Call to Arms for a Free Colonia
- Thread starter Pristine_Bump
- Start date
Where to start...
First of all "you're supposed to be anarchists"...
Choosing to put the power in the hands of the strongest, does not make someone evil (the net effect of anarchic government). Secondly, I'm not in Loren's Reapers, I'm not an outlaw. I was in fact, an important strategist in Spear, and still support spear on their discord every single day by providing help and advice with no strings attached. You see unlike many people, I am able to be friends with my enemies (not that spear is my enemy, except int his one particular conflict). I left spear exactly because of these kinds of politics, arbitrarily creating drama which has nothing ot do with enforcement. There are few people who know spear as I do.
So that takes me to what has been 'dismissed by spear'. Well I can assure that after a long and very heated discussion about it on their own discord, they were unable to articulate it to my satisfaction, and that is people discussing who know each other well.
Also, we're not talking about apples. If some group takes a dislike to one of my squadron members because of his actions that are not against my rules, I'm supposed to ostracise him or be bullied by spear? Are you serious? Yeh that's gonna happen.
And lastly, about LR forcing peple out of open. This is literally a total lie. If people chose to go to solo or PG to avoid the in-game consequences of THEIR actions, you can hard;y blame LR for that. Look, I appreciate you're working with the info you have, but please man, don't drink the spear koolaid, cos spear koolaid, is just other AAA members wih an ACTUAL agenda in the region's koolaid regurgitated. What's more the events that have happened are dramatically overstated by some dramatically oversensitive people. The truth, as in all things is somewhere in the middle.
Since you have a clear misunderstanding about who or what I am, let me make it clear. I am ok with the factions in colonia railing against LR and the nameless. I'm even ok with spear joining in, even though it was against every mandate that ever existed while I was a leader there. What I'm not ok with is:
1) Spear's justification for this, it's just weak, weak, weak. If you are bored and want to have a war, do it and own it, but know when to stop before you become what you fight.
2) There is NO justification for removing the Namesless from Carcosa for the reasons provided (Phisto's a meanie).
Hope this helps (and please, reply to me respectfully, if I didn't care to make my position clear, I would not have used so many words, or replied at all, and I'm open to a proper discussion, but know that I know the community and climates, don't make assumptions, ask if you like). o7
Total genocide of a group that has done a lot for the region and is represented by far more players than Lorens Reapers, or EVEN the 2 or 3 players that spear doesn't like, is cruel and unusual and not justifiable under the excuse of 'because phisto's a meanie'.
Last edited:
This right here is what the cool kids who played Unreal 2003 would call a "headshot".
Mo mo mo monster kill...
Understood, and yes, as I stated and expected. That's a lot of systems that the Nameless don't want, so effectively, it's forever unless the Nameless becomes hugely expansionist AND are basically unopposed, which we all know is not going to happen.
See this?
This is why I liked Spear back when you were a figurehead.
This is why, when I jumped into Wyrd to engineer a ship and saw a swarm of hollow squares and triangles, I felt safe when I saw that one of the names in the contacts panel was yours.
Whatever they are now... god. We need a lawful PvP group for sure, dedicated bounty hunters to play the cops to nearly everyone else's robbers, but I really don't think it's them. Not any more.
Hmmm unless they are pink
Omitted the rest for brevity, but I'd frame it and hang it on the wall.
I mean, I'm not even slightly opposed, in principle, to groups like Spear, given my very humble, law-abiding, boring role in the galaxy, I even highly approve of groups stepping in to fill in the glaring gaps of the incompetent system "security" forces who wouldn't be able to maintain order at a girl scout cookout even if they put all of their efforts into it. I can't count the times when I've found myself in a furball only to see system "security" show up to do no more than watch me pick through the debris for mats.
But this has nothing to do with that, as far as I can see, and since the plaintiffs in this particular case seem oddly disinterested in providing anything by way of evidence other than vague statements and non-specific allegations which, even if they all are true, still count for bupkis in an actual court of law under any civilized form of government, I have nothing to go by other than my gut instincts, and my gut instincts tell me that Spear, the sort of organization that my dreary, peace-loving self would have loved joining if I'd been a follower type, has now turned into something that I would quit immediately if things are what they seem to me at the moment.
And that takes quite a bit of doing.
I was reading about stand-up comics this week (George Carlin and Lenny Bruce, specifically) who were harassed by law enforcement for "obscenity." Think of the children stuff, you know? This situation reminds me of it.
What's worse for a child? The child hearing a person say a bad word or the child watching a person with a gun take away the person who said the bad word?
Well I'm Texan by Providence, so I'm not likely to run into that situation, thank God, because we're not prone to such silliness and the guy saying the bad word would be likely to have a bigger gun (and also likely to not say the bad word in the presence of children in the first place).
Still nailed it right on the head.
Ratkatcher comments:
I have been in Loren's Reapers for a little over a year, having gone to Colonia in response to Phisto's "Operation Montgomery-Scott" call, have fought in every war for The Nameless and Carcosa alongside every member of the squadron I know, they are a pretty happy and easy-going bunch of people who have enriched this time with friendship, advice and a lot of laughter.
I am terrible - I have killed one player in all of my time in Colonia, but he did shoot first.
I will continue to give my wholehearted support to The Nameless and work alongside my fellow 'Reapers' to their benefit, even though that support means that, by association, I must be a tyrant...
I have been in Loren's Reapers for a little over a year, having gone to Colonia in response to Phisto's "Operation Montgomery-Scott" call, have fought in every war for The Nameless and Carcosa alongside every member of the squadron I know, they are a pretty happy and easy-going bunch of people who have enriched this time with friendship, advice and a lot of laughter.
I am terrible - I have killed one player in all of my time in Colonia, but he did shoot first.
I will continue to give my wholehearted support to The Nameless and work alongside my fellow 'Reapers' to their benefit, even though that support means that, by association, I must be a tyrant...
Last edited:
That's the very definition of a "good shoot". You did well.
Unopposed ... yes, of course not, under the circumstances right now. Expansion of any sort is going to require either a significant fight, or a political change, or both (in some order).
But they'd need at worst four (temporary) expansions before the real one, more likely two or three. If that's "hugely expansionist" then the Nameless' starting position in this conflict was as huge expansionists (presence in Union, EEF, Phoenix, Coeus/Santos Dumont; control in EEF [1]).
[1] As I mentioned a few weeks back, Presence 5, Control 2 is more "medium expansionists" than "huge expansionists" by Colonial standards.
I've been killed more times - I'm not at all interested , or active, in the PvP scene - I have no objection, people play however they wish, I certainly do - so just assume that my opponent, in that instance, wasn't either
He did sort of indicate, by opening fire, that he wasn't. Regardless, I hear you. If somebody's shooting at you, you'd best be shooting back. Whatever his reasons were are unimportant at that point.I've been killed more times - I'm not at all interested , or active, in the PvP scene - I have no objection, people play however they wish, I certainly do - so just assume that my opponent, in that instance, wasn't either
Yes it would be. Which is why I actually said:
"Ironically the argument against this is again that certain players have chased noobs out of Open or even out of the game completely."
So please be very careful when accusing people of misleading or lying. Especially when doing exactly that. I will suggest it was a misinterpretation on your part and not deliberate.
I have said it before but maybe not to you, you have too many pips in shields, lower your defences
I dont recall saying who you were or what you represented. I think the phrase youre alluring to was me saying 'Youre supposed to be Anarchists, have some personal responsibility' which was in response to a wider group, the Anarchists, not you if you arent one. The fact that you repeated the Anarchist message meant it was replied to through you not at you. It was clearly aimed at The Anarchists specifically or people who think of themselves as Anarchists. To you I say 'They are Anarchists, they should have some personal responsibility' but this is a public forum and I was speaking to them primarily.
And being honest, apart from a few people I have no idea who anyone is, which side theyre on if any or whether they are Anarchists or just supporting the underdog. I am just responding to the words said. I may point out what I see as hypocrisy regardless of source and I have disagreed with both sides so far on this thread.
So why am I here then? Because this story / conflict / whatever is absolutely brilliant for the game in my opinion. Thats all and Im having fun when its kept respectful so yes we can certainly agree on that and keep it that way.
I think you're confused. The victim here is not the three players that spear doesn't like, or even an outlaw squadron, Loren's Reapers. No, the enemy here is a widely supported anarchy faction, the Nameless, which is most prominently supported by a group called Loren's Reapers, who are roleplaying outlaws responsible for some of the richest lore in this game, they are wordsmiths as well as cheeky space cads and to dismiss this group as 'griefers' is sad, pathetic and heinously poorly represents what they are about.Yes it would be. Which is why I actually said:
"Ironically the argument against this is again that certain players have chased noobs out of Open or even out of the game completely."
So please be very careful when accusing people of misleading or lying. Especially when doing exactly that. I will suggest it was a misinterpretation on your part and not deliberate.
I have said it before but maybe not to you, you have too many pips in shields, lower your defences
I dont recall saying who you were or what you represented. I think the phrase youre alluring to was me saying 'Youre supposed to be Anarchists, have some personal responsibility' which was in response to a wider group, the Anarchists, not you if you arent one. The fact that you repeated the Anarchist message meant it was replied to through you not at you. It was clearly aimed at The Anarchists specifically or people who think of themselves as Anarchists. To you I say 'They are Anarchists, they should have some personal responsibility' but this is a public forum and I was speaking to them primarily.
And being honest, apart from a few people I have no idea who anyone is, which side theyre on if any or whether they are Anarchists or just supporting the underdog. I am just responding to the words said. I may point out what I see as hypocrisy regardless of source and I have disagreed with both sides so far on this thread.
So why am I here then? Because this story / conflict / whatever is absolutely brilliant for the game in my opinion. Thats all and Im having fun when its kept respectful so yes we can certainly agree on that and keep it that way.
I support the Nameless staying in control of carcosa, because I believe that a station called robardin rock, and an asteroid base, in a place named Carcosa, in Colonia, could not be better designated than anarchy and wild wild west kinda situation, it doesn't even have any meaningful assets, it's exactly the kind of dusty backwater system, right at the 'top' of the colonia region, that enforcers would have typically said 'we don't go there...' and left it alone cos nobody does need to go there, it's off to the side. Literally, this couldn't have been designed any better, I'd even venture that this was hand crafted by FD) which is all the Reapers want for it too.
But, no. For some reason, the forces in the region are not satisfied with taking back all the reapers conquests in the last 18 months (they have been retreated from two system in the last week, I don't know if you even understand the ramifications of that), they are now trying to remove them from control of their home system. This is a step too far.
Im also so glad you mentioned the good of the game. Cos I'm sure you can appreciate how YOU would feel when a pvp enforcer group from 22k ly away with almost no bgs experience or understanding of the work involved in the sandcastles they are now kicking down, crosses the galaxy to mess with your group because they believed your enemy's 'words'? or do you think that removing the very important Alliance and Federation ships from availability in the region is something htat's good for the game. Perhaps you think it's good for the game that the same coalition that owns 'most' of colonia already, should own 'all of it', cos that would generate great content...oh wait, no it wouldn't. Keeping an Anarchy group in the area would...
If nothing else, as I understand it, removing an active player group's adopted faction (and I include PMFs in that, PMFs aren't special) from control of its home system and replacing it with a non-native faction would set a nasty precedent when it comes to colonia's political situation and all the various treaties that groups there agreed to abide by.
Well that would certainly be worth raising in any negotiations, but I struggle with how people think removing one of the most interesting factions from the region improves the game. It's the only populated anarchy system in the region. The only one. Even the desired result, that the reapers return to the bubble (we don't dictate other people's gamestyles, <ahem>), does nothing but water the region down. Boggles my mind the lack of live and let live, it's not even sensible.
"Pity the warrior who slays all his foes"