The Demise of Training Alliances |
Post Reply 
|
Page <12345 6> |
| Author | |
Marty 
Wordsmith 
Joined: 17 May 2014 Location: Australia Status: Offline Points: 144 |
 Post Options
 Thanks(0)
 Quote Reply
 Posted: 11 Oct 2014 at 06:14 |
|
"trainees do not spend the majority of their 'illy carreer' in a training alliance. "
My bad, I meant the majority of their illy career up until the time they 'graduate' M
|
|
 |
|
|
Gragnog
Postmaster 
Joined: 28 Nov 2011 Status: Offline Points: 598 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 11 Oct 2014 at 06:58 |
|
I think training alliances bound to parent alliances for that purpose is a good thing as it is a way for alliances to recruit suitable candidates and giving them an amount of protection. I think just calling yourself a training alliance is a joke and demanding or expecting the community to protect you is unfair.
I also think that if you want to be in a training alliance it is all good but why try go to BL and try kill the PvP attitude there? Everyone knows it is a wild country and you cannot try claim "training alliance " in a hostile environment. If you get hit in BL you deserve it, as that is where the people sick of the Elgea way of playing have moved. If you want to stay safe and quiet then stay in Elgea. There are many new alliances starting up in BL and the only ones you hear complaining are the ones who moved there from Elgea alliances. I can see the day when Elgea alliances will gang up on smaller active alliances in BL and try force them to play the way we play here in Elgea. My point is stay out of BL if you want to be in a training alliance or are a peaceful player. Thats why I am staying in Elgea. |
|
|
Kaggen is my human half
|
|
|
|
|
auel
Greenhorn 
Joined: 23 Jan 2013 Location: UK Status: Offline Points: 61 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 11 Oct 2014 at 08:23 |
|
I know that Rill has her detractors, but I think that her contribution is very good indeed and pretty well encapsulates my own understanding of how training alliances should be working.
It is perhaps worth saying that there is space for independent, specialist training alliances such as NS for those set on a military style of play, Q and S for elves and probably others which I am not aware of. However there may well be a case to be made along the lines that there are too many training alliances competing for the diminishing flow of recruits, and by extension that there are a lot of "faculty" accounts enjoying a sheltered and privileged existence. From the general tone of the debate I take it there is a general agreement that training alliances do still have a valid place and that they should continue to enjoy a high degree of toleration and protection? If that is the case perhaps the question should become, can we consolidate some of the existing training alliances without losing anything distinctive? Asio - Consul of TOR Edited by auel - 11 Oct 2014 at 08:28 |
|
|
|
|
Thexion
Forum Warrior
Joined: 17 Apr 2010 Status: Offline Points: 258 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 11 Oct 2014 at 10:24 |
|
As I see it trainees and Faculty in training alliance should be also very conservative about claiming territories and resources. Also training alliances should respect other player claims. For being in training and under protection of community should not give you any advantages in competition. Cannot eat your cake and have it too.
|
|
|
|
|
Badger7
New Poster 
Joined: 05 May 2014 Status: Offline Points: 15 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 11 Oct 2014 at 13:05 |
|
As a faculty member i would like to say T? is very actively neutral, we make it a priority that our members stay out of all disputes, politics and skirmishes. (I will probably get a mauling from koda for even posting here) a graduate students final location and alliance are truly their choice and theirs alone.
On a personal note, the reason i like illyriad is the opportunity to play peacefully, if that is what you want to do, it should be respected, a unique feature in my experience, other games are really harsh on new or peaceful players mercilessly farming or destroying them. It is a real breath of fresh air. If certain alliances and players want to be more aggressive, judging by GC and the forum there should be plenty of willing participants.
|
|
|
I love everyone! I love to be around some people, I love to stay away from others, and some I'd just love to punch right in the face!
|
|
|
|
|
Llannedd
Wordsmith
Joined: 28 Jun 2014 Status: Offline Points: 139 |
Post Options
Thanks(1)
Quote Reply
Posted: 11 Oct 2014 at 14:04 |
|
Personally I don't see the need for "training" alliances at all. I've only been playing a few months, but this is hardly an intellectually challenging game. Yes it has a fair amount of breadth to absorb (different building types, unit types, resources, etc.) but there is very little actual depth or complexity to any of it. The only aspects of the game that probably require any real strategic thinking are the use of diplomatic and military units against other players, which "training" alliances aren't allowed to do anyway. So apart from being a refuge for peaceful players (which is fine too) I don't see any need for "training". The forum posts and guides written by the devs and by other players are more than enough to learn about the game mechanics.
Edited by Llannedd - 11 Oct 2014 at 14:39 |
|
|
|
|
Cactus
New Poster
Joined: 13 Dec 2011 Location: AZ Status: Offline Points: 32 |
Post Options
Thanks(1)
Quote Reply
Posted: 11 Oct 2014 at 14:21 |
|
I disagree with those who say that training alliances should
not be protected. I run a training alliance and though t is a little different
that some training alliances, it is still a training alliance. We train people to trade, craft, and how to
attack NPC’s. We teach people how to respect and be friendly to their
neighbors. We don’t take part in wars and we do not attack people without provocation.
If mistakes are made, diplomacy is the best solution, not beating up on people.
We don’t require people to leave when they reach a certain size but they need
to be involved in helping the younger players.
Those who want to leave will move on.
We don’t send them to any particular alliance. We take in people with as little pop as a 3 population
who just started and want to learn the game. We have a few more experienced
players who help the newbie’s get on their feet. But we do not teach them to attack innocent players.
What confederates we have are more of mutual agreements to be good neighbors and help people who are closer to us than they are to their home base. Some have vowed to protect us should we be attacked. We do not get involved it their disputes with other alliances but would be a neutral negotiator if we were called upon for that purpose. Why people think that all training alliances are just fronts for feeding some parent alliance is beyond me. We do not have a parent alliance but we do have friends. We are a standalone training alliance that teaches people to respect others and to be helpful where they can. We do not teach them to crush others who happen to step on their toes. If someone wants to have a more military role they can move to a more militant alliance. We teach people to have some integrity when playing the game and we do not allow anyone to belittle another person. I recently had to remove an officer and friend from the alliance for disrespectful behavior toward a few newer players. That hurt me personally but I will not put up with that sort of behavior. People are here to have fun. That fun does not always involve fighting and many just want to be peaceful and not be involved in conflict. Those of you who want to crush anyone and everyone no matter if they are peaceful or military minded should reexamine your philosophy of life. Not everyone is like you. Leave the peaceful ones alone and allow them to play the game without fear of intimidation and disrespect. Those alliances who want to fight can fight among themselves. Leave the training alliances alone. If anyone is a member of a training alliance and wants to be involved in a fight they should move out and not involve the training alliance in anyway. Training alliances should be respected as neutral entities and not picked on because they are convenient easy targets. |
|
|
|
|
Angrim
Postmaster General 
Joined: 02 Nov 2011 Location: Laoshin Status: Offline Points: 1173 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 11 Oct 2014 at 15:14 |
|
|
|
|
|
Brandmeister
Postmaster General
Joined: 12 Oct 2012 Location: Laoshin Status: Offline Points: 2396 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 11 Oct 2014 at 16:16 |
|
@Angrim: I had thought the same thing. It's a generic description. But the distinguishing factor of training alliances is the focus on training new players, not any particular set of rules. I think it takes a special mindset to be outnumbered by newbies.
@Gragnog: If you're not going to BL, then why advocate for a playstyle there? I don't mean to drag politics into this, but it's a little ironic that a member of Harmless is telling other people not to set policy in a distant region, given how much Harmless did exactly that in Elgea for two years. 90% of the accounts in Broken Lands are from alliances in Elgea, so it's only natural that Elgean approaches prevail in BL. @Llannedd: There are plenty of training alliances (and regular alliances) that teach people PvP. They are just forbidden from involuntary PvP. |
|
|
|
|
Glin
Wordsmith
Joined: 06 Apr 2014 Location: US Status: Offline Points: 127 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 11 Oct 2014 at 17:45 |
|
[QUOTE=Badger7]As a faculty member i would like to say T? is very actively neutral, we make it a priority that our members stay out of all disputes, politics and skirmishes. ]
yeah--NOT |
|
|
|
|
Post Reply
|
Page <12345 6> |
Tweet
|
| Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
Topic Options
Cactus wrote: