Friends and Enemies

[Perth]

Terran for example. There's no one in Terran that would call bloodfeud on each other nor attempt civil war, despite our differences, because we seek to understand and respect each other. Other nations I've played in though, they really milk the intra-realm conflict RP even though the mechanics aren't there, and it makes things AWESOME. I LOVE Terran's unity but I also LOVE the chaos certain other realms have at heart. I made new characters on other continents specifically because the one-sided nature of Dwilight politics is boring as absolute f*ck and would honestly kill the game for me. About a month back I was going to quit because I was so annoyed at how much everyone is accustomed to landlocking each other. Blockades are boring and don't bring anything to the game. Massive power-blocs that never actually fight is boring. Religions controlling entire swathes of the world without any resistance is boring. So on and so forth.

That's interesting. I see Dwilight as the shining star among the other lesser continents; Atamara being the worst, of course.

Terran, to me, usually has a good amount of intra-realm conflict. The unity of late I think is consequence of having some enemies who have been extremely easy to unify against, Allison Kabrinski and Aurvandil. But, of course, the conflict has never been on the level of the Lurias or anything.

[Indirik]

Then they should find a realm that values teamwork ,but why should those who'd like to stage rebellion or have their own political intrigue get stuck having the same thing day in and out for all eternity in nations that are purposely less-stable?

Why should those who like "Realm as team" (Which, whether you like it or not, is the core gaming experience of BattleMaster) get stuck having to deal with all the realm infighting garbage that some small minority of the game-players think might be cool

Other nations I've played in though, they really milk the intra-realm conflict RP even though the mechanics aren't there, and it makes things AWESOME.

So, the game experience you already have is awesome. And the people who don't want intrarealm fighting like it, too. So, why change it? It will only screw things up for one side, if not both.

I made new characters on other continents specifically because the one-sided nature of Dwilight politics is boring as absolute f*ck and would honestly kill the game for me.

Boring for you, because you didn't pick a realm that suited your play style. That's why we have 6 islands, and literally scores of realms to choose from. Didn't join the right one to start with? Try another one!

The war with Aurvandil is pretty much the saving grace because otherwise it would have been a slow and painful spiral into starvation and misery with everyone too damn weak to go to war.

What? If it weren't for Aurvandil, the entire 'Moot and Asylon would probably be at full-scale war with Astrum/Kabrinskia right now. Instead you've got a war that you are essentially guaranteed that you will lose. And you'll probably be ROFLSTOMPED, too.

... allow for more dynamics within the current system by reshaping what it means to be a realm

Why would we want to redefine what it means to be a realm? That would require some extreme changes all the way to the core of the entire game system. That is, literally, rebuilding the concept of the game from the ground up.

- which is of course more realistically reflective of real-world politics from the Dark Ages to the post-Feudal era.

"It's the way it really was, so adding it would bring more realism" is not a good argument. We're here to play a game for enjoyment. We don't add things because it makes things more "realistic". We add things because it makes the game more fun.

[Gustav Kuriga]

Why should those who like "Realm as team" (Which, whether you like it or not, is the core gaming experience of BattleMaster) get stuck having to deal with all the realm infighting garbage that some small minority of the game-players think might be cool
So, the game experience you already have is awesome. And the people who don't want intrarealm fighting like it, too. So, why change it? It will only screw things up for one side, if not both.
Boring for you, because you didn't pick a realm that suited your play style. That's why we have 6 islands, and literally scores of realms to choose from. Didn't join the right one to start with? Try another one!
What? If it weren't for Aurvandil, the entire 'Moot and Asylon would probably be at full-scale war with Astrum/Kabrinskia right now. Instead you've got a war that you are essentially guaranteed that you will lose. And you'll probably be ROFLSTOMPED, too.

Why would we want to redefine what it means to be a realm? That would require some extreme changes all the way to the core of the entire game system. That is, literally, rebuilding the concept of the game from the ground up.

"It's the way it really was, so adding it would bring more realism" is not a good argument. We're here to play a game for enjoyment. We don't add things because it makes things more "realistic". We add things because it makes the game more fun.

Please note that I'm not saying that a realm can't be a team, and that it can't be fun to have a unified realm. That would be taking my words differently from what I meant them to be. What I mean is I'm tired of people saying that realms are THE team. As if you should put the realm first, always. That's how you get places like Atamara. I left Atamara, despite probably being in Darka, a realm concept I found interesting, because the whole place is too stable.

[Indirik]

What I mean is I'm tired of people saying that realms are THE team.

That's the way the game is built and designed. The realm forms the underpinnings of almost everything in the game, from diplomacy, to trade, to battles, all the way down to the very messaging system itself. You cannot remove the realm-centric focus of the game without redesigning the scope and operation of nearly *everything* in the game. Just about the only things in the game that are not tied directly to realms are guilds and religion.

I can see some possibility for some system like this to be implemented. But I don't think that actual intra-realm combat is the way to go with it. (And from what I've heard of the combat code, I don't think it's something that would be very likely to be implemented, in any case.)

[Gustav Kuriga]

I'm actually not calling for intra-realm combat. I just don't think that realms should necessarily be the only thing that matters. I found that the realms I most enjoy are the ones with internal conflict.

[Ehndras]

Agreed. My forays into Atamara were major bore-fests.

Meh, my opinion has been stated. Nothing that has been said changes the fact that I think some destabilization of the current system would be constructive. Your strict adherence to the current ultimate-team system is fine and dandy but I personally think the game definitely needs some refinement in potential conflict if we are to pull in new players and maintain the ones we have. All the stability, or at least the lack of change, makes for a boring game.

Conflict is good ;-)

[Poliorketes]

I can't help but agree! Conflicts generate actions and this make the game more alive.

One of my characters has arrived to a new realm, in less than 2 days He was threatened with Banishment, in 4 days the Kings had send him 3 death duels, and half the kingdom was waiting for duel him, while the others nobles were trying to stop the conflict... in the end the matter seems to be solved... but it was sooo funny!!!  ;D

PD. The moral of the story is: Theocracies don't have humour sense!

[Norrel]

Indirick, TONS of stuff that's already in the game only serves to divide realms up. Religions, guilds, secret societies, gov't systems that aren't democracies, the feudal hierarchy itself - all of these things encourage a conflict of interest within a realm, be it from religious hatred to jealousy over a person's strength or whatever. Should we do away with all of that since apparently anything that doesn't encourage team play leads to vitriol so awful that 90% of the playerbase considers quitting over it? Come on. If that were true, there wouldn't be prestige or honor or lordships or anything that distinguishes one character from another, since they should only be defined by the strength of their team.

If "realm = 100% unified team" was the overarching design principle of the game, why do we frown on the saxons and their ilk instead of seeing them as exactly what this game was intended to foster?

[Tom]

The realm as a team IS a basic design principle of the game.

And just as much, both intra- and inter-realm conflicts are designed into the game. The core idea is that you compete with and often against other members of your realm, but there are common enemies outside that you will usually ally against.

The strength of a realm does depend on how well it can come together in times of war, but also on how alive competition within the realm is, because competition breeds strength. The right balance between being boring and being hyper-competitive is what - or so I think - makes or breaks a realm. Too little internal conflict and you end up just as weak as if you're ripping yourself apart.

[Chenier]

I didn't read all of the comments yet, but my first impression isn't really positive. This seems like an oversimplified dichotomy. My characters' relations with others are too complex for a simple "friend" or "enemy" category, and adding people as "friends" feels like facebook...

[Indirik]

Indirick, TONS of stuff that's already in the game only serves to divide realms up. Religions, guilds, secret societies, gov't systems that aren't democracies, the feudal hierarchy itself - all of these things encourage a conflict of interest within a realm, be it from religious hatred to jealousy over a person's strength or whatever.

These are all good things. They all add political rivalry, and internal power struggles. That's good. Struggles for positions,
keep things active and lively.

What I don't want to see is open warfare between duchies within a realm. IMO, that would be very bad for the game. Your opinion may vary, and that's fine. The final choice will be made by Tom.

If that were true, there wouldn't be prestige or honor or lordships or anything that distinguishes one character from another, since they should only be defined by the strength of their team.

Reductio ad absurdum. You have taken what I said far beyond anything I ever even implied.

If "realm = 100% unified team" was the overarching design principle of the game, why do we frown on the saxons and their ilk instead of seeing them as exactly what this game was intended to foster?

The game defines the realm as your team. Why do you think that realms control diplomacy? And that realm policies control your actions? And realm affiliation determines where you line up on the battlefield, and even *if* you lineup on the battlefield? It controls where you can go, what troops you can recruit, where you can sell/buy food. It even controls who you can talk to.

Internal struggles for who controls the realm/team, and who holds what positions of power, etc., all that is good. It creates a healthy atmosphere that fosters interest and keeps players coming back. Some players, not all. A sizable chunk of players *like* stable realms. All you have to do to recognize this fact is to take a look at Atamara. It has been, and remains, one of the most popular islands in the game, second only to Dwilight for total number of characters. And yet Dwilight and Atamara are often accused of being the most stable, sedentary, boring, etc. islands. If that were the case, then why are these two islands unquestionably the most popular islands, while the "exciting" islands like Beluaterra and FEI are hands down, predictably, and eternally the least popular, least populous, red-headed-stepchild islands? And why, when the game was focused more on realm-as-team, did we have twice as many players as we do now, if not more? Things were much more active and dynamic, with a LOT more messages, RPs, activity, etc.

I like the idea of adding some ability to denote other families as friends/enemies. Chénier may be right, in that the terminology may not be quite right. I would hate to see people in game asking for others to friend them.

[Velax]

Aww, so mean to poor FEI. :(

[egamma]

I didn't read all of the comments yet, but my first impression isn't really positive. This seems like an oversimplified dichotomy. My characters' relations with others are too complex for a simple "friend" or "enemy" category, and adding people as "friends" feels like facebook...

"allies", "trusted comrades", we can settle on a term later.

But what do we want the system to do?

[Indirik]

I am enjoying FEI, for a change, now that I'm out of OW.

But I'm not trying to cut down any particular island. I'm just saying that when you try to decide how you should change the game to make it better and appeal to more players, you cannot simply discard what has been proven to work. You have to look at what players are playing right now. Stats show that a LOT of people like to play on AT. So obviously AT is working for a lot of people. If it wasn't, they would leave. By the same token, FEI and BT have very low player counts. So, what is it about AT that people like, and about FEI/BT that people don't like? (True, BT may be a bit of an aberration right now, due to the recently ended invasion and blighting.)

Each island and realm provides a different playing experience. If you don't find a realm you like, keep looking. Chances are it's out there somewhere.

[Revan]

Sorry to keep the topic on a slightly divergent thread, but I agree that intra-realm conflict can be an highly enjoyable experience. I think anyone who has been in a rebellion will know that quite a bit of skulduggery goes on and there is much fun to be had triumphing over your comrades in service of your higher goals. In a sense we get the pile-on experience detailed earlier in this thread as people start joining their 'friends' or opposing their 'enemies' and getting into battles, but it comes with the context of being all about the future of the realm. It isn't just a grudge fight between two rival characters (well, not always anyway ;))

It's right that intra-realm conflict can't just happen on a whim, but it would be nice if we could improve the rebellion system. Make it a little more complex and consequential an event than at present. With the hierarchy system being as dynamic as it is now, it's a shame that rebellion simply remains a race to stack as much strength in the capital as possible. It could be so much more.