A call to all rebels to attack the Empire (Victrix)

MAC-9

Chiliarch
rule of law goes way farther back than the magna carta and it isn't only applicable to democracy. and the magna carta was in response to tyrannical practices. the king's own subjects forced it. you would have an easier time gaining traction if your claims of tyranny were actually true. if it were so, then their own people would be itching to support you. but it is just not so.
 

dadofwildthang

Phrourach
Are you kidding me? are you saying that Charter of rights of citizens has little to do with democracy?
The Carta Magna showed us it was possible to build societies based on the rule of law and respect for the liberty of all people. It paved the way for modern democracies and allowed the successful economic growth of Britain and the USA. Long term sustained growth in trade and production requires political and economic freedom.

Why is so hard for you to admit that history has shown time after time that nations and empires who have democratic institutions do better?
Why is it that you love so much your dictatorial and top down, authoritarian, fascist alliances?

This thread was a call to the arms towards Victrix. It was not for you fascist clowns to come and defend dictatorial and undemocratic governing alliances.
this is a War game not R/L (real life) not Nations and empires.. just a bunch of folks from around the world playing a GAME..

now your true colours are coming out.... insulting those who dis-agree with YOUR THINKING as.."..Fascist Clowns.."


YOU are the only one who has a choice about you being here.. "...as its been said many times before. don't let the door hit you on the way out.." if you dont like things
 

FutbolTango

Banned
Banned
this is a War game not R/L (real life) not Nations and empires.. just a bunch of folks from around the world playing a GAME..

now your true colours are coming out.... insulting those who dis-agree with YOUR THINKING as.."..Fascist Clowns.."


YOU are the only one who has a choice about you being here.. "...as its been said many times before. don't let the door hit you on the way out.." if you dont like things
oh...yeah....yes this is a game....where some of you want to make decisions over others...and you want that we obediently follow the orders in the game meanwhile we see how you kill it with your NAP and shady tactics of breaking world wonders and creating mega alliances....

We are not your obedient rowing slaves... is that what you want that we bow our heads in silence meanwhile you continue to let the game astray...
 

Ranga1

Strategos
Has it crossed your mind that most people probably don't want to think? They have enough to think about in real life and this GAME is just fun where they don't have to care about what they do cos it's a game? Clearly not, other wise you would realise you are thinking way too much about this.

Your boss/ business would probably benefit largely if you used all this wasted time arguing about mute points actually working, or maybe your partner would love you to invest this time in them or your friends...but there is a high chance you have none of those which is why I really feel sorry for you.
 

FutbolTango

Banned
Banned
Has it crossed your mind that most people probably don't want to think? They have enough to think about in real life and this GAME is just fun where they don't have to care about what they do cos it's a game? Clearly not, other wise you would realise you are thinking way too much about this.

Your boss/ business would probably benefit largely if you used all this wasted time arguing about mute points actually working, or maybe your partner would love you to invest this time in them or your friends...but there is a high chance you have none of those which is why I really feel sorry for you.
It is not wasted time. It gives me a break from real life.


“The Mega Alliances in Grepolis are a system. That system is our enemy. But when you're inside, you look around, what do you see? Fighters, defenders, leaders, simmers. The very minds of the people we are trying to save. But until we do, these people are still a part of that system and that makes them our enemy. You have to understand, most of these people are not ready to be unplugged. And many of them are so inured, so hopelessly dependent on the system, that they will fight to protect it.”

You are right. Some people do not like to think by themselves in real life or in grepolis. However, some of us, do like to try new things, question everything, discover, experiment, and do not be lackeys of other people.

As for the partner, you a right. She is royally pissed and we have broken up several times over Grepolis.
 

Ranga1

Strategos
As for the partner, you a right. She is royally pissed and we have broken up several times over Grepolis.
And therein lies the problem, you are treating grepo way too much like real life, like so many players like you. Get out and enjoy life instead of delaying it
 

Kal Gordon

Phrourach
I think you may be missing the points, @FutbolTango.
  • No-one, so far as I have seen, is saying that you can't make a democratic alliance. In fact, at least one person has suggested that you do just that, to prove your point with actions rather than words.
  • If players have issues with the way their leadership is behaving, there is an easy solution, called the "Leave Alliance" button. There's nothing preventing players from moving to other alliances.
  • Leading and making those big decisions isn't always fun. I've been in a leadership role on more than one occasion, and while it can be fun, it can easily become stressful and decrease enjoyment of the game, for a number of reasons. A lot of players choose to avoid leadership roles because it's an escape from reality, and they'd prefer not to be taking on all the responsibilities of leadership and decision-making.
  • In a lot of alliances, there are councils, i.e. players making leadership choices on behalf of their teammates, i.e. democracy. It's rare that single-leader alliances will do well, as there is simply too much work. Equally, if a normal-size alliance were to vote on every single decision, it would take a long time to achieve anything. A leadership council is the middle ground, and generally works well. Probably the first thing that I look at when considering joining an alliance (either by applying, or having been invited), is the leadership: if I don't like the idea of them making decisions for me, I won't join. If I do join, then I am, in effect, electing those leaders as my representatives.

It's all very well "fighting the system" in words on the forums, but you're unlikely to achieve anything unless you actually demonstrate your points in-game. Pick, or make, a team that plays the way you say you'd like to play, and help it succeed: you'll have a fun time, and you'll get to prove that it can work.
 

FutbolTango

Banned
Banned
I think you may be missing the points, @FutbolTango.
  • No-one, so far as I have seen, is saying that you can't make a democratic alliance. In fact, at least one person has suggested that you do just that, to prove your point with actions rather than words.
  • If players have issues with the way their leadership is behaving, there is an easy solution, called the "Leave Alliance" button. There's nothing preventing players from moving to other alliances.
  • Leading and making those big decisions isn't always fun. I've been in a leadership role on more than one occasion, and while it can be fun, it can easily become stressful and decrease enjoyment of the game, for a number of reasons. A lot of players choose to avoid leadership roles because it's an escape from reality, and they'd prefer not to be taking on all the responsibilities of leadership and decision-making.
  • In a lot of alliances, there are councils, i.e. players making leadership choices on behalf of their teammates, i.e. democracy. It's rare that single-leader alliances will do well, as there is simply too much work. Equally, if a normal-size alliance were to vote on every single decision, it would take a long time to achieve anything. A leadership council is the middle ground, and generally works well. Probably the first thing that I look at when considering joining an alliance (either by applying, or having been invited), is the leadership: if I don't like the idea of them making decisions for me, I won't join. If I do join, then I am, in effect, electing those leaders as my representatives.

It's all very well "fighting the system" in words on the forums, but you're unlikely to achieve anything unless you actually demonstrate your points in-game. Pick, or make, a team that plays the way you say you'd like to play, and help it succeed: you'll have a fun time, and you'll get to prove that it can work.
a) There is a precedent. Thermopylae in Mesembria has been the most autonomous a democratic alliance that I have ever experienced. It was fun. I hope that others can experience the same again. It can be done.

b) Some people like autocracy. There is no doubt about it, but this should not be the only option.

c) Many people think that this is the only option. We should make them aware that this is not the case. There are many ways to play the game.
 

Silver Witch

Phrourach
a) There is a precedent. Thermopylae in Mesembria has been the most autonomous a democratic alliance that I have ever experienced. It was fun. I hope that others can experience the same again. It can be done.

b) Some people like autocracy. There is no doubt about it, but this should not be the only option.

c) Many people think that this is the only option. We should make them aware that this is not the case. There are many ways to play the game.
It sounds like you have experienced one alliance that was run successfully as a democracy. In my experience of this game that is rare. Many alliances start off as democracies and they fail - its just not possible for 60 players to want the same things and the discussions that ensue slow things up.

Realistically though why does it matter so much to you. If you want to play in a democratic alliance then do so. I dont so I wont.

And Ancient Greece was as far from a democracy as you can get! It was a collection of city states most of which were dictatorships (quite comparable to all our alliances). They made treaties and they attacked each other (also quite like our alliances) - Athens for a short while had a democracy if you were a full born athenian male - but that was only a minority of the population of athens which is not a democracy.

I dont play here - I have no idea whats going on but there was a comparison between Vitrix and Invicta so i decided to add something. Mac and I ran Invicta and neither of us are involved in any way with Vitrix.

Sorry Magick - I know this only adds to the off top :)
 

Kal Gordon

Phrourach
a) There is a precedent. Thermopylae in Mesembria has been the most autonomous a democratic alliance that I have ever experienced. It was fun. I hope that others can experience the same again. It can be done.
I find it hard to believe in the freedom and inclusion of an alliance that began it's life by throwing half of it's teammates to the wolves. I doubt those players voted to be left behind.

b) Some people like autocracy. There is no doubt about it, but this should not be the only option.
Well, most alliances aren't a full autocracy. In effect, by joining an alliance you are electing those leaders to make decisions about your gameplay. You don't have to join their alliance. In that same line of reasoning, autocracy isn't the only choice. There is nothing stopping players from setting up different styles of alliance. I doubt a fully-democratic alliance would do quite as well (as Silver Witch mentioned on another thread, you need to be able to make quick decisions), but I'm perfectly willing to be proven wrong.

c) Many people think that this is the only option. We should make them aware that this is not the case. There are many ways to play the game.
Why don't you run a premade with that setup? :)

And Ancient Greece was as far from a democracy as you can get! It was a collection of city states most of which were dictatorships (quite comparable to all our alliances). They made treaties and they attacked each other (also quite like our alliances) - Athens for a short while had a democracy if you were a full born athenian male - but that was only a minority of the population of athens which is not a democracy.
I explained this earlier in either this or the other thread, and I note that he avoided replying to my explanation. Make of that what you will.
 

1saaa

Phrourach
@FutbolTango. Stop digging please. your historical references have absolutely killed me (i study history a lot). it is clear that you have a very poor understanding of the 'democracies' throughout history and how they operated. it is also worth noting that as a player who is a leader right now i can tell you for a fact that a fully democratic alliance just does not work unless the vast majority of the player base is watching world politics (highly unlikely). MAD DOGS does do votes on the open forum for players to make decisions but these take a long time (typically about 72 hours) to fully complete. that is time wasted. therefore as a general rule i say that servey's should only be used for decision making if the following conditions are met:

1. the alliance does not have to make a decision quickly

2. the decision effects all the player base in negative and positive ways/ will have a profound impact on the alliances future.

3. the decision could potentially be very controversial.