PDA

View Full Version : Oh Happy Days!



HorrorHiro
Jul 30th, 2011, 11:30 PM
I couldn't be happier that the Tower fell. Thats right I said it!

BabySniffer
Jul 30th, 2011, 11:31 PM
I agree it was time for a change, b-but the people!

andrew_huber
Jul 30th, 2011, 11:31 PM
I couldn't be happier that the Tower fell. Thats right I said it!

but why

nikvoodoo
Jul 30th, 2011, 11:35 PM
Because horrorhiro is trollin' for attention by bad mouthing our heroes home.

That's right, now it is I who hath communicated my feelings concisely! What say ye to these developments?


:p just joshin'

HorrorHiro
Jul 30th, 2011, 11:38 PM
at least 90% of those people were less than secondary characters so most likely all of the tower residenve (not including the main characters) and maybe some of the more important characters are gone...

HorrorHiro
Jul 30th, 2011, 11:42 PM
I love you Nik. And I honestly hate most of the Tower Residence main characters or not. So I prefer the Mallers to be honest, simply brecause I like them as an Antagonist and the fact that so many people unerestimated them just makes things so much better...

HardKor
Jul 30th, 2011, 11:44 PM
But they were still people! (from an in story perspective) For some reason Red Shirt deaths affect me. I can't help but personalize the perspective of the non-special people who get tossed around and disposed of brutally in some stories by the major players. And I keep thinking of poor Lewis locked in his room when the building collapsed...

HorrorHiro
Jul 30th, 2011, 11:44 PM
Because I dont like the protagonists nearly as much as I like the Antagonists to be honest.

andrew_huber
Jul 30th, 2011, 11:46 PM
But they were still people! (from an in story perspective) For some reason Red Shirt deaths affect me. I can't help but personalize the perspective of the non-special people who get tossed around and disposed of brutally in some stories by the major players. And I keep thinking of poor Lewis locked in his room when the building collapsed...

i totally fill the same way just cuz there not main characters dosent mean ppl dont care about them

Hollomandious
Jul 30th, 2011, 11:47 PM
I said it in the chat during the airing, "maybe this will be like a reboot..." sadly, i feel i was right, and i wish i hadn't been. After it happened, it took me a little bit to realize how many people we're (most likely) lost (remember, can't assume).

I wonder if Steven made it out alive, or got picked up 1/2 dead?

HorrorHiro
Jul 30th, 2011, 11:52 PM
I'm not a Pyschopath or at least not a complete pyschopath. I feel for the deaths of "red shirts" especially in stories involving survival, near extinction of the human race. But I wouldn't be surprised if they all died.

Creem_Filling
Jul 30th, 2011, 11:58 PM
I think it's terribly sad. So many people died. Not to mention we've lost a major icon of power here on the forums. The forums were kinda like the people's tower. When someone new joins "A new resident has entered the tower", when some is banned they are "exiled from the tower". And so many other places have been referred to as the tower because of what it used to stand for. Now that is rubble, what do we have to stand for anymore? This has not only impacted all the poor people of the the We're Alive world, but the hardcore fans as well. Our monument of safety is down!

andrew_huber
Jul 31st, 2011, 12:00 AM
at least some of them are alive

ComradeNarf
Jul 31st, 2011, 12:01 AM
I think it's terribly sad. So many people died. Not to mention we've lost a major icon of power here on the forums. The forums were kinda like the people's tower. When someone new joins "A new resident has entered the tower", when some is banned they are "exiled from the tower". And so many other places have been referred to as the tower because of what it used to stand for. Now that is rubble, what do we have to stand for anymore? This has not only impacted all the poor people of the the We're Alive world, but the hardcore fans as well. Our monument of safety is down!

Very true, it's a tough loss for the forum as well. I guess we'll have to pledge allegiance to the Helicopter of the Tower Remnants. Or some really cool name like that.

andrew_huber
Jul 31st, 2011, 12:03 AM
the Helicopter of the Tower Remnants.

lol could it fit all of us

HorrorHiro
Jul 31st, 2011, 12:18 AM
Just because it's important to you doesn't mean the same for all of us. Most yes but not all.

Damianjh
Jul 31st, 2011, 03:58 AM
You guys reckon they'll make it o Fort Irwin (or whoever it is) or end up in another tower?

GD_Elite
Jul 31st, 2011, 04:03 AM
I think they will be heading to Fort Irwin, but the surviving characters will have to meet up again. We still have unfinished business with the mallers, the colony and the zombies, as well as the survivors of the tower, so I would expect a return to LA in the future.

Th3_T3ch
Jul 31st, 2011, 07:46 AM
I would think that with the tower, sniff* sniff*, destroyed the survivors will come back in search of anything. They won't do it immediately but it will happen. Also the survivors still have to meet up with Saul and Victor. We all know that Tanya won't let Saul go that easily. I totally agree that we haven't seen the last of the Mallers. I mean they still have Lizzy and now they have (most likely) Burt and Angel!

andrew_huber
Jul 31st, 2011, 08:27 AM
they might have to go back to la cuz they didnt take any supplies did they

Creem_Filling
Jul 31st, 2011, 08:32 AM
Just because it's important to you doesn't mean the same for all of us. Most yes but not all.

I'm going to assume that were talking to me, because I can't find any other post that this would makes sense. I was just sharing my opinion on the matter, that's what threads are for, you don't need to rage on me. But I will call it silly that you like the Mallers more, I respect your opinion, the Mallers have just been asshats the entire time so I find it curious.

reaper239
Aug 1st, 2011, 06:59 AM
they might have to go back to la cuz they didnt take any supplies did they

but you've got to remember, the whole point of going to irwin in the first place was because it was the most likely to be self sustaining. i don't know how many of you know, but ft irwin is home to NTC (National Training Center) NTC is the largest training facility in the free world. they host HUGE training excercises and if there was any one in training at all when everything went down, they would have had tons of food (at least atm) it would also, theoretically, be the most secure facility in the nation, not only do they do MILES training but they also do live fire training, so potentially ft irwin is the last bastion of the US military. irwin is also naturally secure as it is surrounded by desert.

irwin rant over... next

kc said, everyone will hate scratch, and a lot of people felt really attached to the tower. would it be applicable to say that the tower was a character of it's own, and that scratch "killed" the tower?

edit: to clarify, MILES is Multiple Integrated Laser Engagement System... army laser tag

Nullifier
Aug 1st, 2011, 09:02 AM
But they were still people! (from an in story perspective) For some reason Red Shirt deaths affect me. I can't help but personalize the perspective of the non-special people who get tossed around and disposed of brutally in some stories by the major players.

BRO!, you just made my day, never suspected anyone else felt the same, never having heard it expressed in any other genre or forum for said.

HorrorHiro
Aug 1st, 2011, 12:29 PM
kc said, everyone will hate scratch, and a lot of people felt really attached to the tower. would it be applicable to say that the tower was a character of it's own, and that scratch "killed" the tower?

Yes I think it's safe to personify the Tower in that way, I mean it's not like people hate Durai right now (unless your against the Mallers as an Antagonist and as a whole you kind of have to hate their leader/organizer) but I also think it's safe to say that this was just Scratch's plan. It was even questioned if Durai even knew they were still up north or if he knew the mission he gave Scratch and her convoy had been completed. And that's really scary because that means that what Scratch and the Mallers left from the Arena mission did at the end of season 2 was nowhere near how much damage the Mallers at full force could do. That was more like a spec-ops mission for the Mallers if you think about it. And they sure as hell aren't hurting in numbers. Remember when the fake trade was suppose to happen and the Scratch sent the worst of her convoy to be killed pretty much I mean she knew that the Tower would send their best so she sent her convoys worse as a distraction."Thinning out the weak" as she put it.

Osiris
Aug 1st, 2011, 12:39 PM
The tower is dead. Long live the tower.

Let's all take just a brief moment and reflect on all the good things that the tower brought us...

hmm... yeah I can't think of anything. As for hating Scratch by the end of the season? No way. Scratch did nothing wrong. She just wanted the bitch that killed her brother, that's all. She didn't give a fuck about anyone or anything else.

Scratch4Life

andrew_huber
Aug 1st, 2011, 12:42 PM
when the tower collapsed wherent most of the red shirts in the motor pool

reaper239
Aug 1st, 2011, 12:49 PM
The tower is dead. Long live the tower.

Let's all take just a brief moment and reflect on all the good things that the tower brought us...

hmm... yeah I can't think of anything. As for hating Scratch by the end of the season? No way. Scratch did nothing wrong. She just wanted the bitch that killed her brother, that's all. She didn't give a fuck about anyone or anything else.

Scratch4Life


see the problem that i have with that way of thinking is this: if it wasn't for the actions of the mallers and latch's willing participation, he never would have died. she's acting like a spoiled little brat, it was their own fault he died for attacking the tower. that's like saying my brother broke into your house planning to kill you, you shot him, and i come after you for killing him. that may make sense to the criminally insane, but i think someone should put her on her knees, make her beg for her life, and then put two in the back of her head. execution. and i'd do it to anyone running wild like that, two to the head, make sure they don't come back.

so yes scratch did wrong and she should be dealt with like the dog she is.

Osiris
Aug 1st, 2011, 01:05 PM
see the problem that i have with that way of thinking is this: if it wasn't for the actions of the mallers and latch's willing participation, he never would have died. she's acting like a spoiled little brat, it was their own fault he died for attacking the tower. that's like saying my brother broke into your house planning to kill you, you shot him, and i come after you for killing him. that may make sense to the criminally insane, but i think someone should put her on her knees, make her beg for her life, and then put two in the back of her head. execution. and i'd do it to anyone running wild like that, two to the head, make sure they don't come back.

so yes scratch did wrong and she should be dealt with like the dog she is.

You're making a lot of assumptions. If you consider the only force of 'good' to be the residents of the tower, then yes you logic works. If you consider that everyone is simply trying to stay alive the only way they can, then your logic falls apart. Your sense of right and wrong is distorted through the lens of a one-sided storyline. I feel for you, bro. I feel for you. The residents stole from the mallers. There was a plan for that tanker from the beginning and that plan was quite clearly to destroy as many of the biters as they could. The residents fired the first shot and the mallers reacted accordingly. This isn't rocket science, it's just the nature of the world that the story is being told in.

So Pegs did wrong and she should be dealt with like the dog she is.

HorrorHiro
Aug 1st, 2011, 01:43 PM
You're making a lot of assumptions. If you consider the only force of 'good' to be the residents of the tower, then yes you logic works. If you consider that everyone is simply trying to stay alive the only way they can, then your logic falls apart. Your sense of right and wrong is distorted through the lens of a one-sided storyline. I feel for you, bro. I feel for you. The residents stole from the mallers. There was a plan for that tanker from the beginning and that plan was quite clearly to destroy as many of the biters as they could. The residents fired the first shot and the mallers reacted accordingly. This isn't rocket science, it's just the nature of the world that the story is being told in.

So Pegs did wrong and she should be dealt with like the dog she is.


Sadly I think most of the We're Alive listeners have a completely 1 sided view of the We're Alive universe. That the Tower residents are the "good guys" and everyone else is bad, instead of looking at it more logically from the "story of survival" standpoint. And I thought I was the only one that realized that the Tower started the conflict with the Malllers, if the residents had just given Latch and Scratch what was in their territory back maybe just maybe the Tower would still be standing. I mean the number 1 rule of taking something that someone else has already claimed is prepare for the worse because you don't know what their capable of. And everyone completely underestimated the Mallers. So this is the price they pay...

Osiris
Aug 1st, 2011, 01:44 PM
Sadly I think most of the We're Alive listeners have a completely 1 sided view of the We're Alive universe. That the Tower residents are the "good guys" and everyone else is bad, instead of looking at it more logically from the "story of survival" standpoint. And I thought I was the only one that realized that the Tower started the conflict with the Malllers, if the residents had just given Latch and Scratch what was in their territory back maybe just maybe the Tower would still be standing. I mean the number 1 rule of taking something that someone else has already claimed is prepare for the worse because you don't know what their capable of. And everyone completely underestimated the Mallers. So this is the price they pay...

True story, sir. True story.

nikvoodoo
Aug 1st, 2011, 01:47 PM
You're making a lot of assumptions. If you consider the only force of 'good' to be the residents of the tower, then yes you logic works. If you consider that everyone is simply trying to stay alive the only way they can, then your logic falls apart. Your sense of right and wrong is distorted through the lens of a one-sided storyline. I feel for you, bro. I feel for you. The residents stole from the mallers. There was a plan for that tanker from the beginning and that plan was quite clearly to destroy as many of the biters as they could. The residents fired the first shot and the mallers reacted accordingly. This isn't rocket science, it's just the nature of the world that the story is being told in.

So Pegs did wrong and she should be dealt with like the dog she is.


But by your own logic of doing what is right by them, Pegs was defending herself from an act of aggression. Perspective works in both directions. Yes, the Tower committed the first act, but the Mallers escalated the conflict, and they paid the price for it.

And technically, Durai fired the first shots of the war. He was just aiming at cameras. Had the Tower put armed guards on the balconies and they were trained right, they would have fired on the Mallers as soon as they heard the shots.

Osiris
Aug 1st, 2011, 01:52 PM
But by your own logic of doing what is right by them, Pegs was defending herself from an act of aggression. Perspective works in both directions. Yes, the Tower committed the first act, but the Mallers escalated the conflict, and they paid the price for it.

And technically, Durai fired the first shots of the war. He was just aiming at cameras. Had the Tower put armed guards on the balconies and they were trained right, they would have fired on the Mallers as soon as they heard the shots.

WRONG. Burt fired the first shot [first introduction of Scratch and Latch, showing the two that there was only way of reasoning with the residents: with force] of the conflict between forces. This is canon and cannot be disputed. Pegs may have been defending herself from an act of aggression, but that act would likely have never taken place had the tanker not been stolen from the mallers in the first place. Either side of the coin you flip to, murder is still murder. Yes, I am clearly ignoring everything Scratch has done in the past. Fanboys do that. Deal.

nikvoodoo
Aug 1st, 2011, 02:11 PM
WRONG. Burt fired the first shot [first introduction of Scratch and Latch, showing the two that there was only way of reasoning with the residents: with force] of the conflict between forces. This is canon and cannot be disputed. Pegs may have been defending herself from an act of aggression, but that act would likely have never taken place had the tanker not been stolen from the mallers in the first place. Either side of the coin you flip to, murder is still murder. Yes, I am clearly ignoring everything Scratch has done in the past. Fanboys do that. Deal.

I said the War. Not the overall conflict. Burt fired the first shot in the overall conflict between the Tower and the Mallers. The War is accepted as the contents of Chapter 12. Hence why the chapter is called "The War."

The stolen property is what caused the conflict, not Burt's dead eye shot on the mirror. And the shot was taken only after an acceptable trade could not be established for the release of the Tanker. Had Burt killed Latch or Scratch and leaving the other alive to go back to the Mallers would fulfill your scenario of Burt's shot causing the escalation by using only force. Remember, the only part of this story that Durai knows is the theft because Scratch lied to him and pinned it on Charlie. The only thing that matters to Durai (other than wanting the Tower to live in) is the theft.

Osiris
Aug 1st, 2011, 09:07 PM
I said the War. Not the overall conflict. Burt fired the first shot in the overall conflict between the Tower and the Mallers. The War is accepted as the contents of Chapter 12. Hence why the chapter is called "The War."

The stolen property is what caused the conflict, not Burt's dead eye shot on the mirror. And the shot was taken only after an acceptable trade could not be established for the release of the Tanker. Had Burt killed Latch or Scratch and leaving the other alive to go back to the Mallers would fulfill your scenario of Burt's shot causing the escalation by using only force. Remember, the only part of this story that Durai knows is the theft because Scratch lied to him and pinned it on Charlie. The only thing that matters to Durai (other than wanting the Tower to live in) is the theft.

I stopped reading after you began arguing semantics. The cause of the war is the theft of the tanker. Fact. The first aggressively hostile move is Burt shooting at the mirror. The first shot of the 'war' was taken from the tower. Let's have more semantic arguments.... Bill shot a mirror belonging to the mallers. The mallers shot a few cameras belonging to the tower. Blah blah blah, things happened, tempers flared and Pegs shot a man in cold blood. Whether or not that guy was in the wrong is so massively debatable that it isn't worth arguing any further than this. Facts are facts. The first hostile activity was a direct result of Burt, Saul and whatsername stealing the tanker. Spin it any way you feel like from that point, but you're not going to argue beyond the facts. Even though it's lots of fun.







Scratch4Life

nikvoodoo
Aug 1st, 2011, 09:20 PM
I stopped reading after you began arguing semantics.


So I'll do the same and stop reading your post when you start arguing semantics.

Now when you go back and re-read my post like you should have in the first place, I said the first act of the conflict was the Tower stealing the tanker. But since you insist on continuing to argue, I'll turn this on your girl Scratch and say that the first aggressively hostile act was Scratch pointing a gun at Lizzy and claiming she'll shoot her. Facts are facts. She's the first person to act out of hostility. These are facts that can't be debated.

Osiris
Aug 1st, 2011, 09:26 PM
So I'll do the same and stop reading your post when you start arguing semantics.

Now when you go back and re-read my post like you should have in the first place, I said the first act of the conflict was the Tower stealing the tanker. But since you insist on continuing to argue, I'll turn this on your girl Scratch and say that the first aggressively hostile act was Scratch pointing a gun at Lizzy and claiming she'll shoot her. Facts are facts. She's the first person to act out of hostility. These are facts that can't be debated.


Lol. You're such an ass and that's why I <3 you. I DID read your post and like I said yadda yadda yadda, things happened. The first shot fired in an open act of aggression was Burt. Scratch pointed an empty gun at Lizzy. Why wouldn't Scratch react that way though? Their shit had just been jacked and the thieves made aggressive moves towards them when confronted. It's one of those 'who did what first' arguments and we know the root cause of all of it. The theft of the tanker which had been earmarked and needed for a greater purpose. One that would have been a benefit to both sides. So... the first hostile act would be consider the trespassing and theft on behalf of the tower residents. This is the only fact that cannot be disputed in this round of arguments. Had the residents not stolen that tanker, Scratch and Latch would have never confronted Saul, Burt and Lizzy. Burt would have never fired a shot in a show-off 'don't fuck with the best' move, Saul would have never had reason to follow Scratch and Latch. Scratch would have never seen him spying on her and taken that as an act of hostility, chased his candy ass down and eventually ended up knocking on the front door of the tower. Should we go back further?

nikvoodoo
Aug 1st, 2011, 09:41 PM
Lol. You're such an ass and that's why I <3 you. I DID read your post and like I said yadda yadda yadda, things happened. The first shot fired in an open act of aggression was Burt. Scratch pointed an empty gun at Lizzy. Why wouldn't Scratch react that way though? Their shit had just been jacked and the thieves made aggressive moves towards them when confronted. It's one of those 'who did what first' arguments and we know the root cause of all of it. The theft of the tanker which had been earmarked and needed for a greater purpose. One that would have been a benefit to both sides. So... the first hostile act would be consider the trespassing and theft on behalf of the tower residents. This is the only fact that cannot be disputed in this round of arguments. Had the residents not stolen that tanker, Scratch and Latch would have never confronted Saul, Burt and Lizzy. Burt would have never fired a shot in a show-off 'don't fuck with the best' move, Saul would have never had reason to follow Scratch and Latch. Scratch would have never seen him spying on her and taken that as an act of hostility, chased his candy ass down and eventually ended up knocking on the front door of the tower. Should we go back further?

I <3 sparring with you and I knew you had to have read the whole thing :)

We could go back further and argue the semantics of stealing something while ignorant of ownership and territory but that would just bring us back to pretty much where we are now...and it would take about 3 days.

I understand the rally cry against the lack of gray area some people view the Mallers (THEY ARE BAD BAD PEOPLE WHO NEED TO BE HURT SEVERELY!), I'm not one of them. I've argued the Maller perspective up and down the forum because it's boring to have antagonists who are purely bad and nothing else. I agree the stolen tanker is the issue that started it all, I just personally think it's Scratch who escalated it beyond the initial problem.

Osiris
Aug 1st, 2011, 10:00 PM
I <3 sparring with you and I knew you had to have read the whole thing :)

We could go back further and argue the semantics of stealing something while ignorant of ownership and territory but that would just bring us back to pretty much where we are now...and it would take about 3 days.

I understand the rally cry against the lack of gray area some people view the Mallers (THEY ARE BAD BAD PEOPLE WHO NEED TO BE HURT SEVERELY!), I'm not one of them. I've argued the Maller perspective up and down the forum because it's boring to have antagonists who are purely bad and nothing else. I agree the stolen tanker is the issue that started it all, I just personally think it's Scratch who escalated it beyond the initial problem.

I agree to disagree, sir. Scratch may have served as catalyst for the 'War' but I think the overall reluctance and aggressive posturing that Michael took with Durai was the downfall of the tower. There may have not been an amicable solution to the situation, but... hindsight is 20/20 right?

Osiris
Aug 1st, 2011, 10:02 PM
For the record, I hated Latch.

nikvoodoo
Aug 1st, 2011, 10:03 PM
I agree to disagree, sir. Scratch may have served as catalyst for the 'War' but I think the overall reluctance and aggressive posturing that Michael took with Durai was the downfall of the tower. There may have not been an amicable solution to the situation, but... hindsight is 20/20 right?

Agreed. I would really liked to have seen how that situation would have been resolved if Pegs was able to continue to negotiate. Durai seemed to soften up a touch to her...now whether that be a tactic or legit...guess we'll never know...oh but no...Some asshat had to shoot off a couple of shots and ruin our fun.

Osiris
Aug 1st, 2011, 10:13 PM
Agreed. I would really liked to have seen how that situation would have been resolved if Pegs was able to continue to negotiate. Durai seemed to soften up a touch to her...now whether that be a tactic or legit...guess we'll never know...oh but no...Some asshat had to shoot off a couple of shots and ruin our fun.

I would give anything to find out who the shooter was. He's (or she's) the fucktard who brought it all down.

Cabbage Patch
Aug 1st, 2011, 10:24 PM
There seem to be a lot of people on the Forum that are extremely fond of the Mallers, to the point that they’re willing to overlook some pretty glaring character flaws. Let’s not forget that the Mallers are, at their core, a criminal society. The Mallers’ territory wasn’t clearly defined, but we know it included all the areas where they scavenged for supplies, and we know that that included the Tower (Tardust and Bricks were just blocks away hunting for runaway slaves when they captured Lizzie). The incident with the tanker didn’t cause the conflict, it just put the Tower on the Mallers’ radar. In my opinion the Mallers felt that they already owned the Tower, and that everyone in it was a squatter and an unclaimed slave.

yarri
Aug 1st, 2011, 10:30 PM
There seem to be a lot of people on the Forum that are extremely fond of the Mallers, to the point that they’re willing to overlook some pretty glaring character flaws. Let’s not forget that the Mallers are, at their core, a criminal society. The Mallers’ territory wasn’t clearly defined, but we know it included all the areas where they scavenged for supplies, and we know that that included the Tower (Tardust and Bricks were just blocks away hunting for runaway slaves when they captured Lizzie). The incident with the tanker didn’t cause the conflict, it just put the Tower on the Mallers’ radar. In my opinion the Mallers felt that they already owned the Tower, and that everyone in it was a squatter and an unclaimed slave.

Cabbage Patch, I agree with your post. The Mallers operate under toddler mentality. "If I can see it its mine." "If you think its yours. Its mine" "If I touched it in the last day. Its mine" etc... How do you defend your self against a force that has already decided your stuff is theirs?

HardKor
Aug 1st, 2011, 10:33 PM
There seem to be a lot of people on the Forum that are extremely fond of the Mallers, to the point that they're willing to overlook some pretty glaring character flaws. Let's not forget that the Mallers are, at their core, a criminal society. The Mallers' territory wasn't clearly defined, but we know it included all the areas where they scavenged for supplies, and we know that that included the Tower (Tardust and Bricks were just blocks away hunting for runaway slaves when they captured Lizzie). The incident with the tanker didn't cause the conflict, it just put the Tower on the Mallers' radar. In my opinion the Mallers felt that they already owned the Tower, and that everyone in it was a squatter and an unclaimed slave.

I agree. When the Mallers first came to the Tower (both when they sent Scratch and Latch and then later when they showed up en-masse for the War) they weren't looking for their stolen tanker. They were looking to negotiate a deal to move in. And to me that means they most likely wanted to take over from the inside, since they had the numbers advantage. And while the shots that started the War cut off the negotiations so we'll never know for sure how things would have ended up if the Tower and Mallers had brokered a deal, my suspicion leads me to think it would have been more Trojan Horse than alliance.

Creem_Filling
Aug 1st, 2011, 10:35 PM
There seem to be a lot of people on the Forum that are extremely fond of the Mallers, to the point that they’re willing to overlook some pretty glaring character flaws. Let’s not forget that the Mallers are, at their core, a criminal society. The Mallers’ territory wasn’t clearly defined, but we know it included all the areas where they scavenged for supplies, and we know that that included the Tower (Tardust and Bricks were just blocks away hunting for runaway slaves when they captured Lizzie). The incident with the tanker didn’t cause the conflict, it just put the Tower on the Mallers’ radar. In my opinion the Mallers felt that they already owned the Tower, and that everyone in it was a squatter and an unclaimed slave.

I agree. People seem to ignore how aggressively violent they are. Yes, the tower fired at them, but then (Angel or Michael, can't remember) tried to explain to them that it was a rogue person. Plus how willing they are to kill all these innocent people and hold people slaves does not justify that they're "just trying to survive". Honestly, I feel more sympathy for the colony. While I feel that the chain of command was bad, I can also see the logic in it. The mallers have completely lost their since of humanity.

nikvoodoo
Aug 1st, 2011, 10:38 PM
There seem to be a lot of people on the Forum that are extremely fond of the Mallers, to the point that they’re willing to overlook some pretty glaring character flaws. Let’s not forget that the Mallers are, at their core, a criminal society. The Mallers’ territory wasn’t clearly defined, but we know it included all the areas where they scavenged for supplies, and we know that that included the Tower (Tardust and Bricks were just blocks away hunting for runaway slaves when they captured Lizzie). The incident with the tanker didn’t cause the conflict, it just put the Tower on the Mallers’ radar. In my opinion the Mallers felt that they already owned the Tower, and that everyone in it was a squatter and an unclaimed slave.

It's hard to say the Mallers claimed the places they scavenged as their territory. We don't know exactly how large they think their territory is, but they hit Locked and Loaded but I don't think they consider that their territory. No one was standing guard there when Angel and Saul went there, but they did have people looking out for the fuel depot (Scratch, Latch and Charlie). And we don't know how far away Lizzy was when she was kidnapped by Bricks and Tardust. Presumably, she was close to the Tower, but we don't know for certain.The Mallers were en route to the Arena when she was found, and The Tower is on the way to the Arena from the Mall. Lizzy's circumstances are most likely completely coincidental.

The attraction to the bad guy in any piece of entertainment is usually for one reason: they do the things you'd love to do, but you know you can't. I don't think any of the Pro-Maller crowd would claim they forget they are convicts or even bad people. I think they embrace the fact that they were convicts and are now free from the rules of society and can really go to the extremes of their personality. But to claim that they are simply bad people and that's that is short sighted. They are still people, meaning they have multiple facets to their personality. If Scratch didn't have the ability to care or love, she wouldn't have flipped her shit when Latch was killed. If Durai was a cold blooded sociopath, he wouldn't have sounded scared or anxious when the Shots Heard Round the World were fired in chapter 12.

You can hate them, but don't think they are your simple run of the mill mustache twirling bad guys who tie damsels in distress to the railroad tracks for no reason.

HardKor
Aug 1st, 2011, 10:58 PM
The attraction to the bad guy in any piece of entertainment is usually for one reason: they do the things you'd love to do, but you know you can't. I don't think any of the Pro-Maller crowd would claim they forget they are convicts or even bad people. I think they embrace the fact that they were convicts and are now free from the rules of society and can really go to the extremes of their personality. But to claim that they are simply bad people and that's that is short sighted. They are still people, meaning they have multiple facets to their personality. If Scratch didn't have the ability to care or love, she wouldn't have flipped her shit when Latch was killed. If Durai was a cold blooded sociopath, he wouldn't have sounded scared or anxious when the Shots Heard Round the World were fired in chapter 12.

You can hate them, but don't think they are your simple run of the mill mustache twirling bad guys who tie damsels in distress to the railroad tracks for no reason.

Yeah I do find many of the Mallers to be intriguing and even sympathetic. Bricks comes to mind first as he seems to be more of a "dumb muscle" type or is at least treated that way by those around him. But he seems to show more compassion than the others we've seen (heard). Even Tardust would come off as more affably evil if he hadn't been introduced as a scumbag rapist (I don't care how many witty lines he gets, there's no coming back from that). And Durai strikes me as more of an organized crime type, a "professional" who is more calculating than most. Scratch though is rage incarnate. Even when she's "under control" her voice comes off as seething rage bubbling just beneath the surface and when she blows up I feel the need to put on my brown pants if you know what I mean.
She's been willing to not only kill some 20 odd Tower residents in her quest for revenge, but has also show a willingness to "dispose" of anyone who even remotely stands between her and what she wants. She uses the other Mallers as cannon fodder because they are "weak" and she may be planning to usurp even Durai. Scratch is a well done character but she doesn't exactly bring out the warm fuzzy feelings.

Miss
Aug 2nd, 2011, 12:43 PM
The whole tanker innsident could have been handled more.... well slightly diffrent I suppose....... like the tower suggesting they bring somehow empty it then have brought it back, but it was in that confrintation that brought the tower group to the notice of the mallers and it was meationed earler the mallers are a bunch of hard core criminals so pretty much full of aggression and once they found out where the tower was and relazing that they had power (once the power went out) that aggresive side of the group came out and regardless of how the talks went when Duri showed up they came prepared to aggressively take what they wanted whether or not the tower said sure come on in there would have been a fight, and Mike said quite clearly we dont know you well enough and not prepared to let you in at this point in time, even though he had no intentions of ever letting them in, and Pegs killed Latch when he came in to the tower to cause harm violence and potentally death to her Mike and the rest of the tower, what was she to do LET HIM, and then there is Scrach the woman who was a slight nutter beforehand loses her twin which pushes her even more over the edge and starts coming up with varrious situations in order to exact her revenge for her much milder mannered twin brothers death and the tankers at the arena and the one the didnt get blown up there gave her the oppritunatty to do so, and getting her hands on a memeber of the tower(Lizzie) was just icing on the cake

Osiris
Aug 2nd, 2011, 01:00 PM
The whole tanker innsident could have been handled more.... well slightly diffrent I suppose....... like the tower suggesting they bring somehow empty it then have brought it back, but it was in that confrintation that brought the tower group to the notice of the mallers and it was meationed earler the mallers are a bunch of hard core criminals so pretty much full of aggression and once they found out where the tower was and relazing that they had power (once the power went out) that aggresive side of the group came out and regardless of how the talks went when Duri showed up they came prepared to aggressively take what they wanted whether or not the tower said sure come on in there would have been a fight, and Mike said quite clearly we dont know you well enough and not prepared to let you in at this point in time, even though he had no intentions of ever letting them in, and Pegs killed Latch when he came in to the tower to cause harm violence and potentally death to her Mike and the rest of the tower, what was she to do LET HIM, and then there is Scrach the woman who was a slight nutter beforehand loses her twin which pushes her even more over the edge and starts coming up with varrious situations in order to exact her revenge for her much milder mannered twin brothers death and the tankers at the arena and the one the didnt get blown up there gave her the oppritunatty to do so, and getting her hands on a memeber of the tower(Lizzie) was just icing on the cake

Well I mean... let's not say things we can't take back or anything. :(

Guestmaster
Aug 2nd, 2011, 01:44 PM
The whole tanker innsident could have been handled more.... well slightly diffrent I suppose....... like the tower suggesting they bring somehow empty it then have brought it back, but it was in that confrintation that brought the tower group to the notice of the mallers and it was meationed earler the mallers are a bunch of hard core criminals so pretty much full of aggression and once they found out where the tower was and relazing that they had power (once the power went out) that aggresive side of the group came out and regardless of how the talks went when Duri showed up they came prepared to aggressively take what they wanted whether or not the tower said sure come on in there would have been a fight, and Mike said quite clearly we dont know you well enough and not prepared to let you in at this point in time, even though he had no intentions of ever letting them in, and Pegs killed Latch when he came in to the tower to cause harm violence and potentally death to her Mike and the rest of the tower, what was she to do LET HIM, and then there is Scrach the woman who was a slight nutter beforehand loses her twin which pushes her even more over the edge and starts coming up with varrious situations in order to exact her revenge for her much milder mannered twin brothers death and the tankers at the arena and the one the didnt get blown up there gave her the oppritunatty to do so, and getting her hands on a memeber of the tower(Lizzie) was just icing on the cake

I don't mean to de-rail the discussion, but that was a pretty impressive run-on sentence.

reaper239
Aug 2nd, 2011, 02:01 PM
You're making a lot of assumptions. If you consider the only force of 'good' to be the residents of the tower, then yes you logic works. If you consider that everyone is simply trying to stay alive the only way they can, then your logic falls apart. Your sense of right and wrong is distorted through the lens of a one-sided storyline. I feel for you, bro. I feel for you. The residents stole from the mallers. There was a plan for that tanker from the beginning and that plan was quite clearly to destroy as many of the biters as they could. The residents fired the first shot and the mallers reacted accordingly. This isn't rocket science, it's just the nature of the world that the story is being told in.

So Pegs did wrong and she should be dealt with like the dog she is.


incorrect, my view of the we're alive story is through the lens of my own sense of right and wrong and has nothing to do with the story itself. personally i think all the mallers should be executed. they're criminals who acted agressively towards the tower. remember when durai shot out the cameras? first shot. and by your logic scratch and latch should have died when they drew down on saul lizzy and burt during the tanker incident.

what seperates man from beast is humanity. humanity is defending the defenseless from tyranny. i just wish pegs had more bullets and finnished scratch when she had the chance

Miss
Aug 5th, 2011, 01:14 PM
I don't mean to de-rail the discussion, but that was a pretty impressive run-on sentence.
Im sorry that I spent most of my life being illiterete untill a few years ago and that my grammer skills arnt up to your standerds, but I was under the idea this wasnt a site about poor grammer skills but about a really awsome audiodrama

HorrorHiro
Aug 9th, 2011, 11:32 AM
Cabbage Patch, I agree with your post. The Mallers operate under toddler mentality. "If I can see it its mine." "If you think its yours. Its mine" "If I touched it in the last day. Its mine" etc... How do you defend your self against a force that has already decided your stuff is theirs?

You can prove none of that.

HorrorHiro
Aug 9th, 2011, 11:36 AM
incorrect, my view of the we're alive story is through the lens of my own sense of right and wrong and has nothing to do with the story itself. personally i think all the mallers should be executed. they're criminals who acted agressively towards the tower. remember when durai shot out the cameras? first shot. and by your logic scratch and latch should have died when they drew down on saul lizzy and burt during the tanker incident.

what seperates man from beast is humanity. humanity is defending the defenseless from tyranny. i just wish pegs had more bullets and finnished scratch when she had the chance

This is less about what we know and what we assume so can we all just agree to disagree until we actually know anything definitive or absolute about this antagonist?

Osiris
Aug 9th, 2011, 04:30 PM
incorrect, my view of the we're alive story is through the lens of my own sense of right and wrong and has nothing to do with the story itself. personally i think all the mallers should be executed. they're criminals who acted agressively towards the tower. remember when durai shot out the cameras? first shot. and by your logic scratch and latch should have died when they drew down on saul lizzy and burt during the tanker incident.

what seperates man from beast is humanity. humanity is defending the defenseless from tyranny. i just wish pegs had more bullets and finnished scratch when she had the chance


Again, you failed to see my point. You also seem to consider Durai's actions as being the catalyst of it all. You are clearly wrong. The action which lead to all of it was Burt, Saul and Ditzy stealing the tanker. You are blind if you don't see that. By my logic Scratch and Latch should NOT have died when they drew on the three riders who had invaded their territory (ignorant of doing so or not). By my logic they were legitimately trying to protect what was theirs. Remember when Burt took a pot shot to show his prowess with a pistol? That happened long, long before Durai popped any cameras at the tower.

What separates man from beast is NOT humanity. It is the ability to communicate abstract thoughts and the need for comfort above all - albeit a western philosophy. Humanity is NOT defending the defenceless from tyranny. Humanity is the quality or condition of being human; human nature. As we all know human nature is to kill for what's mine. It has been since the dawn of time and will continue to be so long after you and I are both dust, my friend.

By nature humans are vile to each other. I take what is mine. I take what is yours if I want it. Don't mistake your personal ideals for those globally accepted as canon. You're deluding yourself to do so. Read a newspaper or pick up a history book. From the beginning of documented history people have been shitty assholes to each, often for no better reason than they disagreed.

Ra1th
Aug 9th, 2011, 06:13 PM
Again, you failed to see my point. You also seem to consider Durai's actions as being the catalyst of it all. You are clearly wrong. The action which lead to all of it was Burt, Saul and Ditzy stealing the tanker. You are blind if you don't see that. By my logic Scratch and Latch should NOT have died when they drew on the three riders who had invaded their territory (ignorant of doing so or not). By my logic they were legitimately trying to protect what was theirs. Remember when Burt took a pot shot to show his prowess with a pistol? That happened long, long before Durai popped any cameras at the tower.

What separates man from beast is NOT humanity. It is the ability to communicate abstract thoughts and the need for comfort above all - albeit a western philosophy. Humanity is NOT defending the defenceless from tyranny. Humanity is the quality or condition of being human; human nature. As we all know human nature is to kill for what's mine. It has been since the dawn of time and will continue to be so long after you and I are both dust, my friend.

By nature humans are vile to each other. I take what is mine. I take what is yours if I want it. Don't mistake your personal ideals for those globally accepted as canon. You're deluding yourself to do so. Read a newspaper or pick up a history book. From the beginning of documented history people have been shitty assholes to each, often for no better reason than they disagreed.


I full on agree with this but I'd say the shot fired first wasn't so much durai taking out cameras, or Saul/Burt/Lizzy taking the tanker, but the mystery person who opened fire on the mallers right as the two sides were having a stand off. Until then there were other possibilities, maybe not possibilities that seemed appealing to either side, but possibilities other than direct warfare existed.

Osiris
Aug 9th, 2011, 06:31 PM
I full on agree with this but I'd say the shot fired first wasn't so much durai taking out cameras, or Saul/Burt/Lizzy taking the tanker, but the mystery person who opened fire on the mallers right as the two sides were having a stand off. Until then there were other possibilities, maybe not possibilities that seemed appealing to either side, but possibilities other than direct warfare existed.

Right on, brotha.

Ra1th
Aug 9th, 2011, 07:45 PM
I agree. People seem to ignore how aggressively violent they are. Yes, the tower fired at them, but then (Angel or Michael, can't remember) tried to explain to them that it was a rogue person. Plus how willing they are to kill all these innocent people and hold people slaves does not justify that they're "just trying to survive". Honestly, I feel more sympathy for the colony. While I feel that the chain of command was bad, I can also see the logic in it. The mallers have completely lost their since of humanity.

You're looking at this with a HEAVY bias in favor of the tower. In that situation both sides are on red alert, Michael and Durai were in a heated argument, they are on the verge of blows, ANY action that is considered even remotely aggressive would start a war. There is no "Wait we didn't mean that". Once those shots were fired, that sealed their fate. Think of it this way, you are about to be in a fight with another guy. You're both pissed and tensions are high, and you're in each other's faces, and then all out of no where you punch him in the face. After that point, you are now in a fight. It doesn't matter if your arm acted on its own, there are no "wait I didn't mean it" the fight will end when one of you is on the floor or if someone pulls you two apart. It's the same situation here. The tower was either sabotaged by the rat into fighting a war by the rat shooting on person, or some drunk tower resident shot. Either way it doesn't really matter, by that point the war had already begun. An even better example of this was in 1914, when Serbian militants assassinated Austria's Duke Ferdinand. It didn't really matter that the serbians who did it were acting on their own and not on orders from Serbia. Austria retaliated with war, and because of the alliances that had been set up at that point, every major European power was sucked into what we now call WWI.

From the maller's perspective, the tower opened fire on them, the tower declared war, the Mallers will retaliate.

HorrorHiro
Aug 10th, 2011, 12:57 PM
You're looking at this with a HEAVY bias in favor of the tower. In that situation both sides are on red alert, Michael and Durai were in a heated argument, they are on the verge of blows, ANY action that is considered even remotely aggressive would start a war. There is no "Wait we didn't mean that". Once those shots were fired, that sealed their fate. Think of it this way, you are about to be in a fight with another guy. You're both pissed and tensions are high, and you're in each other's faces, and then all out of no where you punch him in the face. After that point, you are now in a fight. It doesn't matter if your arm acted on its own, there are no "wait I didn't mean it" the fight will end when one of you is on the floor or if someone pulls you two apart. It's the same situation here. The tower was either sabotaged by the rat into fighting a war by the rat shooting on person, or some drunk tower resident shot. Either way it doesn't really matter, by that point the war had already begun. An even better example of this was in 1914, when Serbian militants assassinated Austria's Duke Ferdinand. It didn't really matter that the serbians who did it were acting on their own and not on orders from Serbia. Austria retaliated with war, and because of the alliances that had been set up at that point, every major European power was sucked into what we now call WWI.

From the maller's perspective, the tower opened fire on them, the tower declared war, the Mallers will retaliate.

Majority of We're Alive listeners look at the We're Alive universe with a HEAVY bias in favor of the Tower. I highly doubt it was anyone's intention to make the Tower residence seem like the "good guys" but the simple fact that the story follows this particular group of survivors is enough for people to look at them with gold tinted glasses and easily justify any and everything the Tower residence or artists formerly known as Tower Residence do, have done, and most likely ever will do.

Kind of like that guy who calls himself a "patriot" simply because he'll jump to defend any and every action that can be linked to the United States. Whether it be the Vietnam War, the rest of the Cold War, nation building via imperialism etc...

reaper239
Aug 10th, 2011, 01:56 PM
Again, you failed to see my point. You also seem to consider Durai's actions as being the catalyst of it all. You are clearly wrong. The action which lead to all of it was Burt, Saul and Ditzy stealing the tanker. You are blind if you don't see that. By my logic Scratch and Latch should NOT have died when they drew on the three riders who had invaded their territory (ignorant of doing so or not). By my logic they were legitimately trying to protect what was theirs. Remember when Burt took a pot shot to show his prowess with a pistol? That happened long, long before Durai popped any cameras at the tower.

What separates man from beast is NOT humanity. It is the ability to communicate abstract thoughts and the need for comfort above all - albeit a western philosophy. Humanity is NOT defending the defenceless from tyranny. Humanity is the quality or condition of being human; human nature. As we all know human nature is to kill for what's mine. It has been since the dawn of time and will continue to be so long after you and I are both dust, my friend.

By nature humans are vile to each other. I take what is mine. I take what is yours if I want it. Don't mistake your personal ideals for those globally accepted as canon. You're deluding yourself to do so. Read a newspaper or pick up a history book. From the beginning of documented history people have been shitty assholes to each, often for no better reason than they disagreed.


by you're logic the tower folks were also fully justified in all their actions. in fact you can't say that anyones actions are wrong because they all fall under the rubric of "doing what one must to survive" so the reality is you have a bias against the tower people. now that's fine but don't try to pass it off as saying that you are logical and i am not when your own statements violate the very tenants of your philosophy. unfortunately you also seem to have a very twisted view of human nature as i for one and most people i know for two don't line up with your human nature. the people who do line up with that view tend to be criminals, and the exact same people who make up the mallers.

Osiris
Aug 10th, 2011, 07:07 PM
by you're logic the tower folks were also fully justified in all their actions. in fact you can't say that anyones actions are wrong because they all fall under the rubric of "doing what one must to survive" so the reality is you have a bias against the tower people.

1. Did I say anyone's actions were wrong? No. I said they were doing what they to in order to survive or to protect what is theirs. I honestly don't believe that either side was wrong. I believe both sides were acting as they had to in order to make the best of their respective situations. So yes, by that logic the Residents were justified in their actions when defending their home. Just as the Mallers were justified in protecting what was theirs. If you stop for one minute and say 'If the Mallers tried to take what belonged to the tower and got mashed, then the tower was justified in its actions' you must also admit that the Mallers were equally within their rights to try and protect what they had claimed as theirs. Doing otherwise completely contradicts your own edict. Thanks for pointing out your fallacy. The reality is that YOU have a bias with regard to the story and that sides firmly with the Residents being the just side. I'm open to both sides of the coin. Pay attention there's a test later.


now that's fine but don't try to pass it off as saying that you are logical and i am not when your own statements violate the very tenants of your philosophy.

2. See point 1 and argue accordingly.


unfortunately you also seem to have a very twisted view of human nature as i for one and most people i know for two don't line up with your human nature. the people who do line up with that view tend to be criminals, and the exact same people who make up the mallers.

3. My view of human nature is based entirely off what I see on a daily basis in my city, province and country as well as across the globe [Mr. I Think They're Evil And Should Be Executed... prove me more right with every word you type]. Welcome to reality, human nature is to take. We are greedy by design. We are the only creature on the planet that kills for FUN. We kill for pleasure. Is it sinking in yet? Do I need to draw you a pretty picture? You don't watch the news? You never bothered to pay attention to the wars being waged across the globe? The atrocities being committed across huge sections of Africa, China, The Middle East? Christ, throw a fucking rock and you'll hit someone who has committed some sort of crime. Ever pick up a newspaper or history book? I'm afraid they would disagree with your philosophy. It is NOT shared by the majority of the planet I'm afraid. If it were there would be far, FAR less crime. This is not rocket science, this is common sense as well as common knowledge. Think of how your own view of reality is distorted through the lens of the story line. You're seeing a single perspective of a dire situation and you're trying to transpose your reality on top of that. Are you absolutely positive that every Maller is a criminal? That they are all deserving of capital punishment? You can say with absolutely certainty that each one of them should be executed? You're going to pass that judgment on people whom you have no frame of reference towards with the exception of the recollections of past events through one set of eyes?

Remember that this story is in fact being told in the past-tense. Consider that the victors are the ones who write the history books. Now, that being known (and it is fact) consider for a moment the spin YOU would put on your story. Would you tell your story from the side of an aggressive, greedy, manipulative group of warmongers? Or would you choose to paint yourself in the light of what is just and morally acceptable? The greater good.

Also, thanks for calling me a criminal, having no basis whatsoever to do so. I'll keep that in mind when you open your mouth next and perhaps I will return in kind. Backpedal. I'll wait patiently for you to do so.

nikvoodoo
Aug 10th, 2011, 11:44 PM
I'm going to interject myself briefly into the current conversation. Please stay away from personal attacks, and lets not assume anything about anyone's background or thought processes. Lets keep the conversation focused on the story and not on the individuals commenting on the story.

This is an interesting debate in and of itself especially since it's touching on a perspective we aren't privy to as listeners of We're Alive. We don't get the human perspective from the Mallers Camp as often as we hear from the Tower. It's really great to see people deconstructing, and thinking analytically about the motivations of all of the characters in a really deep and meaningful way. It helps add to the story for all of us. But there's no need to train the barrel on each other. Let's keep in constructive.

I'm not saying don't get invested or emotional about the debate. You can get heated about the conversation certainly and that's bound to happen. But keep the comments on point please.

This is not aimed at any one individual responding in this thread. I'm just saying in general lets keep cool heads when debating with opposing view points and remember we're all here to have fun.

Continue!

reaper239
Aug 11th, 2011, 05:54 AM
you've been saying the tower people were wrong the entire time. now you are right that the mallers would be justified in protecting what was theirs, so latch and scratch tracking them down to talk is...

PirateBeew
Aug 11th, 2011, 04:19 PM
owned much!

in any case i too am very happy the tower is gone i would of liked some loose ends tied up but maybe they will be tied up in there new habitat? I just wonder how the rest of the main group will get there...

And the mallers are annoying and deserve to die! although they are badass characters especially scratch.

I wonder if they will stay within the story seen as they have flown to a different region?

Osiris
Aug 11th, 2011, 07:42 PM
owned much!

in any case i too am very happy the tower is gone i would of liked some loose ends tied up but maybe they will be tied up in there new habitat? I just wonder how the rest of the main group will get there...

And the mallers are annoying and deserve to die! although they are badass characters especially scratch.

I wonder if they will stay within the story seen as they have flown to a different region?

Owned? Yeah, I have no idea why he continually tries to bury himself.

Osiris
Aug 11th, 2011, 08:45 PM
I'm going to suggest something to you right now and let's hope that I can explain it slowly enough for you. The story is being told from one perspective. That perspective is will, quite naturally,...