. Good roleplays, and many other features in addition to War found within the game...it just so happens, that war gets in the way of exploring them fully. As I mentioned, an era of peace would be nice, Tom would probably shake up the Island after a while, and battle would return, but for the meantime, the EI could be a place for people who IRL don't have that much time to play, but still wish to hang around. Don't forget that Peace doesn't last forever, someone always does something they shouldn't...it is the imperfect Human nature. -Doc

Something they shouldnt? Peace isnt necessarily right, nor war necessarily wrong, in my opinion. Shouldnt, in relation to keeping the peace, maybe. Shouldnt, in relation to general right and wrong, no. Anyways, times of pecae can be fun, especially if we got religion in EC. Vellos 1 May 2006 00:43 (CEST)

I agree. Most people don't advocate stupid war. There are plenty of examples for that though. It depends on circumstances. --Bishamon Family May 1, 2006 01:03 (CEST)

War can be right, and it can be wrong...always. For instance, if I choose to steal your wife, and you wage a war on my home, that is Just and Right--assuming you ask for her back first, and I say "Go to Hell." I can play victim all I want, but when push comes to shove, I am guilty as hell. Same for anything else. Everyone has their land, sometimes others want more than what the gods gave them....is it right? No. Now what if a realm is being harassed by a larger realm, smaller realm decides to close her borders...large realm invades...is that right? No. You can play victim on any side, but in reality, everything has an absolute right and wrong factor associated with it. Now there is always a way around war. Treaties, Land Swap Agreements, Etc. But it is hard for people to be DIPLOMATIC, why is that? Because sometimes the "easy way" is not only the most convenient, but the most assured. With Diplomacy, there is Peace and Order. Without Diplomacy, there is only Chaos and War. -Doc

I'm not disagreeing, but then why does Yssaria insist on grinding Caligus into the dust? Now, to use you example of the larger realm invading the smaller realm, thats what happened, when Yssaria was a young realm Caligus picked on them. Now Yssaria is getting their own back, and appears hell-bent on forcing Caligus into submission. Who is right in this case? Yssaria, for fighting back against domination by the original invaders, or Caligus, for wanting to end the war which they started? Is it right that Yssaria refuses to accept peace terms? There's always the grey area. --The1exile 1 May 2006 11:07 (CEST)

It is not so grey when you think of it. Realms that start wars while they are incredibly powerful, or suprise attack a realm who is pseudo-evenly matched rarely make a permanent peace. Their pride demands a 2nd shot. Take Sirion and Oligarch for instance, when their war started, Oligarch played a heavy offense, and Sirion a heavy Defense. With time, Oligarch began to lose...and they would make treaties ranging from Ceasefire to Alliance, soley for the purpose of building up her troops again, try to nab allied support, and start up the war again. Who is to say, that Caligus will not try this? If Yssaria opens up the door to forgiving Caligus, what happens if--just say for sake of argument--that Ibladesh + Itorunt surrender, what happens when Perdan's troops are freed up, and then suddenly, Caligus demands some "land back" from Yssaria, Yssaria says "What the hell, are you serious?" and then Caligus invades...with Perdan's support? I am not saying this will happen, but it could happen...only way to ensure a bully 'changes' is by simply removing the bully from the equation. Oligarch was a bully, now she is on her knees. Caligus was a bully, now she is on her knees. Perdan is a bully, sooner than later she'll be on her knees. Of these 3 bullies however, only one has a real shot at surrendering and not being destroyed. It is not hard to figure it out either. -Doc

I disagree. If you truly want to be the good guy, then you must accept the risk of being turned on, that is the fundamental difference between truly being "morally right" or whatever you want to call it, and not. A good example of this can be Perdan and Ibladesh. Shortly after the fall of Isadril, Perdan and Ibladesh were at war. It was a somewhat similar situation as it is now, and Perdan had just taken Al Aquabah. Ibladesh asked for peace. Not only did Perdan accept this peace, but lost lands were returned and Ibladesh was returned to its former strength. Then when things we're going well for Perdan, Ibladesh turned against Perdan and launched a sneak attack against their former ally. The high council in Perdan might have predicted such an outcome, but they accepted the peace despite that fact because it was the right thing to do. Even today, in a similar situation, the right thing for Perdan to do would be grant Ibladesh peace even if they know it would only last until Ibladesh was back on its feet and ready to turn again. I believe Fontan has done similar things in the past as well. As for these 3 realms being "bullies" I don't really see any evidence for that. Whats the current ratio on the EI, 4 realms against 7? I think the bully/powermongers lie much futher to the north. Anyways, enough of what you think is my biased thoughts. The bottom line is this, the RIGHT thing to do isn't necessarily the smartest thing to do, and it could very easily backfire on you if the other party is dishonorable, but that is a risk one must take if they truly want to be the honorable party. --Blackknight 1 May 2006 18:52 (CEST)

Firstly, Blackknight, just want to make sure you know this section is for OOC only. I think I detect a bit of IC dislike there.

Secondly, I have to say that Sirion aren't the ones who command around 70K in mobile, and yet can't destroy a pathetically weak realm inhabited by players who don't give a toss if their chars in there die, while being supported by an allied realm who border on hatred of them. Let's face it, Perdan could have marched south and completely obliterated Ibladesh with over twice their strength, but they didn't. They also had an extra maybe 10K from Ubent that they didn't use, or when they did it was wasted. I've never been completely sure why Perdan seems to lose their army on the way (for example, I think they have 30K or so unaccounted for right now) although I appreciate the logistics are huge. It should not be hard to crush Ibladesh now if they wanted to, and give up on Oligarch... We can see how Oligarch is going to fall, even without Perdan. Perdan should give up on them, and focus their whole might against the south. Then they might have a chance of success. Otherwise they will fall to the united armies of Yssaria, Itorunt, Sirion and Fontan. --The1exile 1 May 2006 23:12 (CEST)

I'm not really sure how my comments were IC dislike, just a list of facts on how diplomatic relations change changed mixed with Just War Theory I studied recently, which is where I drew the whole "be the bigger man even if you get stabbed in the back" conclusion. As for Perdan crushing Ibladesh....maybe there are other reasons why Ibladesh continues to live? Sometimes check is more useful then checkmate.--Blackknight 2 May 2006 04:27 (CEST)

They seemed IC to me earlier but after rereading them they could go either way. I say we leave it. --Bishamon Family May 2, 2006 04:37 (CEST)