Remove Priveledges From The 4 Nations

[Iosif 72]

Simply, I think once we reach 4.0 all of the special treatment for Oren, Conclave, Urugan and Krugmar (High elves to a certain extent) should be removed. If a group of players is active and has a city or village then they are just as valuable to the server as a town who's nation has existed for longer.

This woukd mean that:

Oren, The Conclave, Urugan, HighElvenPlaceThing, Alras, The Princedom of Fenn, IvyBend and any other independant group of players that come into being would all be on par.

Wih the new plot system this would be even easier if I understand how it works.

I'm posting this to try and create a discusion, as I saw this was briefly mentioned a while ago and deserved it's own thread.

[Hiebe 2493]

I agree, I think that everyone already playing the political game for 4.0 when its not even here yet bothers me.

[PtahWithin 1320]

3*

[Supremacy 3361]

Haelun'or*

[AlmondTree 418]

The four nations are where new players usually start out, other settlements are usually a group of friends therefore the four nations should be the ones promoted..

[Emp 209]

Mhmmm.
 

I'd love to see some new powers rise up, but from what I've witnessed, when they try to, they get shut down because of some blatant OOC bias.

[Groobs03 297]

I think that this would be a risky move, as these 4 nations have been on all of the maps in one way or another as base nations.

 

This is what is perceived to keep all four races kind of bunched up in their own lands, and what I assume is an attempt to keep a somewhat healthy population in each race/nation's rp. If say, the human population was split into 3 nations then there may be a large split in rp for the humans, which would either cause everyone to move to one nation anyways, or get bored and go with a more centralized race.

 

I think getting rid of the idea of a base nation capital for each race would be interesting, but it has the opportunity to lead to terrible results.

[Rig 17580]

I agree, I think that everyone already playing the political game for 4.0 when its not even here yet bothers me.

[Sentlit 108]

Why can't we work on improving the 4 nations as they are instead of making a bunch of new ones to water all the others down?

 

Why are nations incapable of having constantly active capitals? 

 

Where's the playerbase?

 

Can I get any more off topic?

[Temp 2006]

Supporting pre-existing factions that are guaranteed long life over a petty faction started by 4 people makes sense to me. Why support the group that may not even exist tomorrow compared to the group that will still be there next month?

[Heff 2460]

Why can't we work on improving the 4 nations as they are instead of making a bunch of new ones to water all the others down?

 

Why are nations incapable of having constantly active capitals? 

 

Where's the playerbase?

 

Can I get any more off topic?

Well after that first comment, ignoring the last one, the two middle ones are ones where you shouldn't be asking unless you have a solution, just like all those leaving posts that presented problems with no solutions.

[Iosif 72]

Supporting pre-existing factions that are guaranteed long life over a petty faction started by 4 people makes sense to me. Why support the group that may not even exist tomorrow compared to the group that will still be there next month?

Alras, Helanor, IvyBend and the Princedom are not "startup factions with 4 members" they all have a very consistant player base and have ALOT more rp then some (One) of the main 4 nations.

[Sentlit 108]

You (Heff) asked for solutions so I have permission to write stuff, right? :D

 

I will put suggested solutions in a list:

-people magically stop being lazy..?

-make capitals popular by creating a reason for people to be there and not pounding out RP hubs with raids and conquest :(

-eliminate all the trolls!

-try to draw focus away from just being conflict or peaceful RP, but have a healthy balance of both in their own place and time... requires heavy community collaboration... campaign for it through propaganda?

-be careful not to make cities to expansive, but keep them simple with a public square in front with bars and restaurants bordering, and make cities not so numerous... and not too far apart...

-make people be responsible for their actions and make them suffer the consequences for bad behavior!!! >:P but then forgive them and move on. a repeat offence or two after the original punishment warrants harsher punishment with less forgiveness!

-remove ghost towns and cities :(

-shrink the civilized world, because it's sometimes hard to find things... and most people don't like taking long walks in the park

 

Practicality and/or possibility may or may not be an issue in any, some, or all of the above listed points.

[Emp 209]

But then again, the other side does a have a point.

I should clarify, in saying that it's not as if I believe that attention should suddenly be diverted from the main playerbases. However, I admire the resilience of such groups as the Fenn in the face of unwarranted mockery. From their example, it's clear that you shouldn't be relying upon any moderating team to ensure that you survive in this world. Rather, that's up to you and your group's creativity. If you want something other than almighty Oren, and can honestly provide something as fleshed-out, then, by all means, be the change that you want to see in the world. Don't make it a matter of "Oh, I'm small and new, therefore I need help," but rather a matter of emerging as a group that provides unique, enjoyable RP that will attract players. Realise that even these grand powers emerged from nowhere.

Don't force an obligation upon someone; draw them in with honey.

 

EDIT: And I don't agree with you to the extent that growing RP should be suppressed. In the same way that you expect newer groups to grow, allow existing groups to grow.

[Temp 2006]

Alras, Helanor, IvyBend and the Princedom are not "startup factions with 4 members" they all have a very consistant player base and have ALOT more rp then some (One) of the main 4 nations.

 

 

Ah. Nice to know this is the common beat-around-the-bush anti-group topic that most of us can ignore.

I'd be far more concerned with distributing land to a group with 60-80 members than a group with 6. There are plenty of plots readily available for smaller groups on 4.0

Gather people and make efforts at claim. It makes no sense to cut off the larger groups for the sake of smaller groups just barely getting off the ground.