Friendly rebellion - A case for the Titans?

[Hyral]

It's on the wiki (if we're remembering the same line) http://wiki.battlemaster.org/wiki/FAQ/Tom%27s_Position_on_Banning

And it does seem to only be referring to banning nobles for having family in an enemy realm, though there is a line in there:

Any policy of "immediate ban" is absolutely not within the spirit of the game.

...that when taken out of context does sound like a general no-instant-ban rule. Unless...it was meant to be general in the first place? o.o

[Chenier]

Believe it or not, I think Chénier is right  :o  ;D

It happens every now and then.

...that when taken out of context does sound like a general no-instant-ban rule. Unless...it was meant to be general in the first place? o.o

But if you look at the context, it says that it is "a kind of paranoia that can easily turn perfectly innocent and good players away from the game", and the two following line are all about fear of spying and people playing in enemy realms.

In other words, that sentence about intant-bans appears to be about these, and therefore reinforces what was said earlier in that message instead of adding new elements to it: don't ban someone just because he has another character in an enemy realm, as having another character in that enemy realm doesn't necessarily make him a spy for the enemy. Give him a chance.

It does not, imo, say you can't instant ban people no matter what. When a Lefanis joined a realm I was judge of, after all of the years in which all the characters of his family grieved those of mine, I banned him within a minute of him doing so (I was online when he joined). This, imo, is perfectly legitimate. After all, he should have expected it, and would have been wholly able to avoid it.

After all, "Tom's position on banning" just rewords and emphasizes of what was *already* there for judges, in the ban help page: http://wiki.battlemaster.org/wiki/Help:Bans , and does say things like "Give people a warning or a fine on their first offense, unless it was really serious".

From all the text available about banning, the way I see it is as follows: The judge must ask himself *why* he is banning the person. If that reason isn't because he's inactive, failed to follow an order, was a random noble from an enemy realm, has a character in an enemy realm, or isn't about the person at all, then it's all good. As long as you don't ban for any of these points, and understand that banning is a serious act that requires serious reasons, then everything is fair game.

[Hyral]

Indeed,  I agree that, in context, that line is probably referring only to banning characters who have family in enemy realms. What I meant was that particular line is probably what some people (myself included) were remembering when they thought there was rule about giving new characters a chance.

Still, doesn't instant-ban sort of say "screw character interaction, I don't even want to play with you"? It seems kind of harsh to me, I'd be interested in your opinion on that :/

[Velax]

Honestly, to avoid this bull!@#$, all he had to do was come up with a new family name and no one would know it was the same guy. But no, he specifically created a family with the exact same name as the one that tore the Far East apart, then decides to create two characters in the Far East (as opposed to any other continent), then plays at least one of those characters very similar to how the old character was. He deserves whatever he gets.

[Chenier]

Indeed,  I agree that, in context, that line is probably referring only to banning characters who have family in enemy realms. What I meant was that particular line is probably what some people (myself included) were remembering when they thought there was rule about giving new characters a chance.

Still, doesn't instant-ban sort of say "screw character interaction, I don't even want to play with you"? It seems kind of harsh to me, I'd be interested in your opinion on that :/

It's harsh. Sometimes, harsh things are justified, though. After all, execution is harsh, and there are no rules about it.

Sometimes, you've just had enough of that "interaction" already.

[Hyral]

No argument that the McGahee family wouldn't have trouble if they weren't called the McGahee family :p The same could be said for any notorious family.

It's harsh. Sometimes, harsh things are justified, though. After all, execution is harsh, and there are no rules about it.

Sometimes, you've just had enough of that "interaction" already.

Execution can only happen after that specific character actually does something wrong, though. Immediately banning a character for something someone related to him has done wrong is not really the same thing. I can understand the part about just having had enough though, if character after character after character is there to torment you.

[Chenier]

No argument that the McGahee family wouldn't have trouble if they weren't called the McGahee family :p The same could be said for any notorious family.

Execution can only happen after that specific character actually does something wrong, though. Immediately banning a character for something someone related to him has done wrong is not really the same thing. I can understand the part about just having had enough though, if character after character after character is there to torment you.

I wasn't saying it was the same thing, just that it was also harsh, and that the game does allow for some harshness.

You can only be banned when you do something wrong yourself or when you are part of that realm. Usually, when a realm dislikes you enough to instant ban you, you should have had an idea you had it coming and could therefore have easily avoided it by not joining said realm.

[Longmane]

Honestly, to avoid this bull!@#$, all he had to do was come up with a new family name and no one would know it was the same guy. But no, he specifically created a family with the exact same name as the one that tore the Far East apart, then decides to create two characters in the Far East (as opposed to any other continent), then plays at least one of those characters very similar to how the old character was. He deserves whatever he gets.

I don't agree at all he should have come up with a new family name for his char/s if he wanted play in the FEI, as while agreeing it was kind of dumb to immediately have one begin acting/behaving/plotting just like Conan right from the off, I certainly don't think he should have needed attempt cover up his former chars pasts like they were all some kind of criminals, as doing that also means doing away with all the achievements, story lines etc they were involved with. 

[Bedwyr]

Yes, I think the point was more that if he didn't want to have the McGahee name held against him, he went about it very poorly.

[Alpha]

I don't agree at all he should have come up with a new family name for his char/s if he wanted play in the FEI, as while agreeing it was kind of dumb to immediately have one begin acting/behaving/plotting just like Conan right from the off, I certainly don't think he should have needed attempt cover up his former chars pasts like they were all some kind of criminals, as doing that also means doing away with all the achievements, story lines etc they were involved with.

If a family has history on a given island, then all descendants of that family will be associated with the family history to some degree.  If a player decides to undertake playing on an island where his family name is reviled, then that player must expect his character to be reviled to some degree. It is a factor that must be considered before making a character on an island where one has a family with strong history. To expect that other player's characters will simply ignore history is unreasonable.

In this particular case, I don't know what the expectation was. Optimus behaves like Conan, becomes king, deposed in shady rebellion, and then a Zurralius is appointed as judge. In the eyes of Alpha, and I'd wager many other older characters, this is Soliferum reborn.  Alpha marked Optimus onto his enemy list when the Azros OftE's temple was burned, then Optimus really damaged Cathayan support in Kindara when Guldor made threats over food sales. Had his behavior been different the call to drive all MacGahee supporters from the south may not have been as strong as it is now.

[Hyral]

You can only be banned when you do something wrong yourself or when you are part of that realm. Usually, when a realm dislikes you enough to instant ban you, you should have had an idea you had it coming and could therefore have easily avoided it by not joining said realm.

I agree if we're talking about an established character joining a realm that clearly hates him (like a deposed tyrant trying to join the realm he devoted his entire career to making miserable) but I can't agree that a new character from a family with bad apples should necessarily expect to banned on the spot :/ It's not you the realm dislikes so much they would ban you on the spot, it's that other guy related to you. That just doesn't sound right (save in those extreme examples that amount to harassment, in which case it might be better to talk to someone higher up the food chain)

[Chenier]

I agree if we're talking about an established character joining a realm that clearly hates him (like a deposed tyrant trying to join the realm he devoted his entire career to making miserable) but I can't agree that a new character from a family with bad apples should necessarily expect to banned on the spot :/ It's not you the realm dislikes so much they would ban you on the spot, it's that other guy related to you. That just doesn't sound right (save in those extreme examples that amount to harassment, in which case it might be better to talk to someone higher up the food chain)

It's all context.

I tend to view it that if a family is established enough to be *that* hated, then that player is able to cope with the ban. Worse case scenario, he runs away and doesn't return to those lands. Or he can emigrate and come back in less than a month with the ban cleared for just 100 gold.

[Hyral]

It's all context.

I tend to view it that if a family is established enough to be *that* hated, then that player is able to cope with the ban. Worse case scenario, he runs away and doesn't return to those lands. Or he can emigrate and come back in less than a month with the ban cleared for just 100 gold.

True enough :]

[Indirik]

In a one duchy Realm why must the Capital be "moved"?  There is no option - a one duchy Realm, whether through loss of the other Duchy/Capital through war or succession should probably have the Capital declared automatically, as it's the only place left to have one.    Plus it can be incredibly expensive to move, which is why Cathay hasn't had a Capital since Anacan left.

I think the expense is part of the idea. It does a few things, like make losing your capital city a pretty damn big hit. If the capital automatically switched to the other city, then you could just keep on going with little disruption, other than the loss of the city, of course. And what if the city revolted from the TOing realm the next day? Would the capital switch back automatically, or would you be stuck with your capital somewhere else, in a potentially nasty spot?

Switching capitals is an expensive proposition. There is a lot of stuff to move, build, and people to hire in the new place. You don't get a free pass on that just because you lost your old capital. Yes, losing your capital is very expensive, dangerous, and potentially realm threatening. But that seems pretty much like how it should be, to me.

Also the text clearly indicates that scenarios like this are not planned for in the coding:

Capital Moved!   (8 hours, 46 minutes ago)
Me'hoe Chan'gu'Con, King of Cathay, Duke of Azros has ordered the capital to be moved to Azros. There is considerable unrest among the population, especially in the old capital, Anacan. The troops are also irritated.

Anacan suffers unrest?  Its not even part of the Realm anymore. . . and why are the troops upset?   We finally ahve a Capital in the REalm.  Havent been able to recruit for a long time.

Yeah, that's probably not the best situation, unrest in a foreign realm from it. Should probably be changed if the city is no longer in your possession.

But I do know that this is clearly intended, having to move it yourself. It happened to Riombara during the last invasion (or was that the 3rd invasion...?), and I clearly remember Tom stating that it was intended, and that you had to move it yourself.  Rio was without a capital for quite a while before they could scrape up the money to move it. Tim probably rememkbers it better than me, he was the ruler.

[Indirik]

I think the idea was that they'd be able to change the name of the realm, which they couldn't otherwise?

You cannot ever change the name of your realm. Ever. Not even if you win the rebellion.

(OK, there is one way: Send Tom an e-mail and beg for him to change it. This has worked for at least one realm. But you'd better have a *very* good reason. But there is no automated game mechanics way that suddenly enables a "Change the name of your realm" option.)