Neighbors
Printed From: Illyriad
Category: Miscellaneous
Forum Name: The Caravanserai
Forum Description: A place to just chat about whatever takes your fancy, whether it's about Illyriad or not.
URL: http://forum.illyriad.co.uk/forum_posts.asp?TID=6446
Printed Date: 17 Apr 2022 at 16:07
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.03 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Neighbors
Posted By: mjc2
Subject: Neighbors
Date Posted: 10 Jun 2015 at 19:52
|
ok my question here is: Do you think an alliance has the moral right to chose its neighbors? If so to what extent do they have the moral right to enforce that choice or is this only a choice when the alliance decides where to place its clusters? Personally i think any alliance has the moral right to chose its neighbors, if you disagree with this then you would probably disagree with most RL zoning laws because in essence all they are is a way for the community as a whole to tell an individual what they can/cannot do with their land. As for enforcement of this in game i believe that any alliance should be able to defend a city inside of their cluster if they like the city owner as a neighbor regardless of alliance that neighbor happens to be in or if they dislike the sieger so much that they cannot stand to think of that player as a neighbor. If this choice is limited to only when the alliance decides where to cluster then it is no choice at all since this is a fluid game and players tend to move around, or stop playing opening the area up to newer players after the account is deleted.
|
Replies:
Posted By: twilights
Date Posted: 10 Jun 2015 at 22:16
| i live in the usa and i guess zoneing is different here....omg, this is a strategy game, i dont think zoneing is part of it...but u have interesting thoughts...i think...??????? |
Posted By: mjc2
Date Posted: 11 Jun 2015 at 08:43
|
i live in the usa too and basically all zoning does is tell landowners what types of buildings they may put on land or what activities they are allowed to do. as an example, you cannot buy up a block of houses in a suburban city, knock them down and then build a factory because the land is zoned residential so you may not build a factory on that land. now you can buy up the block, go to the zoning commission and ask them to change the zone to industrial but all the people on the neighboring blocks may ask the zoning commission not to grant it because they do not want to live next to a factory.
|
Posted By: twilights
Date Posted: 11 Jun 2015 at 10:50
| mmmmmmm, i dont know if that can restrict what individual lives next to you but i can get the drift of wat u sayin, just zoneing isnt the right meaning u lookin fer, yes in this game u can dictate with game mechanics wat city owner is next to you, but u better watch out for pico cause hes determined to crush those that do! and gosh i hear many others are willin to jump in on a gang bang if any support a so call zoneing illy policy....game on! |
Posted By: mjc2
Date Posted: 11 Jun 2015 at 18:04
| yes i agree, zoning isnt exactly what i mean but it is the closest thing i could think of as a RL comparison. but also in illy we dont have different types of buildings that will have impacts on surrounding areas. we do have different alliances that can have impacts on their local neighborhood based on the way they like to play. a good example is the harvesting rules, every forum topic i read asking about them basically comes down to "depends on your neighbors." some areas of illy it is 5sq others it can be up to 15 |
Posted By: Rill
Date Posted: 11 Jun 2015 at 19:06
|
I suggest avoiding making comparisons to real-life situations involving choices of neighbors. Certainly in the United States there is a long history of things like covenants that sought to exclude people of color, as just one example. Invoking rl practices such as this could result in starting a political discussion of the sort that is discouraged on the forum. If you want to make a statement about morality or ethics in Illy gameplay, I'm interested to hear your reasoning, but since the real-life equivalent of this is a serious issue for many, perhaps it should be avoided here on the forum.
|
Posted By: Angrim
Date Posted: 11 Jun 2015 at 19:50
|
before the tortured rl parallels become too...erm...tortured...the appropriate rl parallel for land claims in illy is probably (wait for it) land claims. choose the situation you like best. a very brief "best of" list of problems from one of my favourite land grabs, the americas: * how much land can i claim with one landing (that is, if i just send units but don't stay)? one colony? * what happens to the people already in my claim area? * can powerful figures on another continent really exert control over land just by drawing a line on a map? and, post-revolt: * is it right for distant powers to intervene on a continent they barely inhabit? think for a moment and you'll have many more...and yes, i believe they were all ultimately settled by force of arms. one might look to antarctica as an alternative model, but antarctica isn't actually the scientific nirvana it is sometimes portrayed as, since claiming nations only agreed to suspend competing claims there for a fixed period, so...nothing really resolved yet. does USA actually own the moon by virtue of planting a flag? tbd. |
Posted By: twilights
Date Posted: 11 Jun 2015 at 20:18
| where did color ever come into this?????? omg! wheres the gm???? |
Posted By: Brandmeister
Date Posted: 11 Jun 2015 at 20:38
| Angrim, you're talking about Illyriad as if it's a competitive team game of maps, empires, resources, and armies. |
Posted By: jcx
Date Posted: 12 Jun 2015 at 13:20
|
Basically an alliance has no right to choose neighbors as long as is not blue/within 10 squares its a FREE SQUARE! ------------- Disclaimer: The above is jcx|orcboy's personal opinion and is not the opinion or policy of Harmless? [H?] or of the little green men that have been following him all day. jcx in H? | orcboy in H? |
Posted By: ajqtrz
Date Posted: 26 Jun 2015 at 00:19
In my opinion, mjc2 has a somewhat valid argument...if. If you actually own the land upon which your house sits. You don't. What you own is a limited domain. The land belongs to the sovereign of the country or nation and it is "titled" or "chartered" to individuals or groups for specific purposes. Eminent Domain: "the right of a government or its agent to expropriate private property for public use, with payment of compensation implies that it is just for the sovereign to have the final word as to who will own the title to the land." The compensation is not to purchase the land but redeem the title by paying the person for the value they hold in their title to the land.... which is why every real estate transaction has to have a "title search" to see if the title is "free and clear"....meaning held by the party selling it. They are selling the title, not the land (a common misconception). And the title is bound by rules of entitlement.....which limits the use of the land to what local zoning laws allow and is set by the sovereign of the land. Private property" laws ...the laws we ascribe to "tangible property" are divided into that which is "transportable" and that which is "real estate." The laws are different and the conceptions different. If you wish to make RL an example you would have to ask, first, who owns the land of Illy. If you are consistent you would then say all real estate of Illy is held collectively by the citizens of Illy...the players. Then you would have to say, "who grants the rights to use the real estate of Illy" and that would be the "owners"....the players as a whole. That we don't have a governance procedure by which we can grant some entitlements or charters but we do have game mechanics and generally accepted "don't harvest" rights, the later of which were granted by the community long before I arrived. A right is never "moral" or "immoral" but merely a designation of access. You have access to this or that, or to doing this or that procedure or act. It does not obligate you to do this or that, but gives you the opportunity. The action or accessing may or may not be moral, but the "right" is not. But mjc2 means, I think, that one ought to have the right to choose his or her neighbors. And I agree. And we citizens of Illy pretty much do. Choosing one's neighbors is a positive right --- meaning we are gaining access to an action we may have been denied before. Choosing who will NOT be your neighbor is a negation right -- meaning you are claiming the right to negate an persons positive right (the right to be in the neighborhood). You can encourage anybody you wish to move to your block. But in preventing someone from doing so you are negating their right to move there. The question before us is: do we as a community wish more to safeguard the rights of players to move where they will (within the 10 square rule of course) or grant some alliances the right to negate that right for players in certain areas? In the end, it's our collective decision to make as we are the owners (collectively) of Illy. So, if mjc2 thinks Illy is like rl in this matter, then he would have to conclude that the current conflict is occurring because some players have decided their right to exclude from their neighborhood out weighs others right to settle in that neighborhood. Since Illy is owned by all of us collectively, we get to decide collectively. AJ |
mjc2 wrote: