Print Page | Close Window

Way to nice community-problem for the future

Printed From: Illyriad
Category: The World
Forum Name: Politics & Diplomacy
Forum Description: If you run an alliance on Elgea, here's where you should make your intentions public.
URL: http://forum.illyriad.co.uk/forum_posts.asp?TID=1755
Printed Date: 28 Nov 2020 at 20:31
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.03 - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: Way to nice community-problem for the future
Posted By: Attila the Hun
Subject: Way to nice community-problem for the future
Date Posted: 07 Apr 2011 at 23:05
NOTICE: before anyone reads on, note that i am not screaming for someone to attack me or use hostile diplomatic action against me. This is simply an observation made in the past few months.

This community is nice as a whole, but the protections go on way to much. Wether it be newbie protection or alliance protection, it is becoming increasingly harder for players to attack someone else without fear of 40 other people joining in and crushing the op poser.

This is one of the reasons the factions are being brought into play, so people can actually use their armies without fear of the above^ incidents.

As of right now this game is purely a level up your city and socialize game, thus the reason many people have left this game.

That's all I have to say right now as my head has done a brain fart. I await the user comments.


-------------
It's just a game. :)



Replies:
Posted By: The_Dude
Date Posted: 07 Apr 2011 at 23:20
ATH - If you want a war...How many times have I said this...Post a Request for a War Partner, set out your terms and conditions, and see if you can get a enemy to fight.
 
Otherwise, it sounds like you are complaining that you can't find someone weaker than you to beat up on.  Interesting how no one likes fights that they might lose.
 
Yes, some people get bored and leave Illy.  That is NOT Illy's problem.  That is simply a case of Illy not fulfilling certain people's entertainment goals.  Illy can not be everything to everyone.  However, if the Staff felt that Illy was suffering a declining player-base, I am certain that they would modify Illy to satisfy the gamer market.


Posted By: Attila the Hun
Date Posted: 07 Apr 2011 at 23:23
NOTICE: before anyone reads on, note that i am not screaming for someone to attack me or use hostile diplomatic action against me. This is simply an observation made in the past few months.

and im not blaming illy, im blaming the community, ive been in allainces where they have  a few dozen naps and a dozen or so confeds, and those allainces to which are confeded have a nother few dozen.





-------------
It's just a game. :)


Posted By: Attila the Hun
Date Posted: 07 Apr 2011 at 23:27
For those that go "go pick on someone your own size" no one smart does that. no one  historically has done that, its not practical. All this newbie friendly environment also allows a smaller player to insult larger withotu fear of siege. I can speak in the past of when i have done that and with JR shortly after he made my logo and we started disliking each other.

-------------
It's just a game. :)


Posted By: Brids17
Date Posted: 07 Apr 2011 at 23:30
Originally posted by The_Dude The_Dude wrote:

Interesting how no one likes fights that they might lose.


As it's been said before, it has more to due with the price for losing, which is often all your cities and sometimes, all your research and less about losing in itself. 

Originally posted by The_Dude The_Dude wrote:

That is simply a case of Illy not fulfilling certain people's entertainment goals.  Illy can not be everything to everyone.


True but when I game boasts large numbers of miltitary and diplo units and tons of military strategy, it makes one wonder what the point of it all is. Illyriad is largely focused on being a strategic war game. That might not be all it is but it's certainly a large part of it, so it's rather unfortunate that said part of the game is so rarely utilized and so difficult to use without risking utter destruction on your end.



Posted By: scottfitz
Date Posted: 07 Apr 2011 at 23:51
These are two separate issues. 

Attacking new players is not something I am willing to tolerate at all, it is downright cowardly and it damages the game. I will attack any such bullies and enjoy doing it.

As far as the second point, that people are unwilling to attack anyone for fear of reprisals, this is simply not happening. There are conflicts all over Illyriad and most of them stay small. Even the recent conflict between DB and CHAMP,  when all was said and done, was, for the most  part, just a small war between two alliances. That was in spite of a lot of talking posturing and shouting on the forums. Although the possibility of escalation is real, I just  do not see it not happening.


Posted By: The_Dude
Date Posted: 07 Apr 2011 at 23:53
B17 - I disagree that Illy is largely focused on being a strategic war game.
 
However, if it is, then certainly the politics and confeds and alliances are inseparable from the strategic choice of War or Peace.
 
One more time...anybody that wants a war and wants to restrict the victory conditions to something less than complete destruction, I think this can be negotiated in advance - in essence making a private tournament.


Posted By: Brids17
Date Posted: 08 Apr 2011 at 00:43
Originally posted by The_Dude The_Dude wrote:

B17 - I disagree that Illy is largely focused on being a strategic war game.
 
However, if it is, then certainly the politics and confeds and alliances are inseparable from the strategic choice of War or Peace.


9 out of 25 building are completely focused on making military units, defending against them or building advanced resources with the only purpose being to make military units. 4 more are arguably focused on mostly miltiary units as well.

8 out of 12 advanced resources are used for building military units. The other 4 play a very large part in building military units and have limited uses for non-aggressive units.

When the game was originally released, if I recall there was not even a global chat or alliance chat, this would hurt the argument that Illyriad was made with the intention of being a social game.

Out of the 18 different resources that can be traded none of them are solely based on non-aggressive building. 8 of the 18 resources however, are used solely for building military units and have no other use in regards to building.

Quote Illyriad has vast depth: hundreds of military units, 200-plus technologies, and dozens of available strategies from theft and assassination to sieges, trade, magic, quests -- and we add content on a weekly basis. It's a big sandbox world and possibly a daunting one for a new player


A quote from Stormcrow from the review. All that vast depth and yet the only thing he mentioned that wasn't purely military based was the quests and the magic, which might I add two of the three schools of magic are focused on protect from military or harming players.

There are no advanced resources used to build special buildings that are non-aggressively focused. There is no managing your people, they are simply heavily tied with food, the more food consumption the more people. You don't need to keep them happy or build things keep them loyal, they are simply there as a number.  They have no depth, no emotions, no complaints. This game has nothing that would make it similar to sim city or peaceful city building games with the exception of it having buildings. Illyriad at best could be regarded as a very shallow city building game.


The marketplace as I said is mostly centralized around trading items meant for building armies and again, could be regarded as a very shallow economic game.

 The game also features very basic mechanics that allow for interacts but ultimately lacks private messaging, a friends list and block list and various other mechanics that would be expected in a game centralized around interacting with other players. Even the forums are lack luster and the GMs have stated they don't believe in working on the forums because then they're not working on the game.

The main focus is military in Illyriad. Military has the most depth and if you were to build a game that had only either the military, trading, interacting or city building mechanics in it, while each other them would be lacking, the military one would have the best chance of standing on it's own. Illyriad is a strategic war game.

It's not to say that I don't enjoy trading with other players or posting on the forums or chatting with people or building up my cities but these features are very simplistic and it should be fairly obvious the focus was not on them.

End rant...



Posted By: lorre
Date Posted: 08 Apr 2011 at 01:02
the game is set by the communety i think
the communety dislikes bullies 
its true alot of the res is for warfare but there are enough games out there when u start out you get attacked and destroyed in the first few months of the game thats cause the big players do so and can conquer and conquer (as much they want?) making the fsastest way to grow to kill other players here we need a requiered number of poulation before we can even think of sieiging someone and even then the city has to be pretty big if u want a reasonably decent city when u conquered it 
in other games u usually tae over hte city with all its buildings and tech and u can go back to building up your army and conquer the next city just to be nr1
the need is not here the communety doesnt allow bullieng wich is great in my oppinion


-------------
The battlefield is a scene of constant chaos. The winner will be the one who controls that chaos, both his own and the enemies.
Napoleon Bonaparte


Posted By: The_Dude
Date Posted: 08 Apr 2011 at 01:02
B17 - Every economy must protect itself from potential threats to that economy.  That does not mean that battles are the focus of Illy.  But, human nature being what it is, if you put a shive in enough hands, someone is gonna stab someone else.  Why are most prison gangs not rioting at any given time? 
 
Fighting has a cost.  The benefits must justify the cost.  In Illy war has a cost.  That makes it interesting.  Offense means overcoming the cost imposed by your enemy.  Defense means creating more cost than the enemy is willing to bear.  This is the strategic aspect of Illy.
 
Separately from the loss of units and cities in war, Illy war is hugely complicated to orchestrate on a significant scale in a skilled way.  That requires a lot of player time to plan, coordinate and execute.  This is the most precious gamer element in Illy.  This asset has to be carefully marshalled to prevent a campaign from falling to pieces as a result of player fatigue.
 
There is a cost to a real war.  I encourage player created tournaments with terms and conditions agreed to in advance.  This controls the cost while allowing "bragging rights" benefits.  Gold could also be escrowed with a neutral player to be given to the victor at the conclusion.


Posted By: Gemley
Date Posted: 08 Apr 2011 at 13:57
why dont we have DOUGHNUT FIGHTS!


Posted By: Attila the Hun
Date Posted: 08 Apr 2011 at 14:30
Originally posted by The_Dude The_Dude wrote:

B17 - Every economy must protect itself from potential threats to that economy.  That does not mean that battles are the focus of Illy.  But, human nature being what it is, if you put a shive in enough hands, someone is gonna stab someone else.  Why are most prison gangs not rioting at any given time? 
 
Fighting has a cost.  The benefits must justify the cost.  In Illy war has a cost.  That makes it interesting.  Offense means overcoming the cost imposed by your enemy.  Defense means creating more cost than the enemy is willing to bear.  This is the strategic aspect of Illy.


It's not strategic at all, you just have to have a larger force and you'll most likely win the battle!


-------------
It's just a game. :)


Posted By: scottfitz
Date Posted: 08 Apr 2011 at 15:34
There is more strategy to Illy than tactics, ATH. Strategy determines how many troops show up at a battle and where the battle is fought,  at that point tactics are not that relevant. If you are implying that a smaller player cannot beat a larger one, you are quite wrong.


Posted By: (EOM) Harry
Date Posted: 24 Apr 2011 at 16:28
Originally posted by Attila the Hun Attila the Hun wrote:

For those that go "go pick on someone your own size" no one smart does that. no one  historically has done that, its not practical. All this newbie friendly environment also allows a smaller player to insult larger withotu fear of siege. I can speak in the past of when i have done that and with JR shortly after he made my logo and we started disliking each other.
 
Clears throat for long list proving that atilia is wrong:
 
WW1
WW2
War of the Roses
LIBYA
IRAQ/IRAN war
100 years War
Spanish civil war
Russian Revolution
American Civil War
Korean War
Baltic War
Russia/China War
All three crusades
Roman's taking Cathage/England/Galic's
 
List go's on and on


-------------
Fool's watch the land when the problem is in the heart.


Posted By: The_Dude
Date Posted: 24 Apr 2011 at 16:38
The American Revolution against Britain
The Texas Revolution against Mexico


Posted By: Tinuviel's Voice
Date Posted: 24 Apr 2011 at 18:51
The Greek Revolution against the Ottoman Empire


Posted By: Mr. Ubiquitous Feral
Date Posted: 24 Apr 2011 at 19:32
The day I punched my brother and got kicked in the leg.

-------------
I am a Machine.


Posted By: Createure
Date Posted: 24 Apr 2011 at 20:02
Necro... does AtH even check in here anymore?

Anyhow... an interesting discussion to be sure.

From my own point of view, I love chatting alliance mates and meeting newbies and familiar faces on GC... but at the end of the day I play this game for that moment where I can train some huge armies and send them into an almighty big brawl of some kind, whether it be a tournament, a seige, a friendly tete-a-tete or whatever.


Posted By: The_Dude
Date Posted: 25 Apr 2011 at 01:32
Rock-n-Roll, Createure!


Posted By: Mr. Ubiquitous Feral
Date Posted: 25 Apr 2011 at 14:26
Are we still in a sandbox?  Not only does Illy provide seemingly infinite choices in how to play, the game is largely dependent on the players.  Illy allows for each player to search for other players who are like minded and would like to play as warriors.  If this is done early in their game, their cities' growth will suffer, but they will be enjoying the game.  They have the ability to keep this warring to themselves, and therefore are in their own corner of the sandbox.  Anyone who talks smack about these players, assuming the players are keeping to themselves, are disregarding those players' right to exist in Illy, peacefully or otherwise.  And leave ATH alone, he's just bringing his toys to the sandbox.  

edit:  Thank you carrot much.


-------------
I am a Machine.


Posted By: pixlepix
Date Posted: 01 Jun 2011 at 11:06
A organized fight is not anywhere close to a real fight. A real fight would be attacking a rivals cities during the night, and  burning them to the ground. I personally left illy because there was absolutely no purpose to me building up my army. If I used it against some one, I had the whole server on me, I would be kicked out of my alliance and destroyed.


Posted By: Zangi
Date Posted: 01 Jun 2011 at 15:13
Maybe if it didn't take weeks/months to build a city, you'd see more gung-ho wars of mutually assured non-destruction.


Posted By: pixlepix
Date Posted: 03 Jun 2011 at 02:51
The thing is, what defined building a city? I would argue that todays level of buildings were never meant to be seen. While build time could use an improvement, a city does not have to be maxed out to be functional.


Posted By: Carl Zeis
Date Posted: 03 Jun 2011 at 04:40
True, a city does not have to be maxed out to be functional pixle, but when your gold per hour is based off of your towns total population, it is extremely hard to make any army of substantial size, unless you do have a large city. f


Posted By: pixlepix
Date Posted: 03 Jun 2011 at 11:20
Substantial size is all relative. If this game was a war from the beginning, then the size required for a decent army would be much smaller.


Posted By: Createure
Date Posted: 03 Jun 2011 at 12:42
I agree with pixle - particularly for self-sufficient cities (with positive food income) having a lower population allows to you  put taxes much higher which actually increases your overall gold income.


Posted By: Brids17
Date Posted: 03 Jun 2011 at 16:17
Even so, around 12k pop is the optimal size for max gold income without going horribly negative in food. Maybe it's just me but I'd consider 12k to be pretty large.

Originally posted by pixlepix pixlepix wrote:

While build time could use an improvement, a city does not have to be maxed out to be functional.


The point of the build time being so long is to encourage people to buy and use prestige, so there's really no improvement to make there.


Posted By: pixlepix
Date Posted: 11 Jun 2011 at 13:09
The thing is, what is this server had been a battleground from the start? With mass indiscriminate attacks and mass farming. Your cities being attacked on a regular basis. The current armies would be impossibly high, because no one has insanely large cities. 


Posted By: Kilotov of DokGthung
Date Posted: 11 Jun 2011 at 13:19
Originally posted by pixlepix pixlepix wrote:

The thing is, what is this server had been a battleground from the start? With mass indiscriminate attacks and mass farming. Your cities being attacked on a regular basis. The current armies would be impossibly high, because no one has insanely large cities. 


the armies CAN NOT be impossibly high cause of the upkeep system, like cities cant limitless grow in size cause of the food management system......geez...
this is different then your average mmo
attacks rarely bring profit


Posted By: pixlepix
Date Posted: 11 Jun 2011 at 14:44
What I am really against, isn't that people aren't aggressive. If they want to save their cities, thats perfectly fine. What I don't like, is that if a truly aggressive player comes, they will be teamed up against. If I attacked a player, I would get the whole world against me


Posted By: Kilotov of DokGthung
Date Posted: 11 Jun 2011 at 14:50
Originally posted by pixlepix pixlepix wrote:

What I am really against, isn't that people aren't aggressive. If they want to save their cities, thats perfectly fine. What I don't like, is that if a truly aggressive player comes, they will be teamed up against. If I attacked a player, I would get the whole world against me

as long as no siege is used, i dont see much problem in attacking people of your own size...
the problem is the abuse of siege


Posted By: Brids17
Date Posted: 11 Jun 2011 at 17:19
It's a siege problem. If siege couldn't wipe out your cities so quickly and result in you having to restart from the begin with no help, I think the *could* be more aggressive. I say could because even if that changed at this point, I think the community as a whole wouldn't allow it to happen anyway. 


Posted By: Kilotov of DokGthung
Date Posted: 11 Jun 2011 at 18:17
hu? i personally have a problem just whit siege.
dont blame it all on the community. 



Print Page | Close Window

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.03 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2019 Web Wiz Ltd. - https://www.webwiz.net