Conflict & War FAQ

[Abyssus 486]

guess what happens

 

 

1. pvpers leave the server after this final nerf
2. they end up conforming

the answer might surprise you

[Telanir 6432]

9 minutes ago, Gallic said:

so wait

 

is this suggesting that a settlement can be raided every day provided the attacker can think up some reason to do it IC and the only course of action is to become an isolationist and never open the doors or go outside

 

If you “think up reasons” for your character to do something, that is OOCly motivated conflict and hence metagaming. With that said, if you are at war you don’t need such reasons. If you’re a bandit, I’m sure you have your own reasons as well. We’ve separated raiding and banditry into separate distinctions. I hope this answers your question @Gallic 

 

9 minutes ago, L0rdLawyer said:

-snip-

 

Hey Wolfkite, I’m surprised you are being this confrontational about it, of all people. You’ve listed people highly qualified to write war rules in the old philosophy and mindset. We don’t need that else we’d get all the same problems. It’s time to go back to our roots as a fantasy hardcore roleplay server and fundamentally shift the perspective of war on writing a meaningful story.

 

We haven’t given up on making a working system. This is where we really care instead of rehashing the same broken concept time and time again.

 

If you knew me, you’d expect this from me. Wait for the new era to begin Wolf, once you see them in practice your opinion will change.

 

2 minutes ago, frill said:

-snip-

 

You got it man! All the best Frill.

[Islamadon 4426]

4 minutes ago, frill said:

fleepers cry more

???

Fleepers aren’t against this, Fleepers are just angry men who are disenfranchised with ERP! They only hunt ERPers because they believe it brings down the morality of the server through the promotion of Free Love, Miscegenation, Homosexuality etc (see Zhulik’s Guide to ERP). Uneducated peons such as yourself should realize that in the Clownic Vocabularum the term “Fleeper” is a term designated for a humble new player/man who spends their every waking hour grinding resources and doing monotonous tasks.

The great irony is Fleepers are called PVP goons for waging a war which aims to bring back culture and morality to a server that forfeited development and culture for the whims of Elven hussies and teenagers who care more about looking like an anime character and having online romance rp than adding to the server’s feel. No good man has ever been slain by a Fleeper! Do not disdain the Fleeper, they are the reactionaries which every server needs!

Fleepers don’t care about war rules.

[AlphaMoist 1707]

17 minutes ago, L0rdLawyer said:

You are going to allow roleplay warclaims. Roleplay warclaims. Let me say that one more time. Roleplay warclaims. Do you know how terrible it is having 10 people rp fight at the same time? Imagine 100. 

I’m literally 100% certain he means warclaims that are based on authentic roleplay, not warclaims done 100% through roleplay... You have to be pretty ******* dumb or just looking for a reason to ***** if you actually think staff would push for a massive roleplay battle. 

 

And if a massive roleplay battle is what he meant, then he’s a ******* retard.  

 

17 minutes ago, L0rdLawyer said:

The ****? Who ever wants to go to war? Yeah. I'm losing hope every second. 

I’m almost certain the war aspect is one of the better lotc features people enjoy. Why else would the server be most active when a war is going on

[Dimitri_P 126]

The main concern I have with this is from what I gather a nation can simply deny all wars or raids OOC, which doesn’t make sense if the nation truly has done things that would warrant a war, unless I’m reading this wrong. Is this the case, and if so, are you sticking to that as the final decision?

[Telanir 6432]

1 minute ago, TheAlphaMoist said:

I’m literally 100% certain he means warclaims that are based on authentic roleplay, not warclaims done 100% through roleplay... You have to be pretty ******* dumb or just looking for a reason to ***** if you actually think staff would push for a massive roleplay battle. 

 

Thanks! That part was funny to read… of course not!

 

1 minute ago, TheAlphaMoist said:

I’m almost certain the war aspect is one of the better lotc features people enjoy. Why else would the server be most active when a war is going on

 

Absolutely. It’s time we improved on the static iron-fist enforced system to a dynamic and open system. Nations and charters will be able to wage the kind of war that they enjoy the most. They will not be forced to follow a “one size fits all” system.

[WuHanXianShi14 0]

So both sides need to consent to a war before a war is officially declared and no-cap raiding is allowed? This whole thread is a bunch of vague rhetoric and very little explanation on how things will actually work.

[Salvo 1831]

This seems like a terrible change. LotC is inherently competitive, not cooperative, and anyone claiming otherwise is simply delusional.

 

You really expect people of opposing playerbases, of opposing goals (both IC and OOC), to cooperate with each other in, as you claim, “good faith?”. Non-interactivity and sheltering is already a massive plague on the server, with people calling GMs and hiding behind rules at the smallest happening possible. I simply do not see how further empowering this denial of interaction will benefit the server and its players, expecially when people have something to lose. After all, what’s stopping me from simply saying “no”, when things are not going my way, as seen with the Renatus-Haense war that just ended?

 

Obviously, I don’t expect my post or those of others to be taken into consideration, considering how detached the upper echelons of the staff team are from the rest of the playerbase. To all people cheering for this change and the defeat of “evil pvp goons”, I suggest you take a long, long stare in the mirror.

[L0rdLawyer 2271]

2 minutes ago, TheAlphaMoist said:

I’m literally 100% certain he means warclaims that are based on authentic roleplay, not warclaims done 100% through roleplay... You have to be pretty ******* dumb or just looking for a reason to ***** if you actually think staff would push for a massive roleplay battle. 

 

And if a massive roleplay battle is what he meant, then he’s a ******* retard.  

 

I’m almost certain the war aspect is one of the better lotc features people enjoy. Why else would the server be most active when a war is going on

1. I'm on my phone so instead here's a copy paste of what telanir said. 

 

Try a no-mechanics war: special raids locked to text-combat for two willing nations, try magic wars (however you might define that)

 

no offense. Read next time.

 

2. Everyone hates war unless they're on the winning side. The Elves are the best example of this. People dont willingly go to war because one side will lose it all. Getting crushed in a warclaim kills moral and kills playerbases. No offense. I've fought in the majority of wars that I have been unbanned for for the last 5 years. I maybe missed 1 year of wars total. 

 

8 minutes ago, Telanir said:

 

 

Hey Wolfkite, I’m surprised you are being this confrontational about it, of all people. You’ve listed people highly qualified to write war rules in the old philosophy and mindset. We don’t need that else we’d get all the same problems. It’s time to go back to our roots as a fantasy hardcore roleplay server and fundamentally shift the perspective of war on writing a meaningful story.

 

We haven’t given up on making a working system. This is where we really care instead of rehashing the same broken concept time and time again.

 

If you knew me, you’d expect this from me. Wait for the new era to begin Wolf, once you see them in practice your opinion will change.

 

 

1. I do know you. I know you better than a lot of players on this server. I know you're a decent man with a lot of ideas. But I also know that sometimes you fail at implementing this ideas into reality in a very terrible way. No offense.

 

2. The players I listed above have wanted to change wars from the CB system for years but when they were in staff the administration refused to let them, excluding Harold. 

 

The reoccurring issues come from the administration rail roading the server with their terrible ideas and beliefs that change with the passing of the teams. 

 

3. So a new system? New era? That's what you claim. But that's what you claimed would happen with the team merges. And look where that led us. 

 

No offense telanir. I do respect you man. But from reading what you posted. I do not have high hopes for what is being released. 

 

 

[gandalfo 1413]

16 minutes ago, TheAlphaMoist said:

I’m literally 100% certain he means warclaims that are based on authentic roleplay, not warclaims done 100% through roleplay...

in the new rules if both sides agree then its a thing

[Salvo 1831]

I would also like to add that, no matter how you try to shape it or twist it, LotC never started a purely text-only based medium, but rather an RP-lite PvP/PvE server. I don’t know when this fixation upon text-based combat has begun, but know that I loathe it, and loathe the fact that it was tried to force it down our mouths for years at this point.

 

Truth is, I believe all people that label others as “pvp-goons” and hold an utter and complete disliking for mechanics-based combat to simply be sore losers that cannot adapt and thus seek another way to ensure their win, in this case found with the complete (or near so) removal of PvP. I’ve never met an anti-PvP person that was, at the same time, a good PvPer.

 

Makes you think.

[frill 2276]

4 minutes ago, Salvo said:

You really expect people of opposing playerbases, of opposing goals (both IC and OOC), to cooperate with each other in, as you claim, “good faith?”. [...] After all, what’s stopping me from simply saying “no”, when things are not going my way, as seen with the Renatus-Haense war that just ended?

 

It’s about encouraging a different kind of conflict RP.

 

The conceptualising of good faith as intrinsic to RP is to prevent PvP warclaims and general goonery as being resultant from some OOC desire to screw people over, something that seems to fester as a latent attribute to most of the more veteran players to the bigger nations – reforming the rules so that they necessitate co-operation through a good faith caveat of “this war is just meant to be for fun RP” is something that is there for just that; encouraging roleplay that is far more enjoyable for both parties involved as opposed to encouraging domination and conquest alone.

 

Simply “saying no” would be a meta-action and in bad faith because it’d be an RP nation acting on OOC preservationism instead of a motivation to create and sustain the RP that the conflict would foster. It’s not that wars can’t happen, but it’s that they’re happening for entirely different reasons following the reform.

 

Yes, the previous wars and warclaims had a significant amount of roleplay stoking their flames but the lingering necessity of having both parties agree to conduct the war puts the onus of war on needing to sustain that consent through OOC cooperation – if people’re repeatedly refusing to go to war with your nation, you should have a long stare in the mirror and consider just why that is.

[LaffenOutLoud 351]

I like to hear how the staff is gearing to raids to be more rp-esque and purposeful IRP, and a suggestion to further develop that is to allow the defender of a raid to call RP default instead of MC mechanics default, just as you can call RP default when being banditted – Since just anyone would be able to raid now. 

[Dimitri_P 126]

 

2 minutes ago, LaffenOutLoud said:

I like to hear how the staff is gearing to raids to be more rp-esque and purposeful IRP, and a suggestion to further develop that is to allow the defender of a raid to call RP default instead of MC mechanics default, just as you can call RP default when being banditted – Since just anyone would be able to raid now. 

 

I like that idea a lot, it would be much more fun if raids were like that.

[Mavromino 513]

What if players decide they want GMs to place ladders? Considering that player-made clause and all.