Originally Posted by
octobrev
I would never dream of encouraging fake wars. None of the methodologies I shared were illegal; I've personally vetted each of them to make sure. The rules, as they're writen and enforced, have a lot of grey area to navigate and precedent is often all we have to rely on (fw is determined on a case by case basis). Effective and efficent play requires us to be able to discuss and understand the nuances. These wars may be close to the line but they are definitely not fake.
Wouldn't WsK had been deleted if the tactic associated with them was deemed illegal? And CR as well? Sleepy? And most of the other known kingdoms? What about Ronin vs the U? They farmed all the way to the crown but it was too weird and ambiguous to action. Would they had been deleted if I told you it was organized? What's the difference?
The ability to obtain winnable wars is abundantly more important than race/pers/buildings or any other strategic element at this point. In the past, it was easy to overlook because it only affected honor/ww but now it bleeds into the land/nw competition as well. Leadership cannot, in good conscience, burden a kingdom with an age of play without some level of assurance that the requisite wars will be available to them. It's nice to not have to be mean but, when it comes down to it, gaining access to the warwin bonuses requires pieces on both sides of the board to be moved... somehow.