Your View: War Claims And War Rules

[Samson Option 9652]

Sadly I'll have to go off-topic since I have no capabilities to make another thread in this forum.

 

We've welcomed a new Admin and I believe it is prime-time for people to have law laid on them like Moses fresh from Mount Sinai. Do you all want an immersive, interactive, and dynamic roleplay server or do you want a town server? Perhaps have every member of Lord of the Craft revisit the very fact that they have no rights on this server in that there characters are as much lucky enough to affect others as they are to be affected [be that in the form of wars, romances, whatever]. You had to earn a privilege by making an application, this privilege bars you from having any rights to own permanently a parcel, pixel, or chunk of Minecraft land.

[Kanrath 190]

Scaracen, your argument about people having no right to argue against actions on the server but only the right to participate would also mean that people who demand war rp have no right to demand it because just like owning land its a type of rp and its not being done by staff but by players. You can't say one side has no rights and insist the other side has rights to their rp because neither side any more valuable to the server.

 

 

They are both acted on with the same intent, to own or continue to own. What you do have the right is to argue for your type of rp, and others have a say on if they do or do not want to participate in that type of RP. That has always been a server rule and warclaims are no different then any other types of rp like torture and slavery where you need the victim/participating party to ok it because it can be both highly unenjoyable when its forced and its not a role play many want to participate in. And just like some people have tried time and time again to force people to participate in these types of RP and because of that we have had a number of people leave, so have war claims. Its impossible to deny the fact that pvp is the most common cause of someone leaving the server, be it because someone hacked or because some group constantly harassed a player IC and OOC through pvp and such because of an action days or weeks ago. As is current war claims give both sides a voice with the victim again having the say in the end, though those who tend to do the war claims often try to force the other group to accept their terms without any agreements, as can be seen in many one sided warclaims that clearly are designed to give the attacker a big upper hand, in which there was no discussion before hand and the people being attacked have only two options, yes or no and if they deny it you often end up with harassment both ic and on the forums as the war party tries to convince the other side to agree through intimidation without discussion. 

 

 

We all know there have been at times (May even be now, though unlikely) gms who give benefits/items to friends, and its about time the staff had a position on the server to help counteract it/prevent the rage that happens when it does occur but there isn't enough to prove it. A job where two players whose only job/power is to go over the spawn item logs of the server and screenshot discrepancies and show them to the admins. This way players know players are the ones keeping the "Gifts" to friends down/reporting them, not relying on staff to self incriminate which they don't because they do it when no one else is on/around. there is enough of this "pocket GM" hostility going around its a needed step to cool things down a bit.

 

/END RANT

[Lark 2227]

Lots of bs to read through but what I think is this:

@Pess By your logic, if say, The King of Larkington claims lamd that isn't rightfully his, he can deny warclaims against because it might make him emotionally upset?

@Rantrath

I was going to post my bullshit detector gif but I'm on my mobile device so just imagine a bullshit detector that broke in place of these words.

Honestly I'm not going to argue with ignorance, I just felt I had to say what needed to be said.

[Pureimp10 5691]

@Kanrath

 

Wh-wha'........?

 

 

But, in all seriousness, the Casus Belli system written up by vulcus and Aeto seems to be the best way to handle things. Not everyone's gonna be happy, it is known. But at least go with the system that makes sense.

[AlmondTree 418]

Sadly I'll have to go off-topic since I have no capabilities to make another thread in this forum.

 

We've welcomed a new Admin and I believe it is prime-time for people to have law laid on them like Moses fresh from Mount Sinai. Do you all want an immersive, interactive, and dynamic roleplay server or do you want a town server? Perhaps have every member of Lord of the Craft revisit the very fact that they have no rights on this server in that there characters are as much lucky enough to affect others as they are to be affected [be that in the form of wars, romances, whatever]. You had to earn a privilege by making an application, this privilege bars you from having any rights to own permanently a parcel, pixel, or chunk of Minecraft land.

 

There's a bad way of seeing it. Saying it's not "dynamic" and "Interactive" is really not what I'd call it. With power comes responsibility and there's no such thing. There's not much respect left. 

 

War is such a big thing and nothing comes close to the effects it has to players and the server. After all it's not really romance or the fact that player X got killed that caused sooooooo much despair and anger among players..it's warfare mate. If people do not want their land to be taken cause that's where they RP then..by all means f-ing hell should people simply accept that. Truth be why should they have the privilege to decide such a big thing as where the other players(Defender) are supposed to end up? Wars doesn't end with rainbows and lollipops. The players having their land taken either leaves, or loses interest in the server and no longer enjoys what they are doing. That's the main goal on the server, to have fun and be lax..not to take others fun away.

 

If this thing called "Dynamic RP" means people being able to take over someone else's lands and ruin their fun...then I do not want this utopia of dynamic RP a vocal group loudly speaks so well of.

[Narthok 10416]

@Kanrath

 

Wh-wha'........?

 

 

But, in all seriousness, the Casus Belli system written up by vulcus and Aeto seems to be the best way to handle things. Not everyone's gonna be happy, it is known. But at least go with the system that makes sense.

 

Personally I'm gonna agree with Oren here if you can't protect your land then don't be independent. We see all these splinter factions with such a massive desire to be their own little group. I don't like nation rp and prefer to be independent but this is a cooperative effort. The warclaim needs to have a reason, now sure the pvp trolls from Oren will probably just yell IMPERIALISM and warclaim half the map but Rp is Rp and we should deal with it as it comes. I am in favour of a dynamic roleplay situation with as much realism as possible (realism = immersion for me). Warclaims should not be deniable, period. If you want to have your little town rp then don't play on a server with massive warring empires or join the massive warring empires. Regardless any opposition to the system suggested by Aetosion and Vulcus is just ooc fear of losing your pixels fight for your stuff or don't aggro attacks its that simple.

[Samson Option 9652]

Time for another "Kanrath slaps sense into silly people"

 

 

Scaracen, your argument for people having no right to defending their land means you have no right what so ever to demand to own someones land through military conquest. They are both acted on with the same intent, to own or continue to own. What you do have the right is to argue for your type of rp, and others have a say on if they do or do not want to participate in that type of RP. That has always been a server rule and warclaims are no different then any other types of rp like torture and slavery where you need the victim/participating party to ok it because it can be both highly unenjoyable when its forced and its not a role play many want to participate in. And just like some people have tried time and time again to force people to participate in these types of RP and because of that we have had a number of people leave, so have war claims. Its impossible to deny the fact that pvp is the most common cause of someone leaving the server, be it because someone hacked or because some group constantly harassed a player IC and OOC through pvp and such because of an action days or weeks ago. As is current war claims give both sides a voice with the victim again having the say in the end, though those who tend to do the war claims often try to force the other group to accept their terms without any agreements, as can be seen in many onesided warclaims that clearly are designed to give the attacker a big upper hand, in which there was no discussion before hand and the people being attacked have only two options, yes or no and if they deny it you often end up with harassment both ic and on the forums as the war party tries to convince the other side to agree through intimidation without discussion. 

 

Start Rant (I got a bit...terse below))

 

In short, stop trying to sugar coat it, you people know this goes on, we all do. I can spend an hour on the ban report section and find numerous cases of PVP based harassment usually without any rp involved. So stop trying to play the good innocent victim who just wants to make wars undeniable "Because it ruins my rp"...Bull ^@%#!...

 

Now a Cassus Belli could work with well defined sets of limitations and the understanding all warclaims must be discussed, now making a warclaim that has no impute from the defenders. ALONG WITH THIS it needs to be made PERFECTLY &#%@* clear to some people that you don't (#$%! with the system because the moment Oren, the dwarves, orcs or someone tries to deliberately force a group to react just to have a Cassus Belli the entire thing can go burn in hell and is about as effective as a wet tissue. And I KNOW YOU PEOPLE...you will do it, just like you tried to mess with raid rules by saying the fact they attacked you meant you could bring 20 people in and attack.

 

So if you want your Cassus Belli, then I want &#^@! consequences for messing with the system.....Tired of the passive staff letting people off for stuff that clearly violates the rules, like OOC harassment on the forums/in game.

 

 

P.S.

 

We all know there have been at times (May even be now, though unlikely) gms who give benefits/items to friends, and its about time the staff had a position on the server to help counteract it/prevent the rage that happens when it does occur but there isn't enough to prove it. A job where two players whose only job/power is to go over the spawn item logs of the server and screenshot discrepancies and show them to the admins. This way players know players are the ones keeping the "Gifts" to friends down/reporting them, not relying on staff to self incriminate which they don't because they do it when no one else is on/around. there is enough of this "pocket GM" hostility going around its a needed step to cool things down a bit.

 

/END RANT

 

You didn't even spell my name right, let alone even try to read and understand with your comprehension skills what I meant. Never did I say you had no right to defend your land.

 

I'll be keeping this for when I need proof that arguing on the forums like people are wanting me to do to make good cases is useless. All I get in reply is and I quote from you yourself

 

/END RANTS

 

 

[Samson Option 9652]

There's a bad way of seeing it. Saying it's not "dynamic" and "Interactive" is really not what I'd call it. With power comes responsibility and there's no such thing. There's not much respect left. 

 

War is such a big thing and nothing comes close to the effects it has to players and the server. After all it's not really romance or the fact that player X got killed that caused sooooooo much despair and anger among players..it's warfare mate. If people do not want their land to be taken cause that's where they RP then..by all means f-ing hell should people simply accept that. Truth be why should they have the privilege to decide such a big thing as where the other players(Defender) are supposed to end up? Wars doesn't end with rainbows and lollipops. The players having their land taken either leaves, or loses interest in the server and no longer enjoys what they are doing. That's the main goal on the server, to have fun and be lax..not to take others fun away.

 

If this thing called "Dynamic RP" means people being able to take over someone else's lands and ruin their fun...then I do not want this utopia of dynamic RP a vocal group loudly speaks so well of.

 

Do you know the difference between rights and privileges? Do you actually understand that by applying and gaining acceptance that you are as likely to be affected as you are able to affect? The logical conclusion is that you are not guaranteed your fairy-tale land, a chunk of Minecraft area that is absolutely yours with no means of losing it? Hell, it doesnt even need to be lost at the hands of raiders, it can be lost at the hands of some Drake 4.0 that comes to turn the land into a blanket of ash and tindle for all we know.

[Katherine1 362]

Do you know the difference between rights and privileges? Do you actually understand that by applying and gaining acceptance that you are as likely to be affected as you are able to affect? The logical conclusion is that you are not guaranteed your fairy-tale land, a chunk of Minecraft area that is absolutely yours with no means of losing it? Hell, it doesnt even need to be lost at the hands of raiders, it can be lost at the hands of some Drake 4.0 that comes to turn the land into a blanket of ash and tindle for all we know.

 

But the drake would be far more rewarding RP, in my opinion, than the raiders.

[Samson Option 9652]

But the drake would be far more rewarding RP, in my opinion, than the raiders.

 

Opinions are meaningless. Why is the post-modern world so adamant that if one can **** an opinion then it must be gold?

 

You also don't even fully recognize the point, but alas I probably won't be furthering this and hope that firespirit44 can finally lay the law.

 

[Dry Crackers 268]

Wow the hostility. . my opinion is that if either faction in a war/hostile situation denys a warclaim for no reason other than to have an OOC escape, they loose raiding privilages.  Large-scale battles, in my experience, are fun (though I wasn't involved in some of the infamous shitstorms at the end of Asulon.)  You and your team sit in a fort and try to kill them and their team.  It lasts a few hours, someone wins, someone looses, end of story. 

 

Raids, however, have no real finite end, piss off people who generally aren't involved and just happen to be in the area, and generally contribute to flame, hate, BRs, all that which should logically be avoided.

 

If a faction uses an OOC tactic to avoid hostility which they PROBABLY brought on themselves, they can't be hostile.  Simple.  Replaces the infinite raids which constitue 'war' nowadays that don't do anything aside from piss people off with a few concrete, finite, timed battles with beginnings, ends, and perhaps some plot if you want to be really into it.

 

Plus, if we can avoid raids we can hopefully tone down the button walls, cactus ditches, and things like THAT GOD AWFUL DEMILITARIZED ZONE in the Fringe.  I enjoy the scenery and atmosphere of the server's environment, but when I saw those walls. . . I suddenly felt the urge to check the IP and make sure I was on the right server.

 

P.S.  I know I was a little off topic but to contribute to the main conversation a little bit:  if a war suddenly does not entail you and your PvP goon squad carrying out raids all day and night--if there's something concrete to loose--people might be a little more cautious about initiating hostilities.

[TheBareSheet 194]

Please keep the posts relevant and respectful to others. I understand we have varying opinions, however there is no right or wrong, it is a discussion and being needlessly hostile will not successfully convince others that your idea is the best solution to implement.

[Katherine1 362]

Opinions are meaningless. Why is the post-modern world so adamant that if one can **** an opinion then it must be gold?

 

You also don't even fully recognize the point, but alas I probably won't be furthering this and hope that firespirit44 can finally lay the law.

 

My point is that the loss has to actually have a point and bring fun RP. If it doesn't, then it isn't worth doing. I would rather have no war then wars where half the people involved aren't having fun. This isn't medieval Europe, this is a game where there are people on both sides that should be getting fun out of these events. You can have loss, but you have to put effort into making sure it's fun for the people losing as well. This is not about grabbing land because oh, your country happens to be expansionist. No. You should be going out of your way to make it fun, and if it's not fun, then don't complain that people don't want to give up their RP hub in exchange.

[Kanrath 190]

Saracen sorry that short sentence was all I felt like going into when I had been up for 23 hours..but here let me explain in a bit more detail and then you can correct me. I wasn't disagreeing with you, its just that your example was directed only at one type of rp. The fact is in any online game you have to live with the fact you don't own anything on the game.

 

Your argument was about people having no right to argue/resist against actions on the server but only the right to participate would also mean that people who demand war rp have no right to demand it because just like owning land its a type of rp and its not being done by staff but by players. You can't say one side has no rights and insist the other side has rights to their rp because neither side any more valuable to the server.

 

Now on the other hand say both sides agree to it then that's fine, but the concept that one side has more of a right to their type of role play and that its any more important then the other type is foolish. The fact is players here often take actions based on rl friendships/dislikes, even more so with wars/raids

 

We could though easily just designate 5-8 plots as "Warplots" designate them as military infrastructure and only by taking them would you gain the ability to then attack directly someones land. I mean look at any war, you have dozens of skirmishes usually before the main city is even threatened.

[AlmondTree 418]

My point is that the loss has to actually have a point and bring fun RP. If it doesn't, then it isn't worth doing. I would rather have no war then wars where half the people involved aren't having fun. This isn't medieval Europe, this is a game where there are people on both sides that should be getting fun out of these events. You can have loss, but you have to put effort into making sure it's fun for the people losing as well. This is not about grabbing land because oh, your country happens to be expansionist. No. You should be going out of your way to make it fun, and if it's not fun, then don't complain that people don't want to give up their RP hub in exchange.

 

 

With this I got nothing else to say.