Welcome to the Achaea Forums! Please be sure to read the Forum Rules.

Cities

13468924

Comments

  • DaeirDaeir AustraliaPosts: 6,276Member, Secret Squirrel @@ - Legendary Achaean
    It's less opposing people for not practicing Devotion and suddenly, violently having people who formerly practiced the art, learning the values and ethos associated with it stand up and go "no thanks, we're good. also we don't want anything to do with you anymore and we're going to stop letting your people preach in our streets". That kind of severance, in the wake of Cyrene's historical quasi-alliance with the faith surrounding Good, is nothing but jarring and provocative as far as the cities two relations go.

    Cyrene may not impede from a military perspective, but it certainly does from a social one, at least as far as Targossas is concerned. Terse tolerance is acceptable, but anything beyond that makes absolutely no sense. They're an enemy as much as every other citystate is.
    Shayde
  • KoganKogan Posts: 355Member ✭✭✭✭ - Eminent
    Daeir said:
    It's less opposing people for not practicing Devotion and suddenly, violently having people who formerly practiced the art, learning the values and ethos associated with it stand up and go "no thanks, we're good. also we don't want anything to do with you anymore and we're going to stop letting your people preach in our streets". That kind of severance, in the wake of Cyrene's historical quasi-alliance with the faith surrounding Good, is nothing but jarring and provocative as far as the cities two relations go.

    Cyrene may not impede from a military perspective, but it certainly does from a social one, at least as far as Targossas is concerned. Terse tolerance is acceptable, but anything beyond that makes absolutely no sense. They're an enemy as much as every other citystate is.
    Except we did allow a discussion last time, and would allow another if asked I do believe. It was in Cyrene actually. Until a real enemy of Targossas decided to breathrain the event and it got moved. We at least offer funding to those who do wish to remain Cyrenian and do change class. Could just nope out on them and tell them sucks to suck and send people who want to stay Cyrenian bad enough to drop a class over it straight to Targossas/Rogue because they can't afford the swap.
  • HataruHataru Midwest USAPosts: 474Member ✭✭✭✭✭ - Grand Achaean
    Daeir's argument makes me feel like we're in 2013, not 2017. Re: Targossas and Cyrene.

    It seems, frankly, dated. Given that a lot of the separation of Good and Good!Lite (Targ/Shallam and Cyrene) was Divinely forced as well as, well, pretty much old news at this point...
    (Mhaldor's Next Top Model): Melodie says, "Get rekt scrubbbbb."
    (Mhaldor's Next Top Model): You say, "Scrubbbssss."
    (Mhaldor's Next Top Model): Trey says, "Austere was hangin' out the passenger side of his best friend's ride, apparently."
    LisbethaeLaedha
  • DaeirDaeir AustraliaPosts: 6,276Member, Secret Squirrel @@ - Legendary Achaean
    edited October 13
    I don't see what the difference is.

    Mhaldor rejects Targossian ethos and ideology in favour of Sartan's because self improvement, hegemony, betterment of Creation, etc. Ashtan rejects it because subjugate everything under the Ascendant's will to power the growth of the Infernal Throne. Eleusis rejects it because grr cities paving over Nature hurts the world, people should live in harmony, etc, and then Cyrene rejects it because they'd rather assert their own way over the wisdom and gifts of the Bloodsworn Gods.

    Any way you roll the dice, the rejection is happening. There is no neutrality in saying "we do not agree with you". There is a citystate saying that "our laws and our culture is superior to the mandate of your gods and your faith".

    That is not neutral. What you call them is what you think of them, not what they actually are. There is no conceivable universe where the rejection of Devotion is not anything but a grave, onerous sin from a Targossian perspective. Pawing it off as something "not that bad" is precisely the kind of unassailable glint that I was discussing earlier in the thread. Cyrene is not immune from the consequences of their actions just because they are not an overt, combative threat.
  • SkyeSkye The Duchess BellaterePosts: 2,606Member, Seafaring Liason @@ - Legendary Achaean
    edited October 13
    Daeir said:
    It's less opposing people for not practicing Devotion and suddenly, violently having people who formerly practiced the art, learning the values and ethos associated with it stand up and go "no thanks, we're good. also we don't want anything to do with you anymore and we're going to stop letting your people preach in our streets". That kind of severance, in the wake of Cyrene's historical quasi-alliance with the faith surrounding Good, is nothing but jarring and provocative as far as the cities two relations go.

    Cyrene may not impede from a military perspective, but it certainly does from a social one, at least as far as Targossas is concerned. Terse tolerance is acceptable, but anything beyond that makes absolutely no sense. They're an enemy as much as every other citystate is.
    I for one believed that Cyrene deciding to give up Devotion was a great move and I think it has to do with perspective. I started Cyrenian and this 'historical quasi-alliance' was frankly a one-way relationship in which Cyrene let an outside party into their walls and gave them cause to meddle with the internal goings-on of the city. It is not the same as an alliance. Since the Church (or Targ/Deacon/Devo Eclaire) pretty much called the shots as to whether a person could continue using Devo or not, the city becomes compelled to make policy decisions that ensured that their devo using citizens were not as risk of losing it.

    To me, it has less to do with being secluded from the world and more to do with no longer allowing a third party to impede the city's decision making. And there was really no good way to do it. Like being in a bad and somewhat abusive relationship, it's sometimes best to just make a clean break. Incidentally, the abuser or the party with all the power in that relationship will seldom recognise that it's bad. Everything is going swimmingly (for them) since it's their way or the highway. They're usually shocked when someone decides to choose the highway. 


    Lisbethae
  • DaeirDaeir AustraliaPosts: 6,276Member, Secret Squirrel @@ - Legendary Achaean
    edited October 13
    Honestly, it might just be because I was the Deacon of Celestia at some point, and had a fair bit of time and effort invested into that situation when mostly nobody else cared about it. The relationship between Cyrene and Targossas occupied a lot of my time, and the perspective that gives is probably something that people who haven't slogged through the mess can really understand properly.

    It was a pretty big deal, especially as the split utterly neutered the Deacon position as a whole. It's so neutered in fact that the current Deacon retired and is still the Deacon somehow. That's how little people care about it.

    Note: I'm not contesting the viability or reasoning behind the Devotion split - it was made with obvious, well-thought intent and decisively enacted. It was interesting. What I am contesting however, is the fact that the split was 'soft' or did not overtly influence how Targossas thinks (or should think) about the relationship between the two states. It was a contentious thing - rejecting a religion and faith is a fairly huge deal. It's baffling to me that people think it isn't.
    Shayde
  • ReysonReyson Posts: 285Member ✭✭✭✭ - Eminent
    @Krypton: I'm really not looking to do anything except highlight why it is that I (and apparently a whole lot of other people) see Cyrene the way I do. I'm not even pushing for a change in the laws/gameplay/attitude, simply illustrating that I'm a bit flabbergasted at why Cyrenian players are suddenly super surprised that the faction has the rep it does, when it seems like it's a very carefully constructed and patently deliberate identity they've chosen to embrace via every avenue available. From player attitude to IC behaviour, to laws and what you choose to enforce/not enforce, I can't conceive of any conclusion I could come to other than 'Cyrene doesn't want to play with you if you've ever caused trouble,' based on what I've personally witnessed from that faction. 

    I definitely don't mean to cut out the role of the individual, for the record. Like I said, I've had some neat moments with a couple Cyrenians, and some really great fights with others. But four people out of what, over fifty, sixty active players does not an identity constitute. They're very much the exception, rather than the norm. 
    HataruMelodie
  • TaryiusTaryius Posts: 324Member ✭✭✭✭ - Eminent
    This argument feels familiar.... Cyrene is an enemy to Good if they reject Targ's way, they are not allies they aren't forever going to be neutral but they aren't the biggest threat. both in a military way and in that actively opposing your IG faith and being neutral (not opposing or agreeing) are not equal threat levels.

    My viewpoint... maybe its more of a Mhaldorian viewpoint though /shrug.
    Hataru
  • AralayaAralaya Posts: 602Member ✭✭✭✭✭ - Grand Achaean
    @Kogan the discussion was great and once I actually have time again I'm gonna try and do another one. It was really great until someone breathrained it :(


    Tecton-Today at 6:17 PM

    teehee b.u.t.t. pirates
  • DaeirDaeir AustraliaPosts: 6,276Member, Secret Squirrel @@ - Legendary Achaean
    I would agree - they are not the biggest threat, but they are no less a threat than anything else. A large group of people relatively hostile/dismissive of proselytization and actively spread that culture throughout a fairly large section of the in-game population is a formidable foe, especially when it cannot be fought explicitly. Consider it as a cultural victory a la Civilisation versus a military victory.
  • AralayaAralaya Posts: 602Member ✭✭✭✭✭ - Grand Achaean
    edited October 13
    The way it was explained to me is that Cyrene is bad because yknow, not Good, but since they aren't actively opposing Targossas, instead just kinda sitting there with a lot of people, we don't really treat them as a threat, just kinda the place we tolerate for now


    Tecton-Today at 6:17 PM

    teehee b.u.t.t. pirates
  • KryptonKrypton shi-KhurenaPosts: 2,275Member @@ - Legendary Achaean
    Daeir said:
    a fairly large section of the in-game population is a formidable foe, especially when it cannot be fought explicitly.
    So you want to act on our purely OOC characteristics?

    Targossas has >2000 villagers, according to the war terms; and you have the entire denizen population of Sapience you can focus on swaying to your ideals.
    (Mhaldor): Herenicus says, "Apologies, I am in-and-out of hold with Verizon wireless customer service."
  • DaeirDaeir AustraliaPosts: 6,276Member, Secret Squirrel @@ - Legendary Achaean
    edited October 13
    Antonius said:
    Daeir said:
    I don't see what the difference is.

    Mhaldor rejects Targossian ethos and ideology in favour of Sartan's because self improvement, hegemony, betterment of Creation, etc. Ashtan rejects it because subjugate everything under the Ascendant's will to power the growth of the Infernal Throne. Eleusis rejects it because grr cities paving over Nature hurts the world, people should live in harmony, etc, and then Cyrene rejects it because they'd rather assert their own way over the wisdom and gifts of the Bloodsworn Gods.

    Any way you roll the dice, the rejection is happening. There is no neutrality in saying "we do not agree with you". There is a citystate saying that "our laws and our culture is superior to the mandate of your gods and your faith".

    That is not neutral. What you call them is what you think of them, not what they actually are. There is no conceivable universe where the rejection of Devotion is not anything but a grave, onerous sin from a Targossian perspective. Pawing it off as something "not that bad" is precisely the kind of unassailable glint that I was discussing earlier in the thread. Cyrene is not immune from the consequences of their actions just because they are not an overt, combative threat.
    Targossas' goal is not to spread the teachings of the Bloodsworn and have them adopted by everyone in Achaea. There will be plenty of individuals, villages and even cities who disagree with them and decide "No, thank you, that's not for me." and that is perfectly okay as long as they're still in accordance with the natural and intended state of Creation (as defined by the teachings of Good).
    Absolutely, but is a citystate that knew and was taught those things, and then knowingly rejected it and aggressively denied a prominent means to spread them further acting in accordance with those ideals? That's the core issue here, and something that is very different from what happened with New Hope.

    I'm also not inclined to say that a city leader's position is absolute truth, or perhaps even informed perspective, sadly enough. There's been some pretty shonky CL's over the course of Achaea's history (especially recently). A CL can be very good in some domains, and very bad in others. Better to weight people's opinions on what they present, rather than who they supposedly are.
  • DaeirDaeir AustraliaPosts: 6,276Member, Secret Squirrel @@ - Legendary Achaean
    edited October 13
    Any sort of repurposing that drags Cyrene back into the rest of the world is fine by me. I assume Shallam only got the treatment that it did because it was utterly unsalvageable.
  • TelendriethTelendrieth Posts: 151Member ✭✭✭ - Distinguished
    It was also something desired by a fair portion of the Shallamese playerbase as well. The difference is that the majority of Cyrenians are perfectly content with their city, so the whole Shallam solution wouldn't work. Hell, it'd probably backfire and cause the displaced folks to quit.. leading to an even smaller playerbase and amplification of issues.
    DochithaLaedhaPrytheKayeil
  • MathildaMathilda Posts: 586Member ✭✭✭✭✭ - Grand Achaean
    If a fair portion of Shallamese had wanted to change, then Shallam wouldn't have had to be wholesale replaced -- the population then could have just reformed the city. I assume they didn't, hence the admins bringing the city down, and rebuilding from the ground up to remove the good for the Good.
     <3 
  • TelendriethTelendrieth Posts: 151Member ✭✭✭ - Distinguished
    edited October 13
    Mathilda said:
    If a fair portion of Shallamese had wanted to change, then Shallam wouldn't have had to be wholesale replaced -- the population then could have just reformed the city. I assume they didn't, hence the admins bringing the city down, and rebuilding from the ground up to remove the good for the Good.

    Not entirely true. You have history, lore, divine, and a whole lot of other baggage that would make the transition painful and possibly unable to happen. The events of the time really allowed for the fluid transition into a new ideology of Good, and the Bloodsworn to really give it the backing it deserved. There are some points where I dislike Targ, but having a city with space marine style ideology (maybe a bit of a stretch) is super awesome, and I do like how everything came out.
    Halos
  • KeorinKeorin Posts: 405Member ✭✭✭✭ - Eminent
    edited October 13
    Reyson said:
    For the record, Cyrene does have some very cool people, as I mentioned!

    The last time I really tried to do anything as a kind of enemy-that-goads-you-into-doing-better thing, the person I had interacted with (I broke in just to speak with that person and see if something could come of it) ended up getting yelled at pretty massively (and demoted, I think?) for not just crying for help right away or something. That was sad to hear. It was a good conversation, and a really great moment, but I've kinda stayed away cuz I don't wanna get the cool people in trouble with my cooties or whatever it is Cyrenians are afraid of where Mhaldorians are concerned. 
    Krypton said:
    Off the top of my head, I do not recall a single CDF, let alone demotion, in the 10 years you've been enemied.

    Lmao. Cooties or no cooties, that situation you're referring to, was indisputably an Act of Treason/Insubordination, if we really wanted to be hardasses about the rules.
    As the person in question, I'm kind of baffled on how what happened was some kind of treason. @Reyson shows up at Keorin, and asks where @Shirszae is, because he doesn't recognize the room. Keorn tells him that I'm not about to say, and also she's pretty sure there are guards there. She also says that he should leave before he gets killed, but he's clearly not an active threat, and she doesn't exactly feel like getting someone killed right then (partly because she actually doesn't like killing much, partly because I feel like it's gonna be way more interesting of an interaction if I don't jump to calling for help. Plus, the tables seem to heavily suggest that you should try and solve similar situations nonviolently when possible). We end up talking tersely for a few minutes, at which point a security aide comes in and starts attacking him, so Keorin helps her kill him twice.

    A few hours later, I was stripped of my war aideship and corresponding army rank, without warning or discussion.  Which I think was mostly just because the then-minister of war hated me, but still, treason? It's the first I'm hearing of that.
  • TysandrTysandr Posts: 208Member ✭✭✭ - Distinguished
    The utility of a thread like this approaches

    0


    You can take the people out of Cyrene, but you cannot take the Cyrene out of people.
    Proof of Concepts: Sailing Map, Trading
    bounty
    "It's not rocket surgery."

    Mathilda
  • FarrahFarrah Posts: 1,546Member, Secret Squirrel @@ - Legendary Achaean
    edited October 13
    Daeir said:
    Antonius said:
    Daeir said:
    I don't see what the difference is.

    Mhaldor rejects Targossian ethos and ideology in favour of Sartan's because self improvement, hegemony, betterment of Creation, etc. Ashtan rejects it because subjugate everything under the Ascendant's will to power the growth of the Infernal Throne. Eleusis rejects it because grr cities paving over Nature hurts the world, people should live in harmony, etc, and then Cyrene rejects it because they'd rather assert their own way over the wisdom and gifts of the Bloodsworn Gods.

    Any way you roll the dice, the rejection is happening. There is no neutrality in saying "we do not agree with you". There is a citystate saying that "our laws and our culture is superior to the mandate of your gods and your faith".

    That is not neutral. What you call them is what you think of them, not what they actually are. There is no conceivable universe where the rejection of Devotion is not anything but a grave, onerous sin from a Targossian perspective. Pawing it off as something "not that bad" is precisely the kind of unassailable glint that I was discussing earlier in the thread. Cyrene is not immune from the consequences of their actions just because they are not an overt, combative threat.
    Targossas' goal is not to spread the teachings of the Bloodsworn and have them adopted by everyone in Achaea. There will be plenty of individuals, villages and even cities who disagree with them and decide "No, thank you, that's not for me." and that is perfectly okay as long as they're still in accordance with the natural and intended state of Creation (as defined by the teachings of Good).
    Absolutely, but is a citystate that knew and was taught those things, and then knowingly rejected it and aggressively denied a prominent means to spread them further acting in accordance with those ideals? That's the core issue here, and something that is very different from what happened with New Hope.

    I'm also not inclined to say that a city leader's position is absolute truth, or perhaps even informed perspective, sadly enough. There's been some pretty shonky CL's over the course of Achaea's history (especially recently). A CL can be very good in some domains, and very bad in others. Better to weight people's opinions on what they present, rather than who they supposedly are.

    Who said anything about absolute truth? I said it's silly to say there's no conceivable way blah blah when a former CL and current OH is saying the opposite. You're free to disagree on what should be. Your language of absolutes, including misframing my comment to be about "absolute truth" is arrogant and wrong.

    A CL's opinion is highly relevant - really, it's conclusive unless overturned by the Bsworn -to what Targossas's official position is, though, since IC the CL is the voice of the city. You're purporting to be proclaiming the actual position of Targossas, which is inaccurate if it goes against what Targossas is actually doing. Micaelis hasn't changed stance towards Cyrene since I was CL.

    But Targossas has been neutral towards Cyrene for as long as I've played Farrah. I never changed policy there. They aren't officially classified as "enemies." These are facts, regardless of whether you think they should change.
    Shirszae
13468924
Sign In to Comment.