Let's talk about Realms

[Narthok 9213]

1 hour ago, Eryane said:

I couldn't agree more with this point. I don't think the rules should change entirely, I think the nations (hello there Haense) around now should try to vassalize a lot of these states if this is a concern. This isn't my end all be all argument either, there's of course other things to be done besides this, but I do feel it's important. I'm more on the side of playerbases/NLs need to be making change rather than staff, besides a few minor things such as 1) checking signatures more 2) potential activity checks? I'm hesitant on this. 

 

If you can't vassalize them in whichever way, diplomatically or otherwise (plenty of means to do this without military directly), then they should be left alone without being destroyed OOCly (with proper/thorough realm application checks to begin with, however). 

 

And, way easier said than done - I feel like we as a server need to learn to lose or find a middle ground with potential vassalized playerbases. It would be very interesting to see in RP. It's ok for people to lose (and it's ok to be a conqueror). I'm really hoping a lot of interesting RP comes out of the Stassion annexation, for example. This situation gives a potential for further vassalization, or other conquering. There's a lot of potential there. Please keep bulldozing if it's suitable RPly @Mio

 

This post brings up a very interesting discussion though, thanks @Xarklyfor the nice formatting. This is all I wanted to say o7

We will see what happens now that Haense can't larp as the underdog and actually has to wear the big boy pants for the first time in its history. Vassalization as a super power is usually as easy as rply walking up to one of these fledgling states and saying 'you will vassalize or we will annex you'.

I very much enjoy the current rules environment. Though I do think the propensity to seek total death and annihilation is probably a cultural issue, but one that is unlikely to be resolved. People refuse to discuss terms AT ALL and just demand complete destruction of a particular group. This has never worked in the past and on some occasions it has been actively admin shielded (Telanir shielding Haense after they wrote that giant cope essay).

 

I don't really think there is a solution to how bad people are at diplomacy. Take the legacy of Norland for example. Wiped in Athera atleast three times. Wiped in Vailor twice. Wiped in Axios, Wiped in Atlas. The current iteration has survived since Almaris but has gotten punked several times in wars. The point here being that fullwiping a people isn't really possible and is also not really desireable.

 

People need to learn to lose (I have done this many times, pking at inopportune moments for the sake of the story, those of you who whine about not pking because of the 'stability' of your nations are pathetic by the way) but people also need to learn to win. 

A lot of Hay is made about good faith and collaborative roleplay. But I keep seeing NLs just blatantly combat log and get clipped doing it, and get essentially no punishment. We talk about collaborative roleplay but so many people seem to be motivated by OOC seethe hence ---> we need to make the other side as miserable as possible. Again this is not really something you can fix from the staff side.

Good faith actually means something imo. It means not min-maxing and taking every opportunity for advantage when it will make the collaborative experience miserable. If you ask the various Covenant people I have rped with during this conflict you will find that I generally try to be respectful to the people I am rping with oocly. I have had many compelling rp interactions with Aaun, Haense, Hyspia which were oocly courteous.

 

A big problem with this goofy discord culture is that most interactions with other nations is just people seething and whining in looc about how they're not going to pk or about how they 'need to go'. So we just post these giant dunk posts on the forums and only interact with each other serverside with lightning raids which are generally intended to grief the enjoyment of the opposing faction. These obviously being the result of feeling like there is no other way to achieve rp aims combined with spite at bad faith behaviour (combat logging, talking about not pking ever etc).

We will see how things go. In general it has been very surprising how little in person / serverside diplomacy has occurred this war. Whenever diplomacy does occur its just a 'we are going to do some genocide' posting. Feels a bit like when people chud out in Eu4 multiplayer game.

13 hours ago, Hearth said:

 We'd certainly see alot more raids. But I mean- that's extra conflict roleplay. 

It is a shame that raids are more of a 'I intend to ruin your server experience' rather than an opportunity for interesting rp. I have enjoyed the raids that I have gone on, said raids usually end in the release of whoever we captured etc after interesting enemy to enemy discussion / rp.

13 hours ago, Xarkly said:

 

Specifically re nations not being proactive, I agree, and this is something boomers have been signing about for a while. I guess the point I'm moreso coming from is that I doubt anyone willing to break that mould is forthcoming -- from mina costs to resources to ooc headaches, its easy to see how a lot of NLs wouldn't bother.

 

In a game of chicken between staff and players over who should fix the problem, I just think it makes a lot more sense for staff to take a better stance on realm creation now rather than waiting on a change of player culture that may not come for a long time if ever.

I am literally a nation leader. I will personally take my army and go wipe out some of these dead nations the second the Humandoku Jidai is over and Mio stops being a ***** and declares himself the new Shogun

[MissToni 3487]

14 hours ago, Narthok said:

I do not think the problem here is being able to make settlements. It is more that nations are too spineless to actually annex random sleeper nations. Half the reason we can't do this is because essentially every nation is semi permanently guaranteed by the major super powers. This is a solveable problem without any rule changes.

Haense is easily strong enough to vassalize essentially every polity and make a new Empire. Haense could wipe out or vassalize any of these piastdoms they wanted to without even a war. Send a single diplomat or post demands on the forums. All of these tearpers will fold immediately.

 

I remember back when Oren was still well and alive AND STRONG and I tried my hand at creating my own settlement. Oren literally came to me unprompted and unasked on a diplomatic mission asking if we would be willing to vassalize. And that our group's religion would be allowed and protected as long as the leader got baptised under Canonism, but didn't HAVE to believe in it.

 

We then got threatened by these bandit groups and ended up vassalizing for protection. And low and behold, we no longer suffered the bandit problem. Because they were too scared of pissing off Oren. In the end it was a failed project, but it was quite fun and interesting to see how the big human nation at that time noticed us and wanted us included when we had just started out. But we were very much left to our own devices and able to create our own roleplay and culture. 

[Narthok 9213]

22 minutes ago, MissToni said:

 

I remember back when Oren was still well and alive AND STRONG and I tried my hand at creating my own settlement. Oren literally came to me unprompted and unasked on a diplomatic mission asking if we would be willing to vassalize. And that our group's religion would be allowed and protected as long as the leader got baptised under Canonism, but didn't HAVE to believe in it.

 

We then got threatened by these bandit groups and ended up vassalizing for protection. And low and behold, we no longer suffered the bandit problem. Because they were too scared of pissing off Oren. In the end it was a failed project, but it was quite fun and interesting to see how the big human nation at that time noticed us and wanted us included when we had just started out. But we were very much left to our own devices and able to create our own roleplay and culture. 

The solution to the infinity realms question does not have to be killing all of them. Surprisingly on a roleplay server you can solve a lot of problems by just.. talking to people.. in roleplay

[MissToni 3487]

3 minutes ago, Narthok said:

The solution to the infinity realms question does not have to be killing all of them. Surprisingly on a roleplay server you can solve a lot of problems by just.. talking to people.. in roleplay

We also ended up becoming more active cause people from Oren came down to visit us after they saw us being vassalized and wanted to see what the deal was about and ended up making more friends and some even settled down there. And we also ended up uniting two other farfolk settlements into one with that settlement after some months of roleplay. At the end of the day it didn't survive but it was a fun run that had been a blast to deal with. And I agree the solution doesn't have to be killing them all indeed, have them vassalize and maybe not be so scared about the fact they have full control of the tile they vassalize under you with. I understand NLs being scared of their vassals rebelling, but so much of that creates roleplay and gives activity to the nation. There is put too much ooc stress and anxiety onto vassals that they have to be 100% loyal. Let vassals do what they wanna do, and then suffer the consequenses for it if their King or Queen doesn't agree with it etc etc. 

[Hunnic 351]

There is a very cool exchange happening here; I hope more players come across this post. Now to give my two cents on the post in general, I don't believe it to be fair for a nation to occupy one niche and for it not to be available for "an alternative" to be created. Yes, if multiples of the same niche are created, then the niche is overused and boring and leads to a dispersed player base.
 

However, "Inheriting nations" or rising through its ranks can and oftentimes are unrealistic.

If I had a Cossack Raev group that wanted to delve into "low-fantasy Slavic medieval RP" as you described Haense, we couldn't do so unless the group molded to the RP Haense has. You say nations should be inherited, and that players should change nations from within if they enjoy said nation's niche instead of going off re-creating a similar niche and diluting the player base.
 

I believe this is unrealistic. Cliques and Redtape are in the way.
 

Cliques are a part of human relationships, afaik. But to change your/a nation, you really have to be the NL or be friends with the NL, considering a PRO is the God-Emperor within his tiles. And to get to these leadership cliques for a nation to get new ideas can take an IRL year if it ever happens at all; why wait so long when you can spawn your Slavic nation next to Haense.
 

Red tape, rules, and whatnot, again PROship. You can't easily coup a nation or force the king's hand through threats of force. To have a revolution (which I think was a great warclaim addition, thank you mods), you must have a tile within a nation, so if you have any PvP-centered players within your Cossack group, why would the king risk giving you any land?
 

At the end of the day, people don't like their nations changed, even if it's completely good faith RP. You have a legitimate protests/riots against the current king? He doesn't fear for his life; he can log out.
 

You storm the castle and kill royals your characters deem corrupt? They don't want to PK.
 

You get elected into the Duma and wish to pass land reforms with the people's consent? Doesn't matter if every persona beside the king agrees with you.

The king won't give in. He'll evict you if you keep stirring trouble.
 

There are no consequences that players HAVE to admit to outside of the warclaim rules. Not even good faith change to your nation.
And who would even define if a niche is taken?
An exact copy of Balian could pull 100 things out of their ass and claim it makes them different.
Or a nation with a different niche than Balian could be denied their nationhood on the grounds its "close enough"
 

I know I'm not offering a solution to these issues, and this whole thing was a disorganized rant. I simply  believe the status quo works better than having a restraint on niches. 

[!] Wants to LARP Raev RP:
 [Low-Fantasy Slavic Medieval RP taken. 1/1 try elves!])

[Narthok 9213]

11 minutes ago, Hunnic said:

There is a very cool exchange happening here; I hope more players come across this post. Now to give my two cents on the post in general, I don't believe it to be fair for a nation to occupy one niche and for it not to be available for "an alternative" to be created. Yes, if multiples of the same niche are created, then the niche is overused and boring and leads to a dispersed player base.
 

However, "Inheriting nations" or rising through its ranks can and oftentimes are unrealistic.

If I had a Cossack Raev group that wanted to delve into "low-fantasy Slavic medieval RP" as you described Haense, we couldn't do so unless the group molded to the RP Haense has. You say nations should be inherited, and that players should change nations from within if they enjoy said nation's niche instead of going off re-creating a similar niche and diluting the player base.
 

I believe this is unrealistic. Cliques and Redtape are in the way.
 

Cliques are a part of human relationships, afaik. But to change your/a nation, you really have to be the NL or be friends with the NL, considering a PRO is the God-Emperor within his tiles. And to get to these leadership cliques for a nation to get new ideas can take an IRL year if it ever happens at all; why wait so long when you can spawn your Slavic nation next to Haense.
 

Red tape, rules, and whatnot, again PROship. You can't easily coup a nation or force the king's hand through threats of force. To have a revolution (which I think was a great warclaim addition, thank you mods), you must have a tile within a nation, so if you have any PvP-centered players within your Cossack group, why would the king risk giving you any land?
 

At the end of the day, people don't like their nations changed, even if it's completely good faith RP. You have a legitimate protests/riots against the current king? He doesn't fear for his life; he can log out.
 

You storm the castle and kill royals your characters deem corrupt? They don't want to PK.
 

You get elected into the Duma and wish to pass land reforms with the people's consent? Doesn't matter if every persona beside the king agrees with you.

The king won't give in. He'll evict you if you keep stirring trouble.
 

There are no consequences that players HAVE to admit to outside of the warclaim rules. Not even good faith change to your nation.
And who would even define if a niche is taken?
An exact copy of Balian could pull 100 things out of their ass and claim it makes them different.
Or a nation with a different niche than Balian could be denied their nationhood on the grounds its "close enough"
 

I know I'm not offering a solution to these issues, and this whole thing was a disorganized rant. I simply  believe the status quo works better than having a restraint on niches. 

[!] Wants to LARP Raev RP:
 [Low-Fantasy Slavic Medieval RP taken. 1/1 try elves!])

I'm fairly sure if you try to evict vassals they have a window where they can refuse eviction and declare rebellion.

[Hunnic 351]

4 minutes ago, Narthok said:

I'm fairly sure if you try to evict vassals they have a window where they can refuse eviction and declare rebellion.

Yes you can do that, which I think is a great addition.

I meant more so in the way that, if you live in x nation and try to rally people to your cause and the PRO doesn't like that, he can make you homeless. And who ever supports you. 
Obv this would be super toxic and im not certain if it has been done before.
Just highlighting how much a NL has absolute power over his kingdom, and doesn't have to change if he doesn't want to.

If you have gotten to the point of vassalship then and only then you have a real chance at changing a nation through force.

[ErikAzog 3313]

stop the same 5 people that put their names on realms. I know you've all seen some chronic realm signers.

[Pancho 2565]

This just proves Haense needs to suck it up and take the Imperial Pill

[drfate786 1639]

The reality is this:

 

Player groups on LoTC have their own cliques and cultures. These friend groups, cliques, cultures and whatever simply don't mix with nations such as Haense for example. This typically ends in the eventual balkanization of the server. To do what you are suggesting would actually kill off all activity in the server as these player groups simply don't want to be a part of your one nation 1984 state, nor do they want to be subject to a weak NL that just wants to steal their activity, numbers and by greater extent their friends. They'd simply establish a new nation out of spite and if they can't, they'll leave the server instead of being forced to be part of some nation they don't wish to be a part of.

 

You can't and will not stop balkanization and any attempt to do so is folly as it just makes it happen faster. This is a player issue not a staff or rule issue. I'm not dumb and I know what you're calling for, it won't happen. It will never happen.

 

My advice to you and your clique @Xarkly, stop trying to rule the world before you end up suffering the same fate Oren did in the Acre rebellion. I don't understand what it is with this strange and dangerous obsession for control over player agency, leave people alone. 

 

There is absolutely no rule or system you can introduce to this server to help you control the playerbase, they don't want to be under human empire number 108. They don't want vassalage and they don't want domination. 

 

All I can gather from this post is some poor attempt at trying to be manipulative and convince people that an empire/big autocratic nation wouldn't be such a bad thing after all. It absolutely is and has never led to anything positive on this server, ever. 

 

 

[MaltaMoss 1773]

6 minutes ago, drfate786 said:

The reality is this:

 

Player groups on LoTC have their own cliques and cultures. These friend groups, cliques, cultures and whatever simply don't mix with nations such as Haense for example. This typically ends in the eventual balkanization of the server. To do what you are suggesting would actually kill off all activity in the server as these player groups simply don't want to be a part of your one nation 1984 state, nor do they want to be subject to a weak NL that just wants to steal their activity, numbers and by greater extent their friends. They'd simply establish a new nation out of spite and if they can't, they'll leave the server instead of being forced to be part of some nation they don't wish to be a part of.

 

You can't and will not stop balkanization and any attempt to do so is folly as it just makes it happen faster. This is a player issue not a staff or rule issue. I'm not dumb and I know what you're calling for, it won't happen. It will never happen.

 

My advice to you and your clique @Xarkly, stop trying to rule the world before you end up suffering the same fate Oren did in the Acre rebellion. I don't understand what it is with this strange and dangerous obsession for control over player agency, leave people alone. 

 

There is absolutely no rule or system you can introduce to this server to help you control the playerbase, they don't want to be under human empire number 108. They don't want vassalage and they don't want domination. 

 

All I can gather from this post is some poor attempt at trying to be manipulative and convince people that an empire/big autocratic nation wouldn't be such a bad thing after all. It absolutely is and has never led to anything positive on this server, ever. 

 

 

Your take was so bad you somehow made me agree with Xarkly

Please stop pretending like humanity as a playerbase doesn't hinge on some level of large scale overarching project no matter what. I said this earlier on this thread and I'll say it again, the end goal of every human project in server history has been to build something for others to join and grow, or join something to help it grow. This is the end goal of EVERY SINGLE HUMAN NATION, VASSAL, TOWN, ECT. 

This level of historical revisionism is mind melting why did you post this.

[drfate786 1639]

Just now, MaltaMoss said:

Your take was so bad you somehow made me agree with Xarkly

Please stop pretending like humanity as a playerbase doesn't hinge on some level of large scale overarching project no matter what. I said this earlier on this thread and I'll say it again, the end goal of every human project in server history has been to build something for others to join and grow, or join something to help it grow. This is the end goal of EVERY SINGLE HUMAN NATION, VASSAL, TOWN, ECT. 

This level of historical revisionism is mind melting why did you post this.

 

You're not understanding my argument. I'm saying that you don't need artificial rules and systems to dictate and control this, he's arguing against the current system that favors independence/player agency. You can't FORCE players to be a part of something they don't want to be a part of.

[MaltaMoss 1773]

Just now, drfate786 said:

 

You're not understanding my argument. I'm saying that you don't need artificial rules and systems to dictate and control this, he's arguing against the current system that favors independence/player agency. You can't FORCE players to be a part of something they don't want to be a part of.

yeah ok maybe you're not ill 🤝

actual sane idea

I thought you were attempting to say that empire's do nothing ever and are useless and bad (objectively evil take)

sorry for even considering to defend the perfidious haenseman shill Xarkly 

[drfate786 1639]

1 minute ago, MaltaMoss said:

yeah ok maybe you're not ill 🤝

actual sane idea

I thought you were attempting to say that empire's do nothing ever and are useless and bad (objectively evil take)

sorry for even considering to defend the perfidious haenseman shill Xarkly 

 

Yeah, empires like Renatus weren't that bad as they acted more like protectorates.

 

Protectorates are fine, kingdoms are fine. The thing is, this has to be done through diplomacy and RP, you can't just FORCE people under arbitrary systems to be vassals in exchange for land. It doesn't make sense IRP either since anyone can just settle wherever they please, especially when a map is this big and unclaimed land is so abundant. 

 

When I say empires I'm being hyperbolic and reffering to times where groups like Oren, Malinor/Haelunor, etc went too far and tried to steamroll every core race/non-human vassal to extinction, etc. Promoting player agency is important, if they want a big human empire they need to be competent enough to keep it together and stop balkanization from happening. They can't rely on arbitrary rules to stop vassals from rebelling, leaving, etc or people just flat out being independent to begin with.

[JustAngel69 478]

Someone is going to have to be the bad guy one of these days and go close these realms. 

 

It has to be done.

 

The best time to cut realm bloat is 10 months ago, the second best time is now.