soon no more anti war crying
Printed From: Illyriad
Category: The World
Forum Name: Alliance Recruitment
Forum Description: If you run an alliance and need members, or if you want to join an alliance on the Elgea Continent, post here.
URL: http://forum.illyriad.co.uk/forum_posts.asp?TID=4726
Printed Date: 17 Apr 2022 at 01:35
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.03 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: soon no more anti war crying
Posted By: twilights
Subject: soon no more anti war crying
Date Posted: 31 Jan 2013 at 22:43
| thank you devs for creating a war server, now there will be less tension in the illyriad world. should the first game now be non pvp? personally i say yes...your thoughts? |
Replies:
Posted By: Loud Whispers
Date Posted: 31 Jan 2013 at 22:52
|
May we please not tarnish the soon*TM to be opening with oversimplifications? And I'd much rather keep Elgea the way it is now. One massive continent of Fun. Should be nice to see the new quests too, that tavern might come in handy again :D
|
Posted By: geofrey
Date Posted: 31 Jan 2013 at 23:11
leveling my taverns now. Faction quests seem to give you troops of some sort. So this could get interesting. ------------- http://elgea.illyriad.co.uk/a/p/45534" rel="nofollow">  |
Loud Whispers wrote:Posted By: Darkwords
Date Posted: 31 Jan 2013 at 23:28
+1 We are either victim to anti war rhetoric or to moaning about there being nothing to do. Either way can't win. |
Posted By: The Duke
Date Posted: 31 Jan 2013 at 23:33
|
My fave part of the newness is getting those beasties into my army :) Ive been looking for new recruits and my townsfolk are running out of children to feed my growing army. I dont need Mel Gibson coming along telling them about freedom ------------- "Our generation has had no Great Depression, no Great War. Our war is spiritual. Our depression is our lives." |
Posted By: Epidemic
Date Posted: 01 Feb 2013 at 00:57
| It'll be part pvp war and part peaceful city building. It would be nice if your alliance couldn't follow you to the Broken Lands. |
Posted By: twilights
Date Posted: 01 Feb 2013 at 01:57
| totally agree epi, but they have lands call the war area, and hopefully the alliances are not restricted, its really two different games, at least in the beginning |
Posted By: Rill
Date Posted: 01 Feb 2013 at 03:15
| People are people everywhere. There will be cries for war and cries for peace on the new server, just as there are here. The culture might evolve differently, or it might end up being a lot the same. My guess would tend to be the latter. |
Posted By: Darmon
Date Posted: 01 Feb 2013 at 03:47
I think the main difference between Elgea and the Broken Lands will be that now people have a choice as to whether they want to be a part of player-oriented conflict, or rather, how many of their towns they want to be involved in it. So in theory everyone should be appeased: those who want the ability to engage in conflict more freely and fairly, those who want stronger assurances of perpetual peace, and most specifically, those who want that "new game" experience. It seems like a lot to balance...trying to make everyone happy, I mean. So we'll have to wait and see how effectively the devs manage to pull it off. Also, no matter what, I'm sure people will eventually find something that makes them unhappy. The devs will just be making that a bit more difficult. :P
|
Posted By: twilights
Date Posted: 01 Feb 2013 at 03:59
|
personally i am contacting alot of people from evony to inform them of the new developments here, so many are interested starting the game on an equal playing field, this is definitely going to attract active game players...people be prepare for a different game than what we are currently playing, lots of new people |
Posted By: Hadus
Date Posted: 01 Feb 2013 at 04:14
|
I definitely anticipate increased hostilities in the new server, but I'd hesitate to call it a "war server." Because you use the same account and presumably maintain the same alliance affiliation between both servers, actions in one continent could have repercussions in the other. If I decide to attack a member of EE (only using them as an example cause I know some of the players there) in the Broken Lands, what's to stop them from laying waste to my cities in Elgea? This, I believe, will keep the amount of conflict in check, at least between players already established in Elgea. The x-factors are anonymous alts and new players, both of which could lead to a lot of unprovoked warfare. I'm hoping factions and quests give us some real reason to participate in PvP battle; war can be great fun, but only if it is driven by some purpose--rational or emotional. Attacking or being attacked "4 lulz" is not, for me, enjoyable in the least, not without at least some sort of plan or end goal (even if the goal is to gain/demonstrate power). ------------- http://elgea.illyriad.co.uk/a/p/157483" rel="nofollow"> 
|
Posted By: Meagh
Date Posted: 01 Feb 2013 at 07:08
|
Any war will not be contained to any specific land mass or within the little PVP areas in Broken Lands.. It is the same server with the same player associations. Any act will have consequence throughout, the only exception is if you restrict your activities to huggsville.. err the Kingdom of Virten. - M. ps and I think there will still be anti-war crying. that is ... normal. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Hora
Date Posted: 01 Feb 2013 at 10:59
|
The idea of choosing peace or war, and also how many cities you want to participate, is great. Alliances can raise their recruits in peace (had been such in Elgea, too, but now its definite safety...), and dedicated warriors get all the action they always wanted. Especially when Twilights talks about bringing "active gameplayers" from evony down there...
 |
Posted By: Chaos Armor
Date Posted: 01 Feb 2013 at 12:29
| For some reason the only thing I can think of when we speculate about the culture of the Broken Lands is " http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=32l3sTFRFX8" rel="nofollow - The Great American Melting Pot ". A place for everyone, PvE and PvP! |
Posted By: Hadus
Date Posted: 01 Feb 2013 at 13:08
Yeah, seems like Exodus followed by a rune and reinforcements from another city will be the only way to get inside and survive once it's populated. Then again, siege takes a long time and is very costly; I don't think it will be used willy-nilly there. Thieving and Raids will be far more common I think. ------------- http://elgea.illyriad.co.uk/a/p/157483" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: DeathDealer89
Date Posted: 01 Feb 2013 at 13:35
| Or Broken Lands will be populated by mostly the same people that populated Elgea. So why wouldn't the same anti-war stance have been brought over to there? |
Posted By: ES2
Date Posted: 01 Feb 2013 at 13:51
That is what I said actually in GC last night, Also what someone else said "How do we know that threats wouldnt carry between both continents" "hm you are being pretty successful here when i want to be, better stop that or lose some cities in elgea." I personally just see this as an oppurtunity to have actual nations, though now I suppose that all the " pro-peace" players can reside in one area quite happily. ------------- Eternal Fire |
Posted By: twilights
Date Posted: 01 Feb 2013 at 14:03
|
its going to be hard to play both servers unless u just want to vocally play both. i cant believe with a fresh start and all the great variables the devs have provided that the gameplay will not be the same at all. please keep the 100 member limitation per alliance and of course there is no need for training alliances on broken lances with the protected area. wow that limits the control of older accounts and alliances right away...i wonder how they going to bring over inactive accounts that are being sat?. and image there is finally going to be good areas to place castles without control of the older alliances. remember game play is going to change, people will play mainly on one server or the other and its very tough to start the game completely new when u are use to controlling everything on another server. accept that there are new ways to play, please dont bring over the same tired talk to broken lands |
Posted By: Brids17
Date Posted: 01 Feb 2013 at 14:04
Because unlike Elgea you are choosing to place your cities in a pvp zone. -------------  |
Posted By: ES2
Date Posted: 01 Feb 2013 at 14:10
Whatever Twilights ------------- Eternal Fire |
Posted By: Rill
Date Posted: 01 Feb 2013 at 14:21
Given the severe limitations of the "peace" zone (5 food, no sov), placing a city outside of it will not necessarily indicate a desire for PvP. It might just indicate a desire to claim sovereignty in order to become an A1 cattle merchant. Probably there will be lots of people who will say wishing to be peaceful outside the dedicated peace zone is not a valid option and to "go back to Verten." Hur, hur, hur. wargarble garble. It's completely predictable, and I'm not particularly looking forward to it.
|
Posted By: Auraya
Date Posted: 01 Feb 2013 at 14:23
|
As with everything, we will start to see the community form rules of what is and isn't acceptable within this PvP zone. I highly doubt it will sink to the same levels as Travian, Evony, Tribal Wars etc. People will still defend new players who settle in the PvP zone until they are established. There will still be the same consequences for unprovoked attacks. Some alliances will claim 'What happens in Broken Lands, stay in Broken Lands' and others will carry it over to Elgea. The PvE zone is great though. I imagine many people will grow their cities there first then exodus out to the PvP section, providing the game mechanics will allow that.
|
Posted By: Anjire
Date Posted: 01 Feb 2013 at 14:24
|
I predict history will repeat itself. ------------- http://elgea.illyriad.co.uk/a/p/26125" rel="nofollow">  |
Posted By: twilights
Date Posted: 01 Feb 2013 at 14:27
| we need alot more new people playing this game |
Posted By: bansisdead
Date Posted: 01 Feb 2013 at 14:35
I dont think the Devs should be getting involved in what an alliance does or doesn't do. It is the players choice and not the devs. Just because there is a protected zone doesn't mean new players wont benefit from being a member of a training alliance. After all a protected zone isn't able to offer resources and advice on how best to build a city, this is down to the goodness of the player base. Long live training alliances! ------------- http://elgea.illyriad.co.uk/a/p/124253" rel="nofollow"> 
|
Posted By: geofrey
Date Posted: 01 Feb 2013 at 14:38
|
I think the PVE will detract from more PVP. I honestly think there will be less conflicts involving the destruction of cities, and more conflicts involving PVE goals... For example the Dwarf and Elf factiosn encourage their loyalists to both try and take over a square. So now all the players allied with the Dwarves and all the players allied with the Elves are both fighting to take over a square. It creates more conflict, without involving the destruction of another players cities. ------------- http://elgea.illyriad.co.uk/a/p/45534" rel="nofollow"> |
Posted By: Arakamis
Date Posted: 01 Feb 2013 at 16:24
|
What if an alliance choose to build all their cities in the protected lands and in the event of a war support their allies from there without a possibility to become a target.. there needs to be some restrictions for those who choose to build their cities in the protected zone. Non-Protected Zone is just what it is.. Non-Protected Zone. i'm not against pvp but there is no need to exaggarate the meaning to something else.. it is just like Elgea.. it is the people setting the rules.. |
Posted By: Anjire
Date Posted: 01 Feb 2013 at 17:07
|
There are healthy restrictions for living within the protected zone enough so that with the current game mechanics there really won't be a lot of "support" some one can offer. ------------- http://elgea.illyriad.co.uk/a/p/26125" rel="nofollow"> |
Posted By: Elmindra
Date Posted: 01 Feb 2013 at 17:15
|
No sov, 5 food, half mana. You could support with basics and with a one-time decent attack, but forget about replacing those troops any time soon. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Anjire
Date Posted: 01 Feb 2013 at 17:31
Hmm...The wording is "you cannot attack other players' cities or participate in city-based PVP outside of Virten." Wonder if it is allowed to attack siege camps since they are not city proper? I would hope not but then coding against that would be difficult especially if it is allowed to attack NPC's or squares outside of Virten. I am not sure if "reinforcing" would be valid under the strict reading of the statement since I would imagine that would be considered participating in city-based PVP. *** Should have kept reading the FAQ "and will not allow you to send attacks against any other players' cities. " So, support seems likely as would the ability to attack siege camps and other encamped player units.
------------- http://elgea.illyriad.co.uk/a/p/26125" rel="nofollow"> |
Posted By: Elmindra
Date Posted: 01 Feb 2013 at 17:39
|
So yeah, good luck with those 3.5k T2 cav that take you over a month to replace. -------------
|
Posted By: Rorgash
Date Posted: 01 Feb 2013 at 18:06
|
do people understand its the same game, same players and same alliances? which means once the time comes it will be up to people to decide if fights starting in the new lands will be restricted there or follow us here. for me, i see it following us here aswell, you attack my towns there you should be ready to lose all your towns here aswell. http://sphotos-b.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc7/391924_474704019257719_775841119_n.jpg" rel="nofollow - http://sphotos-b.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc7/391924_474704019257719_775841119_n.jpg
------------- 
|
Posted By: Llyr
Date Posted: 01 Feb 2013 at 18:26
|
Once Broken Lands has enough new players who aren't in Elgea as well, they'll have their own alliances and their own wars. Not everyone will want to play in both. ------------- http://elgea.illyriad.co.uk/a/p/187558" rel="nofollow">  |
Posted By: Rorgash
Date Posted: 01 Feb 2013 at 18:31
|
yea, new players will be a change. we wont know the meta game until the expansion is out, which is probably not for another 2-3 years :) -------------
|
Posted By: The_Dude
Date Posted: 01 Feb 2013 at 20:33
| It sounds to me like Virten cities may break sieges/'cades as well as defend those encampments. By the same token, Virten cities may not reinforce other cities - strictly field operations. The No Sov limit will reduce the ability of a Virten city to rapidly produce troops so that is somewhat of a regulator on the Virten cities - so they have the economic potential of our cities before Sov was introduced. |
Posted By: Hadus
Date Posted: 01 Feb 2013 at 21:04
|
As long as siege and newbie farming do not become sources of casual entertainment in Illyriad, I welcome a change of pace to a more conflict-oriented play style on the new continent.
------------- http://elgea.illyriad.co.uk/a/p/157483" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: Rill
Date Posted: 01 Feb 2013 at 21:29
| Cities in the protected lands may serve as bases for advanced resource production and crafting, rather than troops. I do think the devs are a little naive to claim that people in the protected area can compete in a meaningful way in tournaments, because of the limitations to sovereignty that will not allow them to reproduce troops. That doesn't mean that there is no place for a city or two in the protected area within a player or alliance's overall strategy, but I think there will be plenty of people who mostly enjoy tournaments and PvE who will place their cities in the unprotected areas -- whether the people who want Evony-style play like it or not. |
Posted By: The_Dude
Date Posted: 01 Feb 2013 at 21:50
|
Frankly, I haven't seen PvE players in Elgea being ganked or zerged. What I have seen are PvE players joining alliances that are PvP oriented and then finding themselves in conflict because of the alliance leadership. How can you tell if an alliance is PvP? Does the alliance make land claims? Then it is PvP since NPCs are unaffected by land claims.
|
Posted By: geofrey
Date Posted: 01 Feb 2013 at 22:05
Peace zone will become warehouses for all the alliances to store their goods so no one can get to them. As far as actually creating a PVP continent, this expansion will succeed but not in the way everyone here thinks so. I predict that Elgea will soon become the premier PVP continent, with anyone interested in doing PVE or tournament to begin building in Broken Lands. Broken Lands will give new and small players a chance to start fresh at ground 0 with everyone else. That is going to leave large and older players in Elgea. With all the noobs starting in Broken Lands, Elgea will enter into a severe turf war. I suspect many alliance wills encourage behavior in the lines of "this is our territory, if you don't like it go to Broken Lands with all the other new people, OR ELSE." Alliances will be much more inclined to destroy each other's Elgea cities because they can force their opposition to build in Broken Lands. The idea of destroying a players entire empire is gone, now your just destroying their Elgea Empire. They can/will always have their Broken Lands empire. The Broken Lands will end up being a safe Haven from the larger intimidating alliances of Elgea. The result will be only established military alliances will be left in Elgea. ------------- http://elgea.illyriad.co.uk/a/p/45534" rel="nofollow"> |
Posted By: Rill
Date Posted: 01 Feb 2013 at 22:07
Depends what you mean by land claims. Pretty much everyone is going to want to claim sovereignty at some point or another. While this may have the effect of bringing one into conflict with other players, it does not necessarily express a desire to do so.
|
Posted By: The_Dude
Date Posted: 01 Feb 2013 at 22:21
|
Posted By: Rill
Date Posted: 01 Feb 2013 at 22:32
|
You still haven't clarified whether you view sovereignty as a land claim or not. To take it at its literal meaning, you do, but to then contend that anyone who claims sovereignty is expressing a desire to PvP is a statement with which I would take issue. The majority of people who claim sovereignty do so for economic reasons, although those may also feed into military aims in some cases. There is also a difference between a willingness to fight (if one must) and a desire to fight (because one enjoys it).
|
Posted By: geofrey
Date Posted: 01 Feb 2013 at 22:45
Rill, i'm afraid you might be confusing TD here, and when that happens condescending questions happens, and then the whole post gets derailed and we end up arguing about who can use better punctuation. So lets pretend the last 5 post didn't happen. And instead talk about if Broken Lands will bring an end to anti-war crying. To get back on topic, I think Elgea will become new PVP zone, and Broken Lands will be the safe zone. ------------- http://elgea.illyriad.co.uk/a/p/45534" rel="nofollow"> |
Posted By: Brids17
Date Posted: 01 Feb 2013 at 23:56
What do you need sov for if you're not going to build troops? Food sov? Even then, you don't actually need food sov in order to acquire 10 cities. If you want peace either stick with Elgea or say in the peaceful part of the map. The devs are obviously trying to encourage pvp, as such, it's going to be a free for all in that area.
Don't place cities in the PVP section if you don't want to get attacked. ------------- |
Posted By: bansisdead
Date Posted: 02 Feb 2013 at 00:08
|
Whilst we have GC mob rule, we will be stuck with anti-war crying. Elgea is and always will be the original PVP & PVE zone, no holds barred, until the anti-war crying starts. Whilst im not a fan of the GC cry babies, being a 'victim' of this fairly recently, verbally not physically, I do think that it is also an endearing feature of Illy. There is a problem tho with this set up, as someone like me, who doesnt frequent GC other than for recruitment purposes, can be easily wronged. I had an incident with a player who has just left the game, they murdered some of my orclings harvesters, but when I approached them on this issue they became very defensive and aggressive, too the point of being rude, they offered no apology and instead ran to GC and demanded BSHx give her an apology. She was very active so had the support of GC, what can we do agaisnt this? GC mob rules, to hell with justice or fact. ------------- http://elgea.illyriad.co.uk/a/p/124253" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: twilights
Date Posted: 02 Feb 2013 at 00:13
| omg are we going to play old peoples rules in broken too, war zone should mean war zone, shame the old people are already threatening the thing before it has even started, why not continue trying to ruin the game? |
Posted By: bansisdead
Date Posted: 02 Feb 2013 at 00:25
|
Who u calling old gameplayer? /me attacks gameplayer with my zimmer frame https://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=Ui7&tbo=d&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&channel=fflb&spell=1&q=zimmer+frame&sa=X&ei=WV4MUa70OOid0AWU2IGoDQ&ved=0CDEQvwUoAA&biw=1280&bih=894" rel="nofollow - . ------------- http://elgea.illyriad.co.uk/a/p/124253" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: Meagh
Date Posted: 02 Feb 2013 at 00:50
half of the current training alliances don't do this half as much as they should and and no decent regular alliance neglects it half as much as training alliances imply. - M.
-1 for decrying old people.
There really isn't when it comes to pvp. If you tell another player that they cannot settle on square X then you are engaged in pvp. imho everyone currently in game is a pvp player because all of elgea is in a pvp zone. Diplomacy conducted in GC and the forums is also part of that pvp gameplay. - M. -------------
|
Posted By: Kumomoto
Date Posted: 02 Feb 2013 at 01:50
This is one of the most astute things I've read on the Forums recently. Well said! |
Posted By: Rill
Date Posted: 02 Feb 2013 at 02:44
|
I agree that to some degree it doesn't matter whether one fights because one wishes to or because one is forced to. If one is willing to fight, one is willing to fight. However, to suggest that settling in an area where PvP is allowed means that one wishes to engage in PvP is similar to saying that because airplanes can crash, when one chooses to fly by plane, one wishes to be in an airplane crash. Assumption of risk doesn't mean that one desires to have the adverse event occur. There may be many reasons to settle in an area that allows PvP other than desiring PvP, especially with the way this proposal is set up. For example, Brids claims that there is no reason to want sovereignty if you don't want to engage in open PvP. This is obviously untrue. One compelling reason to claim sovereignty is to speed troop production during tournaments. Tournaments tend to be competitions of endurance and attrition, and the ability to reproduce troops quickly is a major determinant of success. Not having sovereignty will limit the ability to succeed in tournaments. I am not arguing one way or another about whether the design is "fair" or "a good idea." I'm simply describing one of a number of reasons that under this design players with no desire to engage in open PvP may decide to risk the potential anyway (even though they'd rather not) because the game mechanics force them to do so in order to accomplish other goals.
|
Posted By: Brids17
Date Posted: 02 Feb 2013 at 15:18
|
I this people are missing the entire point of the broken lands. Why would the devs put all this time and effort into building an entirely separate world just for it to play out exactly like Elgea? It would be much easier to simply expand the current map if they wanted to make it less crowded. Having and pvp and non-pvp zone is extremely clear they wanted to encourage pvp in said zone and discourage it (or rather, disallow it) it the other zone. If the community is going to force everyone to play in Broken Lands the same play they play in Elgea, it will be a complete and utter waste of an expansion. ------------- |
Posted By: Rill
Date Posted: 02 Feb 2013 at 15:55
|
The developers have said repeatedly that they make the world and how we decide to play in it is up to us. Even if the developers did have some sort of agenda to create more PvP (which is not to be assumed), we are under no obligation to embrace said goal. If the developers DID want to create an environment where people who didn't want PvP would be motivated to stay away from PvP areas, they might have chosen not to create such severe penalties for the non-PvP areas. The fact that there are such severe penalties might be interpreted to mean that in fact they still want a variety of people in the PvP areas, including those who might venture there for reasons other than PvP. I personally would not make such an interpretation, since I think it is misguided to project any "plan" for how players will interact with the world onto the developers.
|
Posted By: twilights
Date Posted: 02 Feb 2013 at 16:21
| well personally i am setting up a structure that will promote pvp and faction strategy. this war is the most fun alot of people have had since starting the game and the devs did a nice job making it more strategy then the biggest team wins...with factions i think the devs can control the game play in broken lands more than our current playing area....people should play a balance game and not just a certain aspect of the game, otherwords be prepared to be attacked and be prepared for more conflict...everyone starts on equal footing there, there will be no one with a big stick pushing out players they feel dont fit in like we have now....i mean the game shouldnt be hum drum and predictable, thats what makes these games so fun! a true game of thrones! THANK YOU DEVS! |
Posted By: Darkwords
Date Posted: 02 Feb 2013 at 17:14
| Actually there will be people with big sticks, that is those with large membership active alliances, who move out there en-mass and united. |
Posted By: ES2
Date Posted: 02 Feb 2013 at 17:51
|
All those for more PvP will continue to cry out for their freedom to wage war, until they are on the losing side, then they will cry out for peace. ------------- Eternal Fire |
Posted By: Darkwords
Date Posted: 02 Feb 2013 at 18:05
|
They have every right to wage war if they wish, but they have to be prepared for others to wage war on them. However, having a War zone to me indicates that we will be attacked not only by other players but by NPCs also. I feel this may help create an environment where conflict is more 'accepted' and likely more common. |
Posted By: The_Dude
Date Posted: 02 Feb 2013 at 18:13
| We have been told that NPC/Factions will attack us on Elgea, too. |
Posted By: Hadus
Date Posted: 02 Feb 2013 at 18:18
|
Those who do desire a "war zone" in Broken Lands: what exactly do you want out of this PvP combat? Do you want the large scale, high stakes war between two massive fronts we currently have going on? Do you want competition for out-of-city objectives such as resources and sovereignty spots? Do you want premediated PvP between willing parties? Do you want newbie-stomping/farming? Do you want battle at a whim, with little rhyme or reason? I think there is a lack of any sort of consensus between those demanding more combat/war in Illyriad. Many people are just shouting "Hurray, everyone get ready for battle, no one can argue for peace because the devs put it there for PvP!" without even thinking about what KIND of PvP will develop there. Even if things do get more aggresive, it may not be what you expect. "Be careful what you wish for" comes to mind. ------------- http://elgea.illyriad.co.uk/a/p/157483" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: twilights
Date Posted: 02 Feb 2013 at 18:34
| i am inviting back all the people who in my opinion were unfairly pushed out of the game by the people that ganged up on them because they wouldnt play the way certain players wanted the game to be played. We will see if the old tactics of harassment and unfair play continue in broken. if gc isnt broken into two parts i image that luna is going to be very busy policing it. hopefully they have different areas for chat so a group of people can not easily try to control play in both areas. |
Posted By: Hadus
Date Posted: 02 Feb 2013 at 19:42
|
You can't demand open PvP and also demand that people not force others to play a certain way. That's exactly what open PvP is; the PvPers force peacefuls to fight against their will. It is essentially the second side of the "unfair" coin; one one side you have forced peace, on the other forced conflict. It is fine to desire such an atmosphere, but if you want open PvP should not complain about being "forced" into a certain playstyle when that is exactly what you wish to do. If it wasn't, you would only be fighting other willing PvP players, and that is already quite possible in Elgea. ------------- http://elgea.illyriad.co.uk/a/p/157483" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: Darkwords
Date Posted: 02 Feb 2013 at 21:15
|
Basically from what I read here GP wants the right to fight against smaller oponents with his friends, whilst no-one has the right to fight against him and his friends even if they are friendly with his targets. If that is what you expect, I would advise that rather than inviting your friends from Evony, you just play there with them. |
Posted By: ES2
Date Posted: 02 Feb 2013 at 21:44
Thats what everyone thinks what will happen when they call for a PvP environment, rarely do they think they would be on the receiving side and losing side of the PvP. Hadus has it head on with his "be careful what you wish for". ------------- Eternal Fire |
Posted By: Arakamis
Date Posted: 02 Feb 2013 at 23:19
|
BL will be pretty much the same imo.. Maybe, a little more aggressive/war-oriented but nothing more.. Even (hopefully) with a new player rush, most of the player base will the same and it is the people setting the rules.. So I say, don't expect/wish too much and yes be careful what you wish for.. |
Posted By: Angrim
Date Posted: 03 Feb 2013 at 00:47
pardon? a good training alliance does considerably more than protect its members. new players will still need to learn the game.
i chose to place my cities in a pvp zone when i joined illyriad instead of some other game. it was not because i was seeking pvp.
new players will adapt to the status quo, whatever that will be. they will join established alliances and adapt to alliance policies. if war is somehow more common in the broken lands, it will be even less likely that new alliances challenging the status quo will survive to do so. the reason change does not happen often in Elgea is not because we lack new players, it's because we lack new players who both desire change and can last long enough in the existing system to play a significant role in changing it.
allies are the most important asset in the game. new players will not have them. players coming from Elgea will, and will already know the game. there is no level playing field.
i am assuming here that the crows have suddenly become intimidating, because i can hardly see them pulling out of Elgea. and if one is intimidated by the crows, what are one's odds in this new free-for-all? ;)
if gc ruled anything, H? would have had to manage its PR much better than it has. the rule of Elgea is on the map, not in the chat room.
you think this will be better when she can do this from a protected zone in which her cities are inviolate? you are an optimist indeed.
with all the time and effort the devs have spent, they have created two areas, one of which operates under restrictions to PvP...and the other which operates under exactly the same rules as Elgea. it is not at all clear to me that they are doing anything but trying to provide a protected space for players who want a civ-style building game and feel that their prestige should buy them something that other players cannot take away. what happens in the rest of the realm, as in Elgea, will be up to us, gameplayer's newly-recruited evonites, and whatever trolls discover that Virten will offer them a sanctuary from which to make things unpleasant for others without fear of reprisal. |
Posted By: Ossian
Date Posted: 03 Feb 2013 at 12:41
Heh. This thread is entertaining. I will offer no opinion on The Broken Lands, Virten cities, PvE or PvP except to say that the unknown is always exciting 
I have always found that when facing a new expansion, server or even a dungeon level the best position to have is to start with a fresh mind. Leave everything else behind and start afresh. It will be exciting and enable each player to gain enjoyment from it whatever their style of play .
 |
Posted By: Brids17
Date Posted: 03 Feb 2013 at 19:43
That's completely different and you know it. You simply don't have a choice in Elgea. In Broken Lands there's a choice not settle in an area where pvp is simply impossible. If you are strongly against pvp, then don't settle in the pvp section. I have played tons of MMOs that had areas where pvp was enabled and areas where it was disabled. People not looking for pvp (such as myself in many games) simply didn't go into those areas. Why are so many people struggling to grasp this concept? ------------- |
Posted By: Rill
Date Posted: 03 Feb 2013 at 20:01
| It's not that we don't grasp the concept, Brids, it's that we disagree with you. People may settle outside the PvP free zone in the Broken Lands because they want to do something that is not possible in Verten, such as claim sovereignty, not because they want PvP. The existence of a zone in which PvP is not allowed, under severe restrictions, is not a reason to banish people who are not interested in PvP to some sort of ghetto that severely restricts their potential for growth. |
Posted By: ES2
Date Posted: 03 Feb 2013 at 20:27
But it's acceptable to claim the PvP labeled zone as a "only for those that *want* to pvp. ------------- Eternal Fire |
Posted By: Rill
Date Posted: 03 Feb 2013 at 21:31
It's acceptable to claim anything one wants.* Whether one is successful in such a claim remains to be seen. *Within the limitations of the Code of Conduct and Terms of Service.
|
Posted By: ES2
Date Posted: 03 Feb 2013 at 21:37
Ah but to claim is an act of PvP already. ------------- Eternal Fire |
Posted By: The_Dude
Date Posted: 03 Feb 2013 at 21:42
|
I would like to point out that Factions have been promoted for about 2.5 years and still have not been released. Many things have been promoted and when ultimately released worked differently than originally promoted. So I don't think we should spend a lot of energy on imagining how TBL will actually work. Personally, I would like to see the previously promoted unreleased features for Elgea to be completed before the creation of TBL - Factions, Pathfinding, Roads, Ships, Combat Magic.
|
Posted By: Darkwords
Date Posted: 03 Feb 2013 at 21:47
|
I feel there will be areas within the PvP zone, where people will only go if they are looking for a fight. As I reckon there will be some areas where the Factions will turn pretty violent. This will prob happen in Elgea also, we all need to keep that in mind. Therefore these areas should in theory atract the ardent fighters in this game. However, anyone that goes to less violent, but non-protected areas is not necarsarily a 'PVPer'. And I expect, as that is most of the map and is the only area for sov, that area will include the majority of the current and mostly peacefull members of this game. As has been said so many times here, if people think they can pick a target in the 'new lands' and just farm them without their friends standing up for them, then they need to think again. As with many here I remember when Elgea was at the point that BL will be, in that is had just started. We will all be limited by resource capability, building levels and most importantly (as you cant speed it), research. I also remember when the first alliance acheived all the seige techs ;) that was an interesting time. |
Posted By: Brids17
Date Posted: 03 Feb 2013 at 22:06
If you want to settle in an area where you can claim sov, settle in Elgea. There's absolutely no reason to settle another 10 cities, in an area that in no way, shape or form can interact with your other 10 (if you even have 10) just to do the exact same thing you do on Elgea. Why would anyone want an expansion in which they do the exact same thing they do in the main game? ------------- |
Posted By: Darkwords
Date Posted: 03 Feb 2013 at 22:08
| Because at some point you will be able to transfer stuff between all 20 cities perhaps? |
Posted By: twilights
Date Posted: 03 Feb 2013 at 22:31
|
i hope everyone that demands that current play continues in the new lands are supporting illyriad by purchasing prestige. remember this is a business and the amount of work in coding the new area should be rewarded. maybe others should be aware of this instead of expecting just a bigger free play ground. this is a war strategy game and we already seeing bullying of older larger alliances against people that want to play a different style. shame on you for need to control everything. we definitely need new people playing this game and u are chasing away the war gamers by making this a chat room and expecting the game to provide you tournaments when u have player vs player sitting right in front of you. its a free speech forum so let me have it. |
Posted By: ES2
Date Posted: 03 Feb 2013 at 22:36
If people here want TBL to be have as many peace periods as Elgea does, then they will Fight for it, such as you will fight for freedom to fight. it's PvP. Twilights, you don't want PvP, you want you in a position to win PvP, otherwise you could pick a fight with anyone in Elgea and get your pvp. ------------- Eternal Fire |
Posted By: Angrim
Date Posted: 03 Feb 2013 at 22:37
they will not be doing the exact same thing. even though the alliances will be the same, the interrelationships will be different because the geopolitics will be different. also, the broken lands will have its own quest line, which is an attraction to some. i could just as easily ask why anyone has an alt, when the world is the same...what can one possibly do with an alt that one can't do with one's main? on the surface, nothing. in the details...many things. (edited to add:)
no, i really don't think it is.
|
Posted By: Darkwords
Date Posted: 03 Feb 2013 at 22:42
If you honestly want PvP then what is your problem with people wanting PvP against you. No-one is saying there will be no fighting, they are just saying that if you want a fight, be prepared for one. Thats the size of it, if you dont like it then you are obviously not up for an honest fight, so stop claiming you are. |
Posted By: Angrim
Date Posted: 03 Feb 2013 at 23:04
i suggest that this can be characterised safely as "pro-war crying". |