Print Page | Close Window

Casus Belli

Printed From: Illyriad
Category: Miscellaneous
Forum Name: Suggestions & Game Enhancements
Forum Description: Got a great idea? A feature you'd like to see? Share it here!
URL: http://forum.illyriad.co.uk/forum_posts.asp?TID=327
Printed Date: 16 Oct 2019 at 04:15
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.10 - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: Casus Belli
Posted By: The_Dude
Subject: Casus Belli
Date Posted: 13 Apr 2010 at 00:34
The game appears to have unlimited resources and land for expansion.  So what reason is there for war?
 
The essence of human social activity is competiton for scarce resources - food, wealth, sexual partners for DNA propogation.  Here, no scarcity exists (ignoring the sexual partners aspect :)).
 
So this is Utopia and there is no need for war to take what the other clan has.  What's left to fight about?  Body odor?  Bad teeth?  Bad manners?



Replies:
Posted By: WildBill
Date Posted: 13 Apr 2010 at 00:47
world domination


Posted By: rescendent
Date Posted: 13 Apr 2010 at 01:02
I get a much higher production rate if as well as producing my own stuff, harvesting the map, and doing quests - I also thieve and my troops raid your stuff...

This action may offend you and that may lead to war I suppose... Alternatively you could just send it to me in caravans?


Posted By: The_Dude
Date Posted: 13 Apr 2010 at 01:17
But what is the point of hurrying and stealing?  Just because you can?


Posted By: HonoredMule
Date Posted: 13 Apr 2010 at 01:31
Because you're afraid someone else will do it first.

We are mostly at peace right now, but in a game like this, such is indistinguishable from cold war.  As long as one player can hurt another, we will all stockpile armament, strive to outperform our neighbors in the tech race, and eye every movement on the map suspiciously.  That, or preach love and unicorns until we're the first to get steamrolled.

Either way, the outcome is inevitable.  Security only comes through military advantage, and that can be gained or lost by the acquisition of plunder.  Throw in a few who just like conflict for its own sake, and you have a conflagration that will ignite repeatedly for the foreseeable future.  This present calm is merely in anticipation of the first shot...an event prolonged only by the collective fear and uncertainty of a populace unwilling to risk the rebuttal of neighbors with untested capabilities.


Posted By: Chu-Cullain
Date Posted: 13 Apr 2010 at 02:43
"Conan, what is good in life?"

"Macrame. The feel of wet sand in your toes as you run along the beach. Making a box kite."


Posted By: The_Dude
Date Posted: 13 Apr 2010 at 03:28
Originally posted by HonoredMule HonoredMule wrote:

Because you're afraid someone else will do it first.

We are mostly at peace right now, but in a game like this, such is indistinguishable from cold war.  As long as one player can hurt another, we will all stockpile armament, strive to outperform our neighbors in the tech race, and eye every movement on the map suspiciously.  That, or preach love and unicorns until we're the first to get steamrolled.

Either way, the outcome is inevitable.  Security only comes through military advantage, and that can be gained or lost by the acquisition of plunder.  Throw in a few who just like conflict for its own sake, and you have a conflagration that will ignite repeatedly for the foreseeable future.  This present calm is merely in anticipation of the first shot...an event prolonged only by the collective fear and uncertainty of a populace unwilling to risk the rebuttal of neighbors with untested capabilities.
 So I build an Army to defend myself from Seige and Bombardment from a player that is stuck in a 2 year old mindset of being compelled to take what I have because I have it?  The point of this is to defend against 2 year olds?Confused


Posted By: jimbo_hawkins
Date Posted: 13 Apr 2010 at 05:57
Originally posted by The_Dude The_Dude wrote:

The game appears to have unlimited resources and land for expansion.  So what reason is there for war?
 
The essence of human social activity is competiton for scarce resources - food, wealth, sexual partners for DNA propogation.  Here, no scarcity exists (ignoring the sexual partners aspect :)).
 
So this is Utopia and there is no need for war to take what the other clan has.  What's left to fight about?  Body odor?  Bad teeth?  Bad manners?


I would disagree with your premise slightly.

The world map "only" stretches for 1000 squares in each direction and our mines will (most likely) top out at level 20.  Therefore, there is finite space and there are finite resources.

Once I have maxed out my personal resource generating capabilities, I'll want more.  I can get them from a few sources - harvesting, trading or warring.  To gather the most resources from harvesting, I need to have a decent fleet for caravans, but even that appears to be limited to 40 per town.  Trading will only benefit me if it disadvantages someone else.  This may happen from time to time, but eventually an efficient marketplace will develop.

This leave warring.  I can convert my resources into an army and through skill I can take resources from another player.  Ultimately, this is what will have to happen if I am to maximize my production.

And isn't that the goal of life - to have more...


Posted By: Wuzzel
Date Posted: 13 Apr 2010 at 09:21
jimbo_hawkins, you forget you can make more towns.
I dont know if there is a limit in towns you can make.


Posted By: The_Dude
Date Posted: 13 Apr 2010 at 13:54
The resources are infinite even at level 20.  You just can't increase the Rate of Production, but a resource is never depleted.  The Rate limit could be a balance element.  Or to encourage a player to establish a new city.
 
But right now, it seems the reason for war is just to be a bully (the game version of Megalomaniac).
 
Since there appear to be no Victory Conditions, World Domination is not even possible.  Esp. since you can't destroy Capitals.


Posted By: Parennis
Date Posted: 13 Apr 2010 at 14:47
Originally posted by The_Dude The_Dude wrote:

Since there appear to be no Victory Conditions, World Domination is not even possible. 

Having been here less than a week, and with a fairly incredible 12.71 posts per day average - beating the GMs and moderators - you really like to hear yourself blow, and blow hard, don't you "Dude"?

Why not spend some time looking things up?  There's a useful search function that might help.

The game is a sandbox, and describes itself as such before you sign up.  Sandbox games allow you to choose your own "Victory Conditions". 

However, the idea of "closing down a server" with game-designer-chosen Victory Condition has been discussed in this forum, and might be introduced.

Originally posted by GM Stormcrow GM Stormcrow wrote:


the general intention is for each server to run for around a year, with some kind of yet-to-be-revealed conclusion point that is hopefully more satisfying than Travian's Natar/Wonders system.  However, if the expansion packs etc keep things interesting and balanced enough for everyone (new players and veterans alike) then this may be postponed or conceptually up-for-grabs.


See http://forum.illyriad.co.uk/game-duration_topic205_post1859.html - Game Duration thread.

Originally posted by The_Dude The_Dude wrote:

Esp. since you can't destroy Capitals.


Conquering or destroying capitals is on the table, and looks like it'll be changing.  At the speed these Devs work I'd guess it's going to be sooner than later.

Originally posted by GM Stormcrow GM Stormcrow wrote:


How about allowing players who have their first and only city "levelled" the *option* to relocate - an "Abandon City" button or somesuch - that relocates them to a fresh city on another random part of the map, but keeping their username / account details.

There could be a timer (say 1 week) during which time players have the option to abandon the city or not.  If they chose not to abandon the city during this time, they could seek to join an alliance / hire mercenaries / rebuild their city or whatever they wish to try to keep their foothold - but if the city is still levelled at the end of the one week timer, the relocation could be "forced".


See page three of the confusingly-named thread called http://forum.illyriad.co.uk/conquering-capitals_topic238.html - Conquering Capitals in this very forum, but I understand that having it on Page 2 makes it difficult for you to get to.

For the avoidance of doubt, "Dude", no one minds people who post a lot and ask a lot of questions.

But they do mind (at least, I do) people who post ill-considered opinions, unsupported conjectures and idiotic comments like "This isn't a game as much as a social site?" when they can't be bothered to read.

Why not spend less time posting and more time finding things using the http://forum.illyriad.co.uk/search_form.asp - search function?


Posted By: The_Dude
Date Posted: 13 Apr 2010 at 15:17
Like I said, this isn't a game as much as an outlet for bullies.


Posted By: HonoredMule
Date Posted: 13 Apr 2010 at 15:46
Originally posted by The_Dude The_Dude wrote:

Originally posted by HonoredMule HonoredMule wrote:

Because you're afraid someone else will do it first.

We are mostly at peace right now, but in a game like this, such is indistinguishable from cold war.  As long as one player can hurt another, we will all stockpile armament, strive to outperform our neighbors in the tech race, and eye every movement on the map suspiciously.  That, or preach love and unicorns until we're the first to get steamrolled.

Either way, the outcome is inevitable.  Security only comes through military advantage, and that can be gained or lost by the acquisition of plunder.  Throw in a few who just like conflict for its own sake, and you have a conflagration that will ignite repeatedly for the foreseeable future.  This present calm is merely in anticipation of the first shot...an event prolonged only by the collective fear and uncertainty of a populace unwilling to risk the rebuttal of neighbors with untested capabilities.
 So I build an Army to defend myself from Seige and Bombardment from a player that is stuck in a 2 year old mindset of being compelled to take what I have because I have it?  The point of this is to defend against 2 year olds?Confused


You can deride the mentality all you want, but at the end of the day that "bully with a 2-year-old mentality" will still take your stuff.  And if you don't defend yourself, it'll be like taking candy from a baby.  After that, you may choose between quitting and playing Sim City (try not to whine about the natural disasters too much...they won't even consider reasoning with you) or spending some time in the real world.  Once there, rescind your national citizenship, pack your belongings, and move into international waters.  Then wait and see how long it takes before yet another "bully with a 2-year-old mentality" takes all your stuff again.

In 28 years I've not seen a shred of evidence dissuading me from believing mankind is at its roots purely evil.  Absent social, political/military, and spiritual influences, they will "take all your stuff" every time--and it will be for no more reason than that they can.  Call it childish, but it's not...it's human.  The only childish element is failing to recognize the consequences or what chance one has of attaining and retaining the benefit perceived in taking the evil road.  But what is also childish is building straw houses on the hurricane belt, for much the same reason.


Posted By: HonoredMule
Date Posted: 13 Apr 2010 at 15:53
A bully is just a human with a neighbor.  Someone who whines about bullies is just someone who isn't stronger than his neighbor.  You say this game is just an outlet for bullies, and in a fashion you are correct.  Yet I suspect that you will enjoy this game very much.

Luckily there is another sinful outlet you have not addressed: the pride of life.  Some of us seek fame and fortune in ways that require a "pious" path...at least whilst under public scrutiny.  And, along with all the other elements of social balance and "self-righteous wrath" found in the real world, such forces will produce a social landscape very similar to that of the players that create it both here and in real life.


Posted By: GM Stormcrow
Date Posted: 13 Apr 2010 at 15:54
A few pointers, though - some of which has already been covered.

Illyriad is a sandbox, and you can do what you like within the game mechanics and the rules.  Insofar as this is the case, your Victory Conditions are personal to you and only you can decide what they look like.  You might choose your personal victory conditions to "be the #1 trader in the game", "run the #1 ranked mercenary alliance in the game", "research everything there is to research", "have the most cities", "be the most aggressive forum poster (Parennis is storming into the lead on this one)", "find a way of Conquering King Sigurd's castle" - or whatever you choose to regard as a victory.

There aren't - currently - any "Forced Victory Conditions" in place in the game, ie Victory Conditions as chosen and implemented by the game design team.

However, we are considering having a conclusion to a server's runtime.  It was always our intention to do so, but we have many months ahead of us in which to plan what such a conclusion might look like, how long the "endgame" would last, and what the Victory Conditions for such a conclusion would be; as well as to decide when would be an appropriate time to implement such a set of victory conditions. 

Personally, I'm in favour of an escalating set of circumstances which ultimately lead to a "victory" or number of "victories" during the server endgame.  It should take time, organisation and effort to be ranked up there as a victor on a server, and it should be satisfying and rewarding to reach, rather than arbitrary - as many of these games are.

Along the way we will be introducing 'smaller' victories (akin to winning the battle rather than the war).  In the http://forum.illyriad.co.uk/current-dev-list_topic98.html - Current Dev List you will see items such as:
"MEDALS FOR PLAYERS

TROPHIES FOR ALLIANCES

STRATEGICALLY IMPORTANT WORLD MAP LOCATIONS"
and even:
"PLAYER GENERATED QUESTS / MERCENARY CONTRACTS
  • Yes. We are, really, really, really considering allowing players to set up their own quests, with specific objectives.  For example, Player X might set up a quest to "Attack Player Y", with a reward of Z gold for each unit killed, or "Sabotage Player Y's Research Queue". Think of it slightly like a "Mercenary" contract system with some "game-enforced" payment mechanism."
which is kind-of like "Player Created Victory Conditions for other Players to fulfill".

I hope that helps answer some of the questions put here.


Posted By: HonoredMule
Date Posted: 13 Apr 2010 at 16:08
When the time comes to produce an endgame scenario, I recommend option 3--specifically, a "king of the hill" or "unreal tournament, domination-style" method of declaring the victorious confederacy (taking place in a number of balanced, spread out locations that must all be held at once).  Then repeat to establish a victorious alliance...again for player.

To prevent stalemate, either disable the creation of new cities (last man standing element) or allow city settling without population requirements (unlimited escalation).  The former is probably better.

I know some in my alliance are very eager for updates to the quest system and find it one of the greatest appeals of this game.  It definitely does increase the breadth of the game and help some find purpose.


Posted By: Diablito
Date Posted: 13 Apr 2010 at 17:45
Originally posted by The_Dude The_Dude wrote:

The game appears to have unlimited resources and land for expansion.  So what reason is there for war?
 
The essence of human social activity is competiton for scarce resources - food, wealth, sexual partners for DNA propogation.  Here, no scarcity exists (ignoring the sexual partners aspect :)).
 
So this is Utopia and there is no need for war to take what the other clan has.  What's left to fight about?  Body odor?  Bad teeth?  Bad manners?

Because you keep posting annoying crap on the forum.


Posted By: Corual
Date Posted: 14 Apr 2010 at 01:03
Originally posted by GM Stormcrow GM Stormcrow wrote:


and even:
"PLAYER GENERATED QUESTS / MERCENARY CONTRACTS
  • Yes. We are, really, really, really considering allowing players to set up their own quests, with specific objectives.  For example, Player X might set up a quest to "Attack Player Y", with a reward of Z gold for each unit killed, or "Sabotage Player Y's Research Queue". Think of it slightly like a "Mercenary" contract system with some "game-enforced" payment mechanism."
which is kind-of like "Player Created Victory Conditions for other Players to fulfill".

I hope that helps answer some of the questions put here.
 
 
That would be absolutely amazing SC! That would add a whole new dynamic to the game. I think I would sqeeze a tear and feel a tingle in my pants!


Posted By: GM Stormcrow
Date Posted: 14 Apr 2010 at 01:31
Originally posted by Corual Corual wrote:

That would be absolutely amazing SC! That would add a whole new dynamic to the game. I think I would sqeeze a tear and feel a tingle in my pants!

In which case, it's gone from a "consideration" to a "definite" on the feature list.

A few fairly critical things to come first - but I'd ETA this in terms of weeks rather than months.


Posted By: Fishymax
Date Posted: 15 Apr 2010 at 17:11
I dont know about anyone else, but I feel pretty pleased to have found a game that is in its infancy.  If anything, the lack of endgame at the moment, and the fact that the developers are listening, and responding to the points brought up by the players, means that you get to have an impact on the next server.
 
I personally will be playing through this server and enjoying the experience.  Maybe even suggesting ideas that come to me as I play.  I think thats what this server seems to be about, and because of this, we will end up with a very playable next server.  (Which, by the way, we will all rock at!)
 
Cheers guys.  Expect me to be levelling up, and then trying to steal your stuff.  Not for any other reason than it will be a good laugh.
 
Chin chin poodles.


Posted By: MFrance
Date Posted: 15 Apr 2010 at 18:26

Yep! And I think it is quite nice to have a land plenty of resources and no need for war. I wouldn't complain about that.

..MFrance



Print Page | Close Window

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd. - https://www.webwiz.net