Your View; War Rules! [ Inc. Raid Rules ]

[Cyndikate 2303]

How about this? Consensual wars. If you guys can't work together, you can't have wars.

[Jistuma 1996]

When things started to come to realization at the time, a lot of assumptions were made about our side by various individuals. We had legitimate RP behind it, but not everyone was aware of the RP that had occurred. Critiquing people's reason for wanting to conquest with a limited perspective and assumptions shouldn't be an argument against forced conquest. You're basically going on to say, you can make a lot of RP posts but that doesn't matter because the reason's still ****. People are RPing, and you'd essentially halt that because you thought it wasn't good enough. Not cool, we dealt with that ourselves.

It is an issue with warclaims as a whole, conquest is a pretty big part of warclaims to be fair, however. Also, initially, as far as high elves were concerned our side's uprising would have been considered conquest since they kicked all of us out of the region and then barricaded the entrance to our district with stone blocks. This was on the assumption, quoting here, "No I didn't mean to take away your perms. I took away your power to add an orc army to bulldoze anything. The owners of the nexus region get to decide." That said, even people who didn't have the ability to add others to the region were removed, so, you decide whether that's a legitimate accident or not.

So instead of confronting us with a non-existent military they simply removed us from the region (though eventually we were added back), told us to warclaim them, and then the following occurred in my post above.

This is the attitude that the current system enables. It needs to be less forgiving to get any sense of actual in game urgency. Right now people basically just lawyer up with the rule book tucked tightly against their chest, shaking their heads at the slightest infraction. Once they move their stuff everything is hunky dory, and it reaches an extreme when you decide to confront the greatest military on the continent with snow balls.

Did you even read what I wrote? The problem with what happened was not the fact that non conquest warclaims exist, it was the fact that WARCLAIMS exist. So you controlled the town, and they said you needed a warclaim, that's has nothing to do with conquest, because they accepted conquest terms. They accepted the warclaim to conquer their town. The problem you had was that the warclaim took too long to happen, and the High Elves were allowed to mess with permissions, items, and buildings while the warclaim wasn't happening. That was the problem, not conquest, because you did conquest. What you are saying is that warclaims halt rp, not that non forced conquest halts rp.

 

Yet, that example was a pretty special circunstance, so... ye... it was a coop, not really a war in all other senses. If you're doing a coop, you're doing it under their noises and there isn't really much of a fighting chance or you simply have a battle inside the walls of the town. A normal war, is someone defending and someone attacking on different parts of land. And while your example was of the very little ones that had good rp reason to happen a conquest, most don't.

[argonian 14254]

When we wanted to abolish VAs, many said it would result in too many villains and abuse of villainy. There are like no villains in the traditional sense anymore.

 

When we wanted PvP default, many said it would be the death of RP. Even PvP defaulters generally start with an RP fight unless it's a big crowd.

 

When we wanted to abolish MAs, many said it would result in too many OP mages with no moderation. I see less mages and those that do RP it are generally pretty sensible.

 

Now we want forced conquest and many say it will result in trolls warclaiming everything left and right until only PvP OREN trolls remain. It's not going to happen, it's a sensationalist doomsday prophesy, and we've empirically demonstrated that all those sensationalist nay-sayers in the past have been wrong every single time.

 

Give us forced conquest (with an appropriate casus belli system).

This. Removing restrictions like this has never caused any of the problems people said it would it the past. Forced conquest won't lead to Oren taking all your homes and conquering the map

[Jistuma 1996]

When we wanted to abolish VAs, many said it would result in too many villains and abuse of villainy. There are like no villains in the traditional sense anymore.

When we wanted PvP default, many said it would be the death of RP. Even PvP defaulters generally start with an RP fight unless it's a big crowd.

When we wanted to abolish MAs, many said it would result in too many OP mages with no moderation. I see less mages and those that do RP it are generally pretty sensible.

Now we want forced conquest and many say it will result in trolls warclaiming everything left and right until only PvP OREN trolls remain. It's not going to happen, it's a sensationalist doomsday prophesy, and we've empirically demonstrated that all those sensationalist nay-sayers in the past have been wrong every single time.

Give us forced conquest (with an appropriate casus belli system).

 

Lets see this another way, shall we? I'm not saying I'm against force conquest but...

 

Removal of VAs eliminated villains so much that now they are extremelly rare and the ones that exist are normally just bandits, religious fanatics or extremists.

 

PVP default is said by many people to be one of the main reasons the quality of rp has decreased so much.

 

Removal of MAs destroyed magic rp.

 

You say what happened was good, for me it was bad. Will forced conquest be good? If I was warclaimed by orcs because they wanted my land, and I had that place to rp, I would be pissed to have it taken away. There are good things and bad things with everything, too many settlements is bad, yet the best rp and the best time I've had on the server has been in VaerHaven and Silva Insula, both towns which would be considered minor. Someone is going to get the bad part of a rule change, there will always be consequences. The way to see it is looking at it and checking if the positives outway the negatives, and if done right, with GMs actually enforcing good Reasons for Conquest, it would probably lean for the positives. But that will, in my opinion, be very hard to do, and even a pretty simple warclaim as we have now gets already pretty ignored (like for example, the fact that both sides have to pay minas to fight, and if the defending side can't pay, he would probably be forced into conquest.)

[Cpt_Noobman 1954]

I think the greatest problem with the current war rules is people choose to follow only half of them. I thought that money and material was meant to be charged for a battle to take place. Right now no logistics are involved what so ever. Also, in regards to the recent Kal'Bogrin war claim, I didn't even know it was happening until three days after the post was made. Aren't leaders supposed to discuss terms BEFORE the post is made? I did end up in negotiations over the terms, though it was over a week and a half after the original post was made. I also agree with much of what Jistuma has said on this thread, especially the part about if the defenders can't pay for the battle, then it is made into a conquest, but not before. Also, use the ENTIRE new war system please.

[ski_king3 0]

Folks need to realize that we've tried pretty much everything and this is the middle ground that we've found. Every system has problems, but this one definitely has the least. The worry isn't that people will start warclaiming everything, but that forced conquest takes away an RP hub which is particularly disruptive to roleplay. Sure, players shouldn't be able to decline facing consequences for their actions, but taking away the place where people roleplay on a regular basis isn't the only possible consequence.

 

Also, people seem to think that this dwarf war is representative of all wars. Does anyone care to notice the high elves who chose to accept the conquest warclaim even though they're severely disadvantaged? Or should we ignore the example in which the system is working because it's inconvenient to our argument.

 

Yes, obviously this system has problems, but I'd much rather see the GM's force the losing side to accept an end of a war and reasonable terms of surrender than accept a forced conquest if most of the losing side's playerbase doesn't want to accept that.

 

 

 

Also, to the folks who are arguing for consent required for any conflict, the toxicity and hatred that that caused in the past was absurd. I'd see forced conquest before I'd see consent-based conflict.

[Jistuma 1996]

My view on how warclaims could be done to make them more interesting - https://www.lordofthecraft.net/topic/124220-ideas-on-how-warclaims-are-used/

[Cyndikate 2303]

If anyone wants my view on this its just that we need to quit changing the war rules so often because the rules themselves weren't the issue to begin with. It's the players who refuse to cooperate with one another and abuse whatever rules we throw out at them to their advantage. roleplay is cooperative story-telling and wars have a stronger emphasis on OOC cooperation. If I were to suggest a change of the rules, then disregarding my previous post, I want the rules to enforce both sides to get along and work together or they get nothing. Anything that is forced, such as conquests, is just going to lead to more problems, such as increased hate, stress and tension between both factions. I don't care if it's in the name of dynamic RP. Dynamic RP isn't even worth it if two sides are going to fling **** and claw at each other. I'd rather see RP be halted than just see dynamic Roleplay cause nothing but drama, and unecessary toxicity.

So yeah, enforce cooperation and teamwork, and start banning players who are abusing the war rules to their advantage. If the great snowball fight really did happen, why didn't anyone just ban the dwarves for doing trolly **** like that? And if they did move their items before the pillage, why weren't they banned for that either, when they were not supposed to move their stash in the first place?

There's another problem. GMs who can't enforce the rules and act like GMs to save their lives. Either they need to get their crap together or they can find someone to replace them. If people are abusing the rules, ban them and be done. As long as nothing's done about that behavior, the longer it's condoned.

[Tirenas 677]

Why don't we make it so that it's a forced conquest if they move their items prior to the pillage? That way it makes pillages worth something more than what they currently are, which is basically nothing.

[ski_king3 0]

I posted an idea:

 

https://www.lordofthecraft.net/topic/124288-idea-addition-to-the-war-rules-involving-forced-conquest/

[mitto 2312]

Moved to The Great Library. It shall be sorted into the appropriate category shortly.

 

If you feel this is a mistake, please contact myself or any FM and we'll restore it.