IS IT ME, OR WARS DON'T FEEL THE SAME?

[MadOne 3381]

You are probably wondering what I mean by the title.

Well, let me explain what is going on. I'm a player, that joined during the War of Two Emperors, and give or take, that amounts to being here for 2ish years. I have joined bang in the middle of the war, and from the moment I joined a human community, I have felt an overwhelming sense of war. When I would roleplay in the tavern unsuspectingly, I felt that I was in a war-torn environment. When walking the roads, I have looked around oocly to see if any enemies would be camping. There was an overall well-roundedness and a sense of conflict sort of "up in the air" as if it was almost an aura.

 

Now, when I am playing on the server, and I play in a community that has a high stake in the war, I do not feel a foreboding sense of war at all. Why is this?

 

I think this will be the 19418th time the community sees a thread like this, but I'm going to do it anyway. 

 

In my opinion, there is a lacking war "culture" about the server overall, and this is not because of a "bottom-up" viewpoint, but a top-down enforced one. What I mean by culture is a general feeling of being in war, having conflict, having stakes. Now, I am saying that this is not a bottom up factor, because it is a symptom, not the cause. It is a symptom of some restricting rules, cultures etc. and I'm going to highlight what I think is the issue.

 

A LACK OF ROAD BANDITRY.

 

I think, during the war of two emperors, one of the most fun things to ever do as an arms man on either side was to set up roadblocks for the citizens. I, with many other soldiers from the same side would be on the roads for extended periods of time to do small skirmishes with enemy soldiers who are doing the same, perhaps capture a knight or two, hang them, bring them to our Kingdom for public trial. And if we encountered enemy citizens who didn't put up a fight, we would confiscate their equipment and let them go back to their city. Now, this would be happening all over the road. We weren't the only party playing the role of a brigand - there were like 5 or more other groups from both sides actively participating in the road and creating a general sense of war, roadblocks and suffering that is characteristic of what a war is supposed to be, which was really good for a warlike environment. When I was in Leuven, I felt Renatus breathe on my neck. I felt the presence of the lurking Dragon Knights, and I saw Reiver patrols on the roads. When Curon flipped, they got their entire rally on the road, stopping everyone to show participation in the war.

 

Now, I don't want this to look like a nostalgia trip, but moreso a point. - Ever since post 2emps, I'm guessing around the time of the Lorraine revolt, banditry has been severely cracked down upon by the rules. I remember a period where there was rumours that you could not cross and perform hostile actions within the CAPITAL TILE of an enemy country, as they would hit you with a raid cooldown. And there has been continuity in the server in that regard of trying to ban banditry, kill it, burn it, etc headed by players who often suffered from banditry whining about the low quality of banditry roleplay and copy paste emotes (they never mentioned they would just mcly run away if a bandit stopped to write a stop emote)

 

I would argue that we should facilitate more for that kind of banditry roleplay to create a stronger sense of conflict, and also a general environment with stakes. I remember, as the Marshal of Haense, having been captured by @FlemishSupremacy and @Milenkhovas they patrolled the roads, and that would have been a huge win for Renatus if they had succeeded in executing me. This could lead to many different avenues of roleplay, from the Nation Leader bargaining with the captors, or sending an army to free captives. It also added a lot of stakes for travelling, conducting affairs outside of your nation, and ensuring the security of entourages outside of cities. Of course, you can argue that facilitating for this RP brings forth some toxic attitudes from the bandits, or the captive people and creates a more toxic environment, though I would argue that this toxic environment already exists, when you starve people out of conflict. I don't know how this current war happened, but since 1.5 years, if you look at the war declaration posts, at this point, a lot of the wars happen because some community is so conflict-starved, that they actively try to fabricate artificial conflict by "baiting" other playerbases that they have ooc griveances with to get that "fix." You could further argue that a newfound leniency would bring forth the bandit groups of yore like the "Reiverhz" or the "Flays" and whatever, but when you look at the current state of the wars right now, and the invovlement of "bandit groups", you would see that this system of curtailing bandits has a far more malicious impact on the war overall. Usually, when war broke out, back when I participated in these "bandit groups", we would like to play 3rd party on sides, or have an "auxiliary" role to fill instead of a major one. Nowadays, you see these dominant PVP groups determine outcomes of wars before they begin through OOCly pming your good friend @Mickaelhzor @Masourior whatever and paying them 30000 mina to get an edge over PVP, but you are removing the freedom of these groups (who will always exist) and forcing them to participate in wars that they aren't really interested or have a stake in just for the sake of conflict, and sometimes helping out their friends or safekeeping their legacies.

 

 

A LACK OF RAIDS.

 

Building up from my point above, I would like to ***** about a lack of raids as well. The raid rules during 2emps were somewhat lenient, and allowed for large raid parties (10 men) usually to come to cities to raid and cause general dismay. I feel like this contributed greatly to the roleplaying aspect of being in war as well. Nowadays, because of having gone through a 1.5 year period of suffering no raids, no one has a culture of what it means to be "raided" anymore. Cities proceed as if there is no war going on, and only way that you would be conscious that a war is going on is if someone said "hey we are at war." which is a really bad way to create an environment where warfare is present. This also added a lot of stakes to warfare, I remember specifically @Piovbeing captured during a city raid on Georg Alimar, the Palatine of Hanseti-Ruska and being executed with his brother. (Palatine is the 2nd in command of Haense, and these characters in question were also royals.) In other instances, I remember having to fight Suffonian raids to Haense, and that being a factor for my subsequent promotion as a military officer. (you can't sustain military progression on the back of bears played by ST solely.)

 

Because of all these events I listed, I beg to differ from the individuals who often say that "warfare rp" or banditry do not contribute to the overall narrative of the server at all. I have personally created a noble house out of warfare, banditry and performing in that vein without specifically being a good pvper at all, and I feel like the server could see a lot more of this in the coming times.

 

A LACK OF CONSEQUENCE.

 

Now, I'm going to go ahead and personally argue that Conquest RP or generally punishing wars can really be pulled off. And I don't mean sniping a tile from a nation, but literally the conquest of their capital city. What I have noticed after the war of 2emps, is that there is generally a total lack of agency, dynamic roleplay, stakes and consequences as a result of war. Now, this war, from what I'm seeing is about conquering some irrelevant tile, which is not going to have any roleplay impact at all, in my opinion. What's going to happen is, a side wins, the other loses, the losing side says "my bad" and gives the winning side some minae, maybe a little abdication. That's it. Where is the stake in this? You are effectively keeping status quo, but lowering the morale of the losing side ever so slightly that they have enough of a grudge to come back and declare another meaningless war with another meaningless fabricated and baited conflict, only to have the side engage in this cyclical structure of fighting and losing and winning for nothing.

 

What the issue is, we have been ruled under this coalition of old players for years and years. And because of this, we frankly have not been able to create anything new, and it stifles the creative power that the server is capable of.  For example, If I rallied like 30 guys, roleplayed as this conquering Mongol horselord, I could not really pull off anything except join a nation, maybe do a settlement and suddenly turn pacifist, because my conflict ability is stifled. It used to be moreso about not the fact that your community was a nation, or an empire or whatever but having an understanding that you used to be rally, get people, get nations, get influence etc. It used to be not be that you were the "imperial faction" or the "dwarven faction" but moreso that you were able to go rally a sizeable amount of people, create a community out of nothing, or something and not participate in the status quo at all. It seems like nowadays under the influence of be it old players, or the "leadership caste" its not about how many people you can rally but about having the right connections. It's was in Oren about being friends with dibley hunwald and alty, or whatever and now it is about being friends with some other people. 

 

Now, the issue behind this is it creates a culture of servitude among newer players. Because I cannot diverge from the status quo, because I cannot enforce a different sort of ideals, maybe carve out my own path, or replace the leadership clique of a nation through overthrowing them (you can pull this off but you have to go through like 20 hoops, and 100 if the current NL doesn't cooperate) I ultimately end up beholden to my NL. Look at the schism that happened in Oren, for example, and you would see sergisala being "wtf why would the pontiff do this" when his NL disagrees, and going "god bless the pontiff" when the Emperor agrees with pureimp10 I don't want to name the orenian community or sergisala specifically, since this happens in any other community as well, but this is the most recent example. It just removes any sort of principled reaction to events, and just creates some sort of a totalitarian and artificial unity in communities, because I can't do anything to resist. Look at the Sedan revolt, for example wherein a bunch of players tried to resist Oren. I remember vaguely that they weren't allowed any allies, external help, etc and it was solely between Oren and Sedan. So you be saying that they are prevented from engaging in diplomatical roleplay? So you be sayin', despite being the underdog, they can't do anything to absolve themselves of that situation? You can nowadays sort of pout and groan at your NL, but in the end, you will always have the chains of your NL's and that person's friends upon your ankle. 

 

Don't mind me only talking about internal politics, of course. This applies to external politics as well. For like irl years now, there has been this ongoing "Cold War" with Dwarves and Oren, which just boils down to an inconsequential war every 3 or so months, where they fight, stop fighting, fight again. Would it not be healthier to just have one side land a proper blow, so that there can be a sense of conclusion? Even better, Imagine one side being able to replace the monarchy, or the leadership clique with another group, internal to that respective community but a distinctive set of people, so that they would be more friendlier in the future diplomatically? Now this war looks like someone is going to have some pyrrhic victory, rinse and repeat.

 

image of me being fed thoughts by my NL

 

 

WARZONE

 

While I commend the initial initiative being taken to create a warzone during periods of conflict, I have found that creating an institutional warzone (one created by staff) stifles RP to the point of no return. I will explain with a memory - Picture Wilheim Barclay and Tylos Barclay, in Leuven, which is 5 minutes oocly down the road from Renatus, the nation that we are at war with. Now, In this road, which is a pipeline for conflict, I can do many things. I can choose to defend my fortress of Leuven, I can go out on the road and try to get some resources from passing enemy civilians, or ambush enemy soldiers, or I can skip the road, pass through the surrounding Dwarven forests and land into Helena to cause general mayhem.

 

Now picture another scenario. I am Osvald Barclay, and the staff release a warzone so I can fight my enemies in the warzone. What happens? I go join a voice chat, say "Hi @Mickaelhz" and he says hello madone, let's charge this fort. So we charge the fort, and click people. End of story. Osvald Barclay gets no military scars, unless I act like my pvp mattered and say "I'm a warzone veteran I lost my eye while clicking fredrickteufel", there is literally nothing to gain from participating in the war irply other than getting your side bonus military points.

 

Also, what is the point of warzones determining the outcome of wars anyway? Don't you think this is also draconian, dogmatic and unnecessary? What went on 2emps was that, Haense got banditted, raided and bullied on the roads so much, that a drive to fight more was dulled down to the point where Vege and Emenzi signed a treaty of peace (don't get started on the mod involvement with that, just bear with the point.) now, by dogmatically determining which side wins, or gains advantages in the war through staff intervention, what you are achieving is a bitter playerbase who may not necessarily be done with war being spoonfed an enforcement that they SHOULD BE done with war. (not to mention, ur literally taking away from the mainservers activity cuz everyone wants to click their foe to save their minecraft liege)

 

While on the informal warzone, I could go into helena and steal 16 horses to get promoted, in the formal warzone, I have to click mailcp 30 times to get a "good job" from some of the lads in vc. Difference is stark.

 

Now, this has spawned a dangerous mentality and a culture around the war, wherein people are sort of waiting for top-down approaches to solve their conflict instead of actively engaging in the war that they are being presented with. It creates a mentality of "the NL is always right" to lower players, and it restricts a lot of geopolitical initiative that other NL's can take. Now, people prefer to dig into their city, act like there is no war in ba sing se, drink their mead and go to their assemblies as usual, happy times until mr red tag says we go to le warzone, and then we do.

 

 

SOLUTION

 

My point is, I think wars need to be less restrictive and dogmatic, and less of a hurdle to go through. (You have to pm like a billion moderators do to anything from what it looks like - not even mentioning bias) Ever since Telanir released that whole "you have get consent to war" people thing, the culture of war has shifted to something more sinister and covert in nature. I would rather have a RP enemy voice their distaste to me IRP by calling me Haenseti scum, than have them oocly plot behind my back to disenfranchise and demoralise my community. 

 

I would say the consequences of war should be expanded, raids should be more relaxed and road banditry should be laxed, if not unrestricted. (and I do think warp points are really a hurdle to go through as well, since you can't feasibly bandit a road with those present) 

 

I can elaborate more of course but I wrote too much man genuinely tired rn

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited December 20, 2021 by MadOne

[argonian 12836]

yeah ok but telanir who never plays has determined that people would stop playing and the server would die if their shitty ******* nations got ganked

 

despite the fact that dozens of nations have risen and fallen without that happening

 

but he knows best

 

war server aint gonna run regardless tho so it is what it is

[LordCrowe 80]

Long story short from what im reading from this word vomit?

Stop Molly-coddling the playerbase and let consequences happen

 

Its not just the war environment, though thats a large part of it. all the new rules, the constant rebalancing, shelving and nerfing of CA's, etc.

Its all because people can't stand losing, and the staff refuse to put their foot down and recognize that this is one of the few cases where "catering to the playerbase" is actually detrimental, of course people are going to say they want measures that make them lose less!

 

the problem is if theres no losers, theres no winners either.

 

stories are driven by conflict, and the new policies suck all conflict out of our stories

Edited December 20, 2021 by LordCrowe
typos

[Marquesa_ 298]

1 hour ago, argonian said:

yeah ok but telanir who never plays has determined that people would stop playing and the server would die if their shitty ******* nations got ganked

 

despite the fact that dozens of nations have risen and fallen without that happening

 

but he knows best

 

war server aint gonna run regardless tho so it is what it is

I agree with this 100%, I’ve been playing since the early 5th Empire and I’ve never witnessed a whole player base quitting and never returning after they had been conquered. If anything, the eras of balkanization following the fall of empires were the time in which the server, or at the very least Human roleplay, was at it’s most active.

 

LoTC was never supposed to be like a certain server that shall not be named. We were never supposed to live in tea party-riddled cities where the fear of total conquest was nonexistent and “slice of life” roleplay reigned supreme, the whole purpose of this server is in it’s name “Lord of the Craft” — we were once a place where anyone, and I mean anyone, could become the Lord of the Craft if they had a sizable rally behind them, as briefly mentioned by MadOne. Sadly this place has become a shell of it’s former self.

Edited December 20, 2021 by Marquesa_

[Burnsider 4542]

This server that MadOne describes is really cool. I'd love to log into it one day. 

[NotEvilAtAll 9927]

Yeah, I guess you're right. It does feel weird to have this war be a bunch of 12v10 fights every few days on the roads over some tiles that won't really matter at all besides flex and forum karma. This intensity of fighting was what would happen without any war declared at all back in earlier LOTC.

 

Creative forces are held back by staff because once something gets built anywhere on Almaris, it's not ever gonna get destroyed in roleplay. Destructive forces are also held back because if something gets destroyed, it's incredibly difficult to rebuild the community again. It's the rabbit hole we've fallen too far into that forces everything into a long-term status quo that can't get disrupted. The recent war rule changes have slightly pushed out of that hole, but it'll take a lot more before the server can be considered truly dynamic.

 

I hope that LOTC gets a map that'll look dramatically different towards its end relative to its beginning before I grow tired of the server and move onto other things in life.

[oryP 972]

we live in a society

[MailC3p 1158]

tfw   person not fighting in war and who's  nation has not been raided during this  war complains  about lack of war.

[Borin 5256]

36 minutes ago, NotEvilAtAll said:

Yeah, I guess you're right. It does feel weird to have this war be a bunch of 12v10 fights every few days on the roads over some tiles that won't really matter at all besides flex and forum karma.

 

To be fair, the Dwarves taking tile 91 means:

 

3 rather large vassal estates need to be moved, the pasting of which has been expensive for some and is wasted

 

Basically free banditry. Free control of the land from the East Hub ---> Providence. Constant banditry allowed, no cooldown, no need to stop, if an Orenian force enters to prevent it, win or lose, there's a cooldown and their numbers are limited.

 

It's generally a very strategic tile to take, tbh, so the consequences are still quite substantial if it's exploited.

 

Otherwise yeah. Completely agree with all else.

 

4 minutes ago, MailC3p said:

tfw   person not fighting in war and who's  nation has not been raided during this  war complains  about lack of war.

 

Lack of war in comparison to W2E etc, my dear Mail. And it's not just about 'lack of war', read the rest! He makes some v nice points :)

[satinkira 5863]

Banditry is fun unless you're just trying to get from A to B and suddenly Bob the Bandit shows up and demands 1000 minas

It has to be done to a good standard 

And besides, people nowadays just speed past at 1000000 mph on horses. Unless you set up a roadblock (For which you'd need perms without making a modern) You're not robbing horse people

[ATallTower 73]

This post is correct. And as someone who used to play back then I can relate to this and understand the frustration.

 

However people nowadays are more sensitive about their mineman nation falling so you know..... Hayho Hayho off to plan another mindless ball and soiree I go.

[MailC3p 1158]

tfw   person not fighting in war and who's  nation has not been raided during this  war complains  about lack of war.

7 minutes ago, Nathaniel Calding said:

Banditry is fun unless you're just trying to get from A to B and suddenly Bob the Bandit shows up and demands 1000 minas

It has to be done to a good standard 

And besides, people nowadays just speed past at 1000000 mph on horses. Unless you set up a roadblock (For which you'd need perms without making a modern) You're not robbing horse people

 

you can  easily bandit people on horses  with a copy pasted emote

[Crevel 4727]

4 minutes ago, MailC3p said:

tfw   person not fighting in war and who's  nation has not been raided during this  war complains  about lack of war.

 

you can  easily bandit people on horses  with a copy pasted emote

 

I really hope this is sarcasm. You're an ISA officer and you should know that low-effort copy paste halting emotes are against the rules.

[Qaz_The_Great 1189]

47 minutes ago, Nathaniel Calding said:

Banditry is fun unless you're just trying to get from A to B and suddenly Bob the Bandit shows up and demands 1000 minas

It has to be done to a good standard 

And besides, people nowadays just speed past at 1000000 mph on horses. Unless you set up a roadblock (For which you'd need perms without making a modern) You're not robbing horse people

Clearly you've never sat at a boat built roadblock

[Harold 3239]

I’ll keep this short as it’s 6am.

 

The players who create the most activity, roleplay, etc are not the PvP goons and nation leadership who jump around the square. Removing nations by way of war, does not align to slice of life roleplayers and they do leave in droves when these things happen, have happened in the past. It also makes wars extremely toxic, especially when the war for example is rooted within race. 
 

I would agree with you that it stagnates roleplay, there is no progression without consequential war. This was always my case when me and @Telanir discussed this topic, but in reality - this is the kicker - the slice of life roleplayers vote, pay the bills, and create a roleplay atmosphere. You remove them from the equation due to toxic clicking wars, you can see why we are where we are now.

 

I may not like it, but I definitely understand it.