I fail to see what we'd gain by entering a war that'd lead to our defeat. Surely it makes more sense to fight against those who are incapable of defending their vast claims than assaulting those who are active and have a vast number of supporters.
For efficiency it makes sense to trade with the grey order, if you fail to see that you clearly fail to grasp the basics of the system in place. I look back over the history of templars in strategus, we were originally hated for being to large, and forcing people to join us. Then we were mocked and betrayed by people who pretended to support us because we were too small and incapable of harming larger clans. now we have sought out allies,through need, we are accused of being "carebears".
What the fuck do you know of our plans. the only one we had this strategus was to destroy Fallen/HRE, being our oldest of enemies (HERETICS). Kinngrimm was thinking along the similar lines and Hospitallers made an bvious choice for fighting on NA pings against a largly NA clan.
m so sorry if you didn't like the fact that your clan lost all their villages, but you guys weren't exactly all so interested in fighting the biggest enemies you could find last strat. If i remember correctly the few fights i saw being initiated by Fallen were against small, unarmed armies in their lands.
Your forecast is just that, you do not know what may happen tomorrow, war may come to any part of calradia.
Thanks Casimir for actually engaging in this discussion. I disapprove of the trolls, even some of my own, who aren't adding anything. There's a point to be made here, and it's either that massive non-aggression alliances to disproportionately empower one side over the other is either GOOD for Strategus, or it is BAD.
First let's address the accusations. Lost our villages? We gave them up. Fallen never fought a defensive battle for a fief following the downfall of Dusturil. The UIF was on the move against HRE, FCC quit the game, anti-UIF coalition failed miserably (why? - again, look at the numbers) and most of our players weren't interested in a game that was rigged since the start (read: Strategus 1). It's the same shit, every round of Strategus. It's boring and unimpressive.
Now, you use an interesting term. "For efficiency's sake" you trade with the UIF, and vice versa. You both maximize profits.
Why, exactly, do you need to do this? You are the third largest clan in the game. Perhaps you've lost members (like everyone else)?
Paul has a great suggestion. "Get your shit together." Sounds reasonable to me, right? I'm kidding, of course. The numbers just aren't there, for you just as badly as for everyone against you. Paul and those that prescribe to that logic are being foolish by refusing to face the reality. The numbers aren't there. No amount of "shit-gathering" is going to change that. It was tried, it failed, moving on.
So, here we are. First largest and the two third largest clans, scheming together to maximize profits... to fight people that can't possibly outproduce them in troops and can't possibly outproduce them in gold/equipment.
So, ask yourself... if I were in the shoes of smaller clans who don't have the numbers to counter my actions... what would you do in response?
"I fail to see what we'd gain by entering a war that'd lead to our defeat."
Ah! Well, isn't that illuminating. Maybe that's why the wars have stopped, why Strategus fucking sucks. It's gridlock. Nobody can move, because the largest powers are so goddamn big and self-enriched that nobody can play the game with any hope of making progress that won't be immediately reversed. Hence, even when you do win... what is it worth? Nobody gives a shit when you win, because we all see how you do it.
The Mercs? Goddamn! 35 of them held back a group of 600 players' combined economic and troop power for a week or so. Now that's impressive, goddamn legendary. Hats off to you, boys.
So you're able to win. It's not some super-clever tactic or strategy. You made a deal with the UIF, and the numbers aren't there for anyone to change it. No matter what the past has been (not being rude, but your paragraph on history was garbled, I didn't understand it), the facts of today are set. You have PLENTY of members. Only the core-UIF is larger than you. The argument that you "need" those large allies just doesn't impress me. I don't think, aside from some of the UIF players, it impresses anybody else either.
Let's look at the last part of your response, which I think is most telling about your attitude on Strategus. I don't need to know your plans, I've seen your actions and you've confessed a large part of what everyone already knew in regards to your relationship with the UIF- so now, I have your words as well.
"Surely it makes more sense to fight against those who are incapable of defending their vast claims than assaulting those who are active and have a vast number of supporters."
You're a total coward! A weenie! A wimp! You admit that fighting the hard fights, oh, that's not interesting to you. You condemn those who do not or cannot fight your massive web of NAP/allies, but refuse to partake in that fight under the absurd argument that picking on the little guys is more sensible than starting wars with equal powers.
Instead, you make agreements to protect yourself from the only individual clans capable of fighting back.
And that right there is why I think we can all LOL together. Casamir, you're extremely unimpressive and a downright bore. I wanted to refrain from getting personal, but you've admitted it yourself and I realize that you're incorrigible and intellectually dishonest. It's as close to griefing as it gets in the cRPG world. You'll do anything to win, and that includes the sacrifice of fair gaming and fun found in the rigors and challenges of competing against worthwhile opponents.
---
Harpag, I still hope to hear a full rebuttal on my last response. You're a much finer conversationalist than Casamir, and seemingly upfront and honest thus far. Don't fall for the one-liner trolls. Let's keep discussing this issue.
