What I Think The War Rules Should Include, A Humans Opinion

[Rivk Zavadsky 700]

Now I would like to point out for the people that are reading this think before you post anything. Thank you.

 

 

Alright so I am Griff or the Super Soldier. I've been through many wars and battles on my time on Lotc. Right now I'm banned but oh well I guess I'll just share one of my stupid thoughts about the server. But this right now is not me being stupid. This is something that will be 2 sided. The one side will agree totally and the other side wont.

 

So here we go......

 

Many battles have happened on this server, good and bad. The bad battles are what will continue to happen if we continue to let these rules stay. The bad battles are these battles that have these underground or up above group pvp fortresses and death traps. It's stupid very stupid. It takes the fun out of wars and makes them long and dull. As the other side that hides in the fort maybe fun because they know that they will win. The other side is bored to death because they have to wait for the people to charge out which they wont do because they are to greedy for winning.

 

I'll use the Battle of Indagolaf for example.

 

Indagolaf was going to be a huge butt fun battle of trebuchet bombing and dwarves and humans killing each other. The battle was not like that. This how everything went down. The humans bomb the dwarven wall and are like where are the dwarves at. The humans find out that the dwarves are hiding in a underground fortress that is filled with pvp traps. The humans sat outside Indagolaf for 4 hours, they built a village, tried to drown the dwarves with a lake. It was boring, and I was happy I was killed that battle cause I was only at the 2 and 1/2 mark. It was kind of a stalemate but the dwarves were the winners in the end.

 

Every single battle that has happened in the past has ended with crying. The only battles that I really didn't noticed whining was Dreadfort, Flotsam and Lucienist, Nations Crossing battle the 1st one, and The Angren Skirmish. The two that happened after the Exodus were Flotsam and Angren one which were both human civil war fights basically. When the Exodus happened the Dwarves became powerful and so they felt verryyyyy powerful. They still carry this trait of feeling powerful because they feel they are so powerful that they will always win and cannot be beat. If they are beat they whine and all everyone on the opposing side hackers. Trust me everyone knows it's true. Many others except dwarves on the server have been given this "I am powerful, I cannot lose" feeling and it's what leads lotc to what makes war terrible.

 

The dwarves even made a 2nd Indagolaf

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wv-H-G7bg64

 

 

Proof right here. I was so mad and thinking why do the dwarves think they feel so cool when they build these Underground fortresses when it actually makes them look bad. Me and my friends laugh when the dwarves lose and they cry, because it's funny. The only reason why I'm picking on the dwarves is because I'm on the Human side not the Dwarven side. The Fringe War was a tearful war, filled with Pvp fortresses. The only human pvp fortress I can think of was Mt. Augustus which was above ground and would've been easy to make it collapse. Indagolaf and stuff was Underground and would've been impossible to take.

 

 

Remove the use of underground pvp fortresses and up ground pvp fortresses.

 

That's just what I want.

 

Now Dwarves, it's your turn to share your opinion.

 

 

((to the dwarves that are offended im sorry but these things had to be said

[AGP 3169]

How does this concern the war rules at all? I'm confused, this seems to just be a dwarf-bashing session calling dwarves whiners and filthy pvp-fort users.

[ausbrig renegade 238]

Support, this pvp fort stuff has to end, its just endless stalemate with both sides claiming victory.

[Rivk Zavadsky 700]

How does this concern the war rules at all? I'm confused, this seems to just be a dwarf-bashing session calling dwarves whiners and filthy pvp-fort users.

Did you read the third to last sentence? That's the war rule that should be included, I had to put a lot of details into my answer.

[FORƎST 1312]

As someone who has played on both sides, historically there has been a river tears spilled during these battles.

 

That said I feel like there would be less tears if;

 

a) There were actual clear-cut and unambiguous rules for us to follow, to limit each side from feeling as if the other is exploiting.

 

b) We all relaxed a little. 

[AGP 3169]

Did you read the third to last sentence? That's the war rule that should be included, I had to put a lot of details into my answer.

 

Oh that was your suggested rule, ok. My.. well my issue with this is how do you do that? Like, what constitutes a 'pvp fort' vs. an 'rp fort.' Banning castles and forts all together makes no sense rp-wise so idk what to do.

[Rivk Zavadsky 700]

Pvp forts are filled with traps that are very hard to get past, rp castles are castle that have defenses that can work but can be destroyed in which pvp traps are very hard to destroy.

[chaotikal 2392]

I think it's a tactic. At least from the dwarven perspective.

[AGP 3169]

Pvp forts are filled with traps that are very hard to get past, rp castles are castle that have defenses that can work but can be destroyed in which pvp traps are very hard to destroy.

 

If we want to look at real life fortifications, though, the more 'pvp traps' it had the better it was. Multiple portcullises, murder holes, boiling water and sand, moats and pits, drawbridges, etc. While it's exaggerated, we basically just have MC versions of actual traps in our fortresses and I don't see how that makes them bad. I would support this if we had a clear way to distinct Rp fortresses from pvp forts.

[FORƎST 1312]

I think it's a tactic. At least from the dwarven perspective.

 

Sadly there exists no viable counter-tactic.

 

Without the use of ladders and TNT these battles drag on for hours and many of us just don't have the time to participate anymore.

[chaotikal 2392]

Sadly there exists no viable counter-tactic.

 

Without the use of ladders and TNT these battles drag on for hours and many of us just don't have the time to participate anymore.

 

Indagolaf'ing is a counter tactic to the Human Tactic of Charging. They have high numbers and good gear, their charges are swift and terminating They're like the "Assassin" or "Rogue" role in a MMO, while the Dwarves counter it by taking the sturdier role. "Tank". There's no counterplay in your view becasue you view it in the way of "I must charge at it, if I cannot charge at it, it is OP." Which is this case, where this technique was developed to counter the Human tactics.

[FORƎST 1312]

Indagolaf'ing is a counter tactic to the Human Tactic of Charging. They have high numbers and good gear, their charges are swift and terminating They're like the "Assassin" or "Rogue" role in a MMO, while the Dwarves counter it by taking the sturdier role. "Tank". There's no counterplay in your view becasue you view it in the way of "I must charge at it, if I cannot charge at it, it is OP." Which is this case, where this technique was developed to counter the Human tactics.

 

Literally not my view at all.

 

If I were to send my entire army at an indigolaf, I'd lose 1/2 on the bedrock fall trap, 1/3 of the remaining guys in a lava pit and the others would be cleaned up with 2+ miles of ankle biters.

 

I was on dwarf side for the better part of a year, I understand what goes into an indigolaf fort. One can be dug out in a matter of hours, and the design ensures that the battle drags on as long as possible. 

 

There is no current counter tactic to an indigolaf because of three integral components which are liberally used inside one; worldguard, LWC and craftbook. With these additions a clever puppet master can construct a labyrinth which enables him to slaughter 20x his numbers all while sitting safe in his control room.

 

We cannot, by current server rules break through doors, tamper with redstone nor build structures to cross 50+ block deep chasms. We cannot block up the tunnel, or occupy the area due to soulstones, regions and other such mechanics.

 

Fighting an offensive battle against an indigolaf is at best foolish, at worst self destruction.

 

Some people consider this type of thing exploitation I myself am not that invested tbh.

[Tirenas 677]

I don't see why the Dwarves' tactic of defense should be removed. Rather than running out and getting slaughtered against 4x our numbers with better gear, we sit inside our elaborate bases and defend. Would you have us run into our enemies' blades, have our nation vassalized, and then have our entire playerbase go and play another race? Because destroying our only viable tactic in a war that is stacked against us for a plethora of reasons will do just that.

[Publius 4098]

Moved to the Archive. It shall be sorted into the appropriate category shortly.