Might & Fealty Community

Gameplay => Realms Chat => Topic started by: Gustav Kuriga on February 17, 2015, 05:43:49 PM

Title: Elysium
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on February 17, 2015, 05:43:49 PM
Basically a kingdom in and of itself that evolved from Linthain Plains and seceded from Ariamis, didn't see a realm thread for it and wanted to create one. It seems to be one of the more active realms, though it may have quieted down after the initial forming of the realm.
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: Zandar on June 09, 2015, 02:23:32 AM
Since there is so much fun happeining with Erstes Imperium (http://forum.mightandfealty.com/index.php/topic,3084.0.html) and comments about gang bangs, I feel it is time to be completely clear about Elysiums position.

We informed the Empress from the outset that our only goal is to defend existing Ryne settlements. Elysium will not engage the Imperium except in the context of defending regions. We will not attack Imperium regions, we will not loot Imperium regions, we will not chase Imperium troops unless they are heading towards Ryne territory.

This is despite the Empresses best attempts to anger my character. For those wondering why EI ends up in such trouble, look to an Empress that constantly overstates the military ability of the realm. Orion is well known for engaging in pissing contests, basically if you push him to demonstrate Elysiums military, he will by stomping all over your face. Having a Ruler from another realm try to imply that Elysium was "lucky" not to have faced the EI military in their last little stoush and otherwise insult the focus of our realm (war is what we do, it is all that we do) was a massive slap in the face, and the ONLY reason I didn't just order the realm to triple the troops sent and see how much of EI we could conquer before running out of steam was that due to the fact that we are only in this war due to the marriage of my characters and Rynes Queen. EI started this war knowing that Elysium would likely join, and expecting Eldamar would due to family ties there. It is rich to complain after the fact when you saw it coming and still went ahead.
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: Lann on June 09, 2015, 02:32:33 PM
Well that escalated quickly.... Why are we speaking about the Erstes/ Elysium conflict here?  Furthermore, there's a lot of OOC bitterness I think is unwarranted.


You have to understand the Imperium's position.  We had a vassal (Octavius Tarquinian) that basically took control of a bunch of Empire-owned estates and then flipped them under Ryne's allegiance with the most flimsy excuse ever.  What he did amounted to theft and treachery.  He stole... our territory.  You can't expect the Empire to just sit there and take that.  We sent word to Ryne requesting that we be allowed to retrieve our estates and take care of the traitor without their or their allies interference.  Instead, Ryne dug in its heals, defended the person who betrayed us, claimed all those estates as their own, and then you joined in on their side. 

And by the way, that's fine.  This game is about conflict and politics, so it's great that this has caused some controversy in-character, even if the timing is absolutely abysmal so far for us.  It's perfectly okay for nobility to seize opportunities and take advantage of situations like this.   But don't sit there and try to play the victim out-of-character or attack the player behind the Empress in some forum thread (of which has nothing to do with the current conflict so I can't help but think you're FISHING for an excuse to troll), because she was VERY close to quitting due to all this OOC mud-slinging.  What Ryne did by protecting a known traitor and taking all of those estates was a much bigger slap in the face to the Empire than any insult you 'suffered' and was bound to cause things to spiral out of control diplomatically. Elysium taking their side wasn't going to put you in EI favor and its naive for you to pretend that it would when you're basically defending an invader. 

Imagine this situation in reverse.  Would you be okay with the idea of one of your vassals defecting a large portion of estates to Ryne and then when you try to petition them so you can deal with the vassal and take those regions back without external interference, you get denied, threatened, and insulted?  You then attempt to retake said estates and wind up with all of Ryne's allies (lets say EI is one for example purposes) suddenly declaring war on you?  No, of course you wouldn't be fine with that.

On a related note, let me just say-- well played Ryne and Elysium.  You screwed us in the EI but it was a damned awesome move and very cleverly played out.  I'll be the first to congratulate you for playing your card, or 'the game' if we want to get Ice and Fire-like, so well.  I don't understand why you feel the need to take this personally or try to attack someone OOC but in-game it was a masterfully conducted political move and I admire you for playing it the way you did.  Congratulations to Octavius too!  What you did took some massive balls and it payed off in dividends for you.  My Imperial character will want to place your head on a pike if he ever gets the chance but excellent move, sir.  THIS is what I joined Might and Fealty for.   
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: Zandar on June 09, 2015, 03:22:13 PM
Well that escalated quickly.... Why are we speaking about the Erstes/ Elysium conflict here?  Furthermore, there's a lot of OOC bitterness I think is unwarranted.


You have to understand the Imperium's position.  We had a vassal (Octavius Tarquinian) that basically took control of a bunch of Empire-owned estates and then flipped them under Ryne's allegiance with the most flimsy excuse ever.  What he did amounted to theft and treachery.  He stole... our territory.  You can't expect the Empire to just sit there and take that.  We sent word to Ryne requesting that we be allowed to retrieve our estates and take care of the traitor without their or their allies interference.  Instead, Ryne dug in its heals, defended the person who betrayed us, claimed all those estates as their own, and then you joined in on their side. 

And by the way, that's fine.  This game is about conflict and politics, so it's great that this has caused some controversy in-character, even if the timing is absolutely abysmal so far for us.  It's perfectly okay for nobility to seize opportunities and take advantage of situations like this.   But don't sit there and try to play the victim out-of-character or attack the player behind the Empress in some forum thread (of which has nothing to do with the current conflict so I can't help but think you're FISHING for an excuse to troll), because she was VERY close to quitting due to all this OOC mud-slinging.  What Ryne did by protecting a known traitor and taking all of those estates was a much bigger slap in the face to the Empire than any insult you 'suffered' and was bound to cause things to spiral out of control diplomatically. Elysium taking their side wasn't going to put you in EI favor and its naive for you to pretend that it would when you're basically defending an invader. 

Imagine this situation in reverse.  Would you be okay with the idea of one of your vassals defecting a large portion of estates to Ryne and then when you try to petition them so you can deal with the vassal and take those regions back without external interference, you get denied, threatened, and insulted?  You then attempt to retake said estates and wind up with all of Ryne's allies (lets say EI is one for example purposes) suddenly declaring war on you?  No, of course you wouldn't be fine with that.

On a related note, let me just say-- well played Ryne and Elysium.  You screwed us in the EI but it was a damned awesome move and very cleverly played out.  I'll be the first to congratulate you for playing your card, or 'the game' if we want to get Ice and Fire-like, so well.  I don't understand why you feel the need to take this personally or try to attack someone OOC but in-game it was a masterfully conducted political move and I admire you for playing it the way you did.  Congratulations to Octavius too!  What you did took some massive balls and it payed off in dividends for you.  My Imperial character will want to place your head on a pike if he ever gets the chance but excellent move, sir.  THIS is what I joined Might and Fealty for.   

No, I don't have to understand their position, frankly I haven't even bothered to ask. It is simple, my Wife and My ally asked for help. I don't particularly as a character care about the specifics, I don't even care if she is in the right or not. But if we want to go all IC, Elysium views land as the belonging to the Lord above all else. No Lord in Elysium must live in fear of retaliation from us should they go their own way so long as they held true to their oath and duties while a member of Elysium. So no, as Ruler of Elysium I don't particularly view EI's claims as having any merit. Others of my characters would feel differently, but don't make the mistake of assuming that the course of action you have taken is going to be universally viewed as the appropriate one, or even a valid one.

Everything I posted previously was in character. The empress IC pissed of my character, not me. Orion is a hot headed oaf, one of his few concerns in life is proving his army is superior to all others, including the other Kings of Elysium. I didn't particularly want to be involved in this war, I even toyed with the idea of refusing to send aid to Ryne, but that frankly simply didn't work with the way Orion and his wife have RP'd so far.

IC I also don't give two flying hoots about being in EI's favour. There are currently 5 realms that Orion has any respect for. By the end of this war perhaps EI will make the 6th on the list, we shall see should there ever be any battles between Elysium and EI.

As to why speak about the Elysium/EI conflict here. It the Elysium thread, it makes sense to talk about things concerning Elysium and Elysiums view of the world in its own thread.
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: Andrew on June 09, 2015, 03:55:44 PM
I wonder who the first 5 realms on that list are.
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: Calpurnius on June 09, 2015, 04:34:25 PM
Please may I try and say again. My comments have nothing to do with Octavius, Ryne, Eldamar, or Elysium. They are only mentioned as background for my anger from comments by another person.  It is hard to ignore continued comments made in forum to sway opinions for in game events. Did anyone read any comments about the war before Roran made his comment in the forum ?

I encourage people to look back one year ago in the beginning of the Ascalon thread.  Notice  the interpretation of  those comments by others.  Why is it so hard to understand that bringing comments to the forum to persuade in game opinions is misleading and harmful. Add to the fact, that current actions are opposite of past comments. Notice the comment hoping others will stay out and the mention of Rathgar. 

This is what my complaint is about.  If the forum was to be part of the ongoing events in game, them please incorporate it into the game itself so more people can be aware and use it.

Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: Roran Hawkins on June 09, 2015, 05:13:43 PM
I wonder who the first 5 realms on that list are.
I'm guessing at least Ryne, maybe even Dragonhaven but I'm not convinced of that at all. Who else have they fought recently?
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: Lann on June 09, 2015, 10:51:09 PM
No, I don't have to understand their position, frankly I haven't even bothered to ask. It is simple, my Wife and My ally asked for help. I don't particularly as a character care about the specifics, I don't even care if she is in the right or not. But if we want to go all IC, Elysium views land as the belonging to the Lord above all else. No Lord in Elysium must live in fear of retaliation from us should they go their own way so long as they held true to their oath and duties while a member of Elysium. So no, as Ruler of Elysium I don't particularly view EI's claims as having any merit. Others of my characters would feel differently, but don't make the mistake of assuming that the course of action you have taken is going to be universally viewed as the appropriate one, or even a valid one.


Fair enough.  And I don't assume that.  Just stating that you're not entirely innocent in this, that EI doesn't consider itself the one who started this war, and that there IS a different view out there that is guiding this affair.  Now I'm happy to play things out as they are and am glad we have different ideas concerning the boundary of realms and the power of lords.  Your realm, as you stated, views its lords as having total authority over the allegiance of their domain.  EI views all lands within as its own and the lords as stewards of that land, and thus, a lord turning it over to another realm is tantamount to theft and treason.  I find it odd and fascinating that Elysium doesn't believe this.  It essentially gives your lords the right to split off if they so choose and tells the world you'd give them a blank pass if they did so, which I find fascinating.  Considering how you stated your realm is a war-like realm and I have to say, you got me hooked.  Might have to make a character there :D . 


Quote
Everything I posted previously was in character. The empress IC pissed of my character, not me. Orion is a hot headed oaf, one of his few concerns in life is proving his army is superior to all others, including the other Kings of Elysium. I didn't particularly want to be involved in this war, I even toyed with the idea of refusing to send aid to Ryne, but that frankly simply didn't work with the way Orion and his wife have RP'd so far.
[/font][/size]

What did you post in this thread that was remotely in-character?  Allow me to use your language from your first post:

Quote
[/font][/size]gang bangs
[/size][/font]

Quote
my character
[/size][/font]

Quote
[/size][/font][/font]Orion
[/size][/font]

Unless your character has a modern since of slang, has multiple characters himself (characters within characters?), speaks in the third person, and routinely enjoys breaking the fourth wall, all of this post seemed very obviously out-of-character to me.  Forgive me for misinterpreting but if you want what you say taken as 'in-character', you need to re-read your posts and consider how it comes across.


Quote
IC I also don't give two flying hoots about being in EI's favour. There are currently 5 realms that Orion has any respect for. By the end of this war perhaps EI will make the 6th on the list, we shall see should there ever be any battles between Elysium and EI.


That's fair.  Good luck to you and may the game continue then. 

Quote
As to why speak about the Elysium/EI conflict here. It the Elysium thread, it makes sense to talk about things concerning Elysium and Elysiums view of the world in its own thread.
[/size]



Perhaps but it just seemed odd that the very first post off this thread dedicated to Elysium comes off like a very aggressive out-of-character attack against another realm and player.  That is why I took issue with it and thought you being immediately inflammatory.  My apologies. 




Also, Calpurnius, you have me at a loss...  I'm afraid I have to admit I don't know a lot of personalities here in the forum versus the in-game ones, or who plays who.   The characters I play are pretty obvious from my name here but what character do you play Calpurnius and how does it have relevance here?  I can't understand your post as your name doesn't seem to mentioned (unless you go by someone else in-game) and I don't know if I've offended you in any way. 


And btw, what is up with the weird editing on this forum?  Seems every post I make I have to go back and correct as the font suddenly increases/ decreases or I get weird html language placed everywhere.
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: De-Legro on June 10, 2015, 12:01:05 AM
Yeah the problem with our "law" about Lords owning land, is that Orion has in the past bullied Lords in contradiction to that law, but then I guess that is the nature of his character.
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: Roran Hawkins on June 10, 2015, 12:27:20 AM

Also, Calpurnius, you have me at a loss...  I'm afraid I have to admit I don't know a lot of personalities here in the forum versus the in-game ones, or who plays who.   The characters I play are pretty obvious from my name here but what character do you play Calpurnius and how does it have relevance here?  I can't understand your post as your name doesn't seem to mentioned (unless you go by someone else in-game) and I don't know if I've offended you in any way. 

And btw, what is up with the weird editing on this forum?  Seems every post I make I have to go back and correct as the font suddenly increases/ decreases or I get weird html language placed everywhere.

The weird editing is weird. Don't bother. Try to manually do your coding, it's fairly simple. In the text editor use the 'toggle view' button to switch to pure coding editor.

Concerning Calpurinius, he is coming here to say that in the one-sided flaming war he kept in my Ascalon thread he only meant to target me with his remarks, considering Zandar's post probably originated from being randomly mentioned several times in the locked thread. I kinda know by now why he's holding an OOC crusade against me, and possibly IC too, but because of his attitude about it I stopped bothering. I don't know who he all plays, but as far as I can tell he plays House Gorling in the Stonedlands, and some characters in the EI. I wouldn't know where else he plays though.

@Calpurinius: Please, if you want to continue this argument, do it through PM with me. There is no need to play the white knight crusading against me if it's a personal quarrel you have with me, we're only going to get more threads locked like this.
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: Zandar on June 10, 2015, 12:44:23 AM
Please may I try and say again. My comments have nothing to do with Octavius, Ryne, Eldamar, or Elysium. They are only mentioned as background for my anger from comments by another person.  It is hard to ignore continued comments made in forum to sway opinions for in game events. Did anyone read any comments about the war before Roran made his comment in the forum ?

I encourage people to look back one year ago in the beginning of the Ascalon thread.  Notice  the interpretation of  those comments by others.  Why is it so hard to understand that bringing comments to the forum to persuade in game opinions is misleading and harmful. Add to the fact, that current actions are opposite of past comments. Notice the comment hoping others will stay out and the mention of Rathgar. 

This is what my complaint is about.  If the forum was to be part of the ongoing events in game, them please incorporate it into the game itself so more people can be aware and use it.

That argument falls so flat. Firstly there is little difference between misunderstands and misinterpretations in the forum or in the game. The problem is some peoples perspective and their inability to recall this is a game and take a step back. That problem will plague them regardless. Secondly don't bother making assumptions about the purpose of the forums. The man that created the forums and the game frequents them. If he see's something that isn't as he wants then he has this amazing power to write a quick post about it.

Before you decided to accuse Roran of OOC motivation and attack him as a player, the forum was merely reporting occurrences as they appeared from some character views. You escalated the matter, and now come to plead about forum etiquette? You make unprovable assumptions about someone elses motivation due to some limited interaction you had months ago. In RL would you call such interaction a valid sample basis from which to peg someone's personality?
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: Calpurnius on June 10, 2015, 04:00:25 PM
Why can I not assume the forums are for people to discuss things out of character, so they can talk freely. Why is it so hard to understand that when people communicate out of character,  what they say should be and are seem as truth.

I see in game actions as anything goes.  I find it insulting that someone will speak 'out of character' in the forum to persuade in game opinions. Or complain about Realms ganging up on his own realm ( which never did happen ), then do the same to someone else and have it interpreted as "bad timing.

Did you read those posts, he even says things got out of hand because of his ooc comments.

Should I be discussing all the BS our realm continues to go through here, and then be asking people in the forum to believe everything I say and react to it.

Again, I now see myself as a minority of one who believes on going events should stay in the game. I'm sure there is a reason why communication must be established in game between realm, if not then make it so everyone playing can have easier access to these comments, rather the the 20 or so who frequent the forums.
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on June 10, 2015, 08:37:24 PM
The weird editing is weird. Don't bother. Try to manually do your coding, it's fairly simple. In the text editor use the 'toggle view' button to switch to pure coding editor.

Concerning Calpurinius, he is coming here to say that in the one-sided flaming war he kept in my Ascalon thread he only meant to target me with his remarks, considering Zandar's post probably originated from being randomly mentioned several times in the locked thread. I kinda know by now why he's holding an OOC crusade against me, and possibly IC too, but because of his attitude about it I stopped bothering. I don't know who he all plays, but as far as I can tell he plays House Gorling in the Stonedlands, and some characters in the EI. I wouldn't know where else he plays though.

@Calpurinius: Please, if you want to continue this argument, do it through PM with me. There is no need to play the white knight crusading against me if it's a personal quarrel you have with me, we're only going to get more threads locked like this.


I'm just going to say that for once i agree with Calpurnius. This whole thing has turned into a fiasco. It would have been much more interesting for people to see that a realm is already at war and hold off declaring on them until after the current war, or to opt out of supporting their allies in what is merely a continuation of the border conflicts between two realms (such as I have done with Tetsuyama, where I have publicly stated our neutrality in this war).
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: Roran Hawkins on June 10, 2015, 11:14:46 PM
Would it have been much more interesting because of IC reasons or because of OOC reasons? I could not predict that the very limited, clear and long anticipated war I declared would have such a heavy OOC reaction, and from an IC perspective I fail to see how this situation is less interesting. You are right though that the situation, especially OOC'ly is far from desired, I mean, I have inadvertedly started a flamewar directed against me.

I feel conflicted about letting OOC knowledge influence IC knowledge, even though some common sense should definitely be present. In this situation I don't feel that I acted wrong though, neither from an IC nor OOC perspective. It mightn't have been the most proper thing to do to attack when the Imperium was already at war (I think that if you go nitpicky about it the war with Ryne ended a few IG days before I attacked, but that's negligible) but as I said before, not everything is always nice.

EDIT: I'm being a bit too defensive here. I think it's in part up to each different person what he would see as more appropriate for this kind of a situation.


Perhaps more on-topic, Elysium has always intruiged me and if I wasn't at my character limit currently I'd have loved to create a character here. The war-like and agressive diplomatic stance is so unique for their realm, I must admit I kinda expected behaviour like this from the Northern clans initially.
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: Zandar on June 10, 2015, 11:33:08 PM
I'm just going to say that for once i agree with Calpurnius. This whole thing has turned into a fiasco. It would have been much more interesting for people to see that a realm is already at war and hold off declaring on them until after the current war, or to opt out of supporting their allies in what is merely a continuation of the border conflicts between two realms (such as I have done with Tetsuyama, where I have publicly stated our neutrality in this war).

The "fiasco" is of their own making. Both wars were extremely limited in scope, both had clear land goals that are tiny compared to the size of the Imperium, both offered terms instead of war and the EI decided to roll with war regardless in both cases. As I understand it Ascalon firstly pushed their claim to the land, war was only declared when they saw EI forces amassing on their borders instead of engaging in dialog.

Why can I not assume the forums are for people to discuss things out of character, so they can talk freely. Why is it so hard to understand that when people communicate out of character,  what they say should be and are seem as truth.

I see in game actions as anything goes.  I find it insulting that someone will speak 'out of character' in the forum to persuade in game opinions. Or complain about Realms ganging up on his own realm ( which never did happen ), then do the same to someone else and have it interpreted as "bad timing.

Did you read those posts, he even says things got out of hand because of his ooc comments.

Should I be discussing all the BS our realm continues to go through here, and then be asking people in the forum to believe everything I say and react to it.

Again, I now see myself as a minority of one who believes on going events should stay in the game. I'm sure there is a reason why communication must be established in game between realm, if not then make it so everyone playing can have easier access to these comments, rather the the 20 or so who frequent the forums.

You can assume all you want, doesn't make it a binding rule that anyone else needs to follow. It is your preference to handle things that way, others disagree and enjoy doing things other ways, ways which as Andrews recent post demostrate are well within the established rules and purpose of the forum.

Perhaps more on-topic, Elysium has always intruiged me and if I wasn't at my character limit currently I'd have loved to create a character here. The war-like and agressive diplomatic stance is so unique for their realm, I must admit I kinda expected behaviour like this from the Northern clans initially.

Elysium was founded because I found playing in the North to be completely unsatisfying. I played in five different realms there ans I couldn't find any that didn't seem to think respecting strength was the same thing as institutionalized bullying. Nothing wrong with that play style mind you, just wasn't what I was looking for when I wanted to play in a warrior culture.
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: Calpurnius on June 11, 2015, 05:27:06 PM
Zandar,

Roran mentioned that I repeat the same thing over when responding to replies. The reason is because everyone makes the issue of something it is not. It is not about how the wars started. It is about how people come to the forum and speak on their behalf involving current events and try to influence the situation.  You say " I can assume all I want " but its not a binding rule, you are correct. I just like to think the people who speak here would be telling the truth, since the forum is not part of the game. As you say it is not binding here or in life, but this is just a game, no real benefit, so why the need.
I also like to think people who complain when things happened to them, would show respect to others and not be a hypocrite in regards to piling on in already lopsided wars.

I'm done trying to convince people this is not about the war with EI, merely about how oneperson continually attempts to benefit from actions against mostly new players. I have been here from the start and have seen and read his treatment of new players, them watch him come to the forum  to persuade everyone differently about what actually happened.
Rroan asked should we be excluded from being attacked because we were trying to reach out and help new players, the answer is no. We are not excluded from anything, but if you would like to see them stay,  Perhaps he could have waited awhile before jumping in to create a 4 against 1 war. Give them a chance to deal with the already one sided 3 - 1 war.

In character all events described are reasonable. It is just that we spent a lot of time trying to save a dead realm to bring new players into the game. Just very disappointed that his in game needs supersede that attempt. When Alummani/Thomas family, and FritzMaurice family left, there were almost 100 inactive regions. Land and soldiers were given to anyone who requested. We gathered enough activity from new and returning people to see it down to only 8 inactive regions. The new players were able to even make their own knight offers to continue the regrowing effort. I do realize people will come and go for different reasons, just really hate to see one of those reasons being a pile on type war. The empire is now back to about 60 regions without lords.

Zandar, when you say the " fiasco was of their own making". Are you trying to say in game that is how it is perceived, or are you saying that is how it actually happened.  Since I cannot assume what you say is true, I have to ask you to explain why you mentioned it.
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: Tom on June 11, 2015, 05:48:03 PM
Since I play Octavius:

Yes, the timing was abysmal for Erstes. Intentionally so. The whole thing was meant to drag as many realms into the conflict as possible, should Erstes - as I expected they would - insist that these estates are theirs (which, at the core of everything, is what Octavius disputes).

So I made one relative join Eldamar and gave her an estate, then Octavius joined Ryne. I thought (correctly) that this would be enough to drag those two realms into war with EI. I didn't expect Elysium would join.

I'm a little disappointed the war was (almost) ended so fast. I had hoped for some intense fighting and then some kind of peace treaty. Likely involving me giving up half of my estates or something, they're worthless scrublands anyways.

Funny how three realms battle over some principles. That really made me happy. Everyone knew that the estates in question aren't worth sending even a hundred men to battle.
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: Roran Hawkins on June 11, 2015, 06:02:01 PM
Zandar,

Roran mentioned that I repeat the same thing over when responding to replies. The reason is because everyone makes the issue of something it is not. It is not about how the wars started. It is about how people come to the forum and speak on their behalf involving current events and try to influence the situation.  You say " I can assume all I want " but its not a binding rule, you are correct. I just like to think the people who speak here would be telling the truth, since the forum is not part of the game. As you say it is not binding here or in life, but this is just a game, no real benefit, so why the need.
I also like to think people who complain when things happened to them, would show respect to others and not be a hypocrite in regards to piling on in already lopsided wars.

I'm done trying to convince people this is not about the war with EI, merely about how oneperson continually attempts to benefit from actions against mostly new players. I have been here from the start and have seen and read his treatment of new players, them watch him come to the forum  to persuade everyone differently about what actually happened.
Rroan asked should we be excluded from being attacked because we were trying to reach out and help new players, the answer is no. We are not excluded from anything, but if you would like to see them stay,  Perhaps he could have waited awhile before jumping in to create a 4 against 1 war. Give them a chance to deal with the already one sided 3 - 1 war.

In character all events described are reasonable. It is just that we spent a lot of time trying to save a dead realm to bring new players into the game. Just very disappointed that his in game needs supersede that attempt. When Alummani/Thomas family, and FritzMaurice family left, there were almost 100 inactive regions. Land and soldiers were given to anyone who requested. We gathered enough activity from new and returning people to see it down to only 8 inactive regions. The new players were able to even make their own knight offers to continue the regrowing effort. I do realize people will come and go for different reasons, just really hate to see one of those reasons being a pile on type war. The empire is now back to about 60 regions without lords.

Zandar, when you say the " fiasco was of their own making". Are you trying to say in game that is how it is perceived, or are you saying that is how it actually happened.  Since I cannot assume what you say is true, I have to ask you to explain why you mentioned it.


And yet you are deaf to every argument I bring to defend my position. You cannot know what my plans and ideas are and should not make assumptions about them and throw them around as if they are fact. I have offered you the chance to discuss it with me in private through PM so I can debunk the misconceptions you seem to have about me. However instead you ignored me as it seems you would much rather continue to crusade against me without actually dealing with the source of the problem that exists between us. I am not some kind of big evil that needs to be destroyed for the good of the game, such a black and white vision is never correct.


If you are not willing to listen to my arguments then how am I, or anyone else for that matter, supposed to conduct a reasonable discussion with you. Yes, you have replied by now to several points I and others raised, but you see it as fact that I am an evil, bad element for the game without any second thought, and continue to bitch on me like there's no tomorrow.
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: Calpurnius on June 11, 2015, 07:05:21 PM
Tom, I play the Schultze and Rentzell characthers in EI, we were willing to fight the war. Thinking we would have an opportunity to concede defeat and relinquish the land.  An offer was made by EI to limit the area of fighting and the EI duchies that would be involved. Ryne chose to call in Elysium and attacked regions outside the contested areas.  What we had hoped would be a border dispute, soon resulted in 3 to 1 realm war.

The war ended so quickly because we realized our troops were  outnumbered when everyone starting joining.

A little history of how things escalate,

One of the experience players accepted a knight offer in EI and soon turned over contol of his duchy to powers in the north. Plenty of excitement leading to threats of 3 - 1 war. Then a regional lord said something to his neighbor,  causing another 3 - 1 threat of war. Everyone continually wonders why no one fights, here it is, no simple border dispute, all out " pile on one" realm war.  Even when Eldamar joined, we continued to fight, we also had threats that Elysium was on their way, so when the offer came to end the conflict we accepted the day after receiving it ( somewhere in the 6-8-? week ). Here we are, still at war with everyone. Through all of this, not one word was spoken in this forum about it ...... until Roran made a misleading comment in the forum.

My response arose because Roran made a comment which led you to believe it was "bad timing". I have been trying to point out Roran knew exactly what he was doing and was clearly aware of the internal problems trying to give and recapture lands as new players were coming and going. And that those action were in complete contrast to his comments one year ago. ( about others staying out his war, and when one other person became involved, complained about the how awful it was fo rall of Rathgar to join in against him ).   

I think that the best possibility of retaining new players is, not to knowingly create 4 - 1 wars soon after new people start. No one else involved came to the forum to justify their actions, because they were unaware of our situation and just doing what the situation warranted.

It is not his "in game actions" that bother me,  he had already attacked EI settlements, prior to me speaking here . It is because of Roran coming to the forum to justify those actions, which are in contrast to the comments he made one year age. Roran did know of the internal situation and used a one year old excuse to join in at that moment., no bad timing.


Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: Roran Hawkins on June 11, 2015, 08:11:21 PM
I must literally be invisible to him when I'm not saying things he can use against me.
My response arose because Roran made a comment which led you to believe it was "bad timing". I have been trying to point out Roran knew exactly what he was doing and was clearly aware of the internal problems trying to give and recapture lands as new players were coming and going. And that those action were in complete contrast to his comments one year ago. ( about others staying out his war, and when one other person became involved, complained about the how awful it was fo rall of Rathgar to join in against him ).   


It seems we agree for once, which is also the point of my concern. You fail to see that the past is the past and think I am purposefully manipulating 'public' opinion and knowledge of what is going on. The situation in the past was what it was, and we both made faults there, and I for one learned from it and tried to do better.


We cannot conduct a healthy discussion about this so long as you refuse to believe that I am not purposefully playing the OOC to help me IC. If you would for once try to talk without me without that prejudice you would find me a lot more reasonable than before. Hence why I invited you to hold that discussion in PM since I feel that if we remove the need to prove a point to other people than just the two of us we can have a much more honest discussion about this.


In fact, I will be sending you a PM right now. I'm tired of this entire thing.
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: Calpurnius on June 11, 2015, 09:11:50 PM
Roran, I have had interaction with you from day one. You could never change my opinion from your comments and actions to other new players.

Should I start with the first meeting, some new lands had opened and I met you in the first region you were trying to capture. You immediately threatened my character,  to join your new kingdom or face the forces of Rathgar. So new you thought I was new, and never looked to see I was a member of Rathgar. I let you know I was trying to gain land for my new vassals and if could work out something to avoid conflict over acquiring the new lands. That didn't go well, you threatened one of the new vassal.  Spoke to the person supporting you, and was persuaded OOC to hand over my vassal to you kingdom " for the good of the game". Tried to make a point in the forum of people using ooc conversation to influence game play here, again the point was missed, I relented.  Made the arrangement to have my vassals join you realm, on the condition they could keep the regions I gave to their family. When I informed my vassals of that decision, the one who was threatened was not happy, and I  never heard from them again. So Mali family got all the regions. Part of the agreement was I make a member of my realm part of Ascalon, unfortunetly I never read any of the Ascalon messages until after you tried to take all the Mali lands. You claimed treason because Alumaani said a Mali vassal did not inform you that he wished to make contact with you.  I had been able to read several mentions from Mali, asking why Alumaani troops were marching through Asclon. You decide to claim Mali unfit and demand all their land. Which led to your posts in your Realm thread about others interfering.

Lets move on to some other things I read and conversations I had with one of the people you brought into the game. They mentioned how they had been attacked by other members of the realm while they were trying to take control over some new regions. And she felt you were just land grabbing. I then was able to read argument between you and her over another dispute involving the same person that attacked her. You sided with the attacker, and soon another person disappeared.

Then the vassal of the now inactive person received land from a new liege, you and your duke then demanded that land. The land was returned and that person left Ascalon. 

These actions may all be stretched to say they are reasonable, but are the benefits you received worth the possible loss of players.  Keep in mind these are members of your own realm.  Some people may not  feel  being treated like that is worth the effort to stay.

I will leave you with a couple of final questions. How many of those lands you demanded were in your realm before Mali joined, how many did you contribute to acquiring ??   At some point in a game, there should be some semblance of fair play for new people to see. You had plenty of land and power, what possible point was there to bully your own members for their land.  That is when you also went to the forum to say it was an ooc misunderstanding.

Roran you are welcome to tell others a different version, I'm sure they will defend your actions, but there is nothing you can say that could change what I have witnessed to make me change my opinion of you.

Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on June 11, 2015, 10:25:22 PM
Since I play Octavius:

Yes, the timing was abysmal for Erstes. Intentionally so. The whole thing was meant to drag as many realms into the conflict as possible, should Erstes - as I expected they would - insist that these estates are theirs (which, at the core of everything, is what Octavius disputes).

So I made one relative join Eldamar and gave her an estate, then Octavius joined Ryne. I thought (correctly) that this would be enough to drag those two realms into war with EI. I didn't expect Elysium would join.

I'm a little disappointed the war was (almost) ended so fast. I had hoped for some intense fighting and then some kind of peace treaty. Likely involving me giving up half of my estates or something, they're worthless scrublands anyways.

Funny how three realms battle over some principles. That really made me happy. Everyone knew that the estates in question aren't worth sending even a hundred men to battle.

I'm really disappointed in you Tom. You are constantly at it about making things better for new players, and then when a realm is making progress in keeping new players, you do something that completely contradicts your opinion on keeping new players. We are perfectly capable of making our own conflicts without GM intervention, thank you. Now EI's progress in rebuilding its player population has been set back real-life months, all thanks to your idiotic intervention.
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: Roran Hawkins on June 11, 2015, 11:08:34 PM
Snip.


The points you raise here are from either the period when I myself was a new player and hardly knew how the game worked or not on my orders. There's also a blatant lie in there, which you would've known if you read my PM.

I sent you a 1800 word PM explaining my side of the situation, and you replied that you didn't even bother reading. I will now hereby ignore your sorry nagging ass. You can accuse me of many things, but do not accuse me of not trying to improve the game or trying to solve the problem. It is your choice to be prejudiced by second hand sources and experiences to the point that when you are offered a second version of the story you ignore it.
I will not further waste my time arguing with the likes of you.

I'm really disappointed in you Tom. You are constantly at it about making things better for new players, and then when a realm is making progress in keeping new players, you do something that completely contradicts your opinion on keeping new players. We are perfectly capable of making our own conflicts without GM intervention, thank you. Now EI's progress in rebuilding its player population has been set back real-life months, all thanks to your idiotic intervention.


He brought lots of interaction to four different realms as a PLAYER of his game. I don't see that as a problem at all. The different wars the EI was involved with were LIMITED, CLEAR and HEALTHY. If anything it was the lack of information the top-tiers in the Imperium give to their vassals that got them to quit, since I have a character inside aswell and he doesn't even know why we are fighting Ascalon and what they want. The members only hear vague information of what is going on, defeating the entire purpose of clear casus belli the attacking realms have used to avoid just that demoralisation.
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: Tweeznax on June 11, 2015, 11:16:18 PM
Has anyone tried explaining to these new characters, in-game and in-character, how these setbacks only provide new urgency to whatever plans the EI has for getting back on track? Or made any attempt whatsoever to smooth things over?
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: Tom on June 12, 2015, 12:01:37 AM
The war ended so quickly because we realized our troops were  outnumbered when everyone starting joining.

Actually, not really. After things went quiet again, I checked the statistics and militarily, EI is quite massive, probably much stronger than you think.
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: Tom on June 12, 2015, 12:05:35 AM
I'm really disappointed in you Tom. You are constantly at it about making things better for new players, and then when a realm is making progress in keeping new players, you do something that completely contradicts your opinion on keeping new players. We are perfectly capable of making our own conflicts without GM intervention, thank you. Now EI's progress in rebuilding its player population has been set back real-life months, all thanks to your idiotic intervention.

I completely don't get why you see this as GM intervention. I was merely playing my character who got bored in his small corner of the realm and decided to stir up some trouble.

Did frogs fall from the sky? Did rivers appear out of nowhere and mountains turned into swamps? If not, why you call this GM intervention? Please. I was already forced to leave one game I created because everyone always thought of me as the GM and not as a player. That, btw. is one of the reasons MaF will never allow you to see which characters belong to what user. I play a couple that are not tied to my three realm-starter-families, and I do have fun with them.
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: Calpurnius on June 12, 2015, 12:25:37 AM
I try to say over and over, this is not about the 3 - 1 conflict. It is about a 4th realm piling on with a clear undestanding of his actions. Then making a comment that has Tom responds with "bad timing" it was perfect timing.

As to the power of EI,  lots of that power now rests with the new players who left. And a fear to hand out even more troops to see them disappear also. When the Compton family arrived,  them and a couple others were made sheriffs to chase bandits. Troops were given to each, Compton was active enough to be made a duke, given more troops to reacquire inactive lands. All those troops in all those regions are gone now. The former emperor of EI returned, was given land and troops for his family, those troops are now lost.  Another person quit with 200 troops in his regions. That must be the power you are speaking of. Plenty of power was handed out to bring new players in, and we feel at a loss for our efforts when someone knowingly tried to take advantage of revolving new players. 4 against 1 over a border dispute is over the top.
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: De-Legro on June 12, 2015, 12:37:39 AM
I try to say over and over, this is not about the 3 - 1 conflict. It is about a 4th realm piling on with a clear undestanding of his actions. Then making a comment that has Tom responds with "bad timing" it was perfect timing.

As to the power of EI,  lots of that power now rests with the new players who left. And a fear to hand out even more troops to see them disappear also. When the Compton family arrived,  them and a couple others were made sheriffs to chase bandits. Troops were given to each, Compton was active enough to be made a duke, given more troops to reacquire inactive lands. All those troops in all those regions are gone now. The former emperor of EI returned, was given land and troops for his family, those troops are now lost.  Another person quit with 200 troops in his regions. That must be the power you are speaking of. Plenty of power was handed out to bring new players in, and we feel at a loss for our efforts when someone knowingly tried to take advantage of revolving new players. 4 against 1 over a border dispute is over the top.


You didn't need a 2nd war though. You could have ceded those three regions to concentrate on the war you were already fighting. EI made a choice here. Funny thing, I PLAY in EI, in the eastern Duchies. I have not been advised that the Ryne war is over, or if it is not where my troops should be, who is in military command, what our targets are, basically anything. Nor am I advised on anything happening in the west. I'm sitting here, as a small time knight, in a time of war with absolutely nothing to do and no idea what is going on, the ONLY thing that has happened was I was told to drop my tiny unit of men (<15) as militia in four different settlements.


EI's problem to me is that a few players still control masses of land and troops, and they seem to run the military themselves without needing to caring to really co-ordinate. That might not be true, but I am giving the perspective as an average player of EI, one who is not in the upper levels of the realm.
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on June 12, 2015, 12:41:41 AM

You didn't need a 2nd war though. You could have ceded those three regions to concentrate on the war you were already fighting. EI made a choice here. Funny thing, I PLAY in EI, in the eastern Duchies. I have not been advised that the Ryne war is over, or if it is not where my troops should be, who is in military command, what our targets are, basically anything. Nor am I advised on anything happening in the west. I'm sitting here, as a small time knight, in a time of war with absolutely nothing to do and no idea what is going on, the ONLY thing that has happened was I was told to drop my tiny unit of men (<15) as militia in four different settlements.


EI's problem to me is that a few players still control masses of land and troops, and they seem to run the military themselves without needing to caring to really co-ordinate. That might not be true, but I am giving the perspective as an average player of EI, one who is not in the upper levels of the realm.


Funny, I had the exact opposite impression during the time I was in EI. Funny that. EI is a realm where you get back exactly what you put into it. If you were to, I don't know, create a conversation for coordinating the military, I'm sure there would be a huge response. But people aren't going to notice you if you don't do anything to be noticed.
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: De-Legro on June 12, 2015, 12:44:43 AM

Funny, I had the exact opposite impression during the time I was in EI. Funny that. EI is a realm where you get back exactly what you put into it. If you were to, I don't know, create a conversation for coordinating the military, I'm sure there would be a huge response. But people aren't going to notice you if you don't do anything to be noticed.


Why should I need to be noticed? I am a knight. I should not be having to push the leadership into providing the base minimum information for their realm to actual feel a part of the realm. You guys talk about new player retention. Here is a hint, if you are forcing them to initiate everything you will lose them. No different to a BM realm that has no realm chatter, players will assume it is dead.
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: Zandar on June 12, 2015, 12:49:45 AM
Yeah good, perhaps we can take the conversation of EI's strengths/failing to their thread.

In actual Elysium news, we came for war, we can't find any troops to fight, we are pretty bored and cranky about marching all that way for nothing.

Also, we have a completely inactive sub-realm. We would like to recruit someone whom we can assist to reclaim it.

http://mightandfealty.com/en/realm/233/view

We would like to see them remain part of Elysium, but that is not an absolute requirement. Just getting some active players back in that area would be a boon. PM on the forums or contact Orion Rhu in game.
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: Calpurnius on June 12, 2015, 01:45:49 AM

You didn't need a 2nd war though. You could have ceded those three regions to concentrate on the war you were already fighting. EI made a choice here. Funny thing, I PLAY in EI, in the eastern Duchies. I have not been advised that the Ryne war is over, or if it is not where my troops should be, who is in military command, what our targets are, basically anything. Nor am I advised on anything happening in the west. I'm sitting here, as a small time knight, in a time of war with absolutely nothing to do and no idea what is going on, the ONLY thing that has happened was I was told to drop my tiny unit of men (<15) as militia in four different settlements.


EI's problem to me is that a few players still control masses of land and troops, and they seem to run the military themselves without needing to caring to really co-ordinate. That might not be true, but I am giving the perspective as an average player of EI, one who is not in the upper levels of the realm.

The so called people in the upper level are those who accepted knight offers and showed activity. Have no idea of the massive land owners you speak of. Hawks Praire gave all its holding to new players and was going to recapture, for a 2nd time, the lands that went inactive again. Those massive lands owned are supposed to be 3 experienced and 5 new players, each with a 18 region duchy so they can make their own offers. If you have just one knight, then of course you will receive limited information, especially since you were most likely here before our arrival. All those members with one region and one character are very hard to depend on.  Never really know why they are here and if they will be there when needed. I've seen a couple of similar situations in other realms, they were there until you gave them troops and asked then to go fight, disappeared with the troops and never showed up at the battle. I trust new players who have a reason for seeing the realm prosper, not the one character from an experienced player. At least 3 of those experienced players took land and troops and also disappeared.

If the people with troops continue to give troops away and the players receiving them continue to vanish, then no one will have any troops. You are certainly an expert how everyone should react. What about an opinion of someone who waits a year, until there is a 3 - 1 war, then gets involved. For game play, an excellent move.  For a first time experience of many new players, not so great. It was like that at the start and continues. It has become obvious that is how things are to be.

We coordinate through the dukes, if your duke told you to drop militia, what can I say, they must be inexperienced. The war with Ryne was hoped to remain limited, so new players were not notified until Eldamar joined. The war with Ryne  is not over because they have not responded to our acceptance to concede. You say we shouldn't have started a 2nd war ? Didn't think we did. Once again, the point is being missed, I don't care who is fighting or why. 

Why are there so many reference to what we should have done in game. It is how it is, and we will deal with it. The actual in game war has nothing to do with my concern for someone who decided to take advantage of a 3 - 1 war and join in. Or each time should we just say take what you want to avoid war. How many times before a realm would disappear. If all wars are being fought 3 and 4 to one, I can assure you the realm of 1 will soon become a realm of 0.

The good news is I hope very soon to dissolved myself from the game. Just trying to avoid leaving the same mess we had to deal with. I had given away most of the land before the war, 3 of the regions were to go to Lormere, but they vanished before taking them. Parks were still trying to take the other 3 when war broke out. Now I will work on giving away the troops.
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: De-Legro on June 12, 2015, 01:55:28 AM
If the people with troops continue to give troops away and the players receiving them continue to vanish, then no one will have any troops. You are certainly an expert how everyone should react. What about an opinion of someone who waits a year, until there is a 3 - 1 war, then gets involved. For game play, an excellent move.  For a first time experience of many new players, not so great. It was like that at the start and continues. It has become obvious that is how things are to be.


It sounds like just the sort of slow burning revenge plot I expect in a game that bills itself as political game. New players also need action, realms like Ascalon ALSO have new players, and the leadership there must work to make the game engaging for those players.


About the only chat I see in EI is players whining about other realms and other players. If that is the sum total of what you see because the realm has decided that Duchy based communication is best, regardless of the fact that breaking things like that down to duchy level severely limits the amount of people in a discussion and this the frequency of discussion, then yes I am sure they find it discouraging.


If realm chat is instead full of bombastic optimism, or they at least understand that the entire realm is not going to die from what is going on, then they are probably going to enjoy actually fighting for a change. That has been our experience in Elysium when the North raided us and we needed to reassure the new lords in our lands.
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: Calpurnius on June 12, 2015, 04:15:37 AM
Of course 4 - 1 realm wars are the most exciting for new players. I don't understand what I was thinking. The new players who joined all those established members with their one character and one region should be ready for war against 4 realms. And yes, EI deserves everything they get, how dare they they say no when people demand or take their land.  Bad bad EI, what were we thinking. We should never have attacked so many realms at once.

Tom wanted some war action and started the scenario for a little border fighting, each person found their actions completely justified to join in. So be it.

I complained about a comment made in the forum, and every one who responds continues to mention it is our fault for everything they had to do. Take some aspirin for the pain in your arm, didn't mean to twist it so hard. Face the fact, everyone was anxious for some fighting and found reasons to make it a 4 - 1 war.

As said before, nothing has really changed, only the names of the people piling on.
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: Zandar on June 12, 2015, 04:19:38 AM
Of course 4 - 1 realm wars are the most exciting for new players. I don't understand what I was thinking. The new players who joined all those established members with their one character and one region should be ready for war against 4 realms. And yes, EI deserves everything they get, how dare they they say no when people demand or take their land.  Bad bad EI, what were we thinking. We should never have attacked so many realms at once.

Tom wanted some war action and started the scenario for a little border fighting, each person found their actions completely justified to join in. So be it.

I complained about a comment made in the forum, and every one who responds continues to mention it is our fault for everything they had to do. Take some aspirin for the pain in your arm, didn't mean to twist it so hard. Face the fact, everyone was anxious for some fighting and found reasons to make it a 4 - 1 war.

As said before, nothing has really changed, only the names of the people piling on.

You already got one threat locked with the feud or whatever with Roran. How about you leave this one before it suffers the same fate, and maybe consider WHY it was locked.
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: Calpurnius on June 12, 2015, 05:34:36 AM
Sorry, hard not to comment on such amusing posts.
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: WVH on June 12, 2015, 04:45:11 PM
Sorry, hard not to comment on such amusing posts.

That is a fact.  It is hard to not reply when people bait you into it, be it on purpose or just general ramblings that are insulting.  Once baited, you want to defend yourself against the slander.  Yet it always starts a wave of arguing and destroys friendly fun gaming.  My suggestion is to smile when someone calls you or your realm a name on here and just ignore it.

It will improve your own outlook on the game greatly to not care anymore what anyone thinks of you or your realm.  Just play the game how you want and ignore the rest.
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: Roran Hawkins on June 12, 2015, 06:10:49 PM
That is a fact.  It is hard to not reply when people bait you into it, be it on purpose or just general ramblings that are insulting.  Once baited, you want to defend yourself against the slander.  Yet it always starts a wave of arguing and destroys friendly fun gaming.  My suggestion is to smile when someone calls you or your realm a name on here and just ignore it.

It will improve your own outlook on the game greatly to not care anymore what anyone thinks of you or your realm.  Just play the game how you want and ignore the rest.
This is amusing because he is the one holding a personal flaming crusade against me and has been 'slandering' my name eversince the beginning of the conflict. That aside, I agree. The best way to defeat the troll is by stopping to feed it.
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: WVH on June 12, 2015, 06:19:16 PM
This is amusing because he is the one holding a personal flaming crusade against me and has been 'slandering' my name eversince the beginning of the conflict. That aside, I agree. The best way to defeat the troll is by stopping to feed it.

*Thumbs up* My advise was to all of us, myself included.  I love this game and I enjoy playing with everyone...most days.  Tempers flare and then a week later I am playing right beside those I was red faced at.  Hard to keep it all in perspective some times.
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: Andrew on June 12, 2015, 06:32:37 PM
Personally, the environment I think we should aim for is that of a gaming group. One in your town or city that you meet up with at the local game shop to play for a while. One that allows you to bring random new people in, where really you're all just there to have fun, and it's understood that sometimes you'll disagree so much you hate each other for the next week, but doesn't stop you from sitting across from them at the next meetup.
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: Weaver on June 27, 2015, 09:26:54 AM
Since I play Octavius:

Yes, the timing was abysmal for Erstes. Intentionally so. The whole thing was meant to drag as many realms into the conflict as possible, should Erstes - as I expected they would - insist that these estates are theirs (which, at the core of everything, is what Octavius disputes).

So I made one relative join Eldamar and gave her an estate, then Octavius joined Ryne. I thought (correctly) that this would be enough to drag those two realms into war with EI. I didn't expect Elysium would join.

I'm a little disappointed the war was (almost) ended so fast. I had hoped for some intense fighting and then some kind of peace treaty. Likely involving me giving up half of my estates or something, they're worthless scrublands anyways.

Funny how three realms battle over some principles. That really made me happy. Everyone knew that the estates in question aren't worth sending even a hundred men to battle.


You bastard! I love you! That's so clever.


But if I may add a few things to the conversation- and believe me, I am not quite keen on flogging a dead horse, but the conversation is so one-sided. I do not believe that Tom used his GM privileges to create this situation. I should know, because I currently play the Emperor- and it was, I believe, my character that was largely responsible for making him leave the realm. After all, I was a Knight with no family name, that questioned a high lord- those were, maybe a bit paraphrased, his words.


As a new member to a realm, this was extremely exciting- and even when I still couldn't even control my own Duchy, the thought of war excited me. Is 3v1 wrong? Heck no it isn't. Is 4v1 wrong? Hell no. Is allv1 wrong? Again. Take a guess. It is a Realm ruler's responsibility to create a realm that can take all sorts of punishment. We came for politics, intrigue, methods to distinguish ourselves. It is in no one's interest to destroy a realm- but a realm also needs to be strong enough, to take a beating, and come out of it intact. That is what I believe.


I also believe that in the same way, a realm is tasked with the ability to field large troops, so that new players can join into battles, and feel like they CAN contribute, but also not be at a high risk of being killed in the battles. IE, a duke that leads 500 troops, with a vassal who brings 100.


If I had allies, heck, I'd wage war all day 3v1, or 2v1, or 2v2. Why? If I was a vassal in the Erstes Imperium, I'd want to distinguish myself. In such, whoever is leading the Realm, be it a Duke, a King, the Emperor, or a Baron- he needs to be charismatic enough to inspire characters to fight wars relentlessly, as if the Empire was standing on the precipice of destruction, even if it was a war over a few worthless scrublands I'd never even send 10 soldiers to.


Heck, when Ryne told me that peace required me only give over the estates, I was like 'Pft, you can have 'em'. I was afraid I'd sound a bit too eager to end the war when I was writing a reply.


But I do not want to explain my actions, or absolve those of others. I invite you to rethink how you see the game, and the community we have. We don't fight over chess, and this is no different. It is a game in which we are trying to be friends OOCly, while being backstabbing bastards ICly. OOCly, we seek to protect the same thing, but ICly, we'd go to the end of the world to erase each other out of existence at the drop of a hat. And I believe EI is a Realm that can take that ICly- as is Elysium, as is Ryne, as is everyone that was mentioned in this conversation.


Now, I'd like to say some things on principle, but I do not want my words to be construed as attacks- so I will rephrase them, so they only mirror me. I realize not everyone is the same, and I try to be considerate. EI is a large realm, I have mentioned this before, and it is difficult knowing everyone's feelings- it is even more frustrating, when you are trying to build something up, only to see it slowly unraveling in the face of unfair circumstances. But I believe, if the EI right now, was coming undone, and I could not turn this frustration into conviction and zeal- and made players unhappy- that the fault lies solely in me. That I have reached the limits of my ability to tell a story. Though, at that point I would cut my losses, and tuck my tail between my legs and try again. Improve myself and expand my horizons.


Take Tom's example. I do believe he is having fun, but I don't think his characters are having fun right now. The way I see it, he is now forced to watch from the sidelines, how his own blood is being hunted down.

And why is it happening like this? Was it OOC perspective that made everyone involved opt out of the war, leaving EI versus Eldamar? That is not fair either. We can't take these things back now, but in the future- I urge you not to take OOC into IC. I will try my best to make EI the one Realm everyone can beat on day and night. I only ask everyone to have the same considerations I do: We are all friends, and we are all working together to make this memorable.


Apologies for the long post, I only wanted to offer my opinion, as the current player of the Emperor of the Imperium. I hope you see this as an olive branch, and a hand extended in cooperation- not fodder for heated discussion, or a shield to defend anyone or justify their convictions.
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on June 27, 2015, 08:34:10 PM
Weaver, you may feel that way, but that hardly means the majority of people in the realm (many of whom do not go to the forums) feel that way. I don't know how long you have been around in Erstes Imperium, but the fact is that the realm had just barely recovered from losing many of its players when this happened. And if you don't understand why these gangbangs are bad for the game, then you clearly have never played Battlemaster, which is slowly dying partly for this reason. On most of the continents, there are either no wars, or if there is one every realm allies against a single one and destroys them. And no one wants to play a game where they are constantly on the losing side, and have no chance of winning.

If people don't learn from the past, they won't get out of this rut.
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: Tweeznax on June 27, 2015, 09:26:22 PM
Isn't this primarily an RPG? When strategy enters play, it is our characters strategizing.  When war is made, it is our characters making it.  History is full of epic disasters, tragedy, and calamity. I would hate to see the possibility of that quashed in this game over considerations of "fairness."  The game is not fair, and any game that purports to be a simulation of something genuine isn't going to be.  When I first started a new realm in the south, I realistically assumed I would have to reach out, find allies, and possibly allow my realm to be vassalized if it was to survive.  I didn't presume everyone was going to play nice just because the realm was new.

I guess my point is, if you start playing referee to the wars, the tragedy, and the triumph, you lose some of the magic of the game!
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on June 27, 2015, 11:28:33 PM
Isn't this primarily an RPG? When strategy enters play, it is our characters strategizing.  When war is made, it is our characters making it.  History is full of epic disasters, tragedy, and calamity. I would hate to see the possibility of that quashed in this game over considerations of "fairness."  The game is not fair, and any game that purports to be a simulation of something genuine isn't going to be.  When I first started a new realm in the south, I realistically assumed I would have to reach out, find allies, and possibly allow my realm to be vassalized if it was to survive.  I didn't presume everyone was going to play nice just because the realm was new.

I guess my point is, if you start playing referee to the wars, the tragedy, and the triumph, you lose some of the magic of the game!

We once believed the same in Battlemaster. That game is now dying because as a result of your opinion, which often times falls prey to people taking advantage of such a situation to further their power, there are realms that basically have control of almost entire game worlds. In fact, the colonies just had it happen where one realm won (yes, won, in an rpg) the island, squashing all resistance to their rule. What happens then is that you have either a behemoth of a realm that is too large to attack successfully by what other realms remain, or an alliance bloc that completely stratifies all diplomacy and takes out any question of there being a surprise in the politics. What we're currently seeing is the latter, with Ascalon, Ryne, Grand Fate, and Elysium forming such a bloc.
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: Weaver on June 28, 2015, 12:26:04 AM
Fair enough, you do have a point. EI is larger than myself and the few people I have constant correspondence with. I cannot speak for them, nor even for their majority. There are really only a few things I can do.


But I think you'd be surprised- from what I've seen, players are mostly unhappy because they have nothing to do. They sit and count their pikes, until it reaches X, and then they start the recruitment cycle, and go back to playing Candy Crush Saga or whatever else they enjoy. Personally, if you ask me, which I'd prefer, counting pikes or getting my ass kicked all across the corelands- I'd go for the latter.


I did play BM, and only for a brief time, because it didn't offer me the depth I was after. To be honest, neither did M&F, until I started paying more close attention. I am educated in just about every aspect of modern warfare, except Naval and Air. Heck, I even know the doctrine for dropping telephone poles from space as anti-bunker ordinance. My point for bringing this up is: I think you'd be surprised how many things you can do in M&F. It is true, I have yet to fight a real war with any of the major powers, but, honestly, I think there's only so much that a combined force can do. And from what I've seen, that is not the case in BM. And even besides that, it's not like EI just fell over. Yes, it recovered from a huge setback- and even more setbacks were present from then on- heck, this whole thing is another one. But EI is anything but weak. I know in general the amount of troops that some realms have. EI easily rivals them. And the players? Well, some of them left- I don't know why, and if it was related- but a large group of other players became intensely involved with current events.


Suppose theoretically, this really turned into a 4v1 gangbang. We wouldn't lose because our troops are not of a high enough quality, or that we are outnumbered- it's because of the sheer size of the realm, and that we'd be attacked from 4 different sides. There is extremely little time to coordinate a force- and at that point, even if you manage it, you have to flip a coin and hope the Duke responsible for the front knows what he is doing.


But my point is, that even then, I believed that we want to create a story, not ruin other realms. And that's what happened- though, going through with the attack, you'd win- without a doubt- you still didn't. I think that is admirable. I think that's how a game like M&F should be. There are people like Tom, and others, who will create these opportunities, and I think we should take them, when given the option, so long as we have a clear goal, and know where to draw the line- that, at least, is the principle I will play by.


At the very least, if anything should be drawn from my long wall of text, is that I am grateful that things didn't devolve into some sort of 'Oh, it's a 4v1, let's destroy it completely'. Heck, I am surprised it was all so civil and... Tom in particular said he is disappointed how quickly we all went back to peace, so that has to mean something about what kind of players we are. And I think that's great.
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: Tweeznax on June 28, 2015, 01:44:19 AM
While I agree that people seem to tend toward creating giant blocs of peace, or sometimes giant blocs of death (which are just giant blocs of peace with spiky edges lol), I don't think that means the game's sandbox vision should be sacrificed to cause artificial conflict and make sure that conflict is "fair." This whole point of the game is that players have absolute freedom, along with the consequences that come with it.

Instead, what I think it means is that there are still some mechanics missing from the game. It should be as difficult to "wage peace" as to wage war, and it isn't.  Larger empires should naturally fall apart as a result of game mechanics, requiring greater and greater effort to keep them together as they grow.  It should hurt the characters to be at peace too long, to be at war too long - basically, while the players are happy and engaged, the characters should always be uneasy about something. Right now, it's way too easy for a rational player to just sit on their thumbs because many times it's the most efficient course of action. That having been said, it's not the goals of the players or their characters that need to change, which is what refereeing would do. It's the goal posts.

Tom has already asked for a discussion on making death and loss either for players to bear, and I think that's part of it too.
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: De-Legro on June 28, 2015, 02:15:28 AM
EI was the target of the so called gangbang, and has finally come out as a power to watch in the world, rather then a large collection of settlements everyone ignores because they were regarded as too weak for even small realms to attack. Partly this is because Ascalon And Elysium had very clear goals, very clear rules of engagement and these were communicated to EI. Eldamar I can not comment on, Elysium has no contact with them I am aware of. This entire war is about to end with Elysium not engage in a single battle, we were clear that the three thousand troops we mustered would only defend Ryne territory and since we arrived we have not seen a single settlement under attack.

I would say the excitement of fighting on several fronts has galavanised the core players in EI, much like what happened when Ryne fought for its life early on. With one notably exception that I have discussed with Weaver it is now probably my number 1 pick for new players to join.
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: Tom on June 28, 2015, 09:29:59 PM
Take Tom's example. I do believe he is having fun, but I don't think his characters are having fun right now. The way I see it, he is now forced to watch from the sidelines, how his own blood is being hunted down.

Things have taken interesting turns. I would enjoy it a lot more if it had sparked a major war, though. These goliath-stomps-david wars are boring, no matter which side you are on.

But here's something: Even when you are completely outnumbered and surrounded, there is still so much you can do in this game. For example, setting up interesting successors will make your death a major political affair.
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: Tom on June 28, 2015, 09:41:43 PM
it should hurt the characters to be at peace too long, to be at war too long


We tried such a game-mechanic in BM and it was a desaster.
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: Tweeznax on June 28, 2015, 09:53:26 PM

We tried such a game-mechanic in BM and it was a desaster.


Darn. Thought I was on to something!
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: Tom on June 29, 2015, 08:13:22 AM
Darn. Thought I was on to something!

So did I when I tried.

No, the incentives to wage war have to come from within. I'll be happy to add anything that motivates people to wage war. Help me find what that is. A statistics of how many estates you conquered? A title depending on how many battles you fought? A cookie for every war you start? Heck, I'll send physical postcards to people if it helps.
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: Ratharing on June 29, 2015, 10:13:24 AM
Instead of having your economy suffer from lack of war, have the excess of population be turned into bandit militias from time to time. And, when you have such excessive population and bandits, allow the lord to recruit that rabble and throw it against someone else in your name.


The problem with the war incentives you made in BM was that once it kicked, it effectively removed the ability of a realm to go to war. If you create a problem that immediately goes away (leaving little to no traces) as soon as the nobles decide to attack someone, then you won't have the same issue.
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: De-Legro on June 29, 2015, 11:30:14 AM
Instead of having your economy suffer from lack of war, have the excess of population be turned into bandit militias from time to time. And, when you have such excessive population and bandits, allow the lord to recruit that rabble and throw it against someone else in your name.


The problem with the war incentives you made in BM was that once it kicked, it effectively removed the ability of a realm to go to war. If you create a problem that immediately goes away (leaving little to no traces) as soon as the nobles decide to attack someone, then you won't have the same issue.


How do you define "excess population" relative to war? Elysium for example has only fought one war within our own borders, all other conflict has seen us as the aggressor. Without massive population losses due armies marching in our lands, population remains relatively constant throughout our conflicts, slight drops for recruitment but that is it.
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: Tom on June 29, 2015, 01:02:18 PM
Everyone who hasn't done it underestimates just how tricky this thing is.

The main reason is that people game it. You add something that forces people to war, they will declare war on a friend just to satisfy the condition. Or they even wage a fake war, with an agreement to only kill troops but not take land.

None of that solves our problem, we need incentives for people to go to real war and take real risks.
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: De-Legro on June 29, 2015, 01:05:28 PM
I am floating the idea in Hawks that we start wars for the simply purpose to secure tithe, or more accurately Hawks will sanction the military activity of any of its members so long as that action is in the pursuit of the noble quest to gather Tithes for our capital. My hope is that it will allow the smaller land holders in Hawks to start their own conflicts and hopefully avoid any accusation of Hawks using overwhelming force.
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: Ratharing on June 29, 2015, 06:18:15 PM
How do you define "excess population" relative to war? Elysium for example has only fought one war within our own borders, all other conflict has seen us as the aggressor. Without massive population losses due armies marching in our lands, population remains relatively constant throughout our conflicts, slight drops for recruitment but that is it.

When your population reaches a balance. In real life you never really reached one, and had both periods of fertility and scarcity. When a population reached its local technological cap, it would be forced to move part of it to somewhere else to deal with the accumulating pressure, or face increasing violence. In your case Elysium would have to direct its population surplus somewhere else, even if in the form of poorly-armed bands. It would, at the very least, create some conflict.

Everyone who hasn't done it underestimates just how tricky this thing is.

The main reason is that people game it. You add something that forces people to war, they will declare war on a friend just to satisfy the condition. Or they even wage a fake war, with an agreement to only kill troops but not take land.

None of that solves our problem, we need incentives for people to go to real war and take real risks.

I am not saying it's simple, and I agree it's far from perfect. But it's a start.
Let people game it. If they are forced to send armed bands to attack friends, well, that would at least put a little dent in their relationship. If not, nothing is lost anyway. But if both them and their friends sent those bandits to a third lord, then he might feel annoyed enough to provoke retaliation.

You see, you will always have disproportionate wars if the way your military/economy works is that you need peace to grow strong and advance techs. A civilized nation will always have the upper hand: higher population, infrastructure and army (both in quality and quantity). My suggestions go towards giving the poorer lands a chance. Having a strong and high-tech realm should naturally give you benefits, but also some drawbacks.

My idea is to represent cultural changes as technology advances. The Germanic societies had a much larger warrior-to-citizen ratio than the Romans of their time. They had to, as they had much less economic security, and most workers should be able to put up a fight if needed. That gave them a much easier time at recruiting levies, and made their society much more resilient to both inner and foreign aggression. The Romans on the other hand, as more modern and advanced societies, had invested in the much more efficient specialization of a standing army. It allowed them to better produce, and to field higher quality troops, but it also left them somewhat defenseless should said troops fail to perform their regular duties.
How to implement it? The more buildings, the higher the technology. Higher tech makes militia progressively less productive. Low tech allows for conscription in larger numbers, raising levies of self-trained armed citizens. Give quantity to the poor to make up for their gross lack of quality. It would improve their ability to wage short-term war, and play invasions.
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: Tweeznax on June 29, 2015, 07:33:37 PM
It would help if there were unique resources of some kind on the map to fight over.  Limited enough that trading would be extremely difficult at best.

Mechanics that breed distrust could help. What if there was an actual penalty for having claims out there you weren't making good on, and a penalty for canceling them? That would make people resistant to both and could breed suspicion, especially if they become hereditary.

Right now, a perfectly rational player could sit back and say, well, if I want to minimize risk and maximize returns, I should be as peaceful as possible. If only real-world leaders were so rational! But in a game, you need conflict.  I do think some mechanic is needed that makes ever larger empires ever more difficult to manage.

Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: Tom on June 29, 2015, 08:19:17 PM
It would help if there were unique resources of some kind on the map to fight over.  Limited enough that trading would be extremely difficult at best.

We have metal as very scarce and wood as scarce, but I don't see people understand it very much. One of my settlements has 20% or so efficiency in the blacksmith and it makes him almost useless. If I were a little bigger with that character, I would certainly go and find metal by force somehow.
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: netforce10 on June 29, 2015, 08:51:49 PM
We have metal as very scarce and wood as scarce, but I don't see people understand it very much. One of my settlements has 20% or so efficiency in the blacksmith and it makes him almost useless. If I were a little bigger with that character, I would certainly go and find metal by force somehow.
maybe make it more visible what effects lacking resources has? If I lack resources then I don't have a clue how much impact there is.(I may be overlooking something though)
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: Tweeznax on June 29, 2015, 09:58:52 PM
We have metal as very scarce and wood as scarce, but I don't see people understand it very much. One of my settlements has 20% or so efficiency in the blacksmith and it makes him almost useless. If I were a little bigger with that character, I would certainly go and find metal by force somehow.


Yes but neither are remotely unique and if you don't have it, you can still build and recruit, just very slowly. Also, your friends might have it. Basically, you are under-pricing the value of peace! Has there ever been a war started in this game over lumber? Metal? I'm still relatively new, so maybe that's happened a few times. But looking at my characters from a rational perspective, I would sooner march an emissary across the map to trade for these items than risk losing a war to a roughly evenly matched opponent.
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: Ratharing on June 29, 2015, 11:05:39 PM
It would help if there were unique resources of some kind on the map to fight over.  Limited enough that trading would be extremely difficult at best.

I see no need to discourage trading. That is the shape of tribute and submission too. If you made local "spices" produced on small regions that granted differentiated productivity bonus according to distance, it would certainly add some flavor.
In practice it would mean declaring which provinces produce said goods (silk, spice, amber, etc) and which would benefit from them, manually setting different percentage bonuses. I can help in the non-technical part if you find that too much work.

We have metal as very scarce and wood as scarce, but I don't see people understand it very much. One of my settlements has 20% or so efficiency in the blacksmith and it makes him almost useless. If I were a little bigger with that character, I would certainly go and find metal by force somehow.

Now, if you only could rouse your poor settlement's warriors for a large but temporal mobilization to raid for metal...  :P
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: Tweeznax on June 29, 2015, 11:27:39 PM
I see no need to discourage trading.

Yes, this is true. I didn't mean to imply trading should be discouraged, but it should be at least as hard as warfare. If it isn't, then for most characters they are going to pick trade. Right now, I see trading to acquire resources as being FAR cheaper and less risky than war.  In fact, in a lot of cases, even just sitting on a shortage would be preferable to starting a conflict.  The "peace game" is way too easy compared to the "war game."  I think something is needed to shake that up, especially because some players want to play good guy characters who simply aren't going to start a war of aggression without very good cause. This should be made into a challenge in and of itself.
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: Ratharing on June 29, 2015, 11:55:30 PM
Maybe improve both the damage and benefits granted by looting? I'm new to M&F, but I've seen comments both in this forum and IC on how little impact looting causes...
Title: Re: Elysium
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on June 29, 2015, 11:59:56 PM
The main reason is that people game it. You add something that forces people to war, they will declare war on a friend just to satisfy the condition. Or they even wage a fake war, with an agreement to only kill troops but not take land.

I don't see the issue with that last one. Fighting is fighting, even if no land is taken. Sometimes so-called "fake" wars are the most fun, as can be seen on East Island currently in Battlemaster.