Responding to your posts isn't badgering.
Call to Arms for a Free Colonia
- Thread starter Pristine_Bump
- Start date
Responding to your posts isn't badgering.
Just saying that if the 1 or 2 posters from one side get jumped on every time they post the thread will not go on til the end.
I dont think we are getting an answer, last night I thought it was close then 'poof' it was gone. It is a viable tactic however frustrating it is. Or it may be showing the same disregard that they feel was shown by the other side originally.
Before FCs Im sure that was a much stronger argument, does it really matter anymore with a weekend trip to the bubble and back with a new fleet all engineered? Is that more important that the real or imagined wrongs that are being accounted for?
I think thats exactly what the other side is saying. You (LR/TN) are the oppressor and everyone else was oppressed (a peace treaty signed at the point of a sword is not a treaty either side is signing in good faith, and has been the 'excuse' for war before, an unjust treaty)*
Theres at least one AC fan on here
*Reading between the lines we may have our answer. Here we go:
TN was put into Carcosa in a 'special' BGS way with super-influence and virtually gteed expansion which ran into another BGS power. (I used to think something else but now think its purely MB was a fan of Lovecraft and took the opportunity with Carcosa, I dont now think there is any more tinfoil, he was just giving them a good start and a chance so they didnt get wiped out immediately is all)
TN was adopted by 1 o r more player groups / squadrons over time but either gave up or got nowhere
Carcosa was taken by a pmf EN and held while TN were unsupported and just an NPC group?
This is where it gets murky. Especially as to chronological order.
DG2 was an SDC event. Everybody who knows about them will have their own views on SDC or on one member who killed Salome. Start another thread about that.
TN was adopted by LR and LR moved to Colonia and took control of Carcosa from EN who were a pmf. Seemingly with no negotiation? We have the date from Isiah, the accusation is it was taken while the pmf was out exploring and maybe even as revenge, when did DW2 end? One side says liberation one says retribution.
At some point LR declared war on Colonia Council and a new 'council' was the eventual outcome. Point of a sword negotiations?
TN have not remained in Carcosa but have been accused of expansionist behaviour which they deny. They have now been retreated back to Carcosa.
So is it really a small group being bullied by the bubble powers or is it chickens coming home to roost and the law catching up? Just those chickens have been building a new hen-house and a lot of people helped who didn't know what the chickens had been up to before they came home to roost and didnt realise the hen-house was built on a demolished farmhouse that people were living in?
Some responses by some from LR about 'murdering explorers' and some feeble excuse are exactly what the group is being accused of. Hiding behind a facade of 'do what you want, its all fine, we are the underdogs of liberty' while trampling on other Cmdrs or pmfs as they see fit. Evidence of similar previous behaviour from one of LR maybe shows a pattern of behaviour that could be read as I want to do whatever I want with no consequences, which in a single-player game would be a fine expectation, but in a multi-player nobody bows to you as you dont bow to anybody else...
Carcosa is the de facto home system of TN. Does home system mean they have to have Control? Expectation has been yes traditionally but obviously exceptions, but most people who adopt a faction want it to control their home system ofc they do. But that doesnt mean its an automatic right. A player group had fought and won that system and no negotiations were attempted it seems. A bit like now but in reverse.
I dont think we are getting an answer, last night I thought it was close then 'poof' it was gone. It is a viable tactic however frustrating it is. Or it may be showing the same disregard that they feel was shown by the other side originally.
Before FCs Im sure that was a much stronger argument, does it really matter anymore with a weekend trip to the bubble and back with a new fleet all engineered? Is that more important that the real or imagined wrongs that are being accounted for?
I think thats exactly what the other side is saying. You (LR/TN) are the oppressor and everyone else was oppressed (a peace treaty signed at the point of a sword is not a treaty either side is signing in good faith, and has been the 'excuse' for war before, an unjust treaty)*
Theres at least one AC fan on here
*Reading between the lines we may have our answer. Here we go:
TN was put into Carcosa in a 'special' BGS way with super-influence and virtually gteed expansion which ran into another BGS power. (I used to think something else but now think its purely MB was a fan of Lovecraft and took the opportunity with Carcosa, I dont now think there is any more tinfoil, he was just giving them a good start and a chance so they didnt get wiped out immediately is all)
TN was adopted by 1 o r more player groups / squadrons over time but either gave up or got nowhere
Carcosa was taken by a pmf EN and held while TN were unsupported and just an NPC group?
This is where it gets murky. Especially as to chronological order.
DG2 was an SDC event. Everybody who knows about them will have their own views on SDC or on one member who killed Salome. Start another thread about that.
TN was adopted by LR and LR moved to Colonia and took control of Carcosa from EN who were a pmf. Seemingly with no negotiation? We have the date from Isiah, the accusation is it was taken while the pmf was out exploring and maybe even as revenge, when did DW2 end? One side says liberation one says retribution.
At some point LR declared war on Colonia Council and a new 'council' was the eventual outcome. Point of a sword negotiations?
TN have not remained in Carcosa but have been accused of expansionist behaviour which they deny. They have now been retreated back to Carcosa.
So is it really a small group being bullied by the bubble powers or is it chickens coming home to roost and the law catching up? Just those chickens have been building a new hen-house and a lot of people helped who didn't know what the chickens had been up to before they came home to roost and didnt realise the hen-house was built on a demolished farmhouse that people were living in?
Some responses by some from LR about 'murdering explorers' and some feeble excuse are exactly what the group is being accused of. Hiding behind a facade of 'do what you want, its all fine, we are the underdogs of liberty' while trampling on other Cmdrs or pmfs as they see fit. Evidence of similar previous behaviour from one of LR maybe shows a pattern of behaviour that could be read as I want to do whatever I want with no consequences, which in a single-player game would be a fine expectation, but in a multi-player nobody bows to you as you dont bow to anybody else...
Carcosa is the de facto home system of TN. Does home system mean they have to have Control? Expectation has been yes traditionally but obviously exceptions, but most people who adopt a faction want it to control their home system ofc they do. But that doesnt mean its an automatic right. A player group had fought and won that system and no negotiations were attempted it seems. A bit like now but in reverse.
I would add something else to this as the whole player named/FDev named factions issue muddies the waters where perhaps it shouldn't.Just saying that if the 1 or 2 posters from one side get jumped on every time they post the thread will not go on til the end.
I dont think we are getting an answer, last night I thought it was close then 'poof' it was gone. It is a viable tactic however frustrating it is. Or it may be showing the same disregard that they feel was shown by the other side originally.
Before FCs Im sure that was a much stronger argument, does it really matter anymore with a weekend trip to the bubble and back with a new fleet all engineered? Is that more important that the real or imagined wrongs that are being accounted for?
I think thats exactly what the other side is saying. You (LR/TN) are the oppressor and everyone else was oppressed (a peace treaty signed at the point of a sword is not a treaty either side is signing in good faith, and has been the 'excuse' for war before, an unjust treaty)*
Theres at least one AC fan on here
*Reading between the lines we may have our answer. Here we go:
TN was put into Carcosa in a 'special' BGS way with super-influence and virtually gteed expansion which ran into another BGS power. (I used to think something else but now think its purely MB was a fan of Lovecraft and took the opportunity with Carcosa, I dont now think there is any more tinfoil, he was just giving them a good start and a chance so they didnt get wiped out immediately is all)
TN was adopted by 1 o r more player groups / squadrons over time but either gave up or got nowhere
Carcosa was taken by a pmf EN and held while TN were unsupported and just an NPC group?
This is where it gets murky. Especially as to chronological order.
DG2 was an SDC event. Everybody who knows about them will have their own views on SDC or on one member who killed Salome. Start another thread about that.
TN was adopted by LR and LR moved to Colonia and took control of Carcosa from EN who were a pmf. Seemingly with no negotiation? We have the date from Isiah, the accusation is it was taken while the pmf was out exploring and maybe even as revenge, when did DW2 end? One side says liberation one says retribution.
At some point LR declared war on Colonia Council and a new 'council' was the eventual outcome. Point of a sword negotiations?
TN have not remained in Carcosa but have been accused of expansionist behaviour which they deny. They have now been retreated back to Carcosa.
So is it really a small group being bullied by the bubble powers or is it chickens coming home to roost and the law catching up? Just those chickens have been building a new hen-house and a lot of people helped who didn't know what the chickens had been up to before they came home to roost and didnt realise the hen-house was built on a demolished farmhouse that people were living in?
Some responses by some from LR about 'murdering explorers' and some feeble excuse are exactly what the group is being accused of. Hiding behind a facade of 'do what you want, its all fine, we are the underdogs of liberty' while trampling on other Cmdrs or pmfs as they see fit. Evidence of similar previous behaviour from one of LR maybe shows a pattern of behaviour that could be read as I want to do whatever I want with no consequences, which in a single-player game would be a fine expectation, but in a multi-player nobody bows to you as you dont bow to anybody else...
Carcosa is the de facto home system of TN. Does home system mean they have to have Control? Expectation has been yes traditionally but obviously exceptions, but most people who adopt a faction want it to control their home system ofc they do. But that doesnt mean its an automatic right. A player group had fought and won that system and no negotiations were attempted it seems. A bit like now but in reverse.
Currently it is not possible for a player group to name their own faction in Colonia. This means if someone wants to support a faction not already supported by a player group they have to either pick one that FDev named or find an abandoned player named faction.
If we're saying that only player named factions count, are you saying that new groups should be shut out of being involved in this way?
Should it be that because I only started playing in January if 2018, I'm looked down on as being a lesser player in the area as none of the current player named factions have an ethos that appeals to me. I'm late so the door is locked?
The questions aren't directed specifically at you, I'm just posing them as food for thought when someone says player named groups should have priority.
Last edited:
No, and that the exact point of all this. You control nothing in this game. Being a controlling faction doesn't mean you are in control, because you are not. It a pixel badge with no meaning. The services a controlling faction can provide through the assets a system contains can be of use to its surroundings.
Sure, TN is gonna lose control over Carcosa, for now, they will never retreat from it though. So the question remains, what will the Nebula gain from all this, and objectively, it will gain nothing but lose something. TN will be there, LR will be there and the BGS will be there, so that will stay. It won't be safer, more dangerous neither. The yard will be gone for the Nebula, it will perfectly blend in with all the other useless yards out there. Thats the only thing that will be achieved.
Last edited:
Just saying that if the 1 or 2 posters from one side get jumped on every time they post the thread will not go on til the end.
I dont think we are getting an answer, last night I thought it was close then 'poof' it was gone. It is a viable tactic however frustrating it is. Or it may be showing the same disregard that they feel was shown by the other side originally.
Before FCs Im sure that was a much stronger argument, does it really matter anymore with a weekend trip to the bubble and back with a new fleet all engineered? Is that more important that the real or imagined wrongs that are being accounted for?
I think thats exactly what the other side is saying. You (LR/TN) are the oppressor and everyone else was oppressed (a peace treaty signed at the point of a sword is not a treaty either side is signing in good faith, and has been the 'excuse' for war before, an unjust treaty)*
Theres at least one AC fan on here
*Reading between the lines we may have our answer. Here we go:
TN was put into Carcosa in a 'special' BGS way with super-influence and virtually gteed expansion which ran into another BGS power. (I used to think something else but now think its purely MB was a fan of Lovecraft and took the opportunity with Carcosa, I dont now think there is any more tinfoil, he was just giving them a good start and a chance so they didnt get wiped out immediately is all)
TN was adopted by 1 o r more player groups / squadrons over time but either gave up or got nowhere
Carcosa was taken by a pmf EN and held while TN were unsupported and just an NPC group?
This is where it gets murky. Especially as to chronological order.
DG2 was an SDC event. Everybody who knows about them will have their own views on SDC or on one member who killed Salome. Start another thread about that.
TN was adopted by LR and LR moved to Colonia and took control of Carcosa from EN who were a pmf. Seemingly with no negotiation? We have the date from Isiah, the accusation is it was taken while the pmf was out exploring and maybe even as revenge, when did DW2 end? One side says liberation one says retribution.
At some point LR declared war on Colonia Council and a new 'council' was the eventual outcome. Point of a sword negotiations?
TN have not remained in Carcosa but have been accused of expansionist behaviour which they deny. They have now been retreated back to Carcosa.
So is it really a small group being bullied by the bubble powers or is it chickens coming home to roost and the law catching up? Just those chickens have been building a new hen-house and a lot of people helped who didn't know what the chickens had been up to before they came home to roost and didnt realise the hen-house was built on a demolished farmhouse that people were living in?
Some responses by some from LR about 'murdering explorers' and some feeble excuse are exactly what the group is being accused of. Hiding behind a facade of 'do what you want, its all fine, we are the underdogs of liberty' while trampling on other Cmdrs or pmfs as they see fit. Evidence of similar previous behaviour from one of LR maybe shows a pattern of behaviour that could be read as I want to do whatever I want with no consequences, which in a single-player game would be a fine expectation, but in a multi-player nobody bows to you as you dont bow to anybody else...
Carcosa is the de facto home system of TN. Does home system mean they have to have Control? Expectation has been yes traditionally but obviously exceptions, but most people who adopt a faction want it to control their home system ofc they do. But that doesnt mean its an automatic right. A player group had fought and won that system and no negotiations were attempted it seems. A bit like now but in reverse.
We just went ahead and flipped Carcosa back in March of last year because of EN's publicly well documented (you can find posts on this very forum) disdain of The Nameless and any and all groups seeking to support them.
When I said earlier that EN was a soft target it's because of this: I knew we would be underestimated. It's what you people always do with outlaws (and it's happening again right now).
As any diplomatic neophyte knows you negotiate from a position of strength. Anyone and everyone realizes that simply rolling up to Colonia last year and asking for Nameless control of Carcosa would've been laughed out of the nebula. In order to be taken seriously we acted first.
Acting first only upsets the other side because we won.
As far this this being "chickens coming home to roost" I suppose you're probably right in a sense. In reality it's just a revenge quest on the part of groups like EN and CIDE with SPEAR as willing lackeys because "Phisto mean grr." In any case, when Carcosa eventually falls it won't be the end. It won't even be the beginning of the end.
It'll be the end of the beginning.
Am I wrong to assume that since TN are the only indigenous faction in Carcosa, "the other folks" you mention were actually conquerors? I'm saying that as a simple commander, I wasn't even here at the time. And I think it was mentioned that even Phisto was against TN at the first war (someone please correct me if I'm wrong). My involvement is more recent. When I saw that Colonia is in danger to lose the ships if The Nameless lose control, I volunteered.
The Moral of this story is "Dont ever go out"
I guess you missed the part where you won unfairly (loaded word perhaps but that's the perception I guess). That doesn't make for a strong negotiating position.
Still not getting it?
I forgot to address this point. When the AAA eventually declares their "New Order" in Colonia, or whatever, they should be well advised to remember that one of the best ways to undermine power is to show the people just how impotent that power is.
Go ask Colonial Legionaries about this. EN hired them to guard their holdings while DW2 was happening. Not our fault they weren't up to the task.
Again it all boils down to one thing: the bad blood exists because Explorers' Nation are sore losers.
But there is no other methodology available for a player group to become involved in Nebula politics currently - no new PMF has been inserted, nor is likely to be - although I'd love to be proven wrong - so the only option for an incoming player group to be involved in the Nebula is to support a NPC faction - indeed, isn't that what is claimed by SPEAR having inserted themselves into a system as their Colonia 'home'?
I cant remember if it was on this thread or not but @Ian Doncaster looked at that issue recently. Colonia is a finite space, should it grow at X% per year and allow new factions in? The original ones were decided by CG support, how should others be added? How big should it get? Would the SP get involved for bubble 2,0 if it got bigger?
I usually speak against too much player influence in game or on the game, i prefer the game to not care and not be affected too much. The BGS to a degree limits the power available as becomes harder to maintain the bigger you get. Its a check on power, so me and fdev agree on this, just my check would be 3,4 or maybe 5 systems max per group so they dont affect my game unless I choose it.
The bubble is 'controlled' by the SP who negotiate with pmf where necessary. Colonia is an experiment to see if players can agree their own rules and form their own 'laws' or even a 'council' to decide matters, or something else entirely that nobody had thought of.....and the answer is No, No they can't. Someone will always be unhappy with some outcome or other or the 'laws' or the 'council' if there is one for some reason or other. And Im not sure how much thought was given to any new group coming in...and what if they just say 'No' to whatever convention is in place.
So far the avoidance of bubble 2.0 shows why or how bubble 1.0 was created in the first place. In lore terms its shows that some groups just cannot abide each other or need help from a bigger power or their rights get trampled (and all sides can claim this from their POV).
The only difference this time is FCs. Both in large scale long-distance warfare and occupation, availability of reinforcements or speed and ease of access to combat ships but also the ability of a non pmf to have a presence.
Arguably new groups should maybe be allowed to petition for an unused group to be replaced with their named group and faction type, if there is one available, but then you still get the 'home' system issue if its been long term held by another group...but would the 'council' like that, or would enough people not disagree to make it viable (if one group disagrees they can just BGS war you constantly).
Turns out most societies eventually group together for the greater good, giving up individual rights for the rights of everyone and the welfare of all. How strictly they enforce their rules is often an indicator of how long they last, whether a 'federation' or 'alliance' or an 'empire' (small f, a & e).
May I then suggest some private communication between representatives from the parties involved? That would exclude heated exchanges by third parties. It's never too late for peace. Of course, you must tell us all about it afterwards
Although I'm not a native English speaker, my take from that is that it means members of Explorers' Nation, not the actual defenseless explorers.
But what were the alternatives for a new group coming to the region? From what I see, this was deliberately chosen because it wasn't the home system of another player group. How many other systems can you say that for that would have avoided this issue? How many of those would have been happy to have a new group take a system without the same argument (I'll save you having to reply to the last 2, the answer is going to be 0)? That argument still looks like an attempt at exclusivity in the game to me.
But then, if this means a new group coming in means permanent conflict in the region, so be it. I'm not against that way of playing the game and this could be interesting as a new dynamic to the region.
Ultimately no faction has any right to control any system. As there is usually multiple native NPC factions that couldn't in fact technically work... Neither EN or TN have any "right" to own the system. The "no, you!" discussions are thus rather pointless.
EN were not there and apparently had no interest to be there (installing mercs as a proxy). Right to holding anything forefeit. It's not a birthright for Randomius sake - I thought we got rid of kings.
EN were not there and apparently had no interest to be there (installing mercs as a proxy). Right to holding anything forefeit. It's not a birthright for Randomius sake - I thought we got rid of kings.
What negotiations are you talking about? There was an agreement, signed by both parties.
Remind us who raged quit with a sidey back to the bubble, and went to Deciat to destroy noobs?
Is that also your big plan if you lose this war? "Go smash bystanders and spread carnage across Colonia", i.e. annoy the neutral folks you were trying to rally to your cause?
Deleted member 192138
D
You're boasting that you left the bubble to burn because SPEAR went to do someone else's BGS?