Play Now Login Create Account
illyriad
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Are Land Claims Bad for Illy?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedAre Land Claims Bad for Illy?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 56789 18>
Author
 Rating: Topic Rating: 2 Votes, Average 3.00  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Ashmadia View Drop Down
Greenhorn
Greenhorn
Avatar

Joined: 19 May 2015
Status: Offline
Points: 54
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 May 2015 at 05:17
Originally posted by ajqtrz ajqtrz wrote:

In response to the person who has said that the "playground analogy" (or metaphor, if you like) was inappropriate because in that analogy there are the adults who ultimately decide if something on the playground is good for all the kids or not.  I guess I should have continued the explanation and pointed out that, ultimately, it's the players of Illy who decided what is acceptable or not.  Just as in a playground situation where kids are "claiming" the swings to the exclusion of other kids, the adults have to decide if they want to take action or not, so too in this matter in Illy.  Thus, the analogy actually fits perfectly once you give ultimate control tot he Illy community.  And just as the adult playground supervisors have to agree on what constitutes "bullying" and what doesn't, so too in Illy, we, the community at large, must do so as well.

As for the idea that telling smaller players and alliances they cannot settle in certain areas, and that if they do,  they will be "removed", one has too wonder what Ash would call "intimidation" and "coercion."  I'm not describing the actions by slanting them, because the very definition of "intimidation"   "
:  to make timid or fearful :  frighten; especially :  to compel or deter by or as if by threats <tried to intimidate a witness>"  Merriam Webster Dictionary.  So if I refrain from settling in an area that has been claimed because I've been threatened with "removal" I'm acting intimidated and the threat of removal is intimidating.  You really can't get any more clear than that. 

Why some people do not want to accept the term "intimidation" and it's enacted counter-part, "coercion" is that it just doesn't sound like something those in a friendly game should be doing outside the strict formal and accepted rules.  I can understand their reluctance, but if you don't label things according to what they are you will never face up to what they are and take responsibility.

As for my "passion" for the subject at hand, I'm actually hoping others become more passionate about the subject.  The more civil discussion we have...and it's really been, overall, quite civil, hasn't it? ... the more we will understand the social implications of what we are allowing.  And make a clear choice.  Right now it appears to me that most of the defense of the practice is coming from those who are well established and don't expect the current crop of land claims to effect them...and thus can argue for the practice pretty easily.  However, my cities are in TBL and I'm don't want myself or any other players to be hedged in by large alliances claiming the land around me.  If they wish to do so, let them plant the cities in the same manner as I and use the existing and well accepted methods. 

Finally, because I am, of course, getting a bit repetitive, if the practice of claiming a "homeland" has been done in Elgea for a long time, and there are no wars over it, it's probably only allowed because nobody made the effort to stop it, or they didn't have the strength to do so even if they wished.  Which is really the problem we face even if we did decide to deny land claims, we have to exercise the authority to either deny the new rule by coming to the aide of the first person who decides to knowingly settle (and not be coerced into moving) or allow the same dynamic become a reality in TBL as it is in Elgea.  I don't think it was a healthy development there, and I doubt it will be on in TBL.  Of course, if you have a large alliance and can take advantage of the new proposed rule, then you will like it...but concern for yourself and not that of the players you effect (except to be so generous with them that you "assist" them in kicking them out) has always has been the easy way out.

AJ


I don't have the time to answer all this stuff, so i will stick to my point, which you might have missed.
It's not that i don't understand the meaning of the words intimidation and coercion, it's that i don't care if you accuse me of it. This it NOT a "friendly" game, i signed up for an "MMO Role-Playing-Sanbox". If i choose to roleplay the "scumbag", i would dare you to try and convince me through words of/and friendship.

Then we talk about the "well-accepted methods" (implying 10 sq rule) which i very well don't accept (more info in my ingame profile). And then we reach the part where i can impose a 50sq rule anytime, provided that i can also back it up. Similarly, i can claim a whole region. If and when i get there, i 'll try to remember to shed a tear for all the players i intimidate and coerce with my claims.
Back to Top
ajqtrz View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 24 May 2014
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 500
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 May 2015 at 23:38
Ash, when you say,  "This it NOT a "friendly" game," you do realize that you've just decided for everybody what this game is?  I find it a very friendly game myself, so I'm wondering if I can be allowed to continue being friendly and playing that way or if you are going to try to convert the sandbox into a most "unfriendly" place?

In addition the fact that you signed up for "an "MMO Role-Playing-Sanbox" and might choose to play the role of the "scumbag" is, of course, your prerogative.  However, in the same way, if you decide to do some action that the rest of Illy doesn't like and they decided to run you out of town, is that is their prerogative, unless the devs declare otherwise. 

All of which underscores my point: in all games where players can be removed the ultimate ability to do that rests in the judges of the game.  In this game the judges are the players and the devs.  The devs remove players who do not adhere to what is best for the game, even if the technique is available...it's called an exploit.  The players may decide that some action or strategy is so unfriendly to new and small players that it deserve the same response.  I'm only asking if one of those actions isn't good for the game and thus should be thwarted by the actions of the whole of Illy. 

I'm not imposing anything on anyone though I am arguing forcefully that land claims are not a good thing for the health of the game and that the whole of Illy should decide to ban them.  This does not mean anyone has to be coerced, since if all agree, then no coercion would be necessary.  But of course, given the strategic advantage the technique has, it is doubtful any alliance will give up such an advantage even if it means that Illy becomes a sandbox of bullies and the bullied....kind bullies maybe, but bullies nevertheless.

You end with a sad statement, in my opinion, and probably a reason you don't find Illy "friendly" when you say you will "shed a tear" for those you have intimidated and coerced.  One has to wonder if the intimidation and coercion don't add just a bit to the "unfriendly" game you are playing.

AJ

Back to Top
Brandmeister View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar

Joined: 12 Oct 2012
Location: Laoshin
Status: Offline
Points: 2396
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 May 2015 at 02:32
Originally posted by ajqtrz ajqtrz wrote:

But of course, given the strategic advantage the (land claim) technique has, it is doubtful any alliance will give up such an advantage even if it means that Illy becomes a sandbox of bullies and the bullied....kind bullies maybe, but bullies nevertheless.

Give the violence propaganda a rest already. Alliance land claims have existed in this game for YEARS in Illyriad without the coercion, bullying, and greed that you are determined to ascribe to them. They have not been the cause of significant destruction in Illyriad. They were not the cause of the two server wars. Land claims in this game are nothing new, and thus far they have been nothing particularly dangerous. You can use words like tyrants and bullies to describe these alliances, but those slurs have been based solely on your predictions of what the claimants will inevitably become, which flies directly in the face of glaring historical proof that previous territory owners did not become any of those things. For once I would like to see you directly and unambiguously address that fact, reconcile it to your predictions, and then succinctly explain why this time it is going to be so catastrophically different.

While I have reservations about the current claims, I find it unproductive to discuss those concerns when people are throwing around hysterical predictions of tyranny and bullying. There are many valid objections to be had here without hauling out the tinfoil hats. Taking that tone undermines what might otherwise become a sensible community discussion on the pros and cons of territory claims in the Broken Lands.
Back to Top
Ashmadia View Drop Down
Greenhorn
Greenhorn
Avatar

Joined: 19 May 2015
Status: Offline
Points: 54
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 May 2015 at 07:20
When i say it's not friendly, i am neither accusing nor deciding anything for any player. I 'm just stating that it's not friendly by default.

Sorry, but as i already have written in private, Illyriad cannot become a sandbox of bullies and bullied, cause it already is.. You don't wan't to accept it, or just say a small perma-owner of a mine is less of a bully than a whole region owner. True, though hypocritical according to my dictionary.
Back to Top
abstractdream View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar

Joined: 02 Oct 2011
Location: Oarnamly
Status: Offline
Points: 1857
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 May 2015 at 17:03
Originally posted by Ashmadia Ashmadia wrote:

You don't wan't to accept it, or just say a small perma-owner of a mine is less of a bully than a whole region owner. True, though hypocritical according to my dictionary.
Agreed
Bonfyr Verboo
Back to Top
Brandmeister View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar

Joined: 12 Oct 2012
Location: Laoshin
Status: Offline
Points: 2396
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 May 2015 at 18:02
Illyriad is a game of empires. Those guards or your sov claim mark the mine as your property, both as an individual and as a member of your alliance (empire) and allied confederation (league of empires). If you ripped a mine out of someone's hands, the response would vary heavily based on the relative strengths of your empires, the owner's disposition, the empire's perception on property claims, political factors, military strategic factors, the opinions of your alliance leaders, the perceived value of the resource, and many other considerations.

I am willing to bet that a tiny alliance losing a little Iceheart mine to a huge aggressor would draw only a few boos from the Peanut Gallery, and no real reaction. Smashing the army on a Silversteel mine would probably draw an immediate war declaration at the confederation level. However, a tiny alliance seizing a Earthblood mine (worthless) from a big alliance might also be met with immediate force. A big alliance seizing a larger Arterium mine from another big alliance might result in a lot of saber rattling, and intense negotiations between their alliances and allies.

I believe it is these situations which keep the Illyriad sandbox interesting. If the territory claims result in some friction, that would be great. Like mining claims, some territories will be disputed, and that will keep the Broken Lands fresh. Elgea is very gridlocked and static, with high stakes over relatively trivial situations. Hopefully the Broken Lands will be more dynamic.
Back to Top
Diva View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 20 Dec 2011
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 416
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 May 2015 at 18:12
Isn't the majority of the people the same from Elgea? Granted there are a couple of war minded... but a lot of BL people ARE from Elgea.

And if more choose BL as a 2nd home, due to increase in cities... (not crowded yet) same playgound, same sandbox will exist.  

Unless land claims happen all over BL, you can't stop the neutral/static from coming in.

And I hope you see, that the opening of BL, not only gave US space... it increased the pop of the GAME, and when you do that.. you have more money spenders.. It's a WIN for the Devs...



Edited by Diva - 25 May 2015 at 18:17
"Um diva.... you are sort of acting like a .... diva...." - PhoenixFire
Back to Top
Brandmeister View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar

Joined: 12 Oct 2012
Location: Laoshin
Status: Offline
Points: 2396
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 May 2015 at 19:40
Diva, I believe that over the next few months we will see a significant de-population of Elgea and the Broken Lands, as permasat accounts are allowed to expire. Only the devs know for sure how many accounts are sitter-only at this point, but my sense is that the number is higher than people realize, especially in the larger accounts. Time will also tell if the devs are genuinely diligent about policing multi-accounting. Since so many Broken Lands settlements were just Elgea players, as you pointed out, I think this might thin the ranks considerably on the frontier.
Back to Top
ajqtrz View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 24 May 2014
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 500
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 May 2015 at 22:13
Well, that Illyriad is "a game of empires" and that "Illyriad cannot become a sandbox of bullies and bullied, cause it already is" are both statements about how the respective speakers see Illyriad.  But as old philsophers' would say, "you don't get 'ought from is."  Thus, what it 'ought' to be is more the question I've been trying to address.  I can say I've learned a lot about the current state of things from the discussion and understand that of course if the players want to act like it's a "war game" and be a bunch of "bullies" there is little I can do about it.  But the question still remains: is that what is good for the game in the long run?

Early on in the game players decided that they would limit the bullying by setting up an expectation  that new players would not be preyed upon by well established players...something that is too often done in most games and which is responsible for no small amount of people leaving when it occurs.  Early on the players of this game said that there should be a recognized distance of sovereignty of 10 squares around each city.  They did this, I assume, to make the game more fun and to retain more players, and to some degree these two informal rules have helped at least the reputation of the community and hence, the game.  And in both cases, from time to time the community has found it necessary to enforce those rules.  But they were rules the community adopted and are pretty much respected at this time.

What most people in this forum seem to resent is that I would suggest a new rule regarding land claims is much the same process as the two mentioned above.  I'm not sure why they think it an unusual thing to make the suggestion since I've obviously got some points to make.  But again, I also recognize that those at the top have on incentive for making the change, and would need to sacrifice a strategic advantage they hold over individuals and smaller alliances.  I guess that's to be expected.....sigh.

In the end the bullying will probably continue.  The smaller and thus weaker will continue to be dominated and ordered around by the stronger, even if the orders are delivered ever so politely.  I guess I was looking for the same spirit of sacrifice that was evidently manifested a long, long time ago.  I apologize for expecting too much and will let the matter drop for now.

Thanks for all your sharing.  As I said, I did learn a lot and that's really a good thing.

AJ
Back to Top
Brandmeister View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar

Joined: 12 Oct 2012
Location: Laoshin
Status: Offline
Points: 2396
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26 May 2015 at 05:38
Originally posted by ajqtrz ajqtrz wrote:

What most people in this forum seem to resent is that I would suggest a new rule regarding land claims is much the same process as the two mentioned above.

Personally, I am objecting to your presentation of land claims as if it is something new to Illyriad. It isn't. What you're proposing is that because this issue is new to you, it should be treated as new and novel by the whole Illyriad community.

I refer all readers to the establishment of the Dwarven Lords Homeland (link) by Belargyle, on January 25th, 2011. That was four years ago. The community had a long forum discussion on the topic then. Memorable players like The Dude, Belargyle, Smoking Gnu, Brids, and Kumomoto all expressed their opinions and concerns. I would like to highlight that some veteran players had precisely the same concerns that were just put forth in this very thread, four years later. Namely that the claimants of that zone would become axe-wielding bullies who smashed up innocent settlements without warning.

People discussed it. The DLords land claim proceeded. Aside from a few bumps, none of those dire concerns ever materialized into reality. Why? Probably because some time prior to the Dwarven Lords claim, an alliance called The Mal Motshans claimed the entire Mal Motsha region, and did indeed become a bunch of axe-wielding bullies who smashed up innocent settlements without warning. Their stance was especially aggressive because at the time, Mal Motsha was apparently a newbie spawn zone, and they were razing helpless, clueless players. In response to their behavior, the server banded together and handed them a savage beating. Nobody ever tried that again.

So the Illyriad community has already established the precedents here. Bullies get crushed, and reasonable land claims are left in peace.

Since that time, the exodus mechanic was introduced, allowing people to painlessly remove cities that are unknowingly moved into claimed territories. Now the cost of moving errant cities is effectively zero (specifically for a double exodus scenario).

Originally posted by ajqtrz ajqtrz wrote:

In the end the bullying will probably continue.  The smaller and thus weaker will continue to be dominated and ordered around by the stronger, even if the orders are delivered ever so politely.  I guess I was looking for the same spirit of sacrifice that was evidently manifested a long, long time ago.

Who is bullying anyone? Land claims have been a part of this game for over four years, ever since I have started playing. I don't remember anyone weaker getting dominated or ordered around by the stronger. If you are suggesting that this has happened in the past, or is happening right now, then please provide the details. If these are just your worries and not actual facts, then I am comfortable repeating what I have said throughout this thread: given the historical peaceful behavior around alliance land claims, and the swift community response to actual problems, I find nothing particularly alarming about a fresh set of claims on the Broken Lands frontier.

I think that sentiment is indeed consistent with the same spirit of sacrifice that was evidently manifested a long, long time ago. Land claims arose, were discussed thoroughly, then adopted, and have been handled responsibly by the community for over four years. If anyone foolishly attempts to go the route of The Mal Motshans... then I would expect a very similar community response to come crashing out of Elgea with the force of a great many armies. I rather doubt that will happen, but in the meantime, it seems unnecessary to keep presenting territory claims as a new issue instead of something that is already a longstanding and relatively respected part of the Illyriad player culture.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 56789 18>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.03
Copyright ©2001-2019 Web Wiz Ltd.