#Add Option to Loot Instead of Pillaging a Province.

106 messages · Page 1 of 1 (latest)

bronze hornet
#

I don't think pillaging should reduce the population... I'd rather have it lower the amount of nuriture you gain per turn. Else pillaging would be a bit overpowered, since you could simply destroy the whole city through pillaging.

bronze hornet
#

Still, reducing the population is too much, since it's like removing the whole thing. I don't know if you noticed yet, but if you loose population your city gets smaller. If you don't have enough nuriture you loose population too. So I'd rather reduce the nuriture, which is going to lead to the city becomming useless too, but not as fast.

#

yes

#

food is nuriture

#

did I type nurture?

#

I'm sorry if I did

light lynx
#

people really want to do war stuff without being called mean names huh

bronze hornet
light lynx
#

i thought this was about """ethically looting""" enemy provinces

#

how does being attacked lower your alignment?

sudden pond
#

Yeah I understand the thread lower down about not losing alignment for pillaging military targets like a spelljammer, but looting is... pretty evil?

sudden pond
light lynx
sudden pond
#

oh i dont support the argument im just clearing the miscommunication up :P

light lynx
#

yes if you counter-invade someone and are now the aggressor your actions stop being morally simple

sudden pond
#

well, even less so if you start stealing everything that isnt nailed down

#

"that guy punched me so i can take everything he owns"

#

doesnt sound super morally justified to me

light lynx
#

when one man steals their neighbor's money without killing them that's theft and a sin, but when an army deprives a whole lot of people of their worldly possessions without also slitting their throats that's... good?

#

truly the line between good and evil can be drawn between "belligerent occupying force" and "wholesale mass slaughter" those are the two sides they are on different sides

sudden pond
#

waging war in general is not a morally black or white act, unless the actual goals and reasons for the war are VERY explicit

#

but then even some of the wars in history we might perceive as universally good or evil are far more complicated than the rough understanding most people have of them today

#

not to philosophize but in the end, military target destruction - fine ok, no alignment penalty, makes sense. Civilian targets looted instead of being put to the sword, iunno about that one chief

light lynx
#

and of course, those armies uhhhhhhhh did some pretty unjustifiable stuff (hello nukes) but because the nazis/imperial japan were the Bad Guys we don't like to talk about that

#

but coming back to aow yeah there's some lines to draw on what is "justified use of force in general warfare" and what is "just plain hurting people for your own greed with no moral justification" and "looting" pretty firmly falls under the latter category

sudden pond
#

right, i wanna avoid getting explicitly political and all, but that was generally my point, war is hell

#

i dont think robbing the citizenry is a morally ambiguous act :P

light lynx
#

bombing civilian factories that might be producing military vehicles is in fact reprehensible yes

#

the same reason stealing from an elf is evil

#

what the hell do you think the difference is

#

you have a very strange definition of looting that does not seem to at all involve walking away with some loot

#

miners are people just as much as farmers are i'm afraid, stealing their belongings for your war effort is also wrong

#

to be clear looting is quite literally a subtype of theft

#

it's theft during a war or emergency scenario

#

...do you not think miners are people?

#

who is being harmed by these actions

#

i see you have placed very little thought into the morality of wartime actions or what those actions look like when you're the victim

#

we are discussing good and evil here

#

i do not think they were moral military targets no

#

"responsibility" and "people who deserve to eb slaughtered without thinking about it" are two different things

#

i am afraid that destroying civilian workplaces is not a good act my friend

#

seriously dude

#

this is a very strange thing to be explaining to someone

#

no? i'm just going to tell you that your proposed solution has no moral standing?? because that's what commentary is???

#

no there isn't

#

what are you talking about

#

where

#

who has drawn this line

#

i hope today isn't the day you learned the concept of "synonyms"

#

or at least if it is i hope you lied about your age when you accepted the discord TOS

#

i guess you're right

#

there is a difference

#

you would be pillaging, not looting

#

nice job deleing all of those messages lmfao

#

weird reaction to this turn of events but an understandable one i suppose, it is embarrassing to be so adamant about something so obviously wrong

#

hahaha are you actually 12

#

come on man you know no one's buying that excuse, especially not if you keep going and delete all of that

#

which words do i not know

outer axle
#

I would delete your comments as well and lock the thread if i could

light lynx
#

are you going to pretend that you weren't horribly wrong about looting vs pillaging

#

or is there something i'm missing

#

you are lmfao

#

nice one dude

#

buddy

#

unfortunately i'm afraid that "good" nations suddenly becoming evil as they are dragged into a war is art imitating life. that being said if you're bothered by all nations trending towards evil in wartime i suppose wait no way did you say that

#

no dude the line between what is and is not justifiable in a war of annihilation is a lot more complex than "i'm on the good side i don't need to think about it"

#

well if i burn their house down i'm probably not going to go to heaven for it

#

that is my response to this

#

i literally screenshot what looting and pillaging are

#

they're emergency/wartime theft and the difference between them is if it's conducted by a state or civilian individuals

#

lmfao

#

you gonna lock this thread or does the incomplete victory of not being able to delete my comments render such an action hollow for you

#

for the record if we go by another source

image.png
outer axle
#

"Traditionally in English and in law:—

PILLAGE, PLUNDER = SACKING

Pillage (from Old French pillage, piller) and plunder (1632, from German plündern) are associated with an army or an organised armed force stealing and killing in an occupied or operational area. The proceeds of both are called the spoils of war.

Pedantically speaking:—

Pillage is forcible stealing (looting), killing and deliberate property destruction. The synonym is sack, sacking.
Memory aid: pillage and killing both have two L’s.
Plunder is forcible stealing (looting) of household goods, clothes, bedding, food, livestock, etc, without necessarily any killing of people.
LOOTING = RANSACKING

Looting (Anglo-Indian, 1788–1842, from Hindustani lūt) is primarily in the sense of forcible stealing by civilians or criminals as part of war, rioting or group violence. The synonym is ransacking. The proceeds are called the loot or booty.

Looting in the 1950s took on the generalised meaning of “stealing from” (without the reference to war, rioting or group violence) — derived from an American English figurative sense from the 1920s.
PROCEEDS OF PILLAGE & PLUNDER

manubial, manubiary (adj)

These old-fashioned adjectives are the words to use for describing the stuff that’s taken as spoils of war or funded from them (i.e. from pillaging or plundering) — often (but not exclusively) used in the contexts of the Roman empire or religious wars.

The adjective comes from the Latin manubiae (money obtained from the sale of booty or plunder)."

light lynx
#

you are projecting a lot

#

but i appreciate how much effort went into crafting a real reply there

#

unfortunately i assumed you would in fact be leaving the thread, and am no longer sober

#

i will get back to you on this one later friend

bronze hornet
#

No, destroying the infrastructure is actually evil, neutral would be destroying the weaponry without hurting anyone.

#

but can the both of you pleas stop the argue?

#

you won't get anywhere like that

#

a nuclear facility is used to gain energy which is used to keep the homes of people warm. (Unless I transalted the words incorrect) so yes. IT IS evil.

#

If you mean nuclear weapons with neuclear facilities that's weaponry

#

so no issue

#

unless you also destroy the land or hurt ppl

light lynx
bronze hornet
#

won't change that the both of you get to know where

#

also you are not better by any means

light lynx
#

thanks i like to think i'm funny too

bronze hornet
#

none of you two are funny.

light lynx
#

damn dude that's rough

bronze hornet
#

no

#

it's the truth

#

Can you please do me the favour and read what I wrote?

#

No. You did not say anything about weapons.

#

that could be a facility for anything.

#

That does not mean you can talk about something else than weaponry.

#

Not everyone knows every vocab to it's best. Some people simply have to guess what some vocabs mean. I am sorry for not being able to understand everything everyone always writes in english due to not being a native english speaker. Please excuse me not being sure about what a nuclear facility is and not knowing that a nuclear reactor would not be called a facility and that a weapon producing facility would be called nuclear facility.
Can you now stop it?

#

When is killing people a neutral act?
Unless it's a undead army defending some recource killing a unit never is a neutral act.

#

No.

#

Even there it ain't.