Why We Did What We Did

NO BGS NO FRIEDLY QUESTIONS... I'm totally kidding. Let me try and answer to the best of my abilities.

At this time the benefits of staying in Nikani, is that my first village is pretty much surrounded by them... if this whole thing goes sour, and I move from Nikani and go to Flank and a war is started, I'm close range. Also, they do have an MNU NAP, which is beneficial. But those are short term benefits. Versus, at this time, I see Flank as a growing alliance that is taking strong strides forward, which is a long term benefit. That is my basic thought process around the two offering different benefits. (I could be looking at it all wrong, that happens to me)


I do agree if Nikani was attacking Flank, Flank has the right to attack back and vice versa, but the impression I got was that those that stayed with Nikani were considered to be 'hostile' and would be attacked (again, I could be wrong, and upon further clarification from some IGM's that does not appear to the be the case)

NO removing all the leadership at once is NEVER a wise option, and I third whoever suggest you and Big Boss as leaders. I also think, if we were to merge back together, to have someone from the now NikaniF alliance sit on council for Flank and vice versa (Not entirely sure how that would work) but to have them operate as an emmissary, as it will take time for hard feelings to go away. Having someone from each side in discussion might make people feel that there is more open communication.

I probably have more thoughts, I often do, but its been a long/hard day at my real job so I might go take a little nap for awhile.

I do have to say that after the initial reactions I am seeing a lot more open discussion and conversations going on and that makes me feel much better. My impression yesterday were that Flank was mad to the point of saying blow them off the map. And I'm glad to see that after the initial reactions have faded we are able to come together and have some conversations. Maybe nothign will come of it, but talking is the first step.

Kaitlyn wrote:Talks are underway with BGS as an intermediary (he has current access to all parts of the forum).

As I said before, thank you for allowing me back in. I do not understand why I was kicked out and think it odd that members who can post through the accounts of sympathetic FUN members are themselves still banned.

If you have read my post as to why we moved, you would have understood the moves (albeit, possibly wrong) and the time constraint to make the decision. If we did nothing, Nikani would have come regardless as their talks with MNU as FUN has done nothing to prevent/retaliate the MNU attacks. It only reinforced their idea that we're farms.

Time was not running out at all. MNU have given their word that they are stopping attacks against FUN. We have good reason to believe that the Nikani attacks will not be nearly as severe as even the paltry efforts of MNU. I am surprised at you for being so scared of MNU and Nikani. First, I think there is little reason to be afraid. We have been winning against MNU. The FUN alliance has killed many more of them than they have of us. Second, they have only been targeting our non-stronghold villages, which we all knew we would probably lose. So no loss there. And third, even if they were going to wipe us out, wouldn't you rather die with friends than survive by selling out some of your fellow FUNsters? It is this third point that particularly concerns me about your reasoning.

As for us doing "nothing", frankly I find that quite insulting, since we in all three FUN wings have spent hours organising defensive operations and helping on operations that have killed literally tens and tens of thousands of MNU troops. Many more than we have lost. We are winning. This was abundantly clear to you for reasons which were quite openly shared with you and VV. There were no secret talks on the FUN*F forums (there is very little on them apart from a little boasting about who has raided the most resources, and chatting about another internet game that some members play). You knew what was going on.

As for where i stand, am I nikani or am I FUN, I started last s6 as FUN and I am a FUNster. Yee is not betraying you by saying move to the nikani wings as FUN*F and Lite are going to be hit. He's following my edict... trying to protect your accounts.

Please Kait, you are not betraying FUN by telling FUN members to abandon their colleagues and join an alliance that has openly said they want to attack us? You are not betraying FUN by splitting the stronghold and distracting us from external threats with a few days of angst and members deleting out of disgust? You are not betraying us because thought that you were protecting us all the while making us all more vulernable? I believe that your intentions were good (even if they were limited to your wing and were not thinking of FUN as a whole, as you wished others would do), but I do feel that your decision was a terrible mistake.

Snapdragon. Thanks for your thoughtful response to my questions. It is very nice to have reasonable conversation partners.

I agree that there may seem to be some benefits to joining Nikani, but I would suggest that they are massive outweighed by the cons. We all knew that our starting villages were vulnerable and would most likely be lost (never without a fight). If you had not written it off in your mind beforehand, then someone failed to introduce you to a key part of the stronghold strategy. As for the cons: MNU have already decided to stop attacking FUN. Those who have some better idea of the inner workings of Nikani know that it is not a particularly stable alliance and may well face internal troubles of its own before too long. But the key point for me is that splitting the stronghold makes us all very much weaker. This is the great strength of this alliance. And even though I doubt that MNU or Nikani stand much chance of defeating a united stronghold, wouldn't you rather go down with friends than jump ship to save your skin?

I do agree if Nikani was attacking Flank, Flank has the right to attack back and vice versa, but the impression I got was that those that stayed with Nikani were considered to be 'hostile' and would be attacked (again, I could be wrong, and upon further clarification from some IGM's that does not appear to the be the case)

You can't have it both ways. If you want protection from Nikani as a member of Nikani, you cannot then be neutral in a battle between Nikani and its enemies.

I consider Nikani F to be a short term anomaly. FUN now has three wings once more. If you wish to rejoin FUN*R, you are most welcome to send me or V-la (BIG.BOSS) an IGM.

Peace,
Byron (BGS)

For the third time in this thread, I will pose my question.

If it is not answered this time, then we know for sure that VV and RKW are purposefully avoiding the answer.

Twice before in this thread I asked RKW or VV a question. It has not yet been answered. Why are you avoiding it?

I will restate it for you, so there can be no excuses.

Please explain to me, how the fragmentation of the FUN alliance (which is what you planned, and carried out) was a benefit to "the alliance as a whole" to use VV 's words.

Thank you for your time.

Fog.

Looking to the future, I would like to present some ideas that I think should be considered.

1) Short-term task: I think we should put some things to a referrendum in a new topic, to give a voice to the masses if you will. As it stands, the leadership is not working as it should and so it is time for an election of some kind. Let the members vote.. I think it is time they had a say.

2) Long-term: I think there should be an 'arbitration committee' put into place made up of a mix of players to mediate disputes in leadership. So if any leader felt there was a problem, they would raise their concerns with the committee who would then make a binding decision. (From reading Tankgirl's replies, I think she would make a good choice for a member of this committee).

3) Deadline: Dialogue in this post is helpful, but the longer this drags on, the worse it will be. The first goal of an arbitration committee would be to set a deadline for a resolution to the current situation.

Loyal FUNster,
AJB

This is all a mess isn't it?

You want a solution? Here are your options:

1.- Follow your believes, not the people telling you what to do (I say it when picking "sides")
2.- Talk, Talk, Talk. Knowledge is power, you will be able to take a decision if you know what the decision will bring.
3.- Don't get personal. Yes, it's hard and even i break it. But hey, you want this mess to clear up or not?
4.- Forum & Troop Tool: Yes, FUN forum for Funsters. Troop Tool, better to get rid of the information in it. Even if we are in different alliances that's no reason to let the information leak out.
5.- Learn from mistakes, Leaders: This all happen for the lack of communication with the members of the wings (Yes, i know what has been stated before but that doesn't mean the problem isn't present)
6.- Getting mad, smart ass comments or anything like that will help on this situation. I wont say names, but learn to handle the situation differently and those who can't tolerate those comments are just acting like the smart ass himself so be smarter.

That's all I got to say.

Superyee

superyee wrote:This is all a mess isn't it?

You want a solution? Here are your options:

1.- Follow your believes, not the people telling you what to do (I say it when picking "sides")
2.- Talk, Talk, Talk. Knowledge is power, you will be able to take a decision if you know what the decision will bring.
3.- Don't get personal. Yes, it's hard and even i break it. But hey, you want this mess to clear up or not?
4.- Forum & Troop Tool: Yes, FUN forum for Funsters. Troop Tool, better to get rid of the information in it. Even if we are in different alliances that's no reason to let the information leak out.
5.- Learn from mistakes, Leaders: This all happen for the lack of communication with the members of the wings (Yes, i know what has been stated before but that doesn't mean the problem isn't present)
6.- Getting mad, smart ass comments or anything like that will help on this situation. I wont say names, but learn to handle the situation differently and those who can't tolerate those comments are just acting like the smart ass himself so be smarter.

That's all I got to say.

Superyee

Yee, this is all good advice. I would simply modify your first point to say "follow what you discern to be best for FUN in conversation with others. Persuade and be persuaded."

And to AJB, thank you for your suggestions. I am very pleased that the last few comments have moved onto considering solutions and constructive ways forward.

AJB wrote:Looking to the future, I would like to present some ideas that I think should be considered.

1) Short-term task: I think we should put some things to a referrendum in a new topic, to give a voice to the masses if you will. As it stands, the leadership is not working as it should and so it is time for an election of some kind. Let the members vote.. I think it is time they had a say.

I always listen to what members say and try to discern what is best in fellowship with the other leaders and an honest dialogue with members. This is how all our leaders aim to act. Please gently raise it when you feel this is not how we are acting. Did you have particular issues in mind that you think require a vote? Remember, Travian is a military situation and so requires most decisions to be made quickly and decisively. Not everything can be put to a vote, since it is quite a slow method of making decisions in many situations that require a faster response. In a parliamentary democracy, very few decisions are put to a vote. Most day-to-day decisions are simply the result of trusted leaders who take the insights of their constituents into account when discerning what is best for the common good.

Personally, I think it is better to have a trusted group of leaders who can make decisions which they are happy to explain, and about which they are happy to receive input and critical discussion. Policies are open to debate and refinement. (NB in a defensive operation, we simply need people to respond immediately to a leader's decision, and explanations sometimes have to wait until later in order to save lives now).

2) Long-term: I think there should be an 'arbitration committee' put into place made up of a mix of players to mediate disputes in leadership. So if any leader felt there was a problem, they would raise their concerns with the committee who would then make a binding decision. (From reading Tankgirl's replies, I think she would make a good choice for a member of this committee).

This is an interesting idea. I will think about it further. But see also my comment below (3).

3) Deadline: Dialogue in this post is helpful, but the longer this drags on, the worse it will be. The first goal of an arbitration committee would be to set a deadline for a resolution to the current situation.

I do not think that we have time to set up an arbitration committee upon which everyone will agree and so which can be trusted, and which can then set a deadline, and then resolve all issues. Nikani are attacking in a matter of hours (allegedly). There are three wings of FUN fully committed to defending the stronghold, and to making any aggressor pay for starting villages (which are only a secondary priority and which may very well be lost). Anyone who wishes to be part of the FUN may contact the FUN leadership in their desired wing. Our discussions about leadership structures continue to evolve. Be assured, that all the FUN leaders are in full agreement and have good communication. Of course, I am also in open, honest and frank communication with the leaders of Nikani F. But they are no longer FUN leaders. That is a sad, but clear decision they have made.

Peace,
Byron (BGS)

AJB wrote:
Looking to the future, I would like to present some ideas that I think should be considered.

1) Short-term task: I think we should put some things to a referrendum in a new topic, to give a voice to the masses if you will. As it stands, the leadership is not working as it should and so it is time for an election of some kind. Let the members vote.. I think it is time they had a say.

I should be be more clear. I think this should be only a short term task to resolve the current divide between parties. Of course this is not an effective means to lead long-term.

BGS wrote:
Did you have particular issues in mind that you think require a vote?

Yes, I think it would be good for those in Nikani F and Nikani T (players who were unfairly put in a shit situation) to vote on questions such as...
'Would you like to re-join FUN?'
'If you said no to the previous question, do you support the idea of establishing an NAP with all 3 FUN wings?'
'Do you feel that a small, permanent arbitration committee would be helpful to mediate disputes between leaders in the future?' To avoid fiascos like this happening again.

Again, people have been put between a rock and a hard place by this fiasco and with clear voting results in hand, leaders or potential leaders could have a better idea of what members want and work towards their general goals. This suggestion is ONLY applicable to the current mess we are in, and is definitely not a long-term solution (of course we cannot vote on everything).

Speaking of the Long-term solution..

BGS wrote: I do not think that we have time to set up an arbitration committee upon which everyone will agree and so which can be trusted, and which can then set a deadline, and then resolve all issues. Nikani are attacking in a matter of hours (allegedly).

To clarify, an arbitration committee would be a long-term, permanent body to ensure fiascos like this don't happen again. Of course there is not enough time to set one up to resolve the current situation, but mis-communication, or other problems will surely arise again in the future. A smart manangement team would agree to an objective process in which to resolve future disputes (disputes will always arise... lets be smart and put in a method by which we can resolve them).

Final notes, maybe I am being too 'business-like' about it, I am a management consultant after all.. he he

AJB

Thank you for your clarifications. I am sorry that I misread your initial post. You were quite clear that your first suggestion was short-term. I simply missed this. I am very happy that you are a management consultant - what an excellent skill set to bring to this game! How long have you been doing that?

I think they are good suggestions to be put to a vote. However, the first two only apply to players who have still not rejoined FUN. It seems to me that this does not require a vote, since the "vote" occurs as each player decides whether to rejoin FUN or stay with Nikani. Whether Nikani F wants to seek a NAP with the wings of the FUN alliance is up to Nikani F to decide. This is a FUN forum, as far as I am aware, even if it is currently being held by Nikani leaders.

As I said, I do like the idea of an arbitration committee in principle, but wonder whether it is too formal a structure for our size. It is only to resolve disputes amongst the leadership, and there are currently only six FUN leaders, who are all in agreement on almost everything. I realise and fully expect we will have disagreements, but the six of us have had serious disagreements in the past and have managed to resolve our own disputes quite well. Perhaps in future if the leadership continues to grow, or if we add more wings? In your experience of management, does this kind of a structure work better when there are more leaders?

I will raise it with the other leaders and perhaps ask you to enter into dialogue with them too. However, not right away as we have more immediate concerns. Thanks again for your reply.

No disrespect, AJB but I wanted to bring up a point. First off, let me clarify that I'm also in management. Perhaps that's why I play this game - to get away from committees, consensus, arbitration etc :-)

Travian is a war game. In the middle of a war, generals don't confab with enlisted men to get everyone's opinions. Broad strategy is agreed on *before* a war (culled from experience, intelligence and sometimes even enemy specific war games) which is then fine tuned before each battle. An agreed strategy that generals stick to. Of course they have to be nimble on the battlefield and make sure they have wiggle room. Yes, they have advisors (mostly trusted officers) but the general will direct the war based on their own competence and intelligence.

Once a good general, a good warrior has the trust of his troops, they will trust him with with their lives (actually, they had better :-)

Once we've signed on with a certain leadership, we're committed. I'm not saying that we become mindless automatons but too much second guessing will prevent a good war machine from achieving its potential. So, is there no room for personal ambition in a professional army? Of course there is - but always subjugated to the greater good of the army.

ALL I've said above applies to a GOOD army - which each alliance should (imho) strive to be.

I'm too new to this alliance to comment on the current problems but I hope we get back to being a good, disciplined, bunch of professional killers :-) We can't always blame the people who lead us - people mostly get leaders they deserve.

My very personal $0.02

joining nikani will not solve anything nikani IS backstabbing mnu mnu will take out nikanis 4 wings in a heart beat dont run to a crap alliance like nikani

Whats funny about this post, is how noble so many of VV reasons sound, and then kait smashes them all out of the water by admitting personal reasons.

So many of the flaws in FUN listed by VV were a direct result of their own actions. Part of MNU reason for hitting us was for diplomatic reasons im sure, but another part of it was for the absolute weakness shown by FUN main. Recruiting small players, and players from other quads is just stupid, as stupid as your move to nikani. Your lack of drive within your own wing also lead to your wing being so heavily farmed by MNU. I dont remember seeing any defensive actions lead by either you or kait, i dont remember seeing more then a few hundred troops killed in a FUN village followed by a post "my troops are all dead help me"

You guys sat by and let the water flow for far to long, and hence why when you stepped in to divert the flow everything went wrong.

This post is again just another attack at FLANK. i know its a few days old, and no i havent read the pags that followed just VV's, but ask yourselves, while VV was bashing FLANK and the actions of its leaders, which wing had the strongest members, which wing had the most troops, which wing was growing the fastest. But instead of asking what can we do to improve, you stagnated. You couldnt even recruit to macth LITE policy and as a result, just before this all went down LITE was about to out rank FUN.

Now whos fault is it that FUN main was doing so badly, are you going to blame FLANK that your members didnt grow, didnt build troops and got farmed...or are you going to finally admit you totally failed your alliance, and cut a deal to save your own ass.

from the quality control inspector
killjilll

just to add to this, not all of FUN was bad, there were just alot of bads. Im glad to say the majority of these bads are no longer with us as a result of the poast week, and im happy to say that the strong members have joined us again. Hopefully you will see the light now.