:)))
Andrew
-----Original Message-----
From: jim.gunn@autodesk.com <jim.gunn@autodesk.com>
To: g2-list@pbm.com <g2-list@pbm.com>
Date: Wednesday, March 03, 1999 5:55 PM
Subject: RE: The Camaris Strait.
>If this solution still isn't practical, how about having your noble or ship
>unit send a message to the warring faction(s) announcing neutrality. To my
>knowledge this does not reveal the identity of the player or faction that
>owns the unit sending the message.
>
>If you can't remember how, look up the MESSAGE command in the Oly G2
>Rules...
>
>Jim
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: jim.gunn@autodesk.com [mailto:jim.gunn@autodesk.com]
>Sent: Wednesday, March 03, 1999 2:23 PM
>To: Seehawk42@aol.com
>Cc: g2-list@pbm.com
>Subject: RE: The Camaris Strait.
>
>
>Isn't it possible to set one's units neutral to an entire faction? Since
>faction ID's are public information via the active players list, this
>dispels the problem of giving away sensitive noble ID's...
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Seehawk42@aol.com [mailto:Seehawk42@aol.com]
>Sent: Wednesday, March 03, 1999 1:50 PM
>To: g2-list@pbm.com
>Subject: Re: The Camaris Strait.
>
>
>In a message dated 3/3/99 4:15:23 PM Eastern Standard Time,
>jim.gunn@autodesk.com writes:
>
>> If you know you're traveling through a publicly acknowledged warzone, and
>> are too lazy to send a simple email that will ensure your nobles safety,
>> then you are an ignorant fool and deserve to lose your units. Either
that
>or
>> you are looking for an excuse to pick a fight (Hugh?) without officially
>> committing to take part in the war.
>>
>
>Another option, of course, is that is none of Borg's, or anybody else's,
>damn
>business what the id#s are for my ships or the nobles on them. Why should
>I,
>or anybody else, be required to offer up sem-private information to an
>unknown
>and obviously agressive group to avoid being attacked?
>
>To clarify my point, Borg is more than welcome to issue Hostile All in
order
>to make their campaign easier to execute, but the idea that announcing this
>somehow absolves them from collateral damage caused to neutrals and newbies
>is
>silly. Maybe somebody needs to remind Borg that it was Plato's supposed
>mistakes in this area that caused them to attack Sir Codric and other
>newbies
>during the New Empire war. That action caused these factions to ally and,
>in
>part, form the Lords of the Crown.
>
>in answer to another poster's remarks asking why this "sea war" is any
>different than a "land war" I offer these two points:
>First, land can be controlled via garrisons, oceans can not. The mechanism
>of
>the game allows clear control of a land province to be demonstrated so that
>all who pass by know who the ruler is.
>Secondly, it isn't different really. If LotC announced that in order to
>make
>their war with Rimmon easier all their nobles were going to issue Hostile
>All
>orders the list would be flooded with complaints of "newbie bashing" and we
>would once again have to suffer through certain players claiming that the
>root
>of this whole conflict is to protect newbies and neutrals.
>The fact is that any nation that decides to issue Hostile All orders does
so
>at the risk of angering neutral players in the area. The last time this
was
>done on any scale it played a major part in galvanizing LotC together.
>Hugh's, and other's, complaints are merely the first warning to Borg that
>attacks on their ships won't be tolerated. In the past, some nations have
>ignored these warnings. I hazard to guess that some of those nations now
>wish
>they had handled it differently.
>
>Eric the Seehawk