Extreme Hoarders of Salem (Tomki)

[vienradzis]

so from this thread we can assume now anyone who is not part of the tribe is now going to be considered part of the rebellion?

No Treaty=dead

[vienradzis]

Of course. You didn't know that ? That's why Celestis, a neutral town, has been attacked.

Saying again no Treaty = dead

[Hose]

Is Treaty now dead too?

[Trenial]

Mik looking sexy as ever

where are the pics of Suff though? And do not doubt the Honey Badger, he is one clever creature.

[Ikpeip]

Of course. You didn't know that ? That's why Celestis, a neutral town, has been attacked.

Good afternoon Cheena,

It's already been established that Celestis was harboring rebels. You and Roberto betrayed your townmates' trust and put them all in jeopardy by operating out of their base in violation of their neutrality.

Of course, it was the actions after the raid that were most shocking. Do you want to hear more?

You got loads of stuff there

I paid the penalty for settling in the first two days of server lifetime near noob spawning area. You also used great "Sun Tzu" ambush and deception tactics and almost got me during saturday evening as I just returned from real life happening (and got me drunk there). Now I have no base but a terrible headache..

You should have seen my face when your braves stormed at the gates . I really thought that flying under the radar would not trigger any real raid on poor looking lot. Alas I was wrong. The problem living as neutral is that all factions attack you eventually. But you solved my hoarding problem .

Nice raid indeed and congrats!

Good on you for taking it in stride. I do think we would've had your scalp, if Johan at the other base hadn't logged on when he did. Without that 30 minute diversion to go scalp him, we would've had your gates and defenses down by the time you logged on. Alas, fate worked to keep you living.

Faithfully,

-PmP

[Cheena]

Of course. You didn't know that ? That's why Celestis, a neutral town, has been attacked.

Good afternoon Cheena,

It's already been established that Celestis was harboring rebels. You and Roberto betrayed your townmates' trust and put them all in jeopardy by operating out of their base in violation of their neutrality.

Of course, it was the actions after the raid that were most shocking. Do you want to hear more?

Yes please, as I returned to the game like one week before and was not playing since four months before your siege, I am very interested in knowing what I have "operated out of their base in violation of their neutrality".
Also my ex-townies perfectly know what I have been doing during that week as they helped me doing so. Reclaiming some decaying area.

[Cawalox]

No Treaty=dead

This bear refused to sign the treaty I offered him on several occasions. He thought I would never find him inconspicuous cave but in the end he lost his scalp.

[ezgoezit]

No Treaty=dead

This is why I decided against joining the tribe... Don't get me wrong, I don't have a problem with the tactics or "being on the wrong side of right", but when I started, I asked about the tribe and was pointed in this direction:

viewtopic.php?f=20&t=8587

There were a few things on that post that did not seem to be in keeping with many other tribe posts I read, specifically this one:

-TMs shall not commit crimes against their fellow man, except in self-defense. This includes larceny, waste, assault, and murder

Now, perhaps I am crazy here, but there seems to be a conflict between that particular rule and the whole "No Treaty=dead" thing.

As it turns out, I am comfortable in grey areas and I don't mind a little hypocrisy. I think it helps my digestion. The problem I am having is that there is a group of people that want me to abide by a treaty that they do not abide by themselves. Considering that, it would be a poor tactical and strategic decision for me to join because their offer of protection is effectively, as dependable as their own adherence to the other rules listed on the treaty.

Had they the intestinal fortitude to simply state something to the effect of, "-TMs shall not commit crimes against their fellow TM, except in self-defense. This includes larceny, waste, assault, and murder." Then I could see the tribe being worthy of consideration.

[lachlaan]

What that rule means is that any treaty signers need to be tame little sheep that should not display dominant behaviour. On the other hand the tribal horde can wreck any non-treaty signer. It's a bit like how you as a civilian can't get a police baton and smack someone over the head to subdue them when you think they should be arrested, while a police officer is allowed to enforce the law.

Edit: That is to say, tribe are afraid of what their treaty signers would be capable of if they ever decided to rebel And this way tribal horde gets to keep all the loot of actual combat, while treaty signers get to stay inexperienced when it comes to combat and PvP mechanics least they become capable of actually enforcing a lifestyle choice without tribe in it.

[ezgoezit]

What that rule means is that any treaty signers need to be tame little sheep that should not display dominant behaviour. On the other hand the tribal horde can wreck any non-treaty signer. It's a bit like how you as a civilian can't get a police baton and smack someone over the head to subdue them when you think they should be arrested, while a police officer is allowed to enforce the law.

That would imply that "tribal horde" are not TMs?