So You're A Rebel, Now What?

[thl111]

I don't know why they target treaty paying players. It will just kill off potential "future subjects" in case they won the war.

[dageir]

If the war is going to protract its wise to kill off the influx of resources. If there is an organized opposition it should resort to guerilla tactics instead of open combat. Burn the fields and retreat. Being a treaty payer would be meaningless if the tribe cant defend them. The more treaty payers that are "burnt" the weaker the tribe seems.

[Sachaztan]

It makes perfect sense to attack treaty payers, in fact the rebels should try to attack as many as possible if they want to win. If the tribe can't protect their serfs then other players are less likely to pay the treaty and it limits the amount of tribute that the tribe gets. It also makes the rebellion stronger through the loot that they get and treaty players are just easier targets than braves.

[thl111]

That sure works during war time but how about post war? I see things this way, during war time, your main targets should be military facilities and combatants, civilian casualties is inevitable but intentional strikes on non- combatants and civilian targets would just make them terrorists and when they take over from the tribe, people who were raided before would only hate them and thus, another rebellion movement. Beside, if we are talking about food and money, I don't see why the tribe can't handle an all out war with the rebs alone, without the tribute from treaty payers. Money is not hard to earn in game.

[darnokpl]

Greetings Fine Pilgrim's of Salem!
It is I, your fearless leader, Colesie!

You are what?

One guy with feathers in hat orders you to pay silver, other guy is saying he is your leader, wow both of them needs to

or check their heads

[RainbowMoostache]

Aww, so much people will die.

But it's fun to watch.

[MaoZeDong]

I don't know why they target treaty paying players. It will just kill off potential "future subjects" in case they won the war.

How can the rebels expect to win a war when their enemies are being funded so well?
Paying the exorbitant treaty tax is more or less the equivalent of what the United States did to support the British before directly entering world war two.

In short : If you're responsible for producing the arms of a nation, it makes you a target when that nation is at war.

-Vision quest complete
Faithfully yours, Mao "Puppy blood is delicious" Ze ****.

[Tylan]

I don't know why they target treaty paying players. It will just kill off potential "future subjects" in case they won the war.

How can the rebels expect to win a war when their enemies are being funded so well?
Paying the exorbitant treaty tax is more or less the equivalent of what the United States did to support the British before directly entering world war two.

In short : If you're responsible for producing the arms of a nation, it makes you a target when that nation is at war.

Killing noobs is killing noobs is killing noobs. If this revolution sets its sights on treaty payers who are paying the treaty for protection in the first place, it is no better than the current system. If a mission statement is ever developed for this ragtag group, I suggest that it include the intended bias against sub producing players attempting to avoid having their bases destroyed. As I said before, without organization, this is doomed to fail, because in my opinion, there will be more supporters of the lols alone brought by the Chief's posts than for a scattering of groups flying Rebel banners without an umbrella of common leadership. So what if Cole's group of Rebels doesn't kill noobs if Yasso's (just a name for example) does? The Rebellion's the Rebellion in the eyes of the common man/woman.

Further, killing civilians or civilian operations is frowned upon whether producing for the enemy or not. Would you kill a master's slaves or maim them to keep them from doing what they have been asked to do? Or would you convince them that their gilded bracelets are bonds of servitude and beguile them to your side?

But no, by all means, start attacking treaty payers. Leave those delicious scents so you can be tracked and ended for testing the justice of Plymouth.

[thl111]

I don't know why they target treaty paying players. It will just kill off potential "future subjects" in case they won the war.

How can the rebels expect to win a war when their enemies are being funded so well?
Paying the exorbitant treaty tax is more or less the equivalent of what the United States did to support the British before directly entering world war two.

In short : If you're responsible for producing the arms of a nation, it makes you a target when that nation is at war.

As stated above, I believe without the taxes from treaty payers, the Tribe can handle the war alone. I mean, they don't have to pay their Braves, they don't have to buy much stuff since most they can produce themselves. And your last statement is quite interesting. Say, I am a citizen of country X and by duty I have to pay tax which in case my country goes to war, it will be funded for military campaigns and such, so that makes me a red and white bullseye painted target when I'm only a civilian? It doesn't make sense. I mean, even in the dark ages, they didn't just kill every single peasant they saw since they were the main resource when the other side takes over. I know the point of war is to cripple your enemy's supply and resources but in this sort of conflict while both sides are trying to gain influence on people, this sort of action would only create more rebellions later on, which ironically, is the cause of this current rebellion in the first place.

[Sachaztan]

As stated above, I believe without the taxes from treaty payers, the Tribe can handle the war alone. I mean, they don't have to pay their Braves, they don't have to buy much stuff since most they can produce themselves.

Makes absolutely no difference, what so ever.

And your last statement is quite interesting. Say, I am a citizen of country X and by duty I have to pay tax which in case my country goes to war, it will be funded for military campaigns and such, so that makes me a red and white bullseye painted target when I'm only a civilian? It doesn't make sense.

You are forgetting that this isn't real life and MM isn't even a government.

I mean, even in the dark ages, they didn't just kill every single peasant they saw since they were the main resource when the other side takes over.

Only this is exactly what they did, over and over again. It was called Chevauchée in Europe and similar scorched earth methods has been used all over the world throughout world history.

I know the point of war is to cripple your enemy's supply and resources but in this sort of conflict while both sides are trying to gain influence on people, this sort of action would only create more rebellions later on, which ironically, is the cause of this current rebellion in the first place.

Pretty much the only thing that you say that makes any sense. I don't even think the rebellion cares what happens after the war if it ever ends. Even so, it isn't entirely true. There are many players that got pillaged by MM and then started paying the treaty, some of them might even have had their main killed and then started paying with their new character.