Author Topic: But out Rathgar  (Read 14539 times)

Tan dSerrai

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 866
  • Karma: +20/-2
    • View Profile
Re: But out Rathgar
« Reply #15 on: May 23, 2014, 11:32:19 AM »
Heck, notify that player ooc. I will gladly avoid him, bending backwards IC to enable you/us to keep him playing. Tell me which estates to avoid, I'll have my char superstitiously 'see birds croak near that path' and wander somewhere else.

Or he could hide out in the woods, watch us pass by. Or he could fight us - expecting to be treated honorably and avoid his estate due to his fighting us. All these options are there, pick whichever suits you and him best and inform me here. I would find it great if we could cause 'fright', but no real damage.

Tom

  • Head Developer
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6320
  • Karma: +102/-15
    • View Profile
    • Might & Fealty
Re: But out Rathgar
« Reply #16 on: May 23, 2014, 11:32:42 AM »
you sail to Rathgar and raid the coast, rathgar ships...only a couple mind...decide it might be fun to return the favour

He's right in that, you know? FI did raid Rathgar first. However:


When will you players in Rathgar grasp basic psychology. When you act in this manner without preamble, when the first interaction someone has is finding out settlements are being attacked, that doesn't encourage content creation.

This is also true - not specifically of Rathgar, but of anyone. So how can we create more interaction?

There are many gamey ways of forcing it - like forcing that you deliver a declaration of war before you can attack a settlement - but that doesn't quite cut it. It would prevent raids and real, intentionally unannounced attacks.

Maybe we could enforce interaction when someone takes control of a settlement? It could be easy, like the creation of a conversation between taker and owner (and everyone opposing or supporting auto-joining it). That way, even if the attacker doesn't speak up, the defender can initiate the interaction. Would that help?


Tan dSerrai

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 866
  • Karma: +20/-2
    • View Profile
Re: But out Rathgar
« Reply #17 on: May 23, 2014, 11:37:09 AM »
Yes, having such a conversation would be a great aid for interaction, especially if other characters would auto-join.

Tom

  • Head Developer
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6320
  • Karma: +102/-15
    • View Profile
    • Might & Fealty
Re: But out Rathgar
« Reply #18 on: May 23, 2014, 11:44:37 AM »
What are we saying here?  That Rathgar should sit in a bubble and stay out of world affairs?  Just fight each other until the rest of the world is large enough to defeat them?

I've said this a dozen times, but once more can't hurt: Rathgar was created in the GS as a realm with constant internal conflict, a lose coalition of tribes. It was intended to be a small realm. It turned out the concept was so popular that it instead became the large realm of the GS. This was allowed under the assumption that its size and power would not matter because most of it would be directed at internal conflict.

And that simply didn't happen. Aside from a few internal conflicts, the vast majority of Rathgars moves have been against outsiders.

Again, the combination has been the problem. If Rathgar had been a small realm, as intended, that would not have been a problem. If Rathgar had been large, but primarily absorbed in internal conflict, there wouldn't have been a problem.


But now all is said and done, Rathgar is not one entity anymore and I sincerely hope we will finally see some of that internal conflict that was promised to us.

And for the record: I have no problem whatsoever with a Rathgar raiding force anywhere else on the map, including EI.

And if Rathgar players want the rest of the game world to change their minds about Rathgar, then we need more battle symbols on the map in the areas of Rathgar tribes, and more shifts in borders, and more outwards visibly signs of this internal turmoil that was supposed to be one of if not the cornerstone of the realm concept.

Then again, EI also fell short of the promised concept, mostly due to so many high-ranking members going inactive. My hopes lie with realms like Ariamis, Ascalon, Black Forest, to name only the ones that I know better (there are more, I just don't know how active or interesting they are).

I don't care if all of the GS realms bite the bullet. I don't care who lives or dies. All I care is that the game works nicely, and as long as the game is so small that it can be map-painted, some care must be applied. If we had 1000 players, none of this would be a problem. Sure, maybe Rathgar or someone else could totally dominate the mainland and the isles - but there would be three or four other continents of the same size nearby.

Velrun

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 135
  • Karma: +19/-11
    • View Profile
Re: But out Rathgar
« Reply #19 on: May 23, 2014, 11:50:21 AM »
He's right in that, you know? FI did raid Rathgar first. However:

So far as I know the raid never got past Clan Northmanni lands. Yet another example of the Rathgar nationalism that supposedly no longer exists?


This is also true - not specifically of Rathgar, but of anyone. So how can we create more interaction?

There are many gamey ways of forcing it - like forcing that you deliver a declaration of war before you can attack a settlement - but that doesn't quite cut it. It would prevent raids and real, intentionally unannounced attacks.

Maybe we could enforce interaction when someone takes control of a settlement? It could be easy, like the creation of a conversation between taker and owner (and everyone opposing or supporting auto-joining it). That way, even if the attacker doesn't speak up, the defender can initiate the interaction. Would that help?

A character in a settlement can message the settlement owner, but the settlement owner has no way to initiate the conversation. Would it be possible to start a conversation with anyone within interaction distance of the settlement?

De-Legro

  • M&F Dev Team
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3129
  • Karma: +105/-55
    • View Profile
Re: But out Rathgar
« Reply #20 on: May 23, 2014, 11:52:18 AM »
I suspect the interaction with Hawks would have been greater had they not landed in settlements that currently have a inactive lord.
He who was once known as Blackfyre

Tom

  • Head Developer
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6320
  • Karma: +102/-15
    • View Profile
    • Might & Fealty
Re: But out Rathgar
« Reply #21 on: May 23, 2014, 11:53:02 AM »
Just bad luck that the first conflict he personally will be involved in didn't arise from that.

Uh, do explain to him that it was probably the reaction to our raid on them? Tell him these are barbarians from the north and we decided to not deal with them (but we did send ambassadors to other mainland realms). Even silence can be interpreted as politics sometimes.

Tom

  • Head Developer
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6320
  • Karma: +102/-15
    • View Profile
    • Might & Fealty
Re: But out Rathgar
« Reply #22 on: May 23, 2014, 11:54:08 AM »
So far as I know the raid never got past Clan Northmanni lands. Yet another example of the Rathgar nationalism that supposedly no longer exists?
/quote]

True as well.

De-Legro

  • M&F Dev Team
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3129
  • Karma: +105/-55
    • View Profile
Re: But out Rathgar
« Reply #23 on: May 23, 2014, 12:01:07 PM »
Uh, do explain to him that it was probably the reaction to our raid on them? Tell him these are barbarians from the north and we decided to not deal with them (but we did send ambassadors to other mainland realms). Even silence can be interpreted as politics sometimes.


I can try, I've sent messages to him, but the last message to me was a rather angry OOC when he found out Rathgar was raiding the lands I promised him. Perhaps the game would never have meet his expectations anyway who can tell.
He who was once known as Blackfyre

Velrun

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 135
  • Karma: +19/-11
    • View Profile
Re: But out Rathgar
« Reply #24 on: May 23, 2014, 12:05:24 PM »

What are we saying here?  That Rathgar should sit in a bubble and stay out of world affairs?  Just fight each other until the rest of the world is large enough to defeat them?  I am truly at a loss here but I am at the point of throwing my own dolls out of the pram, believe me.

You were all just forced to dissolve Rathgar for various reasons. It never occurred to you all to lie low for a week or two. Let the idea that Rathgar isn't a all powerful united nation to actually filter on through the game population and become part of the culture? I wasn't even aware that clan Alumaani was also raiding, that just make the entire image worse since it smacks of co-operation between two to the largest clans, and probably the two most powerful realms in the game. You might not have sent big forces, thing with this game is unless someone bothers to message troops sizes when they spot them, most people in a realm never know what they are up against until a battle is fought. Reports from the Hawks lands have only about 40 troops spotted, yet more then 800 extra food being consumed.

Tan dSerrai

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 866
  • Karma: +20/-2
    • View Profile
Re: But out Rathgar
« Reply #25 on: May 23, 2014, 12:12:45 PM »
Note that I had no idea of the Alumaani raiding - so there IS no coordination. Also note that I am not raiding FI due to the FI raid against the Northmanni. I am raiding the FI because I do not want to raid EI, Ascalon or any newer realms. I thought that FI would be able to stomach being _temporarily_ raided by a force consisting of less than 10% not of my clan but of my own troops.

And - lying low: no, it did not occure to us to completely stop interacting with the outside world. Why should it? Are you seriously suggesting we should draw a dike around Rathgar and not cross it for the next 2 RL years? And if not, then WHAT would you suggest? 'Did it not occur to you...' is no constructive suggestion at all.

Again, give a constructive idea, give suggestions on how to act, give us points of interaction to create something together. 'I do not like you being there' is perfectly ok. 'I want you to vanish for ooc reasons while not being willing to either talk or interact' is not.


@Tom: of my clan, less than 10% are involved in the raid in FI. The rest is balefully staring across the borders within Ratghar. I think this qualifies as 'primarily absored in internal conflict'. We are also holding a Thing right now, which disallows active warfare during its duration.



« Last Edit: May 23, 2014, 12:21:31 PM by Tan dSerrai »

Velrun

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 135
  • Karma: +19/-11
    • View Profile
Re: But out Rathgar
« Reply #26 on: May 23, 2014, 12:22:18 PM »
Note that I had no idea of the Alumaani raiding - so there IS no coordination.

And - lying low: no, it did not occure to us to completely stop interacting with the outside world. Why should it? Are you seriously suggesting we should draw a dike around Rathgar and not cross it for the next 2 RL years? And if not, then WHAT would you suggest? 'Did it not occur to you...' is no constructive suggestion at all.

Again, give a constructive idea, give suggestions on how to act, give us points of interaction to create something together. 'I do not like you being there' is perfectly ok. 'I want you to vanish for ooc reasons while not being willing to either talk or interact' is not.

No I was quite clear in my time frame. A week or two to let things settle down from the last ruckus doesn't seem unreasonable. Mind you I never said no interaction, laying low doesn't mean go away. It would suggest not starting another drama when the last one is still fresh in everyone's mind and likely to bleed over into it.

Tan dSerrai

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 866
  • Karma: +20/-2
    • View Profile
Re: But out Rathgar
« Reply #27 on: May 23, 2014, 12:38:02 PM »
@Velrun:

There is still no suggestion on what to do in the current situation....and forgive me, but sending 10% of my forces to a realm that did seem to not have suffered any internal warfare, is one year old, was _asking_ for more action both qualifies as 'laying low' and 'content creation'. I am truly and honestly very negatively surprised at this reaction.

@De-Legro: if possible, give me the IG name of that player you might lose, point me towards any way to contact him and I'll offer both an ooc - reassurance that he'll not lose any estates and that he does not need to fight where he does not want to.
« Last Edit: May 23, 2014, 12:40:03 PM by Tan dSerrai »

De-Legro

  • M&F Dev Team
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3129
  • Karma: +105/-55
    • View Profile
Re: But out Rathgar
« Reply #28 on: May 23, 2014, 12:50:36 PM »
@Velrun:

There is still no suggestion on what to do in the current situation....and forgive me, but sending 10% of my forces to a realm that did seem to not have suffered any internal warfare, is one year old, was _asking_ for more action both qualifies as 'laying low' and 'content creation'. I am truly and honestly very negatively surprised at this reaction.

@De-Legro: if possible, give me the IG name of that player you might lose, point me towards any way to contact him and I'll offer both an ooc - reassurance that he'll not lose any estates and that he does not need to fight where he does not want to.


Oh he has no estates yet. The Baron of the Verve Forest (think I got that right) went inactive quite some time ago, and he controlled nearly all the settlements up where you are. Some existing players kindly spent some time there running TO's so that we can prepare to both try and claim back the Barony title and prepare the settlements to be easily handed over to new players as they join. Last I know he was headed up that way though to take control of Ironwood.


I don't know how you would think we have no internal warfare. We have been at war with Red Forest pretty much since the creation of the White Company, little battle icons all over the map for more then a week. Then there is the whole seceding from Fading Island thing, which is somewhat newer but certainly has been spoken about on the forum. Apparently Tom has declared war on me for that, would be nice if diplomatic relations messaged the recipient at all.
He who was once known as Blackfyre

feyeleanor

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 191
  • Karma: +7/-3
    • View Profile
    • Clan Dubhaine
Re: But out Rathgar
« Reply #29 on: May 23, 2014, 01:11:44 PM »
[size=78%]@Tan - I am already on the isles and raiding with a small force so it does involve me mate and whats more I am sick of listening to this negativity.[/size]

@Velrun - I haven't a clue what your talking about but FI players landed on our shores and took settlements, my clan sent 50 warriors to plunder some of your coastal villages in response. We can't go south because EI are too weak and Tom threatened to castrate us, we now can't go west because we are spoiling your fun?



It's not just 50 warrior now so it doesn't look like a small force to me  ;)
Personally I've no problem with your getting involved. I ran that raid against north Rathgar to see if it was possible (Tom tried to get all the Duchies to participate but only Prydhain did) and got my butt well and truly kicked, so a return match seems spot on.



I can't guarantee we can give you much sport though as it's taken bloody ages to get any kind of army together between our food problems and too many players who've gone inactive after being given lands. But we'll do our best.


Quote

[/size][size=78%]What are we saying here?  That Rathgar should sit in a bubble and stay out of world affairs?  Just fight each other until the rest of the world is large enough to defeat them?  I am truly at a loss here but I am at the point of throwing my own dolls out of the pram, believe me.[/size][size=78%]



If Prydhain falls I think I'll come join you guys in the north. Sounds like there's fun to be had - especially when some of the dark lands open up to your west.