|
Post Reply
|
Page <123> |
| Author | |
Jargas
New Poster
Joined: 28 Aug 2010 Location: N.E. America Status: Offline Points: 33 |
Posted: 05 Oct 2010 at 01:09 |
|
*Waits for HonoredMules response on the next topic in line*
|
|
|
Jargas Bargnothaltros
Officer of Dark Blight Resident of The Underdark |
|
![]() |
|
King EAM
Forum Warrior
Joined: 26 Aug 2010 Location: Nun'ya Status: Offline Points: 272 |
Posted: 04 Oct 2010 at 22:19 |
|
If you can find a good easy way to make it work more power to you
|
|
![]() |
|
G0DsDestroyer
Postmaster
Joined: 16 Sep 2010 Location: Ásgarð/Vanaheim Status: Offline Points: 975 |
Posted: 03 Oct 2010 at 04:29 |
|
the only way to have a United Alliance would be to have a superpower controlling it.
That superpower would be H?.
No one wants to be controlled by one group everyone is too independent even in their alliances people aren't always connected as well as they should be.
So United Alliance is a good idea, but one that won't wotk well with Illyriad in my opinion, but you never know.
|
|
![]() |
|
Kumomoto
Postmaster General
Joined: 19 Oct 2009 Status: Offline Points: 2224 |
Posted: 03 Oct 2010 at 03:00 |
|
I dunno... I think it might provide a fun venue for us to endlessly debate issues.... Oh wait... we have the Politics forum for that!!! Though could possibly provide some good roleplaying content?
|
|
![]() |
|
Brids17
Postmaster General
Joined: 30 Jul 2010 Location: Canada Status: Offline Points: 1483 |
Posted: 02 Oct 2010 at 17:35 |
|
I think this is a bad idea. Right now everyone is in NAP or a Confederation with each other as it is. You can't attack someone without getting 15 other alliances pulled into it. And war really is a very large part of this game, so to combine forces to stop war seems a little counter productive. If anything, I think this idea would start more wars then solve them.
|
|
![]() |
|
-hypocritical-
Greenhorn
Joined: 11 Sep 2010 Location: Ireland Status: Offline Points: 81 |
Posted: 02 Oct 2010 at 17:00 |
I'm guessing that is aimed at(amoungst others) me, but I know alot(most of my information comes from h? posts actually)
anyway to stay on topic
it wouldn't work, just like the real UN, it has good goals, but it would be next to useless really
|
|
![]() |
|
HonoredMule
Postmaster General
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 Location: Canada Status: Offline Points: 1650 |
Posted: 02 Oct 2010 at 16:51 |
|
Been there, done that. Partisan allegiances, grudges, and bias consistently drive even the most obvious and straightforward proposals into stalemate. Either the UN has no power, or the alliances become vassals and slaves to public opinion and anti-minority causes, or worse, both.
Back in IK, alliances would find consecutive ranges of account IDs (by the heap) all being developed in exactly the same way, online at the exact same time, and with irrefutable proof that they're all being played from the same IP...sometimes with reports of attacks from all accounts on a single target proven to have all been launched within 20 minutes of each other or all at once (definite scripting/account automating). And would the AMC (anti-multi coalition) destroy these obviously cheating accounts? For a while... The AMC was a simple union with one clear goal and clearly marked jurisdiction. It really existed just so the public could satisfy itself that attacks on small accounts were genuine attacks on cheaters and multis, by means of peer review. But it was very unfair that most of the coalition members were friends or at least neutral with DiggIK (Harmless here). So the neutrals started pushing to accept more high-ranking alliances. It only took a couple, and suddenly every case was a "bloodthirsty power grab." When evidence linked the cheater accounts to older players with friends and alliance ties, it was all a conspiracy to weaken DiggIK's enemies. Enemies would oppose anything DiggIK wanted, and neutrals would side against us because it felt morally superior to find fault with the leading alliance and spew some pseudo-intellectualism--oddly they never felt the need without a push from the new members (kind of like some of the new voices participating in recent conversations where they know little to nothing of the background or full story). So we left the coalition to their own devices and abstained from influence. The AMC never pursued a case again, and the game is still rampant with cheaters and multis. Illyriad is an actively-developed game with vigilant watchdogs stopping cheaters before they become such a player-facing problem. You will never be so lucky to have a single case so free of moral subjectivity, inaccurate and biased reporting, and influences by allegiances both public and hidden. I can tell you now Harmless would never join...and we'd never fear any threat such a UN might throw in our faces. We shall conduct all our relationships on a one-on-one basis, knowing that each of our partners as well as ourselves have the freedom to act upon our own conscience and judgment isolated from the differing opinions of 3rd parties. By the way, you can see the standard confederation agreement Harmless makes at: http://illyriad.honoredsoft.com/wiki/UK1:Harmless/Treaties (Note also that to us a pledge of confederation is one-directional...by this document we can, for example, present clearly-documented obligation by ourselves to Toothless, without any implication that Toothless reciprocates those obligations.) |
|
![]() |
|
Larry
Wordsmith
Joined: 10 Mar 2010 Status: Offline Points: 114 |
Posted: 02 Oct 2010 at 16:21 |
|
Because the UN has shown itself to be such a capable entity for solving world issues...
|
|
![]() |
|
Laccy
Greenhorn
Joined: 26 Apr 2010 Location: Spain Status: Offline Points: 56 |
Posted: 02 Oct 2010 at 14:03 |
|
It's a very grand idea. Maybe too early in the game's evolution, but I would be happy to see this work.
|
|
![]() |
|
Special One
New Poster
Joined: 09 May 2010 Status: Offline Points: 18 |
Posted: 02 Oct 2010 at 14:01 |
|
Aelfric and Hora, you guys got my point.
This is for role playing only but if this success, it can affect the way this game is played. As the strongest alliance, H? can choose to join UA (even become the founder) and try control it. If H? choose to don't care with UA, alliance which is not friendly can use it to gather support from other alliances. This will make alliances should play in two side, the game itself and diplomacy side. However, this can be only work if Illyriad has enough role playing players. |
|
![]() |
|
Post Reply
|
Page <123> |
|
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 |