Play Now Login Create Account
illyriad
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - BL Alliance Land Claims: An Early Guide
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

BL Alliance Land Claims: An Early Guide

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>
Author
 Rating: Topic Rating: 1 Votes, Average 1.00  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Jamie View Drop Down
Greenhorn
Greenhorn
Avatar

Joined: 25 Sep 2017
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 43
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Jamie Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: BL Alliance Land Claims: An Early Guide
    Posted: 25 Sep 2017 at 18:03
Amazing post! Very detailed and informational 
Back to Top
Wartow View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 20 May 2014
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 641
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Wartow Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 Jul 2015 at 19:22
How does the fact that Illy does not have an end-game event as was the case in Lord of Ultima (or the upcoming Crown of the Gods) influence the need of a land claim?  Does it encourage a different style of play which is largely incompatible with Illy?

We know Illy is a game with new mechanics and twists constantly being introduced (maybe not a fast as many would like).  It seems getting all of your eggs into the "land claim" basket could prove folly.

The friction sought by some can be easily had without land claims...  I have a lovely neighbor near one of my cities who thinks anyone harvesting within 10 squares of his lone city should be destroyed.  There is friction in that... There is also friction in sov claims and occupying armies no matter where they are.   The land claim is just an expansion on a larger scale, and one that may prove to be unnecessary.

What role will the land claim play in the mysteries and discoveries that are potentially out there?  Will the claims prohibit progress?  There are many players who enjoy this side of the game and may be discouraged from their continued work because particular land segments are off limits.  

I could also add the traders and their roles in the game.  There are probably more players interested in trading as their game play than the mysteries/discoveries folks and they provide a service to the area in which they produce.  Now... if your alliance is well organized and full of active players then perhaps you are self sustaining when it comes to trade, or perhaps you set up a sister alliance without a land claim to occupy a variety of locations in the game to gain access to local goods?  Back on point... These are good neighbors that are potentially being denied access to lands that goes beyond what was previously accepted by the community.
Back to Top
Diva View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 20 Dec 2011
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 416
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Diva Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Jul 2015 at 18:28
JeJune... 

In this last post, you have mentioned ... exactly what I thought, for some ----- "we want the harvesting in the LC we make to be just for us -- no, entry."

The basic premise (I heard) of being in BL was to afford more PvP experiences. PvP basically have been planned occurrences ... what I have seen is a lot of naps because so many are placed w/in filling the land claim area. Fine and dandy to not step on toes. And they want the comfort of protection.

But in that plot of land, who controls what? If some napped in that land gets ticked off and has 41 cities (of their alliance all clustered or spread about w/in that LC) and can no longer stand the rules of LC, wow, that's a trek of exodus that will be painful.

You probably will get some friction/action that way, and dividing more of the land to exile people to areas of the LC or oust them completely.

But I doubt many will just cross the line to make friction with the larger LC's. But the smaller LC's will have a hard time with it .. as they are the targets of opportunity to break the law of the land.

I think land claiming has put them at more risk.

I guess, for me.. I see a long range of "I don't care to deal with it" landclaiming hassles... not just now, but in the future, when there is so much more opportunity in all of Illyriad to bypass it. I have more options to NOT LC than to do it.

But it still makes LC's exclusive, reclusive and sedentary ... and many people for friction sake will try to send you (if cities of that LC alliance are outside the LC)  to your exclusive, reclusive and sedentary place. I would agree with it. It again, makes you have your cake (all of Illyriad) and exclude by force other's entering LC's. 

I find making a claim and then white-washing it to fit your need very objectionable by living outside your LC. Stick with one or the other, or don't make a LC.

Like all things, it's just my opinion... we are all entitled to make a few and raise questions.


Edited by Diva - 05 Jul 2015 at 18:42
"Um diva.... you are sort of acting like a .... diva...." - PhoenixFire
Back to Top
Jejune View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 10 Feb 2013
Status: Offline
Points: 696
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Jejune Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Jul 2015 at 18:05
Originally posted by Diva Diva wrote:

Now you have a base, why would LC war with anyone? ... Other than planned pvp.. what friction is there for LC? ... I'm still shaking my head as to the point of what LC is doing ... becoming exclusive, reclusive and sedentary is not something I look forward to. 

Hi, Diva. That's great point that you make. 

A lot of proponents of land claims make arguments such as "it's a way to ensure the growth of our homeland," or "it gives us control of resources" or "it provides optimal defense" or simply "this is a sandbox game and we'll do what we want." I think another possibility with land claims is that they will cause "friction" over alliances vying for land.

To borrow a quote from Hal over on the thread where alliances are stating that they do not recognize claims:

Originally posted by Halcyon Halcyon wrote:

We do not settle inside a land claim with an intention to force a conflict, but we settle where our strategy indicates even if this means settling inside a land claim. Military or diplomatic actions against our cities will be answered with disproportionate military action.

I see Hal's position here as a really positive development for the game. This is exactly how you end up with friction. As an example, if Hal decides to ignore an alliance's land claim boundaries and begins to settle his own alliance for whatever strategic reason he sees fit, there is definitely going to be friction between his alliance and the alliance who made the claim. 

Will it mean "war?" Who knows? Maybe there is a negotiation and a deal reached? Maybe it becomes a "settlement race" to dominate the region with cities and sov? Maybe it results in a war over that piece of land where his alliance is settling and another alliance has claimed, and either giving up the claim or giving up the settlement plan becomes the bargaining chip in a surrender? 

In any case, even if an alliance ignores a claim and begins settling in another alliance's claim, this is bound to create friction in exactly the same way as if an alliance tried to "counter-claim" inside another alliance's zone.

As one of the players involved in launching the land claim initiatives in the Broken Lands, I think that the alliances who are pro-actively stating that they will not respect the claims and potentially encroach on them are really enriching the land claim project and helping to further demonstrate its potential value. I had imagined in the past that two claiming alliances next to one another would eventually vie for control of disputed lands between them; now, I think it's possible that alliances will challenge the claims by aggressively moving into them. This will most definitely spark a new brand of friction in the game.

Back to Top
Diva View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 20 Dec 2011
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 416
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Diva Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Jul 2015 at 16:04
Originally posted by Jejune Jejune wrote:

 

My personal opinion, however, is that it is dangerous for players to not be inside their alliance claims, since it exposes them in times of war.

Really? I agree with it whole-heartedly, but realistically, would someone want to war (another alliance) with your homeland? That is bring the war to you? Now you have a base, why would LC war with anyone? 

How many PvP would bring a number of troops to attack someone in their homeland, reinforcement is predictable on a grand scale to make the effort to TRY seem like a suicide mission, or rage quit.. rofl

Now I really don't get the point of homeland. Other than you become the peaceful, farmville, trader nations that LC abhor in Elgea.

Other than planned pvp.. what friction is there for LC? At least having cities elsewhere people could interact on a more fair basis.. I agree siege is hard on a player seriously invested, but not a chance with LC alliances, too much back up exists in clusters of the LC for anyone to try that suicide mission.

And as to harvesting.. great, hope they all have that mission statement, but you all won't be alike,.. and perhaps you are overstating atm, their intent. Not all will enjoy or accept the enter at will if it minimizes what they can harvest.

The only reason there is a war atm from outside alliances .. is the challenge to not agree with it. As yours is to support it, some act on opposition to it. But it is somewhat VERY challenging to oppose it with STATE clusters as mentioned above.

I'm still shaking my head as to the point of what LC is doing ... becoming exclusive, reclusive and sedentary is not something I look forward to. 






"Um diva.... you are sort of acting like a .... diva...." - PhoenixFire
Back to Top
Jejune View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 10 Feb 2013
Status: Offline
Points: 696
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Jejune Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Jul 2015 at 10:49
Originally posted by Wartow Wartow wrote:


What does a land claim say about the resources of the claimed area?  Are they off limits to harvesting to others?  Or do the same accepted harvesting rules apply to all players?  The word harvest occurs exactly zero times in the original post and appears to be a concern that has been ignored when brought forward.



I think that's entirely up to the alliance that is enforcing a claim, since the creation of the claim policy would dictate this. I cannot speak for other land claiming alliances, but for SIN, we don't even address it in our claim. Players are free to hunt and harvest on squares in our land claim; for us, the policy is about settlement.

Originally posted by Wartow Wartow wrote:


Does a land claim imply that the claiming alliance will ONLY expand within its claimed area?  Or can members of the alliance set up in other locales to maintain access to key resources (herbs, minerals, anatomies) not local to the claim area?


I think that in all land claiming alliances, there are cities outside of the claimed areas. New players who join a claiming alliance, for example, often remain in the n00b ring for a time. Other players might keep one large city in Elgea for trade purposes. Sometimes a claiming alliance picks up a new player in another region, and he/shae has7 or 8 cities that need to be exo'ed into the claim.

My personal opinion, however, is that it is dangerous for players to not be inside their alliance claims, since it exposes them in times of war.



Back to Top
Raco View Drop Down
Greenhorn
Greenhorn
Avatar

Joined: 29 May 2015
Location: Here
Status: Offline
Points: 42
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote Raco Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Jul 2015 at 08:54
In case of doubt, just ask to alliance leaders about havesting policies.

Also remember that there are other alliances cities inside claimed territories, and as far as I know, they can harvest with the same problems as if they weren't in a claimed land.
Back to Top
Diva View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 20 Dec 2011
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 416
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Diva Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Jul 2015 at 04:19
 
 
[/QUOTE]By Han Dynasty
  • I strongly believe that if a harvesting policy is not mentioned within the LC, then there isn't one.
  • though it may differ to other alliances. I can see your concern however, and I hope that LC alliances that do intend on securing all natural resources within their LCs will clear up any confusion. 
[/QUOTE]

The first point ... about the harvesting policy --- is that ALL of the LC's stance.. doubt it, and I can't come into LC and park an army on a mine nor herbal conquest can I? I can call it mine, until a LC decides to take me off, ON purpose because it's within LC territory. Best case scenario would be to claim that would happen in the free part of ILLY as well. Yeah right.. wink wink. But if I fought back for my claim, then I have the wrath of the state alliance upon me, yes, no? Perhaps saved by paying taxes??? or a portion of my harvest??? Extortion at it's best by a WHOLE alliance.

As Wartow also brought up, most people do have two accounts.. not all.. and because the game mechanics and personal options say you can do anything you want with it.. it does bring up the double standard again... or split personalities within the game. (Main or alt not in LC alliance) One that is free to feed the LC alliance, and you know it will happen, denial is a river in Egypt, and of course the LC account. And I don't have a valid reason to know anyone's alt/main should they not declare it, it can't be policed, obviously a WIN WIN for LC's.

Stop pouring muddy water on me, trying to convince me it's rain.. from 'You' by Bill Withers

Now we have a beginner's guide to Land Claiming... chortle, snort, smh


Edited by Diva - 05 Jul 2015 at 04:32
"Um diva.... you are sort of acting like a .... diva...." - PhoenixFire
Back to Top
Han Dynasty View Drop Down
Wordsmith
Wordsmith
Avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2014
Location: Kingdom of Shu
Status: Offline
Points: 123
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Han Dynasty Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Jul 2015 at 21:35
Originally posted by Diva Diva wrote:

In my opinion.. Things might have gone smoother had LC's said homeland instead of Land Claim.. and not put up fences.

You'd be surprised that some have considered announcing it as a declaration of Homeland. However, it would still be challenged, albeit is sounds less aggressive. While the LC themselves forbid settlement in the areas, I imagine you'll find special circumstances to settle allowed by the LC alliances. 

Originally posted by Diva Diva wrote:

 And forced removal for future landings ... and all the terminology of what that meant. Makes land claiming look like the fences were impenetrable, no discussion about it, and that it excluded. Which in part, might, in the future,  castles are placed within the alliance, and including it's confeds and training and trading alliances for the land claim totally impart no room in the land claim area.


But there has never been even a vague harvesting policy for those not in the land claim (as in certain harvesting policies on alliance pages and profiles), yet some of LC's people are allowed to harvest anywhere, free lands of ILLY. And also have cities in Elgea (not land claimed) and other parts of Broken Lands not IN their homeland.
 


I strongly believe that if a harvesting policy is not mentioned within the LC, then there isn't one. LCs for some are purely an opportunity to centralize and build up a core stronghold for their alliance, with minimal outside presence. That is how it is for Shu-Han, though it may differ to other alliances. I can see your concern however, and I hope that LC alliances that do intend on securing all natural resources within their LCs will clear up any confusion. 


The official forum profile for Han Dynasty.
Back to Top
Han Dynasty View Drop Down
Wordsmith
Wordsmith
Avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2014
Location: Kingdom of Shu
Status: Offline
Points: 123
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Han Dynasty Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Jul 2015 at 21:30
Originally posted by Wartow Wartow wrote:

Feel free to move my response if there is a better location for this discussion... I only felt the answers to these question could help amend the above guide.

Most certainly :)
Originally posted by Wartow Wartow wrote:

What does a land claim say about the resources of the claimed area?  Are they off limits to harvesting to others?  Or do the same accepted harvesting rules apply to all players?  The word harvest occurs exactly zero times in the original post and appears to be a concern that has been ignored when brought forward.

Unless its mentioned in the CL itself, it doesn't. If it is not mentioned in the LC then it should be reasonable to expect the LC alliance is not staking a claim on the natural resources within the area, rather only why they can reasonably occupy with their armies and whatever lays within ten squares of one of their towns. 


Originally posted by Wartow Wartow wrote:

Does a land claim imply that the claiming alliance will ONLY expand within its claimed area?  Or can members of the alliance set up in other locales to maintain access to key resources (herbs, minerals, anatomies) not local to the claim area?

LC alliances desire land to grow their alliance accounts. It is in their very best interest to settle within their LC, else the LC and all the negative attention they got from placing it comes as a waste. I imagine if we encounter LC alliances that grow beyond their original LC we may find expansions, but who is to know. 


The official forum profile for Han Dynasty.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd.