Are Land Claims Bad for Illy?

Mona Lisa wrote: What's wrong with growing the alliance a bit more and at least becoming a dominant local power before calling attention to yourself?  Perhaps claim a dedicated homeland settlement target first (without making empty threats about removing interlopers you can't enforce anyway) ?

1. calling attention to oneself is the first step in recruiting.
2. claiming an area larger than one's actual footprint gives the impression of expected growth.
3. empty threats from a small/weak alliance may be less risky than those from larger/better armed alliances because there is less to risk, and because illy has a entrenched bias in favour of new/small players.
   

The arguments for land claims suggest the following points:

First:  Illyriad is a game.

Second:  It is a game of conquest and domination. 

Third: Any strategy allowed by the formal rules which enhances an alliance or players ability to conquer and dominate should not be thwarted by "informal rules."

Fourth: The strategy of land claims enhances the ability of alliances and presumably individuals, to conquer and dominate.

Fifth:  If a person or alliance is unable to use a strategy or tactic it only shows that they aren't going to be the ones conquering and dominating.  No need to cry about it...that's the game.

Sixth: Land claims is a strategy which makes the game more attractive to those who will "play, stay and pay."

Finally:  As healthy game is one which attracts new players and keeps old ones, and since land claims will do that, one should not oppose land claims.

More detail.

Illyriad is a game and as such should be required to reflect in any way the "real world"  Whatever is done in the game if for entertainment alone and to make more of it is just silly.  Those who try to argue that behind the avatars are real people need to emphasize to those real people that they shouldn't take things so seriously and if they don't wish to play a game of conquest and domination they should go somewhere else. 

It is a game of conquest and domination.  There are cities to be conquered, lands to dominate and all sorts of wars to be fought.  You cannot conquer without armies and since conquering and dominating are the point of the game, why play if you don't wish to fight?  The developers decided to allow it to be a sandbox exactly as they did not wish to restrict the methods and means of conquering but to allow the gamers to find their own way.  Since the basic design of the game is warfare based it is silly to attempt to change it as it will always return to its roots as new players join, grow and conquer.

The devs made the game to be flexible enough that you can develop new strategies or enhance old ones.  The rules of conquering and dominating are few and only within the range needed to make the game more interesting.  For a player or group of players to burden the game with increased "informal rules" is to restrict some players unnecessarily.  Land claims are just an application of a less formal system that has been in use for a few years.  It's not new so the whole question of "should we allow it" is returning to ground already covered and decided long ago.

Land claims enhance the strategic abilities of alliances and as such make it easier for them to plan their conquest and domination over the long term. 

Land claims in no significantly way restrict other players or alliances unless they are too small or inexperienced and therefore deserve to be conquered and/or dominated.  After all, it's a conquer and dominate game so let's play it that way.  Crybabies can go play Farmville.

The world is filled with all kinds of players who want a good, complex, and flexible game of conquering and domination.  Land claims make that easier and thus will attract more players.  Since more players means more money in the devs pocket it generally means more development done in a shorter amount of time.  This, in turn will bring more players as factions go on line, and all sorts of other suggestions are implemented.

So, if the game is a conquer and dominate game and we make the game a more robust conquer and dominate game we can see new players, new procedures, and all sorts of enhanced play.  All we have to do is get on board the bandwagon for enhanced strategies and tactics as they are discovered and implemented. 

Those are the arguments as I understand them.  Do feel free to add/correct my perceptions before I discuss them in a more systematic manner.

I will, of course, after receiving due correction, present a rebuttal.  But lest somebody think I'm setting up a "straw man" argument, I give you the opportunity to correct and make sure the man I intend to knock down isn't a scarecrow.

AJ

STOMP land claim

In the interest of map accuracy, I am wondering if this claim should be represented:

STOMP was created with the intention to strike down alliances whom have the audacity to claim parts of a region as their own

The alliance of STOMP has declared the whole of Elgea and Blasted Lands to be under their control, dictating that all players within these lands must adhere to their practice and policy – essentially, the largest land claim to date. Any players refusing to play by their restrictions and guidelines are subject to hostility. There will be no grandfathering in of players or alliances established prior to this claim, nor will players in violation of this claim have the option to relocate outside of STOMP control.