The Refugee (Defined)

DeletedUser

Guest
I would say that in real life you can have "Diplomatic Refugees", however not in this game as it is not based on real life and its complexities of diplomacy. The main reason for defining a Grepolis Refugee here was due to their troublesome nature of denying a player kill. If you are not attacking a player, it is pointless attempting to define them as refugees, since it becomes pure speculation and opinion.

"Diplomatic Refugees" can be labeled based on a whim - there is no factual proof as it is a matter of opinion that one is a "Diplomatic Refugee" and thus is completely subjective. Find any excuse and bam - there u have one. Poor decisions are just a show of poor leadership and it may certainly make subordinates feel disgusted, but without game action to back it up it is irrelavent. This is a game which has game mechanics that determine if someone can be a refugee, not peoples opinions without something to back it up. There are personality conflcits that can play a big role in how someone 'views' another, however there are no grounds to class someone as a refugee simply because someone else didn't like them. This game is not based on real life. Once a player is attacked there is a possiblity of them being refugee if they join an alliance for protection afterwards. Players who leave or get booted 'because of their poor leadership' or due to being 'unpopular' does not prove they are refugees, as its pure speculation/opinion to say so - even if they join another alliance. Without being attacked prior to joining another alliance for protection, they cannot be objectively classed as refugees. Its impossible to confirm otherwise.

This thread is not about the make beleive, nor is it about people who are masters of manipulation. It is about establishing factual grounds to define a refugee, not someones opinion about what makes one.


"War Refugees" (as you put it) can be backed up through Battle Reports and Defensive Battle Points. There is no subjective opinion associated with someone being attacked with forces (this can be proven) and then joining another alliance (this can be proven) for protection (this is where some subjectiveness may come into it as they can get protection either through new alliance label, associated PACTs, forces/troops, etc. or they may not. If they do, those that helped know by action, or inaction through a PACT, that help/protection has been given and thus is no longer a matter of opinion but a matter of how truthful players are about it.).
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser

Guest
I think I went a bit too complex there lol

If as a consequence to any thoughts on a player, the player gets attacked and there after joins an alliance for protection, this is is the technical definition of a Refugee. If they do not get attacked but join another alliance, this wont necessarily make them a refugee. Even exiled players are attacked (and in real life by revolts) and thus suffer to some degree, if they join an alliance for protection from those attacks, then they are classed as refugees. If someone says that a player is a 'Diplomatic Refugee' without attacks/action/proof to back the statement, then it is just hearsay as stated above.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
lol very interesting thread especially since my alliance is now at war with a former ally on alpha because of a refugee situation. lol it is as described VERY messy.

In our situation a player from a relatively small alliance was picking on one of our smaller players. I wrote to th alliance leader and kindly asked him to have his player back off, not only did he refuse but he quaked and bolted me and then launched 50+ attacks on our player. The alliance leaders sanctioned retaliations and we quickly took two cities. They threaten to join our ally, I scoff at this threat thinking that my friends would not entertain this. lol How wrong I was not only did they flat out tell me that they were not refugee's and would not be kicked but they ordered us to cease attacks and withdraw any CS that landed, we had a few en route when they joined our ally.

There argument was that they were in talks with the players in question about a merge before our spat began, the fact that they decided to join their alliance during our conflict was just serendipity.

If you're interested in the full story you can check it out here http://forum.en.grepolis.com/showthread.php?t=16834

It starts out as a debate but unfortunately spirals off into smack tack and posturing. The first part is a pretty good example of how diplomacy can go bad between allies over a refugee.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Huge post. Nicely done man. Rep from me for this.

Just getting groomed as a Leader and have had this issue. One I accepted Two I did not. Wish I had read this before the issue came up.

Nice!!
 

DeletedUser1405

Guest
I think I went a bit too complex there lol

If as a consequence to any thoughts on a player, the player gets attacked and there after joins an alliance for protection, this is is the technical definition of a Refugee. If they do not get attacked but join another alliance, this wont necessarily make them a refugee. Even exiled players are attacked (and in real life by revolts) and thus suffer to some degree, if they join an alliance for protection from those attacks, then they are classed as refugees. If someone says that a player is a 'Diplomatic Refugee' without attacks/action/proof to back the statement, then it is just hearsay as stated above.

Most alliances will put a time limit on attacks for these players, say 14 and the player becomes a full member and gets the full protection of the alliance.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
My Alliance will normally observe a war, or help in it then when our enemy unknowingly ask for asylum we will let them in, and forcibly hold them at bay while our ally farms them and eventually rims them. Its something we do for fun, capture the refugee, and allow the alliance to destroy them. Its my way of saying, hey you shouldn't have been a coward.


If your a true alliance member, Youll give your last Click to your Alliance :/
 

DeletedUser4013

Guest
My Alliance will normally observe a war, or help in it then when our enemy unknowingly ask for asylum we will let them in, and forcibly hold them at bay while our ally farms them and eventually rims them. Its something we do for fun, capture the refugee, and allow the alliance to destroy them. Its my way of saying, hey you shouldn't have been a coward.


If your a true alliance member, Youll give your last Click to your Alliance :/

That's soo cruel it's hilarious...Capture the Refugee!!!!!!!!! :D
 

DeletedUser20429

Guest
I like it too! I have seen a similar system in L** (I will not write the full abbreviation because I would get infracted.) Someone takes in an alliance into their own and then lets an ally eat them

I also held my own for about 2 weeks against 3 alliances all over 1M points. But most people were premium that were attacking me so I couldn't keep it up for much longer.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser

Guest
Nice work! I agree with most on this thread though - Refugees can cause a lot of damage at times..
 

DeletedUser

Guest
If a player is under heavy attack, but not in an alliance, is that player considered a refugee? We had this issue in my alliance on Olympia (Paragon) recently. I was accused of harboring a refugee. I retorted that I was bringing a strong defender under my wing because he was holding off dozens of attacks on his own without gold.

What happened next? The city was attacked 99 times and I held it almost entirely by myself (and with the help of the "refugee's" wall) .
 

DeletedUser30767

Guest
If a player is under heavy attack, but not in an alliance, is that player considered a refugee? We had this issue in my alliance on Olympia (Paragon) recently. I was accused of harboring a refugee. I retorted that I was bringing a strong defender under my wing because he was holding off dozens of attacks on his own without gold.

What happened next? The city was attacked 99 times and I held it almost entirely by myself (and with the help of the "refugee's" wall) .
and that was the point when you won 16000 BPs at once .. wasnt it ?? :p:p
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Yes, helliswell, I'm referring to Kali k.'s city, Medieval Times.

No Olympia discussion in the Acropolis please.
 

Thrillology

Phrourach
Yes, helliswell, I'm referring to Kali k.'s city, Medieval Times.

No Olympia discussion in the Acropolis please.
You used Olympia as a reference, so please no talking about that world. That statement you made proves even further that you're a hypocrite. No, I do not [actively] play on that world, so I am not at all referring to that world in any way.
----------------------
Good thing this thread is up, there's a few angry players I've met who misuse the term "refugee".
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Thrillology said:

You used Olympia as a reference, so please no talking about that world. That statement you made proves even further that you're a hypocrite.

I was merely answering helliswell's question and reminding him of The Acropolis rules (no world discussion). I am no hypocrite, you're just bitter that I booted you for being a mentally imbalanced nut job. I ruined the game for you in Olympia and you joined our enemy like any good little traitor would, who we crushed beneath our heavy feet. I won't mention my server again, but if I am called out about it I will respond.
 

DeletedUser20429

Guest
Thrillology said:



I was merely answering helliswell's question and reminding him of The Acropolis rules (no world discussion). I am no hypocrite, you're just bitter that I booted you for being a mentally imbalanced nut job. I ruined the game for you in Olympia and you joined our enemy like any good little traitor would, who we crushed beneath our heavy feet. I won't mention my server again, but if I am called out about it I will respond.

Yeah Yeah act all tough. It's a common reaction. If he's annoying you just don't read his posts or add him to your ignore list.
 

DeletedUser31929

Guest
Brilliant!!! Where's the love button?
This idea needs to be in Grepolis!!
 

DeletedUser30951

Guest
i took in a refugee on theta once. he was being attacked by 15+ players and was slowly being worn down. his alliance bailed on him and he was by himself. i had been trying to get him to jump from his current alliance since he was plainly a good player. i lent him enough force to save him and negotiated a truce with the attacking alliance since they didn't want to go to war with us at that time. the player ended up being the second highest ranking player behind myself in the alliance and was worth the effort.

sometimes it is worth the risk if you have seen the player work and know that he can play. any player that can hold of attacks from 15+ players is worth the effort if you have the firepower to help them. i saw the attack reports as i requested them to determine where best to send the defending forces. there are refugees and there are refugees.

i learned about the attacks as he messaged me asking to conquer his cities to keep them from the suns as he and i had been talking. i talked him into letting me help him as i could tell he could from watching his stats and he was only my northeast flank in a perfectly defensible position if he had help. he ended up with about 50000 defending bp from the assaults.

to me a refugee is a mediocre player who can't defend himself even against a single attacker. not a player with 15+ players ganging up on him without any help from his alliance. a good player can never really be a refugee in my opinion as a refugee doesn't truly have anything to contribute. in this case i would say johnKNG was a warrior without a country. i should think any alliance should be willing to help such a player if it is within their power.

Well said Socrates34; I too believe a good player should be helped this is a game of war and the strategy is to survive and personally I think it is very smart move if your Alliance is no longer supporting your efforts then your best move would be to find an Alliance that would. The problem is the Attacker is dissappointed that he will have to fight now to get the same player. Should he be faulted for making a smart move? When we are at war with other Countries you do not see this issue as it doesn't exist. You attack a person and if you are strong enough he will surely lose his city as it only takes 12 hours to put him in revolt and then you have another 12 to conquer him if you do not win in that time you must try again well he is open to join whomever he pleases. I am sorry if you do not like this but to me it sounds like you are crying because the other player made an excellent move and won a round by joining a good Alliance. Yes taking in a "refugee" as some say it could put you to war quickly, but this is what this game is all about. This is my hinest opinion and I am positive not everyone will agree

Guys this is strategy of course it could be upsetting to be attacking someone then they get help, so what it just means they made a smart move and quite possibly the only move they could make to survive. Now keep this in mind what good Alliance in their right mind would want a player that was low in points so they must have some abilities if they took in a refugee. If you are strong enough then you now have your next Alliance to war with

PLEASE THOUGHTS ANYONE
 

DeletedUser

Guest
bpettett28 Thank you for bringing this back on topic, and i would love to see opinions on your post.

Please guys, don't forget the topic. That would be mean. Defining the term or refugee deserves to be discussed just as much as anything else.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
i took in a refugee on theta once. he was being attacked by 15+ players and was slowly being worn down. his alliance bailed on him and he was by himself.

In this case I might accept the refugee as well, but I'm curious as to why his alliance "bailed on him? The answer to that would make or break the invitation imo.


Question to all:
Would you consider the following a refugee? On Olympia, a player that hadn't accepted any invitations for two months held off 25 players by himself before asking for an invitation to my alliance. He was under attack from my enemy and I gained unprecedented DBP defending his city. The "refugee" also gained a fair amount of DBP himself. Is it poor form to invite a player like this?
 
Top