inyati
Morkin Admin
Aqua profunda est quieta
Posts: 4,310
|
Post by inyati on Sept 25, 2007 9:22:52 GMT
<snip> For Sol's benefit the idea as posted is this Since just before the Digg/ES war there has been some discussion about the Direction Morkin should take, In light of the super alliances that seems to be the current FAD. Our position has always been that of trying to stand up for the little guy/do the right & Fair thing. I think the almost overnight destruction of MX at our hands makes us seem like a formidable enemy to even the most brave players, so taking on DIGG might mean taking on us and we have shown on this and on the old server that we will not fragment under pressure even if it means our demise. In my opinion us having the DIGG Pact, really makes them untouchable in the eyes of other alliances, for example Pantheon has over the last week been in a very good position to take on DIGG with the expansion for the new oceans created by the 'DIGG Effect'. But I think that their will to decisively strike DIGG is being tempered by the uncertainty of how we will react to such an attack. If we were to side with Pantheon and then take on DIGG( now that would be a Epic battle) and win we would just put Pantheon at the top of the table and it would probably forge them together creating the next 'DIGG' My proposal above was to open the way for Pantheon and DIGG to slug it out without us being 'in the way', It would also show the other alliances that we are not DIGG's war puppet. The culmination I believe means that sooner or later we would become the target of a top 10 alliance as we would not necessarily have the backing of DIGG via Pact agreement. (Action at last I hear you say ;D) There I think I got all my points across, let me hear your thoughts
|
|
inyati
Morkin Admin
Aqua profunda est quieta
Posts: 4,310
|
Post by inyati on Sept 25, 2007 9:26:25 GMT
Another contribuition: To hell with this. We're reacting, not acting. We simply make a unilateral announcement that we are canceling all pacts immediately. And that we welcome approaches from any alliance who wants a fresh pact/peace treaty with us, but only if that alliance is outside the top 10 and has less than 150 members. As a matter of policy, Morkin will no longer be pacting with any Top 10 or Too-Many-Members alliance, as we feel this unbalances the game and prevents the development of healthy politics. End of fecking story. DIGG will get over it. Time for the Elder Gods to come down from the mountain and just remake reality. Because we can.
|
|
SkulkrinBait
Morkin Admin
Haxx0rs == Suxx0rs! v4
Posts: 6,680
|
Post by SkulkrinBait on Sept 25, 2007 11:10:45 GMT
I agree, we should stick up for the little guy again, as we are doing with HAWK. Cancel all pacts with larger alliances and see what happens. Wait until our dispute with Orc is over though!
|
|
Ruku
Luxor Member
The Weighted Companion Cube will not stab you... The cake is a lie!!!!
Posts: 623
|
Post by Ruku on Sept 25, 2007 12:50:52 GMT
I love the idea, and I really can't wait to see the reaction!
|
|
|
Post by Gornall on Sept 25, 2007 13:00:47 GMT
Like the sound of it, we being wanting to distance ourselves from Digg ever since the great war and this seems a good and "moral" way of doing so.
Definately got my agreement.
|
|
Null
Luxor Member
Don't Tread on Me
Posts: 481
|
Post by Null on Sept 25, 2007 13:09:53 GMT
I agree with dropping all current pacts. However saying we won't pact with anyone in the top10, at this stage, leaves out some valuable allies. With Pantheon as it is currently, the CURRENT top10 involves some alliances that would normally be in the 10-20 range, that may be good candidates for a pact with us....IE: E||M...
I don't really like the limiting of outside the top10 aspect. Sure lets drop Digg, to open up some possibilities, and we can drop all current pacts so it doesn't appear we are singling out Digg, but lets not limit ourselves in the future.
|
|
Sol
Luxor Member
I pledge alligeance to the corn-growers.
Posts: 1,610
|
Post by Sol on Sept 25, 2007 14:33:26 GMT
The idea is great! As for Null's and possibly other people's concern about "will not pact with any top 5 Alliance." We can always have "friendship" with them? I like the idea of not having a pact with the top 5 because it leaves room for war. Imagine, if all 5 alliances or 3 of those 5 had pacts, would it be likely that a smaller alliance or the remaining 2 would want to start a war? War keeps the server healthy. And, although we are a peaceful alliance, leaving room for war = good. Plus, if we had pacts with good small alliances, who knows, we could together take down top alliances.
|
|
Clausewitz
Luxor Member
Veni. Vidi. Vici. Mori.
Posts: 1,437
|
Post by Clausewitz on Sept 25, 2007 14:36:06 GMT
My only concern is that it could backfire.
DIGG or Pantheon could theoretically move against us, confident that the other would not intervene.
We will certainly need to reach new heights of military attentiveness, as I believe there will be a heightened threat that one of the top 2 alliances could prey upon us...
|
|
Sol
Luxor Member
I pledge alligeance to the corn-growers.
Posts: 1,610
|
Post by Sol on Sept 25, 2007 14:39:32 GMT
While possible, I think it would be stupid of them to do such thing.
If they killed us, there wouldn't be anything else to do on the server and they'll quit out of boredom.
But that is a very valid point. I'm willing to accept the risks.
|
|
McGoogus
Luxor Member
McGorgeous
Posts: 548
|
Post by McGoogus on Sept 25, 2007 14:43:31 GMT
Yeah there are certainly risks involved. People will still see us as threatening, but just a bit less. I say it's worth it. Time to have some fun
|
|
Arminius
Morkin Admin
Ich bin Bl?cher
Posts: 4,148
|
Post by Arminius on Sept 25, 2007 14:45:27 GMT
I think the same as Sol. Why would the US and the USSR 20yrs ago have had any interest in attacking any neutral country together? They'd have tried to get their sympathisers to fight on their behalf. Plus, if Digg and Pantheon were to join forces, that would go against anything Pantheon stands for (well, not that they stand for much anyway) and they'd implode. However, we should not be as dogmatic as to let our diplomacy be determined by point scores. Instead of 'top-5' or 'top-10' we should look for the political/real power of an alliance. Valheru are quite high up, but I would say they're not nearly as powerful as some smaller alliances. EDIT: added clarification. Why do people always have to post between me and the previous post
|
|
Sol
Luxor Member
I pledge alligeance to the corn-growers.
Posts: 1,610
|
Post by Sol on Sept 25, 2007 14:48:56 GMT
@ Arminius "Why do people always have to post between me and the previous post" Because you type slow. But yeah, I agree with what you say. Lets make a list of "power" instead of points and see what that gives us.
|
|
Natmus
Morkin Admin
Fight the power!
Posts: 4,518
|
Post by Natmus on Sept 25, 2007 14:48:57 GMT
I'm in.
|
|
Clausewitz
Luxor Member
Veni. Vidi. Vici. Mori.
Posts: 1,437
|
Post by Clausewitz on Sept 25, 2007 14:49:51 GMT
I think the concern is more that Pantheon or DIGG would feel they could strike us with impunity from the other, rather than them trying to do it together.
But if it's a risk we acknowledge and are willing to take, I'm game.
|
|
Warliter
Morkin Admin
Baniter from M/MU
Posts: 814
|
Post by Warliter on Sept 25, 2007 15:00:06 GMT
@clause, I agree with you on the risks, there is a possibility that this may cause pantheon to attack especially if they think we may turn against DIGG, alternatively we go down fighting As I said I think some of Pantheons hesitation to attack or ask DIGG to disband comes from us being an unknown. If Pantheon attacked DIGG and we sided with DIGG, I am confident that we would shatter Pantheon within 2 weeks to a hardcore of players that really want to take DIGG out, the rest would fracture to save their accounts. Who wants to play inselsim any ways EDIT - I agree with Arminius on the political/power ideal
|
|