Ilberd

[Theodric]

Eh, I don't believe we need to take the fight to Garlemald. Ala Mhigo was conquered fair and square - much like it sought to conquer the rest of Eorzea. 'Liberating' Ala Mhigo isn't necessarily a good thing. It's been quite some time since it was occupied and the people living there are unlikely to want the status quo to change - especially if they've come to befriend or look up to the Garlean stationed there. Let's not forget that there's likely to be a lot of Garlean civilians there too - what are we going to do with them? Kick them out? Force them to adhere to Eorzea's ways?

No. I'd rather the Garlemald situation be far more complex than going after the 'bad guys'. Especially when FF games have a long history of making sympathetic/morally grey antagonists.

[Frederick22]

Eh, I don't believe we need to take the fight to Garlemald. Ala Mhigo was conquered fair and square - much like it sought to conquer the rest of Eorzea. 'Liberating' Ala Mhigo isn't necessarily a good thing. It's been quite some time since it was occupied and the people living there are unlikely to want the status quo to change - especially if they've come to befriend or look up to the Garlean stationed there. Let's not forget that there's likely to be a lot of Garlean civilians there too - what are we going to do with them? Kick them out? Force them to adhere to Eorzea's ways?

No. I'd rather the Garlemald situation be far more complex than going after the 'bad guys'. Especially when FF games have a long history of making sympathetic/morally grey antagonists.

That happened like 25 years ago? People still remember how it was before.

[Theodric]

That happened like 25 years ago? People still remember how it was before.

That's more than enough time for quite a lot of people to grow up in the new Ala Mhigo and embrace the new culture. Plus many of the people kicking up a fuss about Ala Mhigo aren't exactly stellar examples of noble causes.

[Frederick22]

That's more than enough time for quite a lot of people to grow up in the new Ala Mhigo and embrace the new culture. Plus many of the people kicking up a fuss about Ala Mhigo aren't exactly stellar examples of noble causes.

Its not. But well its just an opinion.

[Theodric]

Its not. But well its just an opinion.

It is, though. Twenty five years is a pretty long time. Just look at how much our own society changed in the space of 1980 - 2005 as a rough example. Most of the playable races have a similar potential life span to our own, though given how dangerous Eorzea as a whole the life expectancy isn't necessarily great. Yet there's going to be a lot of people who were born into Ala Mhigan society or just generally embraced Garlean rule for various reasons. Many people there - both natives and Garleans alike - are not going to want to be displaced or 'liberated'. Much in the same way as the Ul'dahns and Ishgardian's aren't prepared to do away with the massive quality of life gap between the poor and the rich.

Or at least that is what I hope for, anyway. It's certainly logical and so far the consequences of such things have been explored fairly well - or at least addressed.

[Belhi]

Eh, I don't believe we need to take the fight to Garlemald. Ala Mhigo was conquered fair and square - much like it sought to conquer the rest of Eorzea. 'Liberating' Ala Mhigo isn't necessarily a good thing. It's been quite some time since it was occupied and the people living there are unlikely to want the status quo to change - especially if they've come to befriend or look up to the Garlean stationed there. Let's not forget that there's likely to be a lot of Garlean civilians there too - what are we going to do with them? Kick them out? Force them to adhere to Eorzea's ways?

No. I'd rather the Garlemald situation be far more complex than going after the 'bad guys'. Especially when FF games have a long history of making sympathetic/morally grey antagonists.

I don't really get the logic of 'conquered fair and square' and I'm not sure that is even a fair call since basically Garlemald just marched in after the country had been ripped apart from a mad tyrant, only to then have the Garleans put in the boot. Either they took advantage of a crippled military or they instigated the civil unrest which would lay even more horrible things at their feet. By that logic can't we just Liberate it fair and square?

I do think we might have some issues in the Garleans there. One thing though is that Garlean's and the conquered people hold different social standings. Conquered people are a lower class than any Garlean civilians living their who aren't conquered people themselves. Im also not sure why a lot of Garlean civilians would be moving into Ala Mhigo. And for that matter, when it comes to forcing others to adher to their ways, how are the Garleans any better?

The logical reason we would seek to liberate Ala Mhigo is that the Garleans still want to conquer Eorzea. I think the chances of us switching sides and actually helping them do it is extremely low. They are also the most logical foe for the next expansion unless a new group invades from no where as Yoshi P said the Ascians would be taking a more background role for 4.0. Ala Mhigo is a launch point into Eorzea that the Eorzeans cant ignore with repeated attempts by Garlemald to invade.

I get you like the Garleans and I think they have some cool stuff too but you really seem to want to overlook the facts about how bad they are and the reasons we aren't allying with them. I think in the end I'll just have to agree to disagree with you.:P

[MaikoRaines]

No. I'd rather the Garlemald situation be far more complex than going after the 'bad guys'. Especially when FF games have a long history of making sympathetic/morally grey antagonists.

I'm sure it is more complex. I'm also aware of the General Leo paradigm - Good guy on the wrong side. I do get that and I am sure that not all citizens of Garlemald are evil or have cruel intentions. They might advocate for the poor and have their own code of honor. At the end of the day, they've chosen their side no matter how cruel their Emperor is - they choose to curry favor on the final word of their leader. I would not go out of my way to strike every single Garlean down in vengeance.

With this being said, no matter how honorable or noble their intent is, if they get in my way, I will run them down.

[Theodric]

I think this is a matter of miscommunication. I'm not apologising on behalf of the Garleans, I'm saying that they're really not that bad. I don't really subscribe to the idea that fantasy settings need to mirror the real world in terms of morality, though. Yes, a lot of the stuff that Garlemald is responsible for is absolutely awful by our standards. Yet when applied to Hydaelyn's standards, it's fairly balanced by all the shady stuff that the other nations are doing. Yes, Garlemald is the 'aggressor' but it wasn't so long ago that Ala Mhigo was the 'aggressor'. The Dragonsong War has gone on for a thousand years and all manner of atrocities were committed during that period. Even now it's still going on - whilst the tension with Garlemald has been a very 'recent' thing. Literally about...fifty years, if not less?

[myahele]

Thing is, in their quest to save Hydaelyn, they've effectively helped weakened her significantly through their actions:

1. Nael summoned Dalamud and eventually released Bahamut; resulting in the 7th Umbral Era
2. Gaius excavated Ultima weapon ... who's Ulitma spell ultimately drained most of the little reserves Hydaelyn had.

Even Midgardsomnr (who has a covenant with Hydaelyn herself) did not want the Garleans to be in Silver Tear Lake. It's quite telling that Midgardsomnr will go all out on the Garleans, yet seaming don't do much with the Allagans making CT, that great seal right near where he "slept"

On a side note, isn't ceruleum "liquid aether?" so the Garleans are potentially slowly draining Hydealyn's aether, too ... although the rest of the city states are starting to use ceruleum to fuel airships