| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
The Duke 
Forum Warrior
Joined: 22 Jul 2011
Location: Indiana
Status: Offline
Points: 464
|
 Topic: Rare Res and their Armies
Posted: 08 Oct 2012 at 02:46 |
Feel free to destroy any army I have camped on a square  But I want no  from people when they get  too. Theres more than just tourneys to use an army for now. Talk to your neighbors and secure a agreement of some kind, so that the close people harvest, and the people in the area kill any outsiders  Theres many ways to play this update, and You Will See No Payment to Compensate the loss of your armies if we arrive in a skirmish.  |
|
"Our generation has had no Great Depression, no Great War. Our war is spiritual. Our depression is our lives."
|
 |
ES2
Postmaster
Joined: 25 Sep 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 550
|
Posted: 08 Oct 2012 at 01:35 |
I don't know about any of you, but TLR has had to back off of mines and herbs from the beginning of this update to about present date because towns were exodused in and people who exodused it in (and their rather powerful alliances with their confeds) backed the exodus and claimed whatever was within that exodus, theirs.
With that said, why are we still having the illusion this is a hugging game? There are military units, it's warfare. These are all military expansions to secure more materials for various alliances, ladies and gentlemen, Imperialism has arrived in Illyriad™
|
|
Eternal Fire
|
|
Magnificence
Wordsmith
Joined: 21 Nov 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 122
|
Posted: 06 Oct 2012 at 08:23 |
Ways to make things easier.
1. Remove all diplomatic relationships. List them instead on the alliance summary page.
2. If you want the resource, occupy it. Occupy the bejebus out of it, but don't risk more than you can afford to lose.
3. Dont gather on people's sov, its rude.
That being said, please commence with the many and often extremely far fetched 'what if' scenarios...
|
|
SugarFree
Forum Warrior
Joined: 09 Feb 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 350
|
Posted: 04 Sep 2012 at 14:15 |
are you insane? i rage at NaP harvesting all the times. they still bump.
|
|
twilights
Postmaster
Joined: 21 May 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 915
|
Posted: 04 Sep 2012 at 12:22 |
|
its very simple to share these items, we all become crows naps this will stop all aggression and we would have no need to send armies to protect............?????????
|
|
Uno
Wordsmith
Joined: 12 Sep 2011
Location: Torino
Status: Offline
Points: 101
|
Posted: 04 Sep 2012 at 11:08 |
 The Duke wrote:
Some may say well this is a bit extreme, why not just bump a player off a tile if you want?The problem with this theory is as player A and Player B bump each other back and forth - whatever res they are fighting over is constantly being farmed without the chance to regrow. The GM's have stated sum of these are rare. I have found a cpl via scouting very close to me with only 1 item there. I am purposely letting it germinate and not harvesting it. This is my veiw but I m curious to the general communities thoughts. |
I find camping resources for an extended period of time (more than a few hours just to make sure your specialists aren't slain by animals, if you really must) extremely wrong/in open contrast with the spirit Illy had until this update. Moreover it is act of hostility as you can clearly read from the logs when you send your armies to occupy a square that can easily cause incidents and that in the best case will prevent neutral players from gathering resources that you can't really call yours just because you say so, even if in your sovereign lands. Let me further elaborate on this: the only way to claim those resources are yours is camping them (although NAP and confeds can still harvest them). My take on this though, like I already said, is that this is an act of hostility and should be treated as such. If you send soldiers to prevent other players from gathering then you should expect to be attacked and should keep the conflict on that square and that square only, without calling a war on an act of aggression from the other party when you were the first to throw the challenging gauntlet. The only exception I would give to this are animal parts dropped by your own fights. In that case I would agree to camp the spot if you notice your neighbors like to harvest "your" drops. I realize my pow is clearly not the pow of many players since I've scouted camping armies composed of 2 soldiers. Well, camping a res with 2 soldiers only because backed up by the threat of war from a large alliance (+confeds maybe) is the typical bully attitude. So I say: the community now wants to camp resources and fight for them? Ok, by all means let's do it. But without escalating it to a war. Any conflict on a square of resources should be confined to that square, this is my take. This could be interesting without ruining the game. Regarding automatical ownership of resources on sovereign squares... I disagree even with this, anyways it is obvious that one would be advantaged both in bumping and in fighting for a resource that is within 7-10 distance from their towns compared to someone coming from 100 distance and yes I've had at least 3 such cases since I do not camp any resource. Eventually they will give up wasting time, that's my experience, even though I even let them gather a few times out of compassion :P My last thought is about camping rare herbs in order to let them grow in numbers. First of all do they even grow? Second, you still don't prevent allies, nap and confeds to harvest them. Third this is the best way to obtain the opposite result. Because rare resources are mostly camped, as soon as someone spots one not camped or camped by non neutral armies will send as many harvesters as possible without scouting, with obvious results. I find that if the community would adopt a more mature approach as it always did in past we would obtain better results. If there wasn't all this hurry to seize resources for oneself we could instruct the community to scout-before-harvest and preserve herb patches. And about bumping? This is hilarious because I read of many players outraged by bumping, the same players would repeatedly state in GC that bumping can't be considered a hassle, it is part of the game and one should deal with it. What has changed now? I have only one word to describe this change and that is greed.
|
|
Eréc of Caer Uisc
King of Dyfneint
Indomiti Alliance
|
|
Hadus
Postmaster
Joined: 28 Jun 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 545
|
Posted: 30 Aug 2012 at 04:53 |
Loud Whispers wrote:
SugarFree wrote:
but any rare resource should not be confused with basic minerals, basic herbs. those IMO are exactly what newbies should focus on. |
If say a new player happened to find a rare herb patch in a jungle full of regular herbs, two exclusive resources would immediately present themselves to the player, with two easy actions available. 1. Harvest loads of normal herbs with cheap cotters. 2. With said abundance of normal herbs, make some harvesters. The inherent value of resources is very attractive indeed.
Rorgash wrote:
might is always right, if one is might enough to claim the rights a weaker power has nothing to say :) atleast not until they have gathered together to have a greater power :) |
I have seen someone from 50 tiles away lockdown a patch a new player was harvesting (which was just 1 tile away) for 4 days, harvesting much less. That's a highly extreme anecdote that ticks virtually all the Illy NOPE boxes, but it proves the point that it's most definitely not always right.
SugarFree wrote:
You may think that an exodus right next gives you all rights. Maybe a siege army to your town will make you change yer mind? |
That is a very interesting point. How much right does exodus afford to resource claims? Easily you can say that resources within 10 tiles of a city can't be contested really, but what if someone moves their city to 1 tile away from a resource and then claims sovereignty, whilst another player from 11-20 tiles away had been harvesting it. Does that player retain rights to it from being first? |
Not much to say to your first point, its accurate. As to the second, what is "right" is irrelevant when there is no ability to enforce it. In the scenario you posed, if there is no possible way to prevent this from occuring, what good does it do to say that it's wrong? We can tell people to play a certian way, but it will only matter if we have the "might" to make it "right," so to speak. Your third point raises valid questions, but I think the answer is that there can be no default response. Every player and alliance has their own policy for this, being aware of these expectations and communication whenever there is a shred of doubt is, in my opinion, the best approach.
|
|
|
|
Loud Whispers
Wordsmith
Joined: 31 Jul 2012
Location: Saltmines
Status: Offline
Points: 196
|
Posted: 30 Aug 2012 at 03:52 |
SugarFree wrote:
but any rare resource should not be confused with basic minerals, basic herbs. those IMO are exactly what newbies should focus on. |
If say a new player happened to find a rare herb patch in a jungle full of regular herbs, two exclusive resources would immediately present themselves to the player, with two easy actions available. 1. Harvest loads of normal herbs with cheap cotters. 2. With said abundance of normal herbs, make some harvesters. The inherent value of resources is very attractive indeed.
Rorgash wrote:
might is always right, if one is might enough to claim the rights a weaker power has nothing to say :) atleast not until they have gathered together to have a greater power :) |
I have seen someone from 50 tiles away lockdown a patch a new player was harvesting (which was just 1 tile away) for 4 days, harvesting much less. That's a highly extreme anecdote that ticks virtually all the Illy NOPE boxes, but it proves the point that it's most definitely not always right.
SugarFree wrote:
You may think that an exodus right next gives you all rights. Maybe a siege army to your town will make you change yer mind? |
That is a very interesting point. How much right does exodus afford to resource claims? Easily you can say that resources within 10 tiles of a city can't be contested really, but what if someone moves their city to 1 tile away from a resource and then claims sovereignty, whilst another player from 11-20 tiles away had been harvesting it. Does that player retain rights to it from being first?
|
"These forums are a Godwin's Law free zone."~GM Luna
|
|
Hadus
Postmaster
Joined: 28 Jun 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 545
|
Posted: 22 Aug 2012 at 01:57 |
Salararius wrote:
Hadus wrote:
is it fair to demand that larger players yield to smaller player on the ground of "It's closer to me" or "I saw it first," both of which seem to me like pretty arbitrary ways of determining harvesting right? |
Certainly, if it were that simple then no, I don't believe the community would bestow on the smaller player an inherent right. But there are other scenarios I could conceive. If a smaller player has been working the plot for a few weeks and if he/she has put forth the effort to build the infrastructure to pull the material from Elgea, would the community look on it as "fair" for a big player to send a larger army and claim the resource? How about the scenario where it's the big player sitting on the resource doing nothing with it (that's happening right now) after taking it from the little player?
Certainly there are different scenarios. It's a game, so really I don't believe there is an absolute "right" and "wrong". I am convinced that there is a right and wrong for this community and it may not come down to a simple "might makes right" contest between the two claimants. There may be a bigger force that decides otherwise. It happens here and that's all I'm saying. |
Indeed, I agree. You proposed some cases I had not considered thoroughly. I believe this is where politics and communication come in handy. Let's take the first example: a smaller player has developed a strong system of harvesting and out of the blue a larger player comes claims it on the basis of might makes right. The smaller player has options. First would be to contact the larger player and explain "I've been working this plot efficiently for weeks now, could you give it back. Or, perhaps we can comes to an agreement about sharing it." In many cases, given the kind community, this will probably work. If it does not work, then one could see if the larger player is in an alliance and contact their leadership, explaining the situation. It might turn out the larger player is acting in a way that their alliance deems unfavorable, and they can handle it for you. A more crafty, political approach might be to contact a strong neighbor and say, "Hey, this big guy took the spot I've been harvesting for weeks, if you could help me resolve the issue, we could share the plot or I could give you a share of the harvests." Now the second example: A big player sitting on a resource doing nothing. Again, my first move would be to contact that player. It could be they planned on harvesting but haven't gotten around to doing the necessary research and building. Whatever the case, you might be able to work out a deal where you harvest and give them a cut of the crop, or take turns harvesting the spot. If that fails, the other options above: consulting with their alliance, your alliance, or nearby neighbors, are all viable ways for smaller players to gain some more even footing with larger players. I still agree with Rorgash that "might makes right," but what is important to remember is that might isn't restricted to military might; the right words to the right people at the right time can be far more powerful, and I think players are going to figure this out more as Trade v2 matures.
Edited by Hadus - 22 Aug 2012 at 01:57
|
|
|
|
bansisdead
Postmaster
Joined: 08 Jan 2012
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 609
|
Posted: 21 Aug 2012 at 23:24 |
|
Lets hope trade V2 doesnt turn nasty, if it does those alliances clustered together will have an advantage over those spread across the map. I'm an ork I have no morals..
|
|
|
|
Tweet
Rare Res and their Armies
