The balance of power...
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=5734
Printed Date: 17 Apr 2022 at 04:31
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.03 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: The balance of power...
Posted By: bansisdead
Subject: The balance of power...
Date Posted: 19 Jul 2014 at 23:38
|
With the Grand Alliance holding virtually all the power in Illyriad, what hope is there for the restoration of the balance of power? When H? was top dog there was several alliances holding H? in check, now there are no alliances to hold the Grand Alliance in check. Are we to trust the Grand Alliance will do the right thing, and who will stop them when their not??? ------------- http://elgea.illyriad.co.uk/a/p/124253" rel="nofollow"> 
|
Replies:
Posted By: abstractdream
Date Posted: 19 Jul 2014 at 23:47
|
All things come to an end but until then, things will have to be done differently, no doubt. Don't make the mistake, though of believing that most players even care. The majority of players aren't interested, aren't affected nor will they. EDIT: Infected by the affect effect. ------------- |
Posted By: Mr Damage
Date Posted: 19 Jul 2014 at 23:58
| H held the balance of power once White/Black were defeated, no-one held H in check from then on, H held themselves in check for the most part. The wars since, up until this one, were the culmination of various things depending on who you want to believe and H clearly controlled and won them. The GA faces the same challenge and will be judged similarly on their actions in the future, will they do things differently and any better? That remains to be seen......... |
Posted By: Velociryx
Date Posted: 20 Jul 2014 at 00:02
|
My crystal ball is in the shop, but based on their conduct thus far, the answers to your questions seem to be: None. and No one. If anybody were to try, they'd be hunted to extinction because starting from scratch is fun. ;) What usually happens in conflicts like this, one party feels stifled or slighted by their "overlords" and rises up to cast them off.... ...only to become even worse than the overlords they replace (always in the name of being better, of course!) And they always seem to display a fair bit of righteous indignation when anybody points that out. Abstract is right though - most players will keep their heads down and just not get involved in politics. For them, it won't make much difference, but it appears we're headed to a climate of "open season" on agitators. ;) |
Posted By: bansisdead
Date Posted: 20 Jul 2014 at 00:09
|
Mr Damage, there were alliances/confeds who could have dealt with Harmless? If consome were better organised maybe that could have turned out differently and the Crows were always in the 'wings'. ------------- http://elgea.illyriad.co.uk/a/p/124253" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: Rill
Date Posted: 20 Jul 2014 at 00:13
|
I think the time is past when any one alliance or even confederation could "control" Illyriad -- or even just one continent of it. Personally I think people would be wiser not to try. I think in the future there will be multiple competing and countervailing forces. That's what I think is likely to happen, but at best it is a rough guess. Probably the next person's guess is as good as mine. Maybe better!
|
Posted By: bansisdead
Date Posted: 20 Jul 2014 at 00:19
|
Rill, I hope you are right, but looking at the top ten alliances I cannot see that hope coming into fruition. If there is the slightest truth in my fears then that spells disaster for the future of Illyriad. ------------- http://elgea.illyriad.co.uk/a/p/124253" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: Spheniscidae
Date Posted: 20 Jul 2014 at 00:29
|
Power in Illyriad is now multipolar, held by multiple alliances in a confederation with one another. Previously, it was unipolar - concentrated in one alliance. I fail to see how the substitution of a hegemon for a collective can be anything but positive for the game.
|
Posted By: Velociryx
Date Posted: 20 Jul 2014 at 00:34
| Depends...we talking the Borg Collective? ;) |
Posted By: Brandmeister
Date Posted: 20 Jul 2014 at 01:27
| One massive, monolithic block of permasat accounts is giving way to a large confederation of permasat accounts. If the devs ever halt the rampant multi-accounting in this game, none of the emperors will have any clothes. A system cleanse would return power to alliances consisting of active, engaged players. That is, incidentally, where the power belongs. |
Posted By: Aurordan
Date Posted: 20 Jul 2014 at 01:29
| I'm sure we'll all yearn for the good old days of H? beating people down over Trove mines and NC and friends' constant wars against anyone they decided they didn't like. I'm glad BSH, an alliance who would never dream of using it's size and militarism to push other alliances around, is on top of this issue. I should stop now. I've gone way over my recommended daily dose of sarcasm. |
Posted By: Angrim
Date Posted: 20 Jul 2014 at 02:18
|
Mr Damage has the way of it. H? was unassailable so long as its power bloc remained intact and its opposition fragmented. |
Posted By: KillerPoodle
Date Posted: 20 Jul 2014 at 04:20
|
Aurodan - lets compare and contrast what H? vs Vultures and friends did with their power. On one hand you have an alliance who setup the server wide code of conduct about protecting new players and training alliances. Who actually aborted more wars than most people realize and who went through a whole bunch of diplomacy to try to prevent another server wide war. The one major war they did then enter (and remember there was only 1 war dec from H? followed by 6+ from the other side) that some folk (Rill) are using as justification for the current dog pile, lasted 6 months and ended with at most two players (debatable that it's even two) reduced by more than 30% of their accounts and peace settlements which totaled <10bill gold across 8 alliances with individuals leaving the war for approx 50million. The "victims" of that war bounced back in a relatively short time to mastermind the next server war for revenge - one which laid waste to most of an entire alliance, upwards of 50 accounts (an probably closer to 100) reduced to 1 city, 40 billion in gold compensation (and counting) and extortions of 1 *billion* gold for single players to exit the war. Plus all the other terms alliances had to suffer (no more than 10K troops, no participating in tourneys on XYZ square under threat of resumption of war, etrc etc etc.). Your sycophantic posts of love about the latter group of folk are making you look kinda ridiculous. ------------- "This is a bad idea and we shouldn't do it." - endorsement by HM "a little name-calling is a positive thing." - Rill |
Posted By: Velociryx
Date Posted: 20 Jul 2014 at 04:26
|
Yes KP, but you know...that's "different." ;) (funny how it's *always* "different when we do it") - magic! |
Posted By: Kumomoto
Date Posted: 20 Jul 2014 at 05:18
|
It's over now, so... We'll see how The Grand Alliance will conduct themselves. Hopefully better than they did in the war. I have no interest in staying in a game where folks are regularly sieged out of the game. Two continents will also make things quite different, I believe... |
Posted By: bansisdead
Date Posted: 20 Jul 2014 at 05:47
|
Aurodan there were always bigger alliances to push BSH about. I cannot speak for previous BSH administrations, but BSH is under new leadership now and I sincerely doubt NVP is about to start bullying smaller alliances. Personally I think Brandmeister is spot on. ------------- http://elgea.illyriad.co.uk/a/p/124253" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: Aurordan
Date Posted: 20 Jul 2014 at 06:54
Oh my Devs you're right back at it. You would give H? credit for the sun rising every morning if you thought you could get away with it. Harmless spend years encouraging and supporting her allies' aggression across the map. You don't get credit, in my book, for 'only' reducing people's accounts by 30% in a war you trumped up right from the start, and every single day, someone, usually you, is out someplace in the forums of GC spewing your bitter slander against someone you don't like. Give yourselves a rest. Give everyone a rest.
|
KillerPoodle wrote:Posted By: bansisdead
Date Posted: 20 Jul 2014 at 07:14
and I suppose you own the moral high ground on this issue, pot, kettle, black springs to mind... ------------- http://elgea.illyriad.co.uk/a/p/124253" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: Kumomoto
Date Posted: 20 Jul 2014 at 08:14
Of all the people in this peace I feel the most sorry for, it is you, Aurordan... Who will you rail against now? To which windmill will you tilt? Your skewed world view can accommodate a world where H? is surrendering in good faith? stop the press? Where is your raison d'etre now? Such hatred is not healthy... |
Posted By: Mr Damage
Date Posted: 20 Jul 2014 at 08:19
| Close this one Rik. |
Posted By: Aurordan
Date Posted: 20 Jul 2014 at 09:37
Um, I don't know what anyone may have told you, but the treaty that ended your war does not in any way restrict my ability to call you out whenever I feel it necessary. I guess if you were interested, such an agreement might be possible, but I doubt you could afford it.
|
Posted By: Angrim
Date Posted: 20 Jul 2014 at 09:39
|
Posted By: Nokigon
Date Posted: 20 Jul 2014 at 13:53
| In that case, we need a new treaty. |
Posted By: Epidemic
Date Posted: 20 Jul 2014 at 19:04
QFT! Hopefully the devs do something about this. 3 very simple things they could do to start: 1) Stop sitters from using troops or diplos. 2) Stop sitters from using caravans to ship gold and supplies to their towns. 3) Stop sitters from queueing anything. |
Posted By: lethargic0N3
Date Posted: 20 Jul 2014 at 19:32
What really needs to happen is to either change the system to remove sitters altogether and replace it with some sort of vacation mode.. effectively removing the account from the game for the duration or removing sitting rights after a period of time without the account holder logging in. |
Posted By: King korr
Date Posted: 20 Jul 2014 at 19:59
Though i do agree permasat account's to need to be removed removing those three option's i can't see happening as it would defeat the purpose of the people sitting your accounts. IE if you have troops on rare herb's ect and your sitter can't send them back out for you you lose them ? but isn't the purpose of sitter to make sure you don't unduely suffer while you have reason's for not being able to log in. to be the best and only way to stop permasat is to have the length of time an account can be sat as two month's which mean if you can't log in on that time even just for five minutes you can't moan about sitter being cancelled, as with that two month periode plus the prestige abandon time that give you nearly 150 days to come back ( if your alliance doesn't put your cities up for siege ... ) Which should be more than enough time to come back and have cities still here with your alliance leadership's help. Yes might have some deleveling of buildings but better that ( i've had that might self ) than having 100's of permasat account's
|
Posted By: Deranzin
Date Posted: 20 Jul 2014 at 20:26
There is a certain contradiction here between the bolded and the underlined part, you know ...  ... not to mention the veiled threat ... 
Good guess that one ... 
Hmmm hmmm ... history decrees that it is not really the system of rule that declares whether it will have a positive effect, but the people that are actually ruling. If anyone doubts this, I can offer just one our of many examples : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_Greece
Well, I was never even sat for more than some hours when I slept, let alone perma-sat, but I definitely had no power to stop what came against me ... Power has nothing to do with activity, even if they do wipe out the perma-sat accounts ...  -------------   Just like a "before and after" ad ! ahahahaah :p |
Posted By: Hora
Date Posted: 20 Jul 2014 at 22:44
|
... As the treaty does contain the founding of a PEACE alliance... ...maybe you could found a second alliance extra for KP and Aurordan, and I'd really like to see the Alliance chat No, seriously, guys... just let it rest. The wars over, for now. And congrats on that!
 |
Posted By: The Imp
Date Posted: 09 Aug 2014 at 17:21
|
Accounts should not be "sat" at all. If YOU can't log in to play, then neither should your cities be available to help your Alliance. If it is an important enough account/city to the alliance they can reinforce as much as they want, but if YOU are not there to defend your own cities then so be it. If there HAS to be sitters, the sitter is only allowed to consecutively "sit" for 60 days (or some finite time frame. Put a limit on it). If the owner has not returned/visited by then the account can no longer be sat until he/she does. Only city maintenance can be done. No shipment of goods outside the account and no aggressive military activity except defending the accounts cities. The sitter is only there to MAINTAIN the account until the owner returns. Again...if YOU can't find time to play the game, your account should not benefit from someone who has nothing but Illy time. And finally, each account may only "sit" ONE other account.  |
Posted By: Nesse
Date Posted: 09 Aug 2014 at 20:55
I haven't been partaking in the "server war for revenge" nor the debate about it, but this was an unusually skew comparison with the war I did participate in, so I will make a couple of comments: 1) If I am not completely misinformed, both wars ended when the "victims" surrendered to the side starting the war. I have some difficulty in seeing how it is the Grand Alliances fault that H? waited so long with that. 2) The terms of peace in the one major war included a requirement to keep the terms secret. I am not sure that condition is still in effect but I think you missed the townrazing part of those terms in describing how gracious the peace terms of that war were, KP? 3) I believe Crowfed has been an important force in "the war for revenge". They were not involved in the "one major war". ------------- Nesse(Dwarven Druids) and Odd (Fairy Road Authority) |
Posted By: BBC
Date Posted: 11 Aug 2014 at 19:29
|
who holds the power of balance in illy? We all do. If there is a wrong and we all see it then what's stopping everyone joining in a mutual agreement to stop them? As a few we are weak, but together we are strong! Remember that everyone. ------------- BlackBloodedChampion "Will Work for War" |
Posted By: Kumomoto
Date Posted: 12 Aug 2014 at 07:47
Wow! Couldn't be more true! We should all join the Peaceful Illy Group (PIG)!!! To make sure this travesty never happens again! All alliances need to join or not have a voice! IGM Kumomoto or Empress Olivia if you want to join... |
Posted By: TheBillPN
Date Posted: 12 Aug 2014 at 10:58
|
Hey im not very involved in politics in this game, but i have a few questions...
First which alliances make up The Grand Alliance?
Second why does anyone have to control illy, why cant we all just follow the rules and be nice?
and Third, if someone does control illy, is this such a bad thing?how will it affect everyone if there is a group of alliances that can win any war...just dont start any wars...
|
Posted By: BBC
Date Posted: 12 Aug 2014 at 14:39
If people are truly worried about the balance of power than maybe we should give a different way of power to be obtained. If alliances are willing to give it a chance (such as PIG) then maybe if all alliances see a problem they can fully work together and stop them. If we can at least get 25% of alliance's to join then no matter the size or power of an alliance it wouldn't stand a chance against the alliance's involved. The power will no longer be measured by members like before, power will be measured by unity and the right ideas. If we work together we can change the act of power forever. Think about it. ------------- BlackBloodedChampion "Will Work for War" |
Posted By: scaramouche
Date Posted: 12 Aug 2014 at 17:21
|
I see no reason to consider who will keep the GA in check....none of those alliances ever showed any inclination to want to dominate the server at any given time to my knowledge. Their formation came only for one purpose, now that has come about...I only see them returning to their daily business and minding their own as they did before. ------------- NO..I dont do the Fandango! |
Posted By: Baesil
Date Posted: 13 Aug 2014 at 01:52
| After four pages of posts I'm still not certain what the original poster's complaint was. Did he have some specific grievance in mind or was he apprehensive of the potential for an abuse of power that has not yet come to pass? |