Cookies Disclaimer

I agree Our site saves small pieces of text information (cookies) on your device in order to authenticate logins, deliver better content and provide statistical analysis. You can adjust your browser settings to prevent our site from using cookies, but doing so will prevent some aspects of the site from functioning properly.

What really happened there?

Midnight
Bringslite
Let's try a new discussion. Let's see what we all saw and/or took away from a different subset of conflicts. I realize that a subset will ever lead to references and derails toward the superset that it comes from, but lets give it a shot anyway.

The Battle of Blackwatch as it is called.

Having accomplished (or as close as possible) what it's main goal was, basically the dissolution of Phaeros (or at least a great weakening) why did Golgotha pursue those that wanted to leave? One of Golgotha's oft shouted conditions was that Phaeros citizens would LEAVE PHAEROS if they wanted respite from war. That doesn't appear to have been true.

So, why exactly did Golgotha continue to press those that left?
I can't speak for any settlements, so this is just my personal view: the EBA had always protected Phaeros, and the EBA fought to get a Phaeros company into that settlement. It wasn't bizarre to imagine that Sylva was meant to expand Phaeros' power by giving them more buildings to choose from for more training options for feats that would be used against us.

That "press" you mentioned, lasted for short time (a day or two?) until the following rapid series of events occurred:
EBA dissolved, layoffs were announced, and Sylva joined the AL. The game has slowed to a standstill since then, due to the layoffs.

It will be interesting to see how settlement leaders eventually choose to view the various pieces of the same metagaming group (TSV) that we used to refer to as Phaeros when they were all in the same settlement.

When I suggested the wisdom of peaceful people leaving Phaeros, I was very clear that my advice was to migrate to settlements who had done the hard work to achieve peace (back before people could simply rely on the layoff standstill for peace).

Watching TSV split into multiple settlements wasn't what I was discussing, and I frankly don't know what to think about that occurrence. Luckily I don't have to give it much thought, because any decisions will eventually be made for me by Benevolent Dictator.
He who wrestles with us strengthens our nerves and sharpens our skill. Our antagonist is our helper.
-Edmund Burke
Bringslite
Thank you for your take. Midnight! It actually makes sense, whether it was strictly true because of some of the reasons or all.

Anyone else want to share what they saw/felt was going down in that situation?

Edit: Is there a general agreement, among most politically interested players, that preventing enemies/possible enemies from spreading to new settlements is a priority and justifiable?
Virtute et Armis
-Unknown
Smitty
Bringslite
Let's try a new discussion. Let's see what we all saw and/or took away from a different subset of conflicts. I realize that a subset will ever lead to references and derails toward the superset that it comes from, but lets give it a shot anyway.

The Battle of Blackwatch as it is called.

Having accomplished (or as close as possible) what it's main goal was, basically the dissolution of Phaeros (or at least a great weakening) why did Golgotha pursue those that wanted to leave? One of Golgotha's oft shouted conditions was that Phaeros citizens would LEAVE PHAEROS if they wanted respite from war. That doesn't appear to have been true.

So, why exactly did Golgotha continue to press those that left?

**Notice just my opinion as one of the folks that participated as much as I could in those battles, my views are not to be read as EoX said ____ * This is only my view as a player with in the Empire..

Your question makes no sense to me… Phaeros, Brighthaven, Keepers Hammerfall , Sylva.. etc ..
They were all one alliance up until 9-1-2015 (EBA).
The same players would come out and fight no matter which holdings were attacked, so when sylva was founded on 8-17-2015 .. they were simply a Phaeros company that expanded to a new location.
The EBA was still in existence.. it wasn’t dissolved until 9-1-2015.
If the question is why would EoX continue to attack EBA members, after destroying all of Phearos holdings, I think that should be pretty clear. We were fighting the EBA because of Phearos, the EBA alliance was still intact, even though Phearos had lost all their holdings, there were 4 other settlements that had holdings that were part of the conflict.. So at best we were 20% done burning things down.. then the funding announcement was made.. most EoX vanished.. and a week later EBA dissolved.
Thorgrim Foegrinder
Midnight
Bringslite
Let's try a new discussion. Let's see what we all saw and/or took away from a different subset of conflicts. I realize that a subset will ever lead to references and derails toward the superset that it comes from, but lets give it a shot anyway.

The Battle of Blackwatch as it is called.

Having accomplished (or as close as possible) what it's main goal was, basically the dissolution of Phaeros (or at least a great weakening) why did Golgotha pursue those that wanted to leave? One of Golgotha's oft shouted conditions was that Phaeros citizens would LEAVE PHAEROS if they wanted respite from war. That doesn't appear to have been true.

So, why exactly did Golgotha continue to press those that left?
I can't speak for any settlements, so this is just my personal view: the EBA had always protected Phaeros, and the EBA fought to get a Phaeros company into that settlement. It wasn't bizarre to imagine that Sylva was meant to expand Phaeros' power by giving them more buildings to choose from for more training options for feats that would be used against us.

That "press" you mentioned, lasted for short time (a day or two?) until the following rapid series of events occurred:
EBA dissolved, layoffs were announced, and Sylva joined the AL. The game has slowed to a standstill since then, due to the layoffs.

It will be interesting to see how settlement leaders eventually choose to view the various pieces of the same metagaming group (TSV) that we used to refer to as Phaeros when they were all in the same settlement.

When I suggested the wisdom of peaceful people leaving Phaeros, I was very clear that my advice was to migrate to settlements who had done the hard work to achieve peace (back before people could simply rely on the layoff standstill for peace).

Watching TSV split into multiple settlements wasn't what I was discussing, and I frankly don't know what to think about that occurrence. Luckily I don't have to give it much thought, because any decisions will eventually be made for me by Benevolent Dictator.
I understand your perspective. However, I have been very vocal in explaining the situation.

Sylva and Phaeros are different settlements. We have no formal alliance, though we are friendly and we do things together like taking down escalations. We share a website, but our individual sub-forums have separate permissions and members of one settlement cannot read the messages on the other settlement's sub-forum. TeamSpeak has separate channels for each settlement, similar to how the Golarion Mumble is set up. You are welcome to verify the structure of both the forum and TeamSpeak, as both are public (but the contents of both are hidden).

Taking Sylva had nothing to do with your advice. We have an identity that did not entirely fit with Phaeros, and we decided to take our own settlement. The decision was made in May, when talk began of what buildings would be built in Phaeros, well before the big battles that happened later in the summer.

@Smitty - What you're saying makes sense. However, I personally approached Phyllain twice to negotiate a ceasefire specifically with Sylva. Despite EoX people (I think it was Midnight, actually) repeatedly suggesting that course of action, the response I got was to turn on our allies (EBA still existed at the time) or EoX would keep attacking us relentlessly. Turning on allies is political suicide, besides being underhanded, and was out of the question.
[Sylva] is the premier Nature based settlement in Pathfinder Online. We're a family that has come together through the game, and we're one of the most active settlements currently. We have a solid roleplaying foundation and are a home to those who both love and hate PvP.

[The Seventh Veil] is a meta-game group with members in several different settlements. We've created many guides and spreadsheets for the game that are referenced by hundreds of players on a daily basis and we maintain multiple websites like [Goblinary.com], [The Storehouse], and [The Unofficial PFO Atlas] to make information more readily available. The Seventh Veil promotes positive game play at all times.
Bringslite
So basically, my sequence (perceived) of events is off. Well, I DID learn something by asking/posting what I saw/thought!
Virtute et Armis
-Unknown
Duffy Swiftshadow
As a partially related 3rd party now that Sylva is part of the League, I think ignoring or sticking to stances that ignore a lot of political nuance ends up with plenty of lost opportunities for game affecting RP. Those stances aren't inherently invalid, if anything the game mechanics almost reinforce ignoring those nuances, I just think some potential interaction is lost when conflict gets simplified as it often does.

We had a pretty big internal debate over accepting Sylva due to their EBA ties at the time and our participation as mercenaries in taking Sylva. There was a lot of different ways things could go or be interpreted, we ultimately decided that the benefits outweighed the risks and we somewhat knew the EBA might not be a thing much longer. In the end I think it worked out fairly well for us.

Could it still lead to future political issues? Sure, depends on how other folks out there want to interpret things, but as we've proven over several different topics we can all interpret things differently. My goal is to at least try and be consistent. So even if you disagree with us or are in conflict with us, you at least know what to expect from us. Outside of how someone might view mercenary work, we try to remain reactive versus proactive or aggressive.

It's all RP meta stuff that should be different and hopefully interesting between all of us anyways, I don't get hung up on that part of the game or take it personally.
Smitty
@ Thorgrim
I could be wrong but Phearos had already said multiple times there would never be an agreement with EoX. They were in the EBA as was Sylva. Anything short of Sylva leaving the EBA ( as long as the EBA was intact) had to be the starting point of any agreement to stop fighting Sylva..

Like i said many times I was just a worker bee.. didn’t get involved with the policy discussion just showed up to blow stuff up and fight when able. Yet it makes sense Phyllain would make leaving the EBA the starting point of any agreement because a deal with Phaeros was out of the question..

Think the more intriguing stuff will happen if EoX and Phearos return with the news of the investors.. The EBA is dissolved.. You guys in the SE are still close friends and allies. It remains to be seen what would happen if the former members of the EBA would show up to help defend Phaeros items of interest from EoX..

Think that goes more into the alliance discussion OV and Aragon had a few days ago..
Bringslite
Smitty
@ Thorgrim
I could be wrong but Phearos had already said multiple times there would never be an agreement with EoX. They were in the EBA as was Sylva. Anything short of Sylva leaving the EBA ( as long as the EBA was intact) had to be the starting point of any agreement to stop fighting Sylva..

Like i said many times I was just a worker bee.. didn’t get involved with the policy discussion just showed up to blow stuff up and fight when able. Yet it makes sense Phyllain would make leaving the EBA the starting point of any agreement because a deal with Phaeros was out of the question..

Think the more intriguing stuff will happen if EoX and Phearos return with the news of the investors.. The EBA is dissolved.. You guys in the SE are still close friends and allies. It remains to be seen what would happen if the former members of the EBA would show up to help defend Phaeros items of interest from EoX..

Think that goes more into the alliance discussion OV and Aragon had a few days ago..

The letters O and V getting posted always make my ears burn. Pray share with us any discussions for alliance between OV and Aragon. I wasn't there and I am curious.
Virtute et Armis
-Unknown
Smitty
Could of been mistaken, but i thought there was a conversation recently about OV 's confrontation with Freevale and Aragon .. at least i thought there was… you guys were fighting each other, folks came up from down south and sort of ended the conflict.. if that was not with you sorry.. but it was with someone.

Did not mean to imply OV and Aragon were forming an alliance .. was meaning to draw a connection between how the southern groups came into that conflict, with no official Alliance.. and was wondering if the same thing would happen if EoX comes back and Phaeros comes back.
Bringslite
Smitty
Could of been mistaken, but i thought there was a conversation recently about OV 's confrontation with Freevale and Aragon .. at least i thought there was… you guys were fighting each other, folks came up from down south and sort of ended the conflict.. if that was not with you sorry.. but it was with someone.

Did not mean to imply OV and Aragon were forming an alliance .. was meaning to draw a connection between how the southern groups came into that conflict, with no official Alliance.. and was wondering if the same thing would happen if EoX comes back and Phaeros comes back.
Ok. No worries. You had me confused though! smile
Virtute et Armis
-Unknown
 
You must be logged into an enrolled account to post