creation of a war league
Printed From: Illyriad
Category: The World
Forum Name: Politics & Diplomacy
Forum Description: If you run an alliance on Elgea, here's where you should make your intentions public.
URL: http://forum.illyriad.co.uk/forum_posts.asp?TID=5160
Printed Date: 17 Apr 2022 at 15:34
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.03 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: creation of a war league
Posted By: twilights
Subject: creation of a war league
Date Posted: 22 Jun 2013 at 20:45
has anyone consider forming a war league of perhaps six alliances who are at constant war with each other? of course there would have to be rules that would have to be enforced but i think there is enough players in the game that would be interested...this way it might reduce all the verbal conflict going on between people that want to play the game differently. what are others thoughts? and as always please be polite with no personal name calling and please try to stay positive on the possibility.
|
Replies:
Posted By: The Duke
Date Posted: 22 Jun 2013 at 21:36
|
I like the idea however I think that this will be curbed since BL will have an aggressive side ------------- "Our generation has had no Great Depression, no Great War. Our war is spiritual. Our depression is our lives." |
Posted By: asasama
Date Posted: 22 Jun 2013 at 21:46
| This idea seems to get suggested every 6 months and nothing ever comes of it. Perhaps you could be the one to do the heavy lifting for setting such a system up twilights. |
Posted By: Arakamis
Date Posted: 22 Jun 2013 at 23:25
|
I don't think there will be enough motivation for artificial wars.. You should have something to loose or win in order to fight imo. Tournaments, for instance, are fun but a real war is better as long as you are winning ofc. :D |
Posted By: st aug
Date Posted: 22 Jun 2013 at 23:53
| Constant war I don't know about that. You need time to regroup and rebuild. As far as the war league I like the idea of that but that will never go over in here not now. To many none fighters and players that wish to have nothing to do with fighting . The game is changing and a new type of player is coming on board so you never know. Any thing that gets the players out of the shadows and banging on each other is ok by me. So great idea my dear my vote for a war league is yes |
Posted By: twilights
Date Posted: 23 Jun 2013 at 00:06
|
could have rules such as must have at least 5 castles in play or have to sit out until u rebuild..no nap, no confederation....both main and alt must be in same alliance..no spying and each player signs a contract agreeing to what ever rules the league has...these of course just suggestions...gosh if there is enough peeps into it we could have lots of fun..think of it, six alliance playing strategy to dominant but a safety clause that enables player not to lose everything. it be war of games of thrones, constant rebuilding so players can jump right back in.... |
Posted By: st aug
Date Posted: 23 Jun 2013 at 00:26
| hmm what about a war league that players of the same size only fight players of the same size. Then the alliance's leaders can monitor there smaller players and teach them the game what to do when to do it and so on. As far as the bigger players they can have the own war league and do there thing . I don't know if the bigger players would enjoy it. But I think the smaller players would love it. |
Posted By: Rill
Date Posted: 23 Jun 2013 at 02:38
|
Personally, I think it's a possibility that a little name-calling is a positive thing.
Hope that was polite enough.  |
Posted By: DeathDealer89
Date Posted: 23 Jun 2013 at 03:43
Its 'war' only there is no diplomacy, sneaking around, spying, has 'rules', can't lose everything, time to rebuild ect. So its 'war' just take out everything that constitutes war. Personally I find this idea as being hilarious. If there were 6 big alliances that wanted to make never ending war on the server, they probably could whether the rest of the server wanted to or not. I find it a bad idea to take all the people who want never ending war and put them in a system that forces them to work together and learn about war.
|
twilights wrote:Posted By: Gemley
Date Posted: 23 Jun 2013 at 04:34
|
IF someone created this I know eventually one of the alliances will majorly break the rules, won't apologize and then start a war (it would be a no mercy deal) between the alliances and only one or two will be left standing. It seems to me that the final result will be a lot of players rage quitting or getting seiged out of game. Sure it would be fun for most of the time but at the end of the I think the majority of affected players would not think it was worth it. Just my two cents. ------------- �I do not love the bright sword for it's sharpness, nor the arrow for it's swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend� - J.R.R. Tolkien |
Posted By: HATHALDIR
Date Posted: 23 Jun 2013 at 05:48
|
twi you can have a war alliance, press declare war button and presto, you have a war!Don't over complicate the bleeding obvious, or be shy that if you lose you might lose 3 or 4 towns, sometimes it happens, but plan to win otherwise! ------------- There's worse blokes than me!! |
Posted By: Brandmeister
Date Posted: 23 Jun 2013 at 06:31
|
A war without catapults is basically a PvP military exercise. If you add more rules and take out diplomats, it's closer to a tournament. It seems that many alliances arrange such events for practice and entertainment. While an exercise might improve the military experience of your team, I have to agree that it falls considerably short of a real 'war'. Removing the risk might encourage more players to participate, but it also removes their incentive to fight like cornered rats (or to flee like rats). And if tournaments aren't satisfying your hardcore wargamers, then I really doubt that a city-based tournament will make them happy. |
Posted By: BaoBao
Date Posted: 23 Jun 2013 at 09:40
|
Too bad the DEVS dont want this game to be a wargame. Otherwise they could have simply left the Tournament VII: The Champions Return going on. They could reset the stats at the end of each month and move the winners into the hall of fame. To have the small players involved too, devs could create separate tourney squares for players based on the number of towns they have. E.g. 5 groups: 1-2; 3-4; 5-6; 7-8; 9-10 towns. |
Posted By: Brandmeister
Date Posted: 23 Jun 2013 at 14:15
| I believe the devs want Illyriad to be a sandbox game. If players want self-created tournaments or even wars, I don't foresee them getting stopped. |
Posted By: tansiraine
Date Posted: 23 Jun 2013 at 18:03
|
the main thing that makes illy different is that we are not at constant war.. I been there done that and there are a bunch of games already out there that cover that need. If people really wanted that they would be playing those games and not illy. Personally coming out of a 6 month long war where you were constantly on guard watching waiting responding and attacking it gets old. I been there done that for year long wars you get burned out. The balance here is what makes the game worth playing.. yes there is War there is peace there is the in between.. We are getting more people here that like conflict want war etc.. does it make illy a better place? or will it turn it into like the other games out there instead of making illy stand out as a place that all types of play is welcome and encouraged.
Those who want to war maybe they need to make a forum post.. say let war.. but war with rules is a tournament.. not war think of that before you ask for it |
Posted By: Ossian
Date Posted: 24 Jun 2013 at 12:41
|
Posted By: Albatross
Date Posted: 24 Jun 2013 at 13:16
|
So, what expectations do players have about their alliances getting involved in wars? Would players leave and reform, just because they're itching for a fight? Does that leave a hole where they once were? Is there an expectation to keep these 'tournament-like' groups of alliances self-contained, or will there be an overspill? How is overspill contained, and at what point would someone peripheral to the arrangement become involved? What happens to players who try to wear two hats at the same time? This might seem fine, if a little chaotic, for established players who know a little about the state of play, but it could touch a raw nerve if new players are caught up in it. Are training alliances immune to these effects? Should we be keeping sparring isolated, or should it have wider repercussions? In asking these questions, I think the answer is 'information', and knowing where players stand, and what they're expected to do. There's trouble when players step outside of their expected roles, because it makes us feel insecure about our assumptions of safety. So, is the answer to make it as obvious as possible, that a player is in a 'war tournament'? e.g. Cut off all ties with their former alliances, join a sparring alliance, and ensure that sparring alliances have "sparring" in title? What complications could occur if players try to 'wear two hats'? -------------  |