WesWorld

Guys, chill out. If you really want to "discuss" (argue, cough, cough) about this, do it in private, or contact the mods...this isn't something that the rest of us should have to hear.

Quoted

Originally posted by Red Admiral

Quoted

Yugoslavia has demonstrated a willingness to discuss and resolve differences through diplomatic processes.

Then we progress a little while, all along whilst Yugoslavia is going on a military spending bonanza, until we hear of the Warsaw Pact. So, why did all these countries with many opposing views and years of hatred between them suddenly come together in one movement? Ordinarily you'd think it was because Russia was on the march again, but there's been nothing on that front (surprisingly little notice of their "intervention" in Lithuania) so Italy is left with the conclusion that the alliance is directed at her. With such an economic block behind Yugoslavia, a long war has become much more winnable for them.

Ah yes, that's right. Its a common misconception that the Balkan nations can't get along, and are doomed to spend their efforts ethnically cleansing each other, when in fact the Warsaw Pact is a historical 1930's alliance with two additiona members who were not in it in OTL.

As well as I have mentioned before, you people set borders in the Balkans which are most certainly not historical, do not bother to create or assist with a timeline that can explain said borders, and then insist the Balkan nations must follow what you incorrectly perceive to be OTL levels of hatred against each other.

Preposterous!

Quoted

Originally posted by TexanCowboy
Guys, chill out. If you really want to "discuss" (argue, cough, cough) about this, do it in private, or contact the mods...this isn't something that the rest of us should have to hear.

Please refrain from attempting to give moderator advice unless you are a moderator.

Quoted

Originally posted by TheCanadian
As well as I have mentioned before, you people set borders in the Balkans which are most certainly not historical, do not bother to create or assist with a timeline that can explain said borders, and then insist the Balkan nations must follow what you incorrectly perceive to be OTL levels of hatred against each other.

Preposterous!

Preach it, brother Canadian!

Quoted

That's the sort of rude and snide comment that I see being constantly directed at Bruce.

I've been a bit combative of late, but I don't think rude.

Quoted

As well as I have mentioned before, you people set borders in the Balkans which are most certainly not historical, do not bother to create or assist with a timeline that can explain said borders

One of reasons behind that would be that we didn't start with anyone in the Balkans besides Greece. We didn't even start with the UK or USA in order to limit the scope. Things have grown a lot from there. Lots of borders aren't historical, mostly from simply using a modern(ish) world map as the starting point. Do I want to come up with a timeline that makes some sort of sense? Not really, my focus of interest isn't in the politics (besides Italy). Coming up with a detailed alternate history to explain the unexplainable doesn't suit me personally. I find it easier to accept things as a fait accompli and move onto matters that are more of interest to me.

Quoted

One of reasons behind that would be that we didn't start with anyone in the Balkans besides Greece. We didn't even start with the UK or USA in order to limit the scope. Things have grown a lot from there. Lots of borders aren't historical, mostly from simply using a modern(ish) world map as the starting point. Do I want to come up with a timeline that makes some sort of sense? Not really, my focus of interest isn't in the politics (besides Italy). Coming up with a detailed alternate history to explain the unexplainable doesn't suit me personally. I find it easier to accept things as a fait accompli and move onto matters that are more of interest to me.

That is fine if you don't wish to come up with a timeline for Italy, it is your choice after all. There is little change to Italy from historical aside from Dalmatia, which can be explained by the Great War. Not all the other changes in the Balkans can be changed by the Great War, and if there are border changes there is absolutely no reason there can't be changes in diplomacy and foreign relations as well.

Quoted

Preach it, brother Canadian!

I most certainly will!

Quoted

Originally posted by Red Admiral

Quoted

That's the sort of rude and snide comment that I see being constantly directed at Bruce.

I've been a bit combative of late, but I don't think rude.

To be honest, I've seen it as something of an ongoing and worsening trend. I've been on the recieving end of it with trying to do things with Canada numerous times, to the point where it's been discouraging me from discussing ideas and concepts in the design boards. It's seemed that whenever I've tried having Canada develop something approaching 'world class', so to speak, there's invariably a comment from you stating that Canada had neither the historical means nor motivation to do anything but buy surplus british equipment, and I should be content running a squadron or two of Sloops for the RN, and some trainers and a handful of Hurricanes for the RAF.

Most of it seems to to stem from a tendancy for you to point out the problems and otherwise why something shouldn't work, with either no real suggestions on how to make the proposed concept(s) viable, or a suggestion to buy someone else's existing product. In general, I don't think folks appreciate being told (repeatedly) that the idea(s) they've been working on are basically of no value.

Quoted

Originally posted by Red Admiral

Quoted

As well as I have mentioned before, you people set borders in the Balkans which are most certainly not historical, do not bother to create or assist with a timeline that can explain said borders

One of reasons behind that would be that we didn't start with anyone in the Balkans besides Greece. We didn't even start with the UK or USA in order to limit the scope. Things have grown a lot from there. Lots of borders aren't historical, mostly from simply using a modern(ish) world map as the starting point. Do I want to come up with a timeline that makes some sort of sense? Not really, my focus of interest isn't in the politics (besides Italy). Coming up with a detailed alternate history to explain the unexplainable doesn't suit me personally. I find it easier to accept things as a fait accompli and move onto matters that are more of interest to me.

From what I understand, Bruce, Brock, and Jason are spending a decent amount of time to write up a somewhat comprehensive backstory for WW's Great War to try and explain how things ended up they way they did, so hopefully that will help everyone in the region. I'd suggest joining them on IRC to discuss it, if you're interested.

Quoted

Originally posted by ShinRa_Inc

Quoted

Originally posted by Red Admiral
One of reasons behind that would be that we didn't start with anyone in the Balkans besides Greece. We didn't even start with the UK or USA in order to limit the scope. Things have grown a lot from there. Lots of borders aren't historical, mostly from simply using a modern(ish) world map as the starting point. Do I want to come up with a timeline that makes some sort of sense? Not really, my focus of interest isn't in the politics (besides Italy). Coming up with a detailed alternate history to explain the unexplainable doesn't suit me personally. I find it easier to accept things as a fait accompli and move onto matters that are more of interest to me.

From what I understand, Bruce, Brock, and Jason are spending a decent amount of time to write up a somewhat comprehensive backstory for WW's Great War to try and explain how things ended up they way they did, so hopefully that will help everyone in the region. I'd suggest joining them on IRC to discuss it, if you're interested.

I'll loudly second this. I and the others have been working on a timeline for the Balkans and WWI which, we believe, should comprehensively address all the problems with the history and borders. It would be nice if you could work as partners with us, rather than merely offering criticism after we've done all the hard work. If you don't want to participate, that's fine too - but mind that we might get a tad irate if your only feedback is to criticize us.

The thing is, alot of the borders haven't really been explained. How did Italy get Dalmatia, when it didn't in OTL? Did Italy take it without outside help, because IMO that's the only way Italy would have been able to justify taking Dalmatia. Yugoslavia losing Macedonia, but gaining Albania? What happened there? And how did Bulgaria avoid Neuially? And how did Russia withdraw from the Great War when they should have been receiving a flood of supplies after the Atlanteans open the Darnadelles? Romania not gaining Bessarabia if Russia isn't in some sort of turmoil due to their withdrawal doesn't make much sense either. Greece having Macedonia and Smyrna? The list goes on and on. While outside Europe, things seem to be fairly defined, Europe as it stands today makes no sense. Hence the reason why we wish to develop a timeline to make sense of things.

Quoted

Originally posted by Red Admiral

Quoted

Yugoslavia has demonstrated a willingness to discuss and resolve differences through diplomatic processes.

This is nonsense.

Yugoslavia has been posturing for an invasion of Italy for the past few years. We've had a recent change in government and what do they do? Massively increase spending on the military, especially buying new and advanced weapons (the rationalisation moves were pretty sound) and starting up localised production as if preparing for a long war.

I am curious about the posturing of which you speak. Are you referring to actions of previous ‘caretaker’ players? Are you referring to the half-scripted ‘war that was not’ which would have left Yugoslavia totally dismembered?

Quoted

Originally posted by Red Admiral
Diplomatically, the only noises heard are of "Italian occupied Slovenia and Croatia" which are deeply unsettling. It's also rather amusing as Yugoslavia is basically just a Serbian mini-empire ruling over a plethora of ethnic groups.

I fear your prejudices are showing. I regret that my conception of Yugoslavia does not conform to yours. It is also interesting to learn something of how Italy regards its Slovene and Croatian provinces – as this is the first I have ever heard of Italian policy in the region; perhaps I missed it among the plans for intercontinental heavy bombers.

Quoted

Originally posted by Red Admiral
Italy hasn't had the budget for doing any massive lines of fortifications like the Maginot line so is understandably worried by any talk of a Yugoslavian invasion - why? because they can simply walk to the coast and only have to put up with the police along the way.

Then perhaps Italy should reconsider diplomatic options; compared with military outlay, not to mention the costs of actual war, talk is cheap.

Quoted

Originally posted by Red Admiral
So, why did all these countries with many opposing views and years of hatred between them suddenly come together in one movement?

Ordinarily you'd think it was because Russia was on the march again, but there's been nothing on that front (surprisingly little notice of their "intervention" in Lithuania) so Italy is left with the conclusion that the alliance is directed at her.

I do not know anything about a Russian intervention in Lithuania. The only thing I am aware of is the League’s activities. Perhaps someone will be good enough to point out the thread.

But as to why we have chosen to ally with each other, I can only state my own views as a player. If the Great War taught the nations of the Balkans anything it is that they cannot remain the pawns of the Great Powers: either they must find a way to coexist with one another and eliminate the opportunity for outside meddling or they would spiral towards destruction. Unfortunately, OTL history shows us what the alternative would end up as. Some players have suggested that ‘historical reality’ must impel us toward self-destruction. To that I say, “Bull-crap”.

Quoted

Originally posted by Red Admiral
Why does Italy have little interest in diplomatic relations?

Good question. You are doing all the complaining.

Quoted

Originally posted by Red Admiral
I really don't know how you take this as being rude unless you had no idea of what you were getting yourself in for with WW

I thought I had seen that comment; I was not certain of what Wesworld was cracked up to be but I have found only one player to be consistently smug, dismissive, rude and uncommunicative in turn. While I have differences with other players, I have, generally, found them to be reasonable. That this comment was subsequently edited out tells me something.

We need Shin to post the off-topic thread sign....

Bruce, there was a mini-war between Russia and Poland in Lithuania, when Poland invaded Lithuania in support of the Wilno rebels. This "mini-war" ended when the peace treaty was signed, which was violated by the rebels, leading to the LoN intervention.

Ok, Brock, let me rephrase it.....I'd appriciate if ya'll wouldn't argue like this out here. One of the things I appriciate about WW is the friendliness and non-flaming about this forum that's fairly unique on the forum, and I, for one, would like to keep it that way.

Quoted

Originally posted by TexanCowboy
We need Shin to post the off-topic thread sign....

If this assesment were in the encyclopedia as most other nation's assesments are, I would. But appearently (And correct me if I'm wrong here), Bruce posted it here for the purpose of discussing this and other matters, so I'm inclined to believe it's on topic; which leads to to the following-

Quoted

Originally posted by TexanCowboy
Ok, Brock, let me rephrase it.....I'd appriciate if ya'll wouldn't argue like this out here. One of the things I appriciate about WW is the friendliness and non-flaming about this forum that's fairly unique on the forum, and I, for one, would like to keep it that way.

Meddle not in the affairs of Moderators and elder statesmen, for you are not helping matters by trying to be Freelance Police.

From what I've read, this has been a fairly civil airing of long-held concerns several players have been harbouring, and unless another venues can be agreed upon (like the IRC channel), conducting this discussion between 3 or 4 concerned parties via PM is somewhat unwieldy and inefficient. As such, I see no need to try and shut it down at this particular point*.

If the matter is truly upsetting you, I suggest you avoid this particular thread for the time being.

*(this opinion is subject to change should attitudes drift much further from constructive discussion, and into overt bashing or baiting. Keep this in mind, kindly)

Quoted

Originally posted by TexanCowboy
Bruce, there was a mini-war between Russia and Poland in Lithuania, when Poland invaded Lithuania in support of the Wilno rebels. This "mini-war" ended when the peace treaty was signed, which was violated by the rebels, leading to the LoN intervention.

More correctly, Russia answered their treaty obligations to maintain the independence of Lithuania. That job done, and Poland withdrawing, they likewise withdrew to leave the field to the LON.

Quoted

Originally posted by TexanCowboy
Ok, Brock, let me rephrase it.....I'd appriciate if ya'll wouldn't argue like this out here. One of the things I appriciate about WW is the friendliness and non-flaming about this forum that's fairly unique on the forum, and I, for one, would like to keep it that way.

I agree with your sentiments for polite discourse, but I disagree with trying to silence an discussion purely in the name of Fluffy mcFeelgoodness. Shutting down all hints of dispute is jolly bad form and will encourage, rather than discourage, future interplayer misunderstandings as we see here. Better to politely hash things out like adults and solve problems, rather than ignoring them.