The clan The Coalition within magick came around when Stavenn (back in the day) was knee deep in derping it up day after day raiding Kinsarmar. When the clan was created, Kinsy, Celidon AND Pre-demonic Khandava did the exact thing to Stavenn; we destroyed seige, guards, pretty much every single thing we could get our hands on.
What AM did to Kinsy is valid imo. Kinsarmar is imfamous for letting political drama scare/push/kick combatants away from the city, leaving them on their self-proclaimed thrones of power (until crap hits the fan).
So, this latest raid really drives home a lot of points that really aren't working for Imperian right now. We'll post here for things that are wrong with the death system. The long and the short of it is that there is no penalty for being stupid. Four 2+ hours, Cordilia, Menoch, Kryss, Septus, Shou were stupid. There was no incentive to play smart or avoid death. What you basically had was one team (Demagick) scoring touch down after touchdown and Anti-int basking in the glory of a field goal. Never mind the fact it was the third overtime and the score was 246-12. There wasn't a way to keep them out. There wasn't a wait to end the encounter. 18 people (12 of which were bored) had to watch while 5 people too dumb to realize they lost fan girl over the 'good' fight.
The cool thing about the glorious charge is that the derps stupidly charging died. The people defending didn't have to deal with them anymore. Butch and Sundance jumped out and got riddled with bullets and the Bolivians could go back to doing other things. In Imperian, those kids are one of those creepy bouncy clowns that keeps rolling back up.
Shard fall shenanigans end, because the shards are gone.
Obelisks end because the timer ticks.
Raids don't end because there's no win/loss condition.
Raids don't end because there is no loss.
Can we please have a thorough look at how death works? Penalties associated with dying in enemy territory? Penalties associated with dying to enemy guards?
I'm all for the pitted battle that goes back and forth. But this shit? This was just retarded. It was like watching fish jump out of a fish tank because they saw it on Jackass and thought it was cool.
Thinking about it, I'd sort of like to see a sort of generator based thing.
The generator absorbs another kind of power when a city enemy dies inside the city. This energy decays at a fairly decent rate. After it's charged up enough power from enemy deaths, it radiates a city-wide/sewer-wide worldburn style effect for something like the next 3-4 hours. It goes through phase, goes through blackwind, it hits masked enemies, and it's not even remotely close to being tankable. Something to drive home a message like "YOU HAVE FAILED ENOUGH FOR RIGHT NOW. TAKE A BREAK."
"On the battlefield I am a god. I love war. The steel, the smell, the corpses. I wish there were more. On the first day I drove the Northmen back alone at the ford. Alone! On the second I carried the bridge! Me! Yesterday I climbed the Heroes! I love war! I… I wish it wasn’t over."
I wish we had an 'Interesting' button for posts like the above.
<div>Message #2062 Sent By: (imperian) Received On: 1/20/2018/2:59</div><div>"Antioch has filed a bounty against you. Reason: Raiding Antioch and stealing Bina, being a right</div><div>ass, and not belonging anywhere near Antioch till he grows up."</div>
I like that kind of solution because it's not a win condition to end a raid, it's a penalty for excessive losing.
I mean, if there was a win condition, does anybody actually think that achieving it would make Kryss and Menoch and such go home? So what if there's nothing to do after that, it's not like there was anything to do last night and they still went at it until Septus had to log and they lost their way in.
It's also not a PK objective, so it shouldn't increase the amount of raids a city suffers. Dealing with raids every day is not something that is particularly fun; it gets tiring fast, because it puts demands on your playing time. Yes, yes, I don't have to respond blah blah blah. That's technically true while being a complete load of crap in actual practice, and everybody knows it.
"On the battlefield I am a god. I love war. The steel, the smell, the corpses. I wish there were more. On the first day I drove the Northmen back alone at the ford. Alone! On the second I carried the bridge! Me! Yesterday I climbed the Heroes! I love war! I… I wish it wasn’t over."
To be perfectly honest, it sounds a lot like discretionary powers in Lusternia. I'm not an absolute fan of the idea, by any means.
<div>Message #2062 Sent By: (imperian) Received On: 1/20/2018/2:59</div><div>"Antioch has filed a bounty against you. Reason: Raiding Antioch and stealing Bina, being a right</div><div>ass, and not belonging anywhere near Antioch till he grows up."</div>
The idea here is that since the power decays over time and is only generated by enemy deaths in the city/sewers, you can't fire it unless the raiders have wiped a good few times and you can't keep a charge built up so you can pop it when people raid. It's not a switch that you throw to remove a successful raid; it's a switch you throw to tell the failbus to find another stop.
It's specifically designed for scenarios like last night, where we had a team of lemmings hurling themselves into certain death for hours on end. You accomplished nothing and irritated everybody. With this kind of system in place, we could have slapped the "YOU HAVE REACHED YOUR FAILURE QUOTA FOR THE DAY. TRY SOMETHING ELSE" button after your third wipe or thereabouts and gone about our merry way.
"On the battlefield I am a god. I love war. The steel, the smell, the corpses. I wish there were more. On the first day I drove the Northmen back alone at the ford. Alone! On the second I carried the bridge! Me! Yesterday I climbed the Heroes! I love war! I… I wish it wasn’t over."
I just don't know how much I welcome the idea of a system that tells me when to stop using my time how I want. If that usage involves flinging myself at a city, whatever, we are raking in the death penalty and gaining nothing from it.
If the failbus keeps crashing, what do you care? If you get bored, go home. It's not like we can do any damage with all 70 guards lined up at the gates.
Also, that system definitely discourages large raids in terms of group size. The larger the group, the faster the penalty. I would just stop bringing willing lowbies like Rynn. It doesn't discourage single raids because to accrue the level of generator charge necessary for this security measure, they'd have to die innumerable times.
I don't really object to a way to repel raiders, but a hard cap so to speak doesn't feel like the way whatsoever.
<div>Message #2062 Sent By: (imperian) Received On: 1/20/2018/2:59</div><div>"Antioch has filed a bounty against you. Reason: Raiding Antioch and stealing Bina, being a right</div><div>ass, and not belonging anywhere near Antioch till he grows up."</div>
A good step forward would have deaths in enemy townes/sewers/city clear mark return/hermit/waymark/shard mark/raksha band so that the instant respawn is not an option. If people want to 'raid' at some point they should have to go through obligatory process of 'guard the siege engine'. Then they may start to appreciate city-raiding as a cluster f.
One thing I like about Khizan's idea is that it would move the conflict from the city to the townes. Townes I can at least throw my hands up in the air and say "I have work tomorrow. You have fun with my respawning npcs" and there's not going to be a lot of collateral damage. The way it is now, if your A-listers log off, the J.V. and the red shirts are in for a night of griefmongering/supreme victory.
If you want to move conflict to townes, then you had better be prepared to propose some ideas for a system like that. I definitely no problem with it, but I'm not sure what would constitute a change.. townes have guards too. We could just kill those. If you have objectives in there, you become obligated to defend said objectives with guards.
If you don't have objectives, it won't stop determined people from going back to cities.
Also, defenders have a serious serious advantage in guards, siege, combat mobility, etc. I don't like the idea of handing them more advantages on top of that.
<div>Message #2062 Sent By: (imperian) Received On: 1/20/2018/2:59</div><div>"Antioch has filed a bounty against you. Reason: Raiding Antioch and stealing Bina, being a right</div><div>ass, and not belonging anywhere near Antioch till he grows up."</div>
@Sarrius Your arguments don't sync with your actions. If it's such an advantage why did you throw yourself pointlessly at them for 3 hours? You were tactically, numerically, skillfully out gunned in a territory where 50 guards were on demand, albeit slow in arriving. It didn't stop you. Three plus hours. At no point did you make headway or find any silver lining or modicum of progress. It did not stop you from trying. If it was so bad, why did you keep trying? Actually, I'll answer this for you. 1) You didn't lose anything. 2) You didn't care about the consequences. You either gained pk xp or lost 0.03% xp dying to guards. This is a problem. Kinsarmar lost gold/comms and had nothing to show for it because of 1+2.
Honestly, Sarrius really brings to light the griefing mentality of raiding. I recognize it because I've done it*. You raid to generate a pk reason. Most people can't ignore raiding. There's a reason you picked Kinsarmar and Stavenn and poked at Celidon/Khandava sporadically. You weren't looking for the 'city raiding' experience, you were milking the pk from people who are too newbie to defend. Your actions are far more valuable than your arguments. "kill guard, provoke response from people I can pk farm." Due to this 'raider mentality' you (@Jeremy, @Garryn) really need to put time limits on how long you and how frequently can raid. Case in point, AM got their ass handed to them all night last night and were back at it 1.5 hours after everyone logged off. There needs to be a steep penalty or an outright firewall to keep the bad out. Die twice in 5 minutes? Here's your dunce hat, go do something else. Raiding is and end run around the pk rules to 'obligate' someone into pk. Where shardfalls and obelisks are 'opt in' with no real penalty or emotional compromise. City raiding isn't. People either feel guilty for not helping or log off to avoid it all. Both options are bad. The administration should address this.
With townes, I'm not really obligated to defend them. I'm more likely to lock some guards up in a store no one owns and log off for the night. You kids will just meander around and eventually log off. Towne fear will recover while we're both offline and everything is peachy keen.I'm not again city raiding, but raiding a city needs to be less "I infiltrated. Oops. I died. Infiltrate again." Trojan horse only worked once, you know? It needs to be "oops, I can't infiltrate again. Must go through the front gate." Yes, the city defender should have the advantage, said any military leader ever. That's why there's walls, gates, and guards. That's why it's a stronghold. Turns out, strongholds are aptly named. The problem is, when people died raiding strongholds they didn't respawn 10s later to lemming rush into another bad death.
And now to devil's advocate this. To give AM the benefit of the doubt (which they don't deserve) there should be a way to win. The problem here is that it's a slippery slope. If Kinsarmar let's themselves get extorted by #teamthuglief they're really just setting themselves up to be exploited again. Whatever system you go with needs to have a victory condition that shoves a pacifier in the mouths of the pk hungry and effectively blocks them from this stupidity for a few days (maybe a few weeks) so people can enjoy the game, rather than swat at mosquitoes all day erry day for a week. (Yep, it's been a week)
*I have to mention this before he and Menoch poorly utilize the term hypocrite.
I just don't know how much I welcome the idea of a system that tells me when to stop using my time how I want. If that usage involves flinging myself at a city, whatever, we are raking in the death penalty and gaining nothing from it.
If the failbus keeps crashing, what do you care?
To carry on with the metaphor, your failbus kept crashing in large part because Ahkan and I were camping the road with a spike strip. When we stop doing that, the bus is much less likely to crash. "Our raids were failing so why not just let them fail?" doesn't really apply when we're the reason why your raids are failing.
As to the other, well. There are lots of rules in this game that stop you from using your time how you want. On the obvious end of the scale, Abigail found out that you're not allowed to spend an enjoyable day spamming racial slurs over market. On the other, somewhat more reasonable, end of the scale, I can't go out and kill every Antiochian I see, even if it's totally legit RP for a Stavennite. I can't go out and purge every Magicker I see, even if it's totally legit RP for an Antiochian zealot.
This is because, while these are all things that people may want to do, they are also things that diminish the playing experience of other players. City raiding is no different. It's not something you can ignore without throwing RP completely out the window, and this makes the game much less enjoyable. How do you think it looks to new players to be like "Oh, yeah, just ignore them. AM tools around the city all the time because they're bored and it's just too much damn work to throw them back out again. I mean, they'll keep that crap up for HOURS, until they have to log off. We don't want to spend all day dealing with them, so we let it slide"?
It sucks. It's bullshit. It's a selfish screw-you-got-mine playstyle that needs to be restricted for the same reason that we restrict AM zealot RP: because it is a playstyle that makes the game suck for everybody else.
"On the battlefield I am a god. I love war. The steel, the smell, the corpses. I wish there were more. On the first day I drove the Northmen back alone at the ford. Alone! On the second I carried the bridge! Me! Yesterday I climbed the Heroes! I love war! I… I wish it wasn’t over."
While the first half of your argument is irrefutable, the second half falls apart very fast when the opposite side is given a charitable surrender opportunity and denies it purely for the sake of pride.
<div>Message #2062 Sent By: (imperian) Received On: 1/20/2018/2:59</div><div>"Antioch has filed a bounty against you. Reason: Raiding Antioch and stealing Bina, being a right</div><div>ass, and not belonging anywhere near Antioch till he grows up."</div>
While the first half of your argument is irrefutable, the second half falls apart very fast when the opposite side is given a charitable surrender opportunity and denies it purely for the sake of pride.
1) No one believes that you will be able to reign in Menoch,Kryss, Brishi et al. 2) Not one of us would trust that Kryss, Menoch, Brishi et al would stop even if they said they would. 3) No one believes that you would stop after just one pay out (You can't prove this, we can't prove it - on balance it's not worth the risk.)
It isn't "pride" that stops Kinsarmar from keeping going, its the lack in belief of your word as a leader, your ability to handle your troublesome citizens and this amounts to the fact that no other real option was supplied.
And that's fine, but it is objectively the fault of your council for not agreeing. What was the worst you lost? 100 diamonds we established are nearly worthless? Please, Cadeyrn, you know that is a crock as well as I do.
Nothing ventured, nothing gained. I have dealt with troublemakers on behalf of Magick before, and I have a history of eliminating problem children from my city (see @Ryax, see @Dias) - it isn't my fault your city is ruled by people who don't understand the idea of costs, benefits, and risks.
<div>Message #2062 Sent By: (imperian) Received On: 1/20/2018/2:59</div><div>"Antioch has filed a bounty against you. Reason: Raiding Antioch and stealing Bina, being a right</div><div>ass, and not belonging anywhere near Antioch till he grows up."</div>
I might be missing something obvious here but, assuming Sarrius didn't reign people in, wouldn't it really not matter, especially now that Demonic is helping Magick? You'd be out 100 diamonds (who cares) and there'd be a reasonable chance that this ends and people can move on with their lives. I mean, I find Sarrius incredibly smug too most of the time, but this is just kind of putting your fingers in your ears going 'nope nope nope'.
‘Least I won’t have to carry it no more. You see how bloody heavy it is?’
‘Every sword’s a weight to carry. Men don’t see that when they pick ’em up. But they get heavier with time.”
And as smug as I am, I never pass up the chance to spite people. At this rate, if I wasn't willing anyways, I would stop aggression to make you each eat a healthy serving of crow.
<div>Message #2062 Sent By: (imperian) Received On: 1/20/2018/2:59</div><div>"Antioch has filed a bounty against you. Reason: Raiding Antioch and stealing Bina, being a right</div><div>ass, and not belonging anywhere near Antioch till he grows up."</div>
"I'm going to do what I should have done three days ago. I'll show you! I am the supreme victor."
Freaking hipsters.
But I did do what I should have: offered them reasonable surrender terms. It is not my fault they denied them, and I refuse to be blamed for it. I am continuing to let this go on because I don't walk away emptyhanded from things like this and because it isn't ruining anybody's play experience in my circle.
Be it pride, mistrust, or benefactors on the sidelines influencing them, they refused peace in exchange for a paltry sum of 100 irrelevant commodities. That is not my fault, and the 'this sucks!' argument crumbled in my eyes because of it.
<div>Message #2062 Sent By: (imperian) Received On: 1/20/2018/2:59</div><div>"Antioch has filed a bounty against you. Reason: Raiding Antioch and stealing Bina, being a right</div><div>ass, and not belonging anywhere near Antioch till he grows up."</div>
No. It doesn't work that way. It honestly has nothing to do with "Well, Kinsarmar could surrender!" because YOU WERE LOSING.
Last night you took a hellacious beating. We flipped your failbus off of a bridge and lit it on fire. We did this so many times that we got tired of it. And what was your solution to this? "Well, stop doing it and let us roam the city, hur hur hur."
The problem is that you were like "Five losses? Pah! Sixth time is the charm! Six losses? Pah! Seventh time is the charm! Seven lossses? Eighth time..."
The problem is that demonic could spend the next month slapping the failbus around Kinsarmar and you'd still be saying "If you're tired of this, pay us to quit doing it!" even if you were still losing all the fights.
The suggestion I made is not "stop AM from raiding Kinsarmar". It is "if a raid has failed repeatedly, it should get a time out."
"On the battlefield I am a god. I love war. The steel, the smell, the corpses. I wish there were more. On the first day I drove the Northmen back alone at the ford. Alone! On the second I carried the bridge! Me! Yesterday I climbed the Heroes! I love war! I… I wish it wasn’t over."
Yes, and my response is that this is not a purely mechanical discussion. Your argument leans on the fact that defending against that sucks the fat one. It does. However, you didn't have to get involved. Kinsarmar didn't have to prolong things. We were winning until you stepped in. Now we are playing more aggressively when you aren't around to carry them to victory.
You cannot deny that a portion of your argument relies on both parties being reasonable, and Kinsarmar was not reasonable. They denied the quickest solution.
<div>Message #2062 Sent By: (imperian) Received On: 1/20/2018/2:59</div><div>"Antioch has filed a bounty against you. Reason: Raiding Antioch and stealing Bina, being a right</div><div>ass, and not belonging anywhere near Antioch till he grows up."</div>
See, none of that applies. None of that matters. None of it.
Let's say Kinsarmar pays the tribute and you stop. Let's also say that after that you go to Khandava and you start raiding Khandava.
And let's say that, each and every time you raid, Khandava slaps you around. You have zero success whatsoever. Your grand total is zero player kills and zero guard kills.
The problem is that you could still keep that crap up for HOURS AND HOURS AND HOURS despite never winning a battle. You could even, perhaps, say "Pay us 100 diamonds and we'll stop!".
THAT is the problem.
"On the battlefield I am a god. I love war. The steel, the smell, the corpses. I wish there were more. On the first day I drove the Northmen back alone at the ford. Alone! On the second I carried the bridge! Me! Yesterday I climbed the Heroes! I love war! I… I wish it wasn’t over."
Comments
What AM did to Kinsy is valid imo. Kinsarmar is imfamous for letting political drama scare/push/kick combatants away from the city, leaving them on their self-proclaimed thrones of power (until crap hits the fan).
Karma.
Thinking about it, I'd sort of like to see a sort of generator based thing.
The generator absorbs another kind of power when a city enemy dies inside the city. This energy decays at a fairly decent rate. After it's charged up enough power from enemy deaths, it radiates a city-wide/sewer-wide worldburn style effect for something like the next 3-4 hours. It goes through phase, goes through blackwind, it hits masked enemies, and it's not even remotely close to being tankable. Something to drive home a message like "YOU HAVE FAILED ENOUGH FOR RIGHT NOW. TAKE A BREAK."
"On the battlefield I am a god. I love war. The steel, the smell, the corpses. I wish there were more. On the first day I drove the Northmen back alone at the ford. Alone! On the second I carried the bridge! Me! Yesterday I climbed the Heroes! I love war! I… I wish it wasn’t over."
"On the battlefield I am a god. I love war. The steel, the smell, the corpses. I wish there were more. On the first day I drove the Northmen back alone at the ford. Alone! On the second I carried the bridge! Me! Yesterday I climbed the Heroes! I love war! I… I wish it wasn’t over."
It's specifically designed for scenarios like last night, where we had a team of lemmings hurling themselves into certain death for hours on end. You accomplished nothing and irritated everybody. With this kind of system in place, we could have slapped the "YOU HAVE REACHED YOUR FAILURE QUOTA FOR THE DAY. TRY SOMETHING ELSE" button after your third wipe or thereabouts and gone about our merry way.
"On the battlefield I am a god. I love war. The steel, the smell, the corpses. I wish there were more. On the first day I drove the Northmen back alone at the ford. Alone! On the second I carried the bridge! Me! Yesterday I climbed the Heroes! I love war! I… I wish it wasn’t over."
If the failbus keeps crashing, what do you care? If you get bored, go home. It's not like we can do any damage with all 70 guards lined up at the gates.
Also, that system definitely discourages large raids in terms of group size. The larger the group, the faster the penalty. I would just stop bringing willing lowbies like Rynn. It doesn't discourage single raids because to accrue the level of generator charge necessary for this security measure, they'd have to die innumerable times.
I don't really object to a way to repel raiders, but a hard cap so to speak doesn't feel like the way whatsoever.
If you don't have objectives, it won't stop determined people from going back to cities.
Also, defenders have a serious serious advantage in guards, siege, combat mobility, etc. I don't like the idea of handing them more advantages on top of that.
And now to devil's advocate this. To give AM the benefit of the doubt (which they don't deserve) there should be a way to win. The problem here is that it's a slippery slope. If Kinsarmar let's themselves get extorted by #teamthuglief they're really just setting themselves up to be exploited again. Whatever system you go with needs to have a victory condition that shoves a pacifier in the mouths of the pk hungry and effectively blocks them from this stupidity for a few days (maybe a few weeks) so people can enjoy the game, rather than swat at mosquitoes all day erry day for a week. (Yep, it's been a week)
As to the other, well. There are lots of rules in this game that stop you from using your time how you want. On the obvious end of the scale, Abigail found out that you're not allowed to spend an enjoyable day spamming racial slurs over market. On the other, somewhat more reasonable, end of the scale, I can't go out and kill every Antiochian I see, even if it's totally legit RP for a Stavennite. I can't go out and purge every Magicker I see, even if it's totally legit RP for an Antiochian zealot.
This is because, while these are all things that people may want to do, they are also things that diminish the playing experience of other players. City raiding is no different. It's not something you can ignore without throwing RP completely out the window, and this makes the game much less enjoyable. How do you think it looks to new players to be like "Oh, yeah, just ignore them. AM tools around the city all the time because they're bored and it's just too much damn work to throw them back out again. I mean, they'll keep that crap up for HOURS, until they have to log off. We don't want to spend all day dealing with them, so we let it slide"?
It sucks. It's bullshit. It's a selfish screw-you-got-mine playstyle that needs to be restricted for the same reason that we restrict AM zealot RP: because it is a playstyle that makes the game suck for everybody else.
"On the battlefield I am a god. I love war. The steel, the smell, the corpses. I wish there were more. On the first day I drove the Northmen back alone at the ford. Alone! On the second I carried the bridge! Me! Yesterday I climbed the Heroes! I love war! I… I wish it wasn’t over."
2) Not one of us would trust that Kryss, Menoch, Brishi et al would stop even if they said they would.
3) No one believes that you would stop after just one pay out (You can't prove this, we can't prove it - on balance it's not worth the risk.)
It isn't "pride" that stops Kinsarmar from keeping going, its the lack in belief of your word as a leader, your ability to handle your troublesome citizens and this amounts to the fact that no other real option was supplied.
Nothing ventured, nothing gained. I have dealt with troublemakers on behalf of Magick before, and I have a history of eliminating problem children from my city (see @Ryax, see @Dias) - it isn't my fault your city is ruled by people who don't understand the idea of costs, benefits, and risks.
‘Every sword’s a weight to carry. Men don’t see that when they pick ’em up. But they get heavier with time.”
Freaking hipsters.
Be it pride, mistrust, or benefactors on the sidelines influencing them, they refused peace in exchange for a paltry sum of 100 irrelevant commodities. That is not my fault, and the 'this sucks!' argument crumbled in my eyes because of it.
Last night you took a hellacious beating. We flipped your failbus off of a bridge and lit it on fire. We did this so many times that we got tired of it. And what was your solution to this? "Well, stop doing it and let us roam the city, hur hur hur."
The problem is that you were like "Five losses? Pah! Sixth time is the charm! Six losses? Pah! Seventh time is the charm! Seven lossses? Eighth time..."
The problem is that demonic could spend the next month slapping the failbus around Kinsarmar and you'd still be saying "If you're tired of this, pay us to quit doing it!" even if you were still losing all the fights.
The suggestion I made is not "stop AM from raiding Kinsarmar". It is "if a raid has failed repeatedly, it should get a time out."
"On the battlefield I am a god. I love war. The steel, the smell, the corpses. I wish there were more. On the first day I drove the Northmen back alone at the ford. Alone! On the second I carried the bridge! Me! Yesterday I climbed the Heroes! I love war! I… I wish it wasn’t over."
You cannot deny that a portion of your argument relies on both parties being reasonable, and Kinsarmar was not reasonable. They denied the quickest solution.
Why is quickest the best way to take in this situation? Why is buying you off going to change anything?
You can reply as many times as you like with,"If you'd done X, I would have done Y", but that doesn't make it true.
Let's say Kinsarmar pays the tribute and you stop. Let's also say that after that you go to Khandava and you start raiding Khandava.
And let's say that, each and every time you raid, Khandava slaps you around. You have zero success whatsoever. Your grand total is zero player kills and zero guard kills.
The problem is that you could still keep that crap up for HOURS AND HOURS AND HOURS despite never winning a battle. You could even, perhaps, say "Pay us 100 diamonds and we'll stop!".
THAT is the problem.
"On the battlefield I am a god. I love war. The steel, the smell, the corpses. I wish there were more. On the first day I drove the Northmen back alone at the ford. Alone! On the second I carried the bridge! Me! Yesterday I climbed the Heroes! I love war! I… I wish it wasn’t over."