There is a big difference between not wanting to fight against 16 houses and wanting to just farm.kyprian wrote:If 16 houses are allied and 'nobody is willing to fight them' that would imply the majority does not, in fact, 'sign up to fight a war'.
In world 1 house 18 is close to defeating there long enemy house 17. I can not imagine H18 taking a join us or die attitude with the other neutral houses to make another world 2. I can see a big argument if it is suggested and I can see many leave if the house decided to follow that tactic.kyprian wrote:While i do not play in W2 and has little interest in politics on *any* world, most of the forum rage seems to be about players playing to meet the victory conditions as set by FF.
The strategy for TCA was explained to me by saying that one stick can be broken, but if you tie all the individual sticks together they can not be broken. That is what TCA is based on as I was told. I find that hilarious knowing the history of the word fascism.
I give TCA credit, and commend them for being able to get almost all the houses to allie with them, even if I do not agree with their tactics. I do not understand why other houses allow them to hold the control that they have in this world.
I disagree with some that think action should be taken by firefly. I do not think firefly should be picking winners or losers even if is to act as a trustbuster.kyprian wrote:The goal - as defined by glory rounds - is to be the last house standing as those weaker houses are eliminated from contention. Unless the alliance is intentionally subverting this and lengthening the glory rounds, how is it 'against the game developer's intentions and worthy of intervention?