Towards a better Illyria |
Post Reply | Page 123 4> |
Author | |
Hucbold
Forum Warrior Joined: 20 Nov 2015 Location: Meilla Status: Offline Points: 251 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Posted: 03 Oct 2017 at 15:29 |
"We, the free citizens of Illyria, refusing to live under the yokes of tyranny and appression hereby resolve and mandate the following fundamental laws for the good governance of the kingdom.
All Illyrians are free to pursue their own course, free from intimidation or burdens of any kind provided that they observe the laws set out herein. All Illyrians are free to live where they choose subject only to the terms allowed herein for land claims. These laws recognise that towns and players each have the right to declare themselves non-combatants by appending the letters NC to their town name. A non-combatent town may not attack another active town either militarily or diplomatically. One that does is guilty of a war crime. A non-combatent town may defend itself but may not attack any other player town or encampment. Allowence will be made for hunting accidents where the encamped army was not present when the hunters were despatched. A non-combatent town in an alliance at war may be attacked, blocaded, thieved, spied and scouted but may not be sieged. A non-combatent town in an alliance at war changing its status to combatant is guilty of a war crime. An attack on a non-combatent town not at war or a siege on any active non-combatent town is a war crime. The punishment of a war crime is a just cause for war. A town with less than 1000 population is automatically regarded as non-combatant. Land claims are legal but are not automatically recognised. The opposition to a land claim is a just cause for war. Non-combatant towns are allowed, by right, within land claims. However, they may not have a standing army exceeding 2,000 troops; they may not have more than 10 T1 scouts (for hunting purposes); they may not set a ward targeting scouts. Land claimers have the right to scout at will any non-combatent towns within their claim. Land claimers may excercise lesser conditions but more severe ones. Cities within a land claim have the right to declare themselves non-combatent or to leave within 100 days of the establishment of the claim without interference from the land claimer. A failure to observe this law is a war crime. Individual combatent players who have a dispute may settle the dispute diplomatically or militarily. If they chose a military route, they do so by posting a notice on the forum. Either party may appeal to at most one other player for assistance. Other parties may not interfere. Individual disputes may excalate into alliance versus alliance wars. This may only be done by a war declaration. Extensive hostilities against another alliance without a declaration is a war crime. Alliances and individuals are free to attempt to set rules about encampments and harvesting within 10 squares of their cities. Attempting to set rules outside this area, other than via a land claim, are war crimes. Enforcing rules not displayed clearly on either the player's profile or the alliance's profile is a war crime. Player's have the right to leave an alliance during a war. They also have the right to define certain towns as non-combatent during a war. If a player rejoins an alliance during a war or redesignates a city as combatant, having previously designated it as non-combatant then both the player and the alliance are guilty of a war crime. A 'Pertual Pursuit Policy' is a war crime. The surrender terms for a war may include reparations in gold or resources, the disbandment of specified quantities of troops and diplomats and the exodus of no more than one town per player from or to a specified area on the map. If war crimes have been committed then the winner may petition the United Illyrian Security Council for more punitive measures. There will be a United Illyria Security Council. It will consist of the leaders of 10 alliances. The five alliances with the most towns will automatically be members - this membership may change as town numbers change. The other 5 members will be elected annually by the other alliances. The election will be performed via a forum thread. Each voting alliance will cast 1 vote per town that they own at the time of the election and may only vote for one alliance. Alliances may nominate themselves but alliances may not vote for themselves. In council votes, council members cast the number of votes for the towns they represent - either the number that voted for them or, for permanent members, their current number of towns. For resolutions to be carried, at least 6 members must vote in favour and members representing 60% of the represented towns must vote in favour. The UISC may alter the terms of this declaration - in which case the threshold for adoption is 7 members and 70% of represented towns' Any Security Council member may propose a motion. Voting concludes 7 days after the motion is proposed. The motion is put by posting in a forum thread. Voting is by alliance leaders in that thread. Persons who do not accept these rules may not seek any protection under its terms and may be subject to collective action by those who do." This is a PROPOSAL Discussion and proposals for ammendment are welcome. |
|
The Reaper
Greenhorn Joined: 03 Jun 2015 Location: Washington Status: Offline Points: 40 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Don't piss in my sandbox.
|
|
Zenorra
Greenhorn Joined: 21 Nov 2013 Location: USA Status: Offline Points: 46 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
You can do as you please, OUTSIDE of our land claim.
|
|
|
|
Ten Kulch
Postmaster Joined: 20 Jan 2017 Location: Fellandire Status: Offline Points: 678 |
Post Options
Thanks(1)
|
So to recap: The biggest alliances (by towns and population) would like to impose a number of restrictions and rules on the military alliances who scare them. 1. Players can decide if they are safe non-combatants, 2. Players can declare individual towns safe and non-combatant, 3. Only big alliances get a vote, 4. If we don't get our way, we will try to pig pile the alliances we don't like.
When are you muggle autocrats going to get it? Just because your accounts and alliances are big, and you have a half dozen permasat farms each, does not mean you are virtuous. You'd like to imagine that size alone is justification for making all the rules. There is no rational reason to let you decide the rules for all regions, alliances, and players, except one: force. You acknowledge that by the last lines, issuing an implied threat to everyone who doesn't agree to your rules. You've already ruled out their participation by slanting everything for size and population. This is the way that Elgea has been run for the last few years, and exactly why it is a stagnant husk. You are trying to preserve a doomed political system that is suffocating your continent. The server is being refreshed. The stagnant is being broken apart. The remaining active accounts are already moving to active alliances, which are far healthier and more engaging. Even if that renewal process threatens the big, old alliances, the breaking of that giant log jam can only be good for the game. |
|
Check out my blog, Warmongering in Illyriad for self-defense techniques, military city construction, and PvP strategies.
|
|
Wartow
Postmaster Joined: 20 May 2014 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 924 |
Post Options
Thanks(1)
|
I'm "a-ppressing" my back button to see what else is in the forums...
|
|
|
|
Hucbold
Forum Warrior Joined: 20 Nov 2015 Location: Meilla Status: Offline Points: 251 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Wrong. Every alliance gets to vote. Top 5 have permanent seats - they represent 394 towns out of 3216. The votes are weighted so they only have 12 1/4 % of the vote on any issue. The law of the land is then what the land decides. That's called democracy. You may win and 30 of you may be left playing the game with each other. This is genuinely an attempt to save a complex game from terrorists who could just as easily play violent games that abound out there. I'd be on your side if it took a couple of weeks to build up. In fact it takes years - so the destructive faction is wiping out years of people's effort - and laughing at them. That's what I want to stop.
|
|
kodabear
Postmaster General Player Council - Astronomer Joined: 18 Jun 2013 Location: Lucerna Status: Offline Points: 1515 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
We already tried something along these lines with pig but the failed due to being two sides. One side wanted to limit war and the other wanted to limit the damage of wars.
|
|
Fiona
Wordsmith Joined: 02 Jul 2014 Status: Offline Points: 151 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
A lot of words to go from calling us terrorists to war criminals. Nice job
|
|
Grom
Wordsmith Joined: 29 Sep 2017 Location: Mal Motsha Status: Offline Points: 185 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I could not be bothered to read the whole thing. But what makes you think you are the right person to set out guidelines (or even proposals) for server-wide behaviour? Your own behaviour landed you in a conflict that has not even seen its conclusion yet, and you seem to have a hard time inspiring just your own alliance.
|
|
Stukahh
Forum Warrior Joined: 03 Feb 2015 Location: Fellandire, BL Status: Offline Points: 266 |
Post Options
Thanks(1)
|
From the description of Illyriad on Steam -- "Build a city, Create an Empire! Research 400+ technologies, and Build 70+ buildings, Craft and Trade 380+ items in an entirely player driven market. Fight Wars and Forge Alliances with thousands of players and create your own Empire in this award-winning, critically-acclaimed MMO."
I assume the Developers wrote this brief description. The SINdicate is creating its own Empire as have many other alliances and confeds in the history of the game. It is impossible to be labelled a terrorist or war criminal in the context of this game. The devs are encouraging Empire building. You can only build an empire by stepping on the throats of your enemies. Such is life. We are doing what we are supposed to be doing and you are the person who is part of the problem rather than the solution. Stukahh |
|
I don't always drink. But when I do, I prefer the blood of my enemies.
|
|
Post Reply | Page 123 4> |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |