Play Now Login Create Account
illyriad
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - War Avoidance Game
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

War Avoidance Game
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12
Author
  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
asr View Drop Down
Wordsmith
Wordsmith


Joined: 22 Nov 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 109 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote asr Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Apr 2016 at 16:41
I get it. When you have lesser buttons in checkers you still can win because you know more and do no mistakes. 1K hours playtime will have more indepth game knowledge than a 100 hours player but with using brains(learning game) and having welldefined goal you can grow faster and destroy oldies.

There is also other way to take down a cycloph. Hide behind lambs and when giant is sleeping, just poke his eye out.
Back to Top
Skybreaker View Drop Down
New Poster
New Poster


Joined: 10 Mar 2015
Status: Offline
Points: 5 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Skybreaker Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Apr 2016 at 17:42
Originally posted by Gragnog Gragnog wrote:

I think you missed the boat again. Before the current SIN vs Shark/ VIC / Unibrow war SIN was a tiny alliance compared to them. David took down Goliath easily. Small alliances and players can totally destroy the big boys. Its not the size that matters but how you use it that makes the difference.

While i do agree with this, its also worth mentioning that SIN contains quite a few vets with more experiences that most
Back to Top
Angrim View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar

Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Location: Laoshin
Status: Offline
Points: 1173 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Angrim Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Apr 2016 at 01:37
Originally posted by Skybreaker Skybreaker wrote:

Originally posted by Gragnog Gragnog wrote:

I think you missed the boat again. Before the current SIN vs Shark/ VIC / Unibrow war SIN was a tiny alliance compared to them. David took down Goliath easily. Small alliances and players can totally destroy the big boys. Its not the size that matters but how you use it that makes the difference.

While i do agree with this, its also worth mentioning that SIN contains quite a few vets with more experiences that most
i would have said that was Gragnog's point.
Back to Top
ajqtrz View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 24 May 2014
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 500 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote ajqtrz Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 Apr 2016 at 01:43
I do think some of the points made are pretty good.  But in the end, "the proof is in the pudding."  Most players don't go to war, especially the smaller ones, and most avoid it with some success.  And many of those who end up in war, due to either their personality, actions, or the re-actions of others, are often forced into wars of which they wish to have no part. 

It would be an interesting thing to simply ask players how many wars they have entered into where both parties were there because they just wanted to have some fun and making war was their mutual way of doing so. And then to compare that number to how many they have engaged in for other reasons.  In any case, I'd be willing to bet the majority of wars are not mutually shared fun experiences, and from that I must conclude that most players, because they want to have fun, (and war, to them is not fun), really play Illy as a "war avoidance" game.

AJ
Back to Top
Sun Tzu View Drop Down
New Poster
New Poster
Avatar

Joined: 15 Jul 2015
Status: Offline
Points: 32 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Sun Tzu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 Apr 2016 at 02:10
so then why is HIGH still at war with BB?  
Back to Top
ajqtrz View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 24 May 2014
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 500 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote ajqtrz Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 Apr 2016 at 02:26
Originally posted by Sun Tzu Sun Tzu wrote:

so then why is HIGH still at war with BB?  


Because they haven't surrendered?  LOL

Because I'm not in HIGH?

Because once you are forced to war you fight until you win?

But of course, the question isn't really relevant to this as it's just an observation on my situation and that really doesn't have any bearing on the ideas put forth above, now does it?

AJ
Back to Top
Sun Tzu View Drop Down
New Poster
New Poster
Avatar

Joined: 15 Jul 2015
Status: Offline
Points: 32 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Sun Tzu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 Apr 2016 at 02:45
if youre not in HIGH then who are the members/now member in HIGH?  and why are they/him at war with BB?  its all relevant. 
Back to Top
Hyrdmoth View Drop Down
Wordsmith
Wordsmith
Avatar

Joined: 02 Jul 2015
Status: Offline
Points: 164 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Hyrdmoth Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 Apr 2016 at 10:26
Originally posted by ajqtrz ajqtrz wrote:

It would be an interesting thing to simply ask players how many wars they have entered into where both parties were there because they just wanted to have some fun and making war was their mutual way of doing so. And then to compare that number to how many they have engaged in for other reasons.  In any case, I'd be willing to bet the majority of wars are not mutually shared fun experiences, and from that I must conclude that most players, because they want to have fun, (and war, to them is not fun), really play Illy as a "war avoidance" game.
You have set up what I see as a false dichotomy.

Player A defines Illyriad as being fun by achieving objective Alpha. Player B does likewise with objective Beta. Objectives Alpha and Beta are contradictory, so Player A and B come into conflict that will result in war if diplomacy fails.

In the case of war, neither Player A or B are engaging in a "mutually shared fun experience", since war was not their objective, but war has become necessary to achieve their objectives. Ultimately it will resolve the conflict between their contradictory objectives.

This is why I used the quote, "war is politics by other means", and why I think that war is an integral part of Illyriad, without being the only part of Illyriad. Thus Illyriad is neither a war game, or a war avoidance game, but a game in which there is, necessarily, war.
Back to Top
ajqtrz View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 24 May 2014
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 500 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote ajqtrz Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 May 2016 at 23:58
Hyrdmoth.  Good observation.  It is, as you correctly say, I think, a false dichotomy.  But it is also a matter of probability.  A false dichotomy is false because it does not include all the options.  You correctly showed that it would be possible for their to be a war in which both sides are reluctant.  I'll give you that.  But like all such divisions, each possible outcome has a probability attached to it.  In my opinion the situations where: 1) both sides are pursuing mutually exclusive goals; and 2) neither side is unwilling to compromise enough to satisfy the other and resolve the issue through diplomacy, are a pretty small sub-set of the total conflicts.

Perhaps it is also true that diplomacy is the method by which most wars are avoided.  Thus, to lack the willingness to compromise is to "loose" the "war avoidance" game and be forced therefore, into the "war game."  What I would like to see is a way that those who wish to avoid war can do so without also becoming 2nd class citizens of Illy or having to do things which unnecessarily detour them keep them from achieving their goals.

AJ
Back to Top
ajqtrz View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 24 May 2014
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 500 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote ajqtrz Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 May 2016 at 00:03
Originally posted by Angrim Angrim wrote:

Originally posted by Skybreaker Skybreaker wrote:

Originally posted by Gragnog Gragnog wrote:

I think you missed the boat again. Before the current SIN vs Shark/ VIC / Unibrow war SIN was a tiny alliance compared to them. David took down Goliath easily. Small alliances and players can totally destroy the big boys. Its not the size that matters but how you use it that makes the difference.

While i do agree with this, its also worth mentioning that SIN contains quite a few vets with more experiences that most
i would have said that was Gragnog's point.


Not to be too complicated, but "ALL THINGS BEING EQUAL" does mean having the same level of experience and commitment.  The "big verses small" question is one of resources available, not experience and capability.  That SIN is a well run and in many way superior fighting alliance than many others, I have no problem admitting, nor should any other person in Illy.  But most of us do not have the experience of some SIN members and most of us are not run in the same manner.  Thus, most of us are wise to play the game as a war avoidance game, don't you think?

AJ
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.03
Copyright ©2001-2019 Web Wiz Ltd.