|
|---|
| Archives |
Quick walkthrough 
Edit
Hey, could you explain what the reason for removing the objective section is on this page? Generally this is desirable by readers who don't have the patience to read an entire walkthrough. If there technically no objectives then you can label it "Quick walkthrough." —Atvelonis (talk) 19:22, June 23, 2019 (UTC)
Re: Strange categorisationEdit
Thanks for bringing that blog to my attention. I don't know how that went unnoticed for 6 years. The Cat Master (talk) 14:33, July 25, 2019 (UTC)
Yeah, some blogs still have nnecessary categories / images that shouldn't be there. Unfortunately only admins (or original author of blog) can remove those - I used to just put their links in my sandbox and point Atv to it every once in a while. Or can let an admin know in the Discord (let me know if you need invite for that)
Also good job on all the quest expansions, looks good :) --Shockstorm (talk) 10:03, July 29, 2019 (UTC)
Transclusion Edit
Heya, here's a little trick you can use if you need to add an identical copy of a table or something to another article: go to the source article and surround the thing you want to copy over in the tags <onlyinclude></onlyinclude>. Then go to the page you want to copy the thing onto, and type {{:<name>}}, where "name" refers to the article that you just added the tags to. This lets you "transclude" the contents within the tags from one page to another, but they're only stored in one place, so they only have to be updated once. Very neat! —Atvelonis (talk) 10:33, July 29, 2019 (UTC)
Regarding Busiao Edit
I saw you entered in a discussion, with Busiao No Laughs. While it surprises me at all that you've managed to not completely facepalm in said discussion, I'd caution you against him.
I've had the unfortunate honor of having to endure his baseless arguments and accussations before, and it's something I've come to learn isn't great in terms of keeping topics straight, or open for that matter. He never compromises, and anyone who disagrees with him, well, let's just say he treats them like the spawn of satan incarnate.
Just felt like giving you a warning, kind regards and happy editing.
Blademaster Jauffre (talk) 17:56, July 30, 2019 (UTC)
Image settings Edit
Hi GreyFox, it's good to see you uploading some ESO content. I'm curious what your visual settings for the game are; your screenshots look pretty saturated, perhaps a bit too much so, e.g. File:Temple of the Ancestor Moths (Online) Chapel.jpg is shockingly blue, to a distracting level. I wouldn't say it's explicitly problematic in images like File:Gate of Ghartok.jpg, probably because that scene doesn't have a whole lot of blue light to begin with.
Uploading vibrant/attractive images is good, but I also think it's important not to overdo it; excessive saturation can obscure details that would otherwise be visible. So maybe dial back the color a bit in-game, if you don't mind? And generally speaking it's better to go for daytime images anyway! That should help avoid the excessive blueness more broadly. :P —Atvelonis (talk) 17:18, August 8, 2019 (UTC)
- Thank you for the quick response and your understanding. Yeah, I know from experience that getting screenshots at the right time in ESO can be a real pain. Since the in-game day doesn't quite line up with the real-world one, it can be annoying to have to adjust your playing time to suit the optimal screenshot time. And making sure that players are out of the shot and everything is a whole different story. But I digress.
- By the way—and I think I haven't asked you this before—would you be interested in joining the wiki's Discord server? Most of the staff and a number of prolific editors are in there. It's a pretty good place to coordinate editing projects, ask for quick feedback/help, or just get to know members of the community a little better. We'd love to have you! —Atvelonis (talk) 18:24, August 8, 2019 (UTC)
Re: User page editEdit
I’m so sorry about that. I didn’t mean to do that. I was checking the recent changes on my iPhone, and accidentally hit rollback link on your profile instead of the history link on an article edit below on the list. The Cat Master (talk) 04:22, August 19, 2019 (UTC)
Re:Soliciting/advertisingEdit
Thank you for bringing that up. People just won't stop with that vampire nonsense. It's been deleted, now. Ottoman Hold Message Me My Action 02:48:16 September 02, 2019
Re: Image from another website and licensing policy Edit
The wiki uses a CC-BY-SA license in order to host copyrighted content. We don't actually need explicit permission from the copyright holder to host their material, rather we just need a link back to the original, the name of the author, and an explicit message declaring that we are not the copyright holder, and that the information is being shared in accordance with fair use. I agree that the section on licensing on that page is not very useful, though. I've updated it now: do you have any additional thoughts on the clarity of the policy? —Atvelonis (talk) 19:37, September 20, 2019 (UTC)
Re: Timeline dates for Orsinium and Imperial City Edit
Thanks for the message. If ZeniMax has stated out-of-universe that this content is in 2E 582, then we should record it as such. Would you be able to find that exact forum post and add it as an additional citation to each point that is being moved from 583 to 582? The 583 citations should be kept on the page, but the dev post does take precedence. Since we should also record the continuity error, I would recommend that you add a note about this in the "Examples of timeline conflicts" section near the bottom of the page. —Atvelonis (talk) 14:39, September 26, 2019 (UTC)
Less unnamed Edit
Thanks for adding the name of the ruins, I tried making a search for the name of the mobs there, but couldn't find anything. TherasTaneel (talk) 16:55, September 27, 2019 (UTC)
Re: 'Status Effects (Blades)' Edit
Thank you for the explaination, although I wish you had told me sooner, because the page wasn't done. It wasn't an issue that it was anything you said, it was that it wasn't done and needed feedback. Instead of marking it for deletion and no work on your part, either edit it, or give feedback, right an attention or ask the person what is going on.
Now I want to show how you yourself basically said you are wrong in why to delete it. The part where you said most apropriate and can't be added part. This page you were refereing to WAS the added to and most apropriate. It had different and more information that was too much to add to the combat page.
I would also like to inform you, that the idea for this page matches other pages and how information venn diagrams and has some missing in other pages as it is rellevant to combat only.
What we do when there is a work in progress is we aplly patients. We wait until something has been worked on enough until it is complete and therefore catagorizes as whatever arguments we try to make. Because if we try to do logic before it's done, our logic is wrong and it's that it's not done, so when we do no work and apply no energy of our own as a form of solving the problem and delete, we basically don't do anything constructive. One thing to ask is if we solving an issue by being something that be described as not spending energy or thought or being lazy. When work can be applied to solve a problem, and someone else just hasn't gotten around to it yet. We need to let them. If we give them a road bump, and set them back, we need to add on that time.
One thing we have to ask is if the thing we are doing causes more time to be spent, this includes on someone elses shoulders. If we are causing more time be spent for others, our actions are probly destructive. What we need to do is add more time onto deciding what we do before doing anything. If we aren't going to spend effort, we spend patients.
What I do, is research pages and compare and contrast, before I make a decsision. If I can't be bothered, I don't bother to help. Many a times I have caught myself by aplying my own advice when anylizing graphs. It is all too easy to make a mistake that refelcts poorly on our selves. What we do, is slow down, take time and anylize.
If we say the reason the page should be removed supports the page staying, then maybe we are going to fast. The fisrt problem was caused by adding templates too fast. The next one is not waiting until that is fixed, and then the rough draft brought down before any arguments even aply. From now on I will use an attention to inform people what is going on. But I shouldn't have to. People should slow down and use common sence. When they don't common sence can take pages, and pages, and sometimes hours to explain.
Look at this. This is all the information I can bother to explain why you are wrong. That is only part of why I didn't want to tell you in message. The attention was enough. If I message someone, they can take offence, and when it is a situation where they litterally put in the wording to their side of the story to why they shouldn't have removed something, they can be put on the defensive or I can embarass them, or attract a vindicive person in a wrong mood on the wrong day who could have been a freind or ally as mere extra. It is a situation that is unplesant and time consuming. Not only do I have to rewright an article and be careful of the people who don't think before they do stuff, what I have to do is finish it and make it a rough draft, then not not a rough draft which all in one go, and I have to write this.
Typically, when someone doesn't use common sence and causes an issue, they require an ammount of explaining that they never are capable of using and it is a waste of time. That is why I didn't message you, because the attention is enough feedback to relize what is going on. Now Im not saying you aply to all parts or it necisarilly applies to you, it's just common of people. Now typically when someone causes an issue by not slowing down and thinking and then allowing more time for someone to fix the problem before trying to judge things, they will then require more explaination (like the attention (like after the attention), which is exactly what happened. Not only that but the attention wasn't enough, which also happened. In other words, you have been predicted kind of accurately thus far, so please take my points into consideration. Now I past this is a little uncertain. I don't know yet where you qualify after all this, so please don't offence.
Now this isn't mean to be an insult or embarass you, in fact that is part of why I didn't want to message you. But look at this book. Please just don't judge rough drafts or message people first, kind of like what you said. I might have just said I'm not done it is a rough draft and somepages will be shortened and mained to others. I have to put all the information on each page first and see what combanitions of aspects are longer on each page and which ones are summerized and mained to.
For example. Status effects involve combat, but also damage. Doing damage may have plenty of blah blah, damage itself is another concept and may have plenty of blah blah not necisarily all in verb sence. Now adding non combat aspect to the combat is not the most aproriate (like you said). Also, the physical damage has a status effect part, but not elemental. Elemntal will have not the physical damage. Now if someone wants compare and contrast, they can go to status effects, which will also have poison, and others that does not stop damage like it does in combat. Now physical damagae had a status effect aspect that only involved how to handle dealing and receiving it with status effects. Combat does not have that nuance and doesn't need the ellaborate version on it's page, but a shorter version that can be linked to phsycial damage. Combat doesn't need to express how physical damage can be negated in such a nuanced way as in status effect page, so again the information is actually more aproriately relevant and added to the page was deleted.
It is not necisary to add information and make a huge block on one topic. Three different pages with nuances most apropriate to there aspects is the best aproach. it breaks a monster into different, smaller, distince parts. Rather like this message that could be broken up into two. But I won't because It kind of shows how some info should be broken up.
All this could have been seen by just slowing down and letting me spend hours, and then taking the time to read it all and understand it (or nothing if not) after past rough draft. I shouldn't have to point these things out. Each of use should interested in doing the best job we can or we don't do something. Otherwise, if everyone expects others to tatke the time to explain things to use the whole world suffers. Please. You could be reading the versions by now that don't have the issues, but I need to iniitiate the rough draft (after the time I spent on this that could have seen that finished) part before I can even do that, and then formating and then go past rough draft. All that may not even make it to that point, because since it's not done it shouldn't exist long enough to not have issues. So we spend ten seconds at the expense of wasting hours of time that could go into serving us and the world in general.
Forgive me for having issue with this, it isn't just you and if the race doesn't figure this type of crap out we could litterally go exstinct starting after around 60 or so years with how things are going. This type of thinking is actually a huge problem on the macro scale and not just on issues involving wikis. This crap probably costs trillions of dollars and perhaps recessions and who knows what, keeps us from reaching the stars, who knows. Please don't take this the wrong way, but please. I hope you understand why I don't want to deal with the problem on a wiki to someone. Attention had all the information to figure all this out and I shouldn't have needed to message anyone.
If it can't be dereived from that out than those individuals need to hold themselves to what they can teach me on or whatever. Because quite frankly, it's not that hard to derive everything I wrote from all the information and what I wrote in attention, maybe the world and real life part, but if it couldn't be derived from there, then I'm probably right.
Dutyclaus (talk) 04:22, October 16, 2019 (UTC)
- As I said, it's not necisarilly you. It may not be you at all. I was trying to say.
Discord Edit
When you have a moment, I just have a message for you on Discord. —Atvelonis (talk) 04:47, October 19, 2019 (UTC)
Bug or Not Edit
- Regarding: https://elderscrolls.fandom.com/wiki/Dragon_Rising?diff=2945362 are you saying that Bethesda would deliberately make the map marker go away? Why would they do that? If it wasn't deliberate, it's a bug. DaBarkspawn (talk) 03:50, November 1, 2019 (UTC)
- I will point out that none of the other map markers are so removed, so if that's the intent, it is a pretty weak one. Please do check the CK and let me know what you find. DaBarkspawn (talk)
Thanks for the map renames Edit
- I'm sure Atv appreciates the assist as well. Have a sweetroll! DaBarkspawn (talk) 04:39, November 25, 2019 (UTC)
 | Have a sweetroll! | |
| DaBarkspawn has awarded you a Sweetroll! | ||
| All the renaming and relinking. | ||
Talk page arguments Edit
Yes, I was kind of surprised when they started attacking me there. I would have thought Discord would have been a better place for that. DaBarkspawn (talk) 15:32, February 13, 2020 (UTC)
Traditional Nordic Duel Edit
Why did you remove all my contributions on Traditional Nordic Duel? You said that "many is correct" despite providing no argument. I already told you that 4/400 doesn't make for a "many", not to mention that when the other side is just as "many" that "many" becomes misleading. And the trivia is related to the page at hand. Trivia = details, considerations, or pieces of information of little importance or value. So calling that "unnecessary trivia" is as redundant as saying "young baby". That is the only page where you removed them with a half-explainiation, for the ones on Torygg's page you didn't even bother to give a half-reason.
MinimusMaximus (talk) 11:49, February 14, 2020 (UTC) Minimus Maximus
Wow, I did not expect such an in-depth and articulate answer. I appreciate it and respect you for it. I understand, the Torygg argument was similar to the Traditional Nordic Duel argument. It in indeed a page first about the lore then about the actual in-game gameplay, but even with that point of reference in mind, the word "many" is still misleading because while there are many considering Ulfric a murderer, whether rightly or not, there are many considering Ulfric a hero and the duel a fair and legitimate traditonal nordic duel, whether rightly or not. Given the current stance of the Jarls and of the people in various cities, I'd say the supporters and anti-supporters are more or less equal.
It's the equivalent of saying "There are many who voted for Trump while other people consider Hillary a better choice". It gives the false impression that Hillary lost terribly when in fact the 2 of them were very close. This is not to bring politics into discussion or to imply something related to the game out of this, it only servers as a comparison of how the word "many" can be misleading when there are 2 large sides of an issue. When we say "many" we usually imply it as opposed to few, many went to school therefore only a few didn't. Therefore, when you say that "Many in Skyrim consider Ulfric a murderer,[13][3][14][15] while others claim Ulfric simply followed Nordic tradition.[16]" you imply that the supporters of the Empire are many and that the supporters of Ulfric are a few, which according to the game's lore it's not the case.
That is not an assumption but a fact, there is a conflicting accounting of the legality of the use of shouts in duels. That conficlitng accounting is the basis of the Imperial policy for calling Ulfric a murdere because he killed Torygg, shouted him apart, while the Stormclock supporters claim that it was an honorable duel. High King Torygg accepted the duel, by his own authority as the high king of Skyrim the duel was legal and allowed, it was the shouting part that the imperials view as dishonorable and breaking the rules of the duel therefore making it murder. The equivalent of bringing a pistol to a sword duel, you killed the opponent but it was murder, not honorable victory of the duel. The use of the shout is the basis of the Empire for calling it murder. Therefore, its related with the article on a core level.
Tsun's description of magic being honourable despite modern Nordic belief doesn't indeed indicate the legality of procedure in relation to Nordic dueling, specifically the use of shouts, but it provide information regarding the subject of whether shouts are allowed or not based on deduction. If magic was considered unhonorable by the nords, then by deduction any form of magic would have been dishonorable in a traditional nordic duel. It is not a specific confirmation, but it's a lack of infirmation, which I believe counts as relevant information. The equivalent of saying Jack the Ripper was left-handed and suspect Billy Joe was left-handed, it doesn't automatically make Billy Joe the criminal but it doesn't infirm the fact that he could possibly be the killer. Had Billy Joe been right-handed, it was unlikely he would have been the killer. That trivia information is not making claims that shouts are or aren't legal, it only presents a relevant fact stated by a nordic god and lets the reader draw his own conclusions by his own deduction.
I looked on the lore and it says that "Ulfric can only use Unrelenting Force and Disarm Dragon Shouts". While my original point that he only knows Unrelenting Force is wrong, the conclusion of my original point remains correct. Even with Disarm, it was impossible for Ulfric to rip Torygg apart because Disarm is not a shout that you can rip people apart with. Ulfric cannot do that which he has no ability to do, it is not unlikely, it is impossible. You can attack Ulfric in game to see what you can do or read lore about Ulfric on the internet, the ressult is the same, what the Imperials said he has done, including the Imperials who watched the duel, it was impossible from a lore perspective. While there is an advanced technique that makes it possible for Unrelenting Force to disintegrate affected enemies, the "Dragonborn Force", there is no evidence that Ulfric or even the Greybeards know how to use this advanced technique, not in game or in the lore. Making this not a theory but a fact. Which supports the following notion made: "Making the Imperial version of the events most likely a lie".
The exaggeration of the Imperials, including the Imperials who have first-hand witnessed the duel is for propaganda. It makes sense that the account gets sensationalized by the people that see him as a monster/hero. Of course this is just a theory for one cannot really know their reasons, but we can really known that what they claim ot have had happened is a lie.
I disagree, I believe the version that Ulfric Stormcloak "shouted him apart" is exactly the official version of the Empire. That is the position over everyone who supports the Empire, including high-ranking members, while no supporter of the Empire every says otherwise. As mentioned, it is not necessary due to a lack of evidence but because of propaganda reasons, Ulfric is a hero to the Stormclocks and the Empire needs to make him look like a monster to the rest of Skyrim. Simply killing Torygg in a duel considered fair by most of the Nords wouldn't do it.
Since nothing says black & white that "this is the official version of the Empire" it remains possible of course that this is not the official version of the Empire, although it doesn't explain the exaggeration of many high-ranking officials who are supposed to know and support the official version, my biggest concern about this "just murder" version without the "shouted him apart" version is its lack of basis for the accusation. It is widely known throught Skyrim that Ulfric came to Solitude and challenged Torygg to a traditional nordic duel. A duel that Torygg the High King and ultimate authority in Skyrim willingly accepted. Duels have been a common thing throughout the history of the Empire. The Elder Council itself agreed that duels are a legal way to resolve land conflicts.
Ralof said that the begining of Skyrim: “They wouldn't dare give Ulfric a fair trial. Treason, for fighting for your own people! All of Skyrim would have seen the truth then!”. While Ralof is in no way a lawyer or anything close, his claim could be correct. The only reason to execute Ulfric without trial, is to deprive him of the chance to defend himself and avoid the exposure of the fact that his accusation of "murder" has no legal basis as he didn't "shouted him apart". We know that duels are legal under the Empire, many know that Torygg willingly accepted the duel, we know that the Empire has a legal system, which is not convened in Ulfric’s case. This indicates the Legion is acting without legal basis. Which is one additional reason why I believe that "shouted him apart" is the official position of the Empire, without it, the "murder" version lacks a legal basis for the accusation.
I thank you for encouragement and imploring me to continue editing, people like you are what makes the wiki a great place.
MinimusMaximus (talk) 23:18, February 16, 2020 (UTC) MinimusMaximus
Hi, no worries, thank you for replying.
I see, as a determiner the word "many" makes sense.
High King Torygg was the highest authority in Skyrim according to Imperial Law. And the highest authority in Skyrim agreed with and accepted the duel against Ulfric, giving his consent. The argument that duels are permissible in the Empire only if two claimants to a disputed territory have equal titles is incorrect, the contents of the book "How Orsinium Passed to the Orcs" mention that "the law is very clear that if two claimants with equal titles to the property are set in deadlock, a duel must be held" but it doesn't mention anywhere "only", it doesn't mention anywhere that these are the only necessary conditions for a duel to happen. Lack of instances doesn't automatically mean illegality, it remains fairly possible that the duels remained legal but didn't happen as there is nothing pointing out to their illegality.
This is exactly why I wished to add the trivia that "The nord hero Tsun mentions that magic is honorable, regardless of modern Nord's opinion of it, however there is no clear mention in favor or against using the Thu'um", because, as you said: "the claim that use of the Thu’um in a traditional Nordic duel would be illegal itself is inconsistent", as many players wonder whether or not the Thu’um is legal acording to Traditional Nordic Duel costums.
I find the fact that all high-ranking Imperial members tell the "shouted him apart" version when speaking about the event as evidence. It is unlikely that they would all use the exact same dramatic exaggeration, including the high-ranking members who actually watched the duel and know the real facts. You bring up the point that "If you have ever played a game of Chinese whispers, you should know how information passed from person-to-person without detailed and multifaceted analyses is subject to bias, misinformation, dramatic exaggeration", however, when even people who witnessed the duel with their own eyes make the same exaggeration, one cannot speak of distorted information, and the fact that all people who watched the duel have the exact same distorted information is dubious at best. Moreover, if you're an offical and your state has the position "Russian troops invaded Crimeea without hurting anyone", you as a high-ranking official can't go around and say "Russian troops intimidated and people into submission" because in your position you represent the state, the same principle is valid in Skyrim, Imperial officials are supposed to upheld the Imperial position, not their own version or exaggerations, and since the Civil War is such a big event, they are or will be likely informed about the official Imperial position in the matter.
There is no evidence that Ulfric knows Dragonborn Force, while the evidence that he doesn't are that when fighting him in game he never uses Dragonborn Force although it would have been easy to implement if the developers wanted to make a point, there is nothing in the lore about him ever using Dragonborn Force from a verifiable source, Dragonborn Force is a super secret technique that you learn from Hermaeus Mora and not even the Greybeards may know (when you face them with Bandits, they use Fur-Ro-Dah but never Dragonborn Force version) and because of the name "Dragonborn Force" it is possible that only the Dragonborn can learn this technique.
The legal justification is High King Torygg, the highest authority in Skyrim according to Imperial Law, who agreed with and accepted the duel against Ulfric, giving his consent. If there is no specific law against it then the High King Torygg's word is law, if there is a specific law against it then it depends who holds more authority (what I mean by this is that a traffic light is law, but a cop directing the traffic breaks that authority). Considering the fact that all high-ranking Imperial members tell the "shouted him apart" version when speaking about the event including the ones who actually watched the duel and knew the real facts makes this likely the official Imperial stance, a highly dubious exaggeration if that is.
MinimusMaximus (talk) 12:06, February 19, 2020 (UTC) MinimusMaximus
New message Edit
Hey, I've confirmed that giant nirnroots yield 3 samples of nirnroot ingredient each. I'm pretty new and don't know how to link. I have two screenshots from my game before and after of collecting giant nirnroot. I though creating a link named "confirmed" and when clicked its going to take the user to screenshots.
Silentrious (talk) 12:23, February 15, 2020 (UTC)
Vulthuryol TriviaEdit
Hi. You removed my trivia addition in the Vulthuryol page because it was confirmed to not be possible. I don't know how you got that result but it's wrong. I made a new character so that I could record the whole thing. The recording can be found here.
Don't undo the removal. I just add the entry back at some point tomorrow in a bit cleaner form which fits into two sentences.
[[Special:Contributions/80.222.30.15|80.222.30.15 05:09, February 16, 2020 (UTC)]]
The Empire vs Stormcloaks, who is right?Edit
This is not related with the Traditional Nordic Duel discussion we are having, I have seen that you are well versed in The Elder Scrolls lore and eager to discuss the in-depth implications of pieces of lore, so I would like to bring you my case about The Empire vs Stormcloaks if that is okay. For the record, anyone can join the conversation.
Years ago was having a discussion with a friend and the question came up: Who do you support? He said "Ideally, the Stormcloaks, pragmatically, the Empire, because they want to fight for Skyrim's independence but only the Empire can beat the Thalmor" and then he asked me, I replied: "Ideally, the Empire, pragmatically, the Stormcloaks, because it's better to have united but autonomus provinces with different cultures and traditions under the same rule but the Empire is too weak, poor in leadership and corrupt to beat the Thalmor". In our discussion I managed to convince him that my view was right, but I would like to see if my view is still right when judged by an expert in The Elder Scrolls lore.
I also had an internet discussion about the Empire vs Stormcloaks, the ressult was like many internet discussions, inconclusive, but you can use it as a reference to explore:
ARGUMENT 1) "You can't fight the Thalmor alone" Counter-ARGUMENT 1) Hammerfell did it, and did it better than when they were under the Empire. This is evidence not theory.
ARGUMENT 2) "The Thalmor want to conquer, not destroy all humans" Counter-ARGUMENT 2) According to the Thalmor religion, they believe that if they destroy all humans they will earn their right to divinity again.
ARGUMENT 3) "The Talos part of the treaty is really just a sideshow and an extra." Counter-ARGUMENT 3) It's far from a sideshow or an extra, in the Thalmor religion, the hate for Talos is a central element because Talos is the god that replaces Lorkhan. The Thalmor hate the the missing god Lorkhan who tricked them and made them lose their divinity. And Talos is the one who replaced Lorkhan, and beside that Talos is a human-god, a god that was once human, one of the lesser races according to them, there is no greater insult to the racially superior Thalmor than this.
ARGUMENT 4) "Stormcloaks don't even realise that the Empire is pretty much owned by the Thalmor" Counter-ARGUMENT 4) Stormcloaks make it clear that this is the reason they don't want to be part of the Empire anymore, they mention a lot that the Empire is no more than a puppet-state of the Thalmor.
ARGUMENT 5) "Stromclocks have a lack of vision because you can't just alienate the only friend you have" Counter-ARGUMENT 5) The exact same argument is valid for the Empire, it's prefectly accurate to say that the Empire alienates their friends in Skyrim instead of letting them rule themselves as they want, and fight together against the Thalmor as separate self-ruling states without all the bloodshed of a Civil War, they're stubborn as hell. Instead of losing troops to Skyrim they might as well leave Skyrim gain independence and then colaborate with them. But do they have such a big picture in mind? Nope. The Empire is all about "Kill these people who want to rule themselves so that we both get weaker, because everyone knows, the weaker you are the more chances you have against Thalmor". The same could have been said about Stormcloaks if they weren't right about the Empire being owned by Thalmor and about the Empire having weak leadership. It is unclear and I doubt that they are a complete puppet-state, but it is certain that they are at least partially owned by the Thalmor due to losing the Great War. Unlike Hammerfell, the Empire already proved they can't fight back Thalmor, yet fight Stormcloaks who might have a chance because reasons.
ARGUMENT 6) If Hammerfell was some shiny example that the Stormcloaks can defeat the Dominion, then the Empire would have won the Great War in the first place. The only reason that Hammerfell won against the Dominion was because the bulk/main forces of the Dominion were in Cyrodiil fighting, the Redguards put their civil war on hold and fought together and the Redguards knew the land better. It wasn't some grand victory that proved one small nation could easily defeat the Dominion, if it were that easy, Hammerfell could have just kept going and fought the Thalmor all the way back to the Summerset Isle, instead of signing their own peace treaty. People blindly assume that just because Hammerfell won 1 victory that somehow means the Dominion can be easily defeated. "Hammerfell did it, so can Skyrim!" isn’t a valid argument without seeing the bigger picture.
COUNTER-ARGUMENT 6) I do not believe that "Hammerfell did it, so will Skyrim!", but I do believe that "Hammerfell did it, so can Skyrim!" is a valid argument, it's a possibility, not a certainty. The Dominion cannot be easily defeated, but that doesn't mean they are impossible to defeat. Hammerfell may have had a little bit of luck with the circumstances, but if the Dominion could have beaten Hammerfell in no time they wouldn't have signed a peace treaty. As for the Skyrim or Empire vs Dominon, as mentioned before, I believe that "Hammerfell did it, so can Skyrim!", while the Empire on the other hand cannot do it. The Empire already proved he's too weak to fight the Thalmor, more than once, it's not the Septim Empire anymore but a shadow of it's former self, there is not even a Septim on the throne anymore but a weak and corrupt politician, The 4th Era Empire is no more the Septim Empire than the Holy Roman Empire of the middle ages was the Roman Empire of antiquity. Another reinforce to the "Hammerfell did it, so can Skyrim!" is that I believe the Dominion won't beat them in no time because the Dominion states in one of their books that "A Stormcloak victory is also to be avoided", there could be many reasons for that, but if the Stormcloaks would win the rebelion, wouldn't the Dominion have free hand to kill everyone in Skyrim? why would it be "also to be avoided" ? One can falsly interpert "a Stormcloak victory is also to be avoided" as "Ulfric is just a Thalmor puppet, he is there to weaken the Empire!" but the argument that the Empire is too stubborn to back down was already explained in number 5 making this Civil War situation their fault. So if I had to pick between Empire and Stormcloaks, I'd pick Stormcloaks, at least they have a chance from my perspective.
ARGUMENT 7) If you believe that "Hammerfell did it, so can Skyrim!" is a valid argument, then you're discounting the fact Ulfric himself says the Stormcloaks cannot fight the entire Empire in an open invasion. Should you attempt to attack Solitude while the Dark Brotherhood quest "Bound Until Death" is active, you're met with this direct quote from Ulfric: "We're ready to march on Solitude, but the Emperor's cousin is getting married! If royal blood was spilt, all of Cyrodiil would be up in arms. We can't afford an all out war with the Empire. So we'll bide our time for now." If he admits he couldn't face a full invasion from the Empire, what real chance does he have against the Dominion (who I might also add, includes forces from Summerset Isle, Valenwood and Elsweyr)? This is Ulfric, in-game saying he could not take on Imperial forces alone. This is FACT. And when you mentioned "A Stormcloak victory is also to be avoided" from that dossier, you forgot to add "SO EVEN INDIRECT AID TO THE STORMCLOAKS MUST BE CAREFULLY MANAGED". The Thalmor are USING the Stormcloaks and this is stated in the line ”Ulfric's death would have dramatically increased the chance of an Imperial victory and thus harmed our overall position in Skyrim."
COUNTER-ARGUMENT 7) The Thalmor are using the Stormcloaks and not the Empire to mantain Skyrim in chaos because they are weaker than the Empire, otherwise they would have helped the Empire, it is merely a tactical choice that doesn't say anything beside that. The Stormcloaks are not indirectly Thalmor slaves, it's just that this conflict, about which the Empire is also stubborn and indirectly help the Thalmor because of this. You need 2 people for tango: Stormcloaks and the Empire. As for the strength, if the Empire wins in Skyrim, how would they be able to fight the Dominion? And why is Ulfric, if aware of his army being underpowered compared to the Empire, still thinks they can take the Dominion while the Empire can't? Don't get me wrong, I still believe the Empire can't beat the Dominon because internal corruption, being pretty much slaves to Dominion due to inner influences, has already failed durring the Great War and is already failing right now to protect any Imperial citizen from the Dominion, basically the Dominion can do to the Empire whatever they want, the treaty is just a joke. It's just I wonder how would the Empire think to fight back given the situation & what is Ulfric's reasoning for rebellion to eventually fight Dominion, given the fact that he already knows he's too weak to fight the Empire in an all out war? In war, good or bad leadership can make or break a battle and by extension a war, the Empire already proved weak leadership, the Stormcloaks have yet to prove their leadership skills, but superior tactics and leadership skill could be the reason why Ulfric thinks he can have a chance against the Thalmor while the Empire can't.
ARGUMENT 8) The Thalmor and the Empire are not allies, so they wouldn't help the Empire for anything. (as a response to why the Thalmor are indirectly helping Ulfric and not the Empire) COUNTER-ARGUMENT 8) They would if that would maintain chaos in Skyrim, weakining both sides, Stormcloaks and the Empire.
ARGUMENT 9) Ulfric is a giant dick who doesn't know what he says. There’s no way the Stormcloaks could win a civil war and still have the numbers to challenge anyone, least of all the Dominion, who still has forces in the Isles, Valenwood, and Elsweyr. COUNTER-ARGUMENT 9) I doubt an idiot could be a war hero and spark a rebelion as well, not to mention keep it alive. And when he waits to march on Solitude because of the Emperor's cousin's wedding, it shows that he's not an all-attack no mind brute.
ARGUMENT 10) The Dominion does not control the Empire's armies, nor dictate Imperial policy beyond the treaty signed 30 years prior. This is stated nowhere in-game. So the Empire are not slaves to the Dominion. They can send Justiciars to root out Talos worshippers, but that doesn't mean they govern the Empire. The White-Gold Concordat doesn’t give the Thalmor free reign to do whatever they want, it gives them rights to enforce the treaty in Imperial controlled territories. The terms on that treaty don't state “The Thalmor have permission to do whatever they want“. Furthermore, the Thalmor and the Empire are in a cold war state, with neither side wanting to disrupt the peace, and the Thalmor doing whatever they want would end that peace.
COUNTER-ARGUMENT 10) Of course no official treaty is going to say "We can do whatever they want", but that doesn't mean they can't do whatever they want. Let's be honest, that was never how history worked + High Elves already proved themselves masters with diplomacy even durring the Septim dynasty. I irronically think that Ulfric has higher chances of winning agaist Thamlor with his small army than the Empire has even if not being corrupted by Thalmor already given the circumstances.
ARGUMENT 11) You say the Empire is corrupt. Typically it means you do something sinister for personal gain, usually by working the system and bending the rules to your own will. The most corruption within the Empire I see regularly is infighting for control over more power, like Maven for example, but the same could be said with Ulfric murdering the High King. COUNTER-ARGUMENT 11) The Stormclocks and the Empire are different factions now, so the corruption argument fails. If anything it's a pro-Ulfric argument, if Ulfric could have started a rebelion while under the Empire it shows the state of the Empire rather than the state of Ulfric. As far as the Empire is concerned I mean political corruption, for the reasons mentioned above. The same cannot be said for Ulfric because he didn't do it for power, for his power only, he does if for Talos Worship, for the people of Skyrim, a different thing altogether.
ARGUMENT 12) The White-Gold Concordat is a peace treaty, not an alliance. COUNTER-ARGUMENT 12) I know, but how is this connected to anything I said?
ARGUMENT 13) If Ulfric was really about defending the name of Talos and Nord tradition, he could've taken into use the Dominions' apparent lax watch on Skyrim at the time and prepared an army capable of taking them on in secret. Yet instead chose to wage a pointless war, so he's an idiot wearing a war hero mask. COUNTER-ARGUMENT 13) A sneaky attack on Thalmor? At best Ulfric could have made some damage to the Thalmor Embassy but this is way far from doing any real damage to the Thalmor. If anything, doing what you suggest as part of the Empire would be a death sentence. This is an even worse plan than fighting Imperials on open field.
ARGUMENT 14) Ulfric himself said the High King himself was a message to the other Jarls. What was this message? "I will rule this land. Those who are not with me are the enemy". That's why he attacked Whiterun, because Balgruuf refused to support Ulfric. COUNTER-ARGUMENT 14) If you want a revolution to save your people, and someone will oppose you, what are you going to do? As for the duel with the high-king, Ulfric made his reasons clear in the game. And the fact that he goes to sovngarde if you kill him says something about his honour.
ARGUMENT 15) Even if the Thalmor think they can do whatever they want, they must do it discreetly because if the Empire find out, they will retaliate. COUNTER-ARGUMENT 15) The Thalmor wouldn't necessarly have to do it discretly but they can do it officially, because as already mentioned: The empire lost the Great War, Thalmor are masters of dipolmacy, the Empire is pretty much destroyed by The Great War. If you think the Empire has any decisional power you forget that the White-Gold Treaty was imposed by the Thalmor, it wasn't a negociation except in name.
ARGUMENT 16) And why do you think the Empire have low chances against the Dominion than the Stormcloaks? What would be easier? Taking on 1000 men with your 1000 men, or take on 1000 men with your 500 men? The Empire (and by extension Skyrim) is not ready for another War, and if the Thalmor happen to think the Empire isn’t strong enough to fight back yet, then so be it, let them believe they still have the power. Overconfidence is your opponent's greatest ally and Thalmor let theirs aid the Empire during the Great War and that cost the elves huge numbers of its troops, lets keep that trend going. No one at present is ready for War but the Dominion is just the ones willing to "poke the bear", they want the Empire to strike first, so long as the Empire doesn't play their game, they can continue to grow in strength and be ready for when the Dominion gets tired of playing and actually acts, preferably after they believe they're so superior, it'll be easy.
COUNTER-ARGUMENT 16) You're claiming that the Empire vs Thalmor is 1000 vs 1000 and Skyrim vs Thalmor is 500 vs 1000. There are 3 things wrong with this belief. A) Empire and Thalmor aren't equals - the Imperials themselves say that they are too weak to fight the Thalmor. The Thalmor made peace just to avid further bloodshed in their ranks, because they would have won with ease and the ressult would have been the same as in the treaty, since the terms are only in favor of the Thalmors. B) Empire lacks competent leadership - As I have already mentioned before, this isn't Septim era anymore, the Empire got defeated in the Great War. I wouldn't count on someone who has already failed in leadership. C) The Empire is Thalmor's puppet, they have to do whatever they want to do as long as it is an offical reason, because if the Thalmor attack now they are going to be destroyed because reason A.
ARGUMENT 17) As for the Thalmor "officially" searching for Talos worshippers, you mean the Thalmor has spies within their ranks and because the Empire has allowed the Justiciars to walk all over Skyrim without impunity, they can watch and observe anything? If so, don't you think the Empire is using that to their advantage? They can't very well work on plotting an invasion with the Thalmor roaming free. It'd be SUPER easy to hide their numbers. They know they're going to attack the Dominion eventually, the Dominion knows it, everyone knows, letting them think they're seeing the full force as a bare bones operation is just the basics of espionage. The Empire has tons of its own spies as well. The Empire knows the Thalmor Justiciars are reporting back everything they see to their superiors, why wouldn't they try to control exactly what it is they see? Intelligence can make or break a war they wouldn't let them openly see EVERYTHING.
COUNTER-ARGUMENT 17) As for the spies, the Thalmor aren't dumb either, in fact High Elves as a race (meaning average per individual) are amongst the most intelligent races of Tamriel, I believe the most intelligent but that's just my subjective opinion. The Empire would have to try very very hard to bilnd the Thalmor. In the end, it's all about risk, neither of us could tell whether the Empire had more chances with their sneaky army building or the Stormcloaks with their Skyrim's domination, both have lower chances than the Thalmor, in the end is nothing more than a guess, but I'd rather bet on those who haven't lost already and have no chances of being manipulated by the foe on the inside.
ARGUMENT 18) This is math, plain and simple. The Thalmor control 3 provinces and the Empire control 3 provinces. Are you suggesting that Skyrim alone can defeat the Dominion? I would just like to point something out: Tiber Septim himself, with all the races of Tamriel except the Altmer and Bosmer in his Legions, needed the Numidium to conquer the Dominion. Think about that. All of Tamriel against them, all four human races, two beast races and the Dark Elves, and Tiber Septim, who became the God of War, couldn't do it without a overpowered god-like Dwemer robot superweapon and years of trying. Yet Ulfric thinks he can do it with only Nords? Um.... alright then. Good luck with that. Once again, a single legion just about bested the Stormcloak rebellion. The Stormcloaks cannot hold off way more of this, such as Dominion forces. The Dominion is in way better shape than an independent Skyrim. Anyone can see that. Lastly, Ulfric's war is supposed to be about fighting against the Dominion, right? Then why in the name of Oblivion do you never see him, or any of his men, raise a blade against the Thalmor? There's an Embassy in Skyrim. Why don't they attack it? Why don't they raid that Thalmor prison and free captured Talos worshippers? Why did he turn this into a fight against the Empire?
COUNTER-ARGUMENT 18) The math is good, the logic fail. If you think that controled provinces = military power and that the "why the empire can't beat thalmor" arguments are pointless simply because 3 = 3, either you only want to win the argument, not to debate for the sake of truth or have a simplistic and wrong view of the factors involving a war, it is not only the bigger army that matters. There is one thing to defend yourself, and completly another to attack Summerset like Tiber Septim. In other words, it's not that simple, it's not the same battle.
ARGUMENT 19) Ulfric was obviously messed up (understandably) by the Thalmor torture, more than he may like to admit. He has a just "cause" but he is not the right man to lead that cause. His "you're with me or against me" attitude isn't good for relations which an independent Skyrim would soon need. He has misplaced angst towards the Empire, causing the deaths of thousands and fueling Alduin’s power, instead of fighting off just the Thalmor. Those siege weapons could have been aimed at the Thalmor Embassy, not the city of Whiterun. Skyrim deserves better than Ulfric. COUNTER-ARGUMENT 19) I've already mentioned why Ulfric attacking Thalmor embassy before conquering Skyrim first would be a terrible idea, you had no rebutal but you bring this up again. At this point you began to repeat the exact same argument that was previously countered, leading me to simply repeat myself. If I have to repeat myself because you keep mentioning things already countered, I doubt we will be going anywhere.
What are your thoughts on this?
MinimusMaximus (talk) 13:22, February 19, 2020 (UTC) MinimusMaximus
_Chapel.jpg){kind=link}
