Kabrinskia, Astrum, and other such stuff of the North Western Astroist states.

[Penchant]

Penchant,

"Wrong" and "bad" don't necessarily mean the same thing. Someone could tell you to bake them a cake and you could bake them an excellent pie, in which case you'd be doing a good job at the wrong thing. Inversely you could bake that person a bad cake, thus doing a bad job at the right thing. So the words don't necessarily mean the same thing.

In BM context what I mean is that while the point of this game is subjective what constitutes optimal or suboptimal play mechanics wise can be measured objectively. So you could make an objective statement that "having taxes above sustainable levels is bad", you couldn't state that "having taxes above sustainable levels is the point of the game".

To the RL example, you haven't gave an example of where you did it badly but not wrong, you merely put them both in the sentence. If I made the cake badly, how could I have not done something wrong? To the BM, also just because you say that sustainable levels isn't the point of the game, doesn't imply that they are not playing wrong because they of it. I put too much salt in the cake so I made it wrong but the point of  making cake isn't how much salt I put in it. Also, I am no longer arguing that what you said isn't what you meant but that before you clarified your intention it seemed like you were implying people who have their tax rate below the optimal amount of gold were partly playing wrong. As you have clarified what you meant, feel free to drop it, just don't continue to claim people are playing badly but that it doesn't means its wrong the way they are playing as that is what you were initially claiming.

[Glaumring the Fox]

I  fully agree with everything Indirik is saying... Hell hath just froze over.  :o

and on another note I think people are jealous of Aurvandiil.

[Penchant]

Playing every turn, twice per day, is intended play. That's why there are two turns per day. Unless you're trying that even though there are two turns per day, that it is intended for you to only play one of them. Or that you're only supposed to play, say, two out of three turns.

Using terms such as "unbalancing" and "massive advantage" are loaded words intended to imply that the people who are logging in to play every turn are doing something wrong. That doing so is somehow unintended an abusive. I'm sorry, but that's pure bull!@#$. In fact, you could make a damn good case that making such a claim is, in fact, violating the Inalienable Rights of the players of Aurvandil. After all, playing at your own pace is the #1 IR. That manes they can play as often as they want, or as infrequently as they want, and it's no one else's damned business. They are allowed to play as often as they want, and their right to do so is guaranteed by the Inalienable Rights. Complaining that they play too often is just as much a breach of the IR as is complaining that your own people don't play often enough.

To the first paragraph, Anaris is claiming that when mechanics are made they are not made in mind that 100% or even 90% will all be active every single turn. Anaris is not complaining about  Aurvandils activity, merely stating that, that mechanics were not made with those kind of rates even remotely close in mind. As to the unbalanced and massive advantage, that is plainly the truth. If On Atamara CE fought Carelia they would have a massive advantage and it would be unbalanced, that doesn't mean that CE is doing anything wrong, it's just the truth.

[Penchant]

I am not going to try to imply the activity they show and the participation they claim wouldn't be nice but I definitely am not jealous as though there is nothing wrong with their realm, I would not want to be in a realm like Aurvandil, otherwise I would be in Aurvandil. The realm I am in, is the realm I want to be in though that doesn't mean I think my realm is even close to perfect in any way.

Edit: Would someone, preferably an Aurvamdilian as they know what's going on best ,want to write up something on what's been going on in the war currently for the Facebook page?

[Velax]

Playing every turn, twice per day, is intended play. That's why there are two turns per day. Unless you're trying that even though there are two turns per day, that it is intended for you to only play one of them. Or that you're only supposed to play, say, two out of three turns.

So you're saying a realm where the large, if not the vast majority of players can log on and respond to orders every turn is perfectly compensated for by the game's mechanics, given the relative activity levels of current realms, and has no negative effect on any other realm?

BattleMaster is a PvP game. As such it is highly confrontational, and highly dependent on the skill level and effort expended on the parts of the players involved. Maybe not quite so heavily as FPS style games, but it it still counts. If your team can't be bothered to even play, then you *will* lose. And, IMNSHO, you deserve to lose.

I'd be interested if you can provide other examples of PvP games where the leading members of clans/guilds/whatever will be punished by the game developers for any criticism of the lack of activity of other members.

[Lanyon]

So you're saying a realm where the large, if not the vast majority of players can log on and respond to orders every turn is perfectly compensated for by the game's mechanics, given the relative activity levels of current realms, and has no negative effect on any other realm?

No he's saying just what that paragraph says

[Penchant]

No he's saying just what that paragraph says

He is arguing the wrong point though basically as Velax is talking at a realm level where I highly doubt especially from how Anaris sounds that all mechanics were built with the expectation that all realms would be having 90+% of characters being active very single turn.

[Velax]

Sorry, I'm calling Bull!@#$. Newsflash Velax: That game has two turns per day so you can play it twice a day. Playing it twice a day is not abnormal or unbalancing. You want to play once a day and have that be the norm for everyone else, too? Then, as NoblesseChevawhatsit says: Go play on the Colonies.

You're missing the point. I don't want to play only once a day. I'm likely one of the most hyperactive players in this game. However, I recognise that's not going to be the same for everyone and the existence of an entire realm of players where it does happen basically gives them an "I win" card against pretty much every other realm in a 1v1 war - no matter the size of the other realm - or with even worse odds. So they're struggling to win currently when it's 8v1. And the fact they can't score an easy win against 8 other realms is somehow being used as an argument that this style of play isn't unbalancing? That's what I'd be calling Bull!@#$ on.

[Kwanstein]

To the RL example, you haven't gave an example of where you did it badly but not wrong, you merely put them both in the sentence. If I made the cake badly, how could I have not done something wrong? To the BM, also just because you say that sustainable levels isn't the point of the game, doesn't imply that they are not playing wrong because they of it. I put too much salt in the cake so I made it wrong but the point of  making cake isn't how much salt I put in it. Also, I am no longer arguing that what you said isn't what you meant but that before you clarified your intention it seemed like you were implying people who have their tax rate below the optimal amount of gold were partly playing wrong. As you have clarified what you meant, feel free to drop it, just don't continue to claim people are playing badly but that it doesn't means its wrong the way they are playing as that is what you were initially claiming.

Ahh that was confusing to read, but I did understand the part where you said to drop it  :P (but I also got the gist of it - you're right I'm using weird/incorrect terminology).

Someone else would have been able to put my words more succinctly but alas not I.

[Indirik]

To the first paragraph, Anaris is claiming that when mechanics are made they are not made in mind that 100% or even 90% will all be active every single turn. Anaris is not complaining about Aurvandils activity, merely stating that, that mechanics were not made with those kind of rates even remotely close in mind.

As far as I am aware, player activity levels have not ever been taken into consideration in any game balancing decisions. (Other than the auto-abdication from positions.) We've never sat down and evaluated production, CS, food, etc. From a standpoint of "we think players will miss 20% of turns", nor ever considered adjusting anything based on player activity levels. During our current efforts to rebalance region stats, the issue has never arisen a single time. I don't even know where you'd begin to account for that kind of thing.

Extremely high activity levels used to be the norm back when I joined. Back then a realm like Aurvandil would have been average, at best. There are realms on other islands that could probably match Aurvandil's military performance. Have Aurvandil square off against CE and see how well they do.

The idea that such activity/movement rates would be OK on other isplands, but not Dwilight is also ridiculous. Dwilight is the SMA island, not the "slow and steady" island, or the low activity island. We don't have separate standards for activity or movement rate on Dwilight. Nor are there any such implied expectations.

Does it suck fighting against something like that when you can't match it? Yep, it sure does. Been there, done that. Lost a few armies to it. It's your job to find a way to compensate for it. (And no, I don't have any magic solutions or innovative suggestions to help you with that.)

[Glaumring the Fox]

Too many entitled realms, too many nobles here think they are entitled to their realms... Like so much dust in the wind.

[Indirik]

So you're saying a realm where the large, if not the vast majority of players can log on and respond to orders every turn is perfectly compensated for by the game's mechanics, given the relative activity levels of current realms, and has no negative effect on any other realm?

I said exactly what I meant, which bears no relation at all to what you claim. Go read what I said again.

I will, however, add this: game mechanics makes absolutely no attempt to balance the game based on player activity level, make assumptions based on player activity level, or take it into account in any way. Nor, do I feel, should it attempt to do so. Your realm is what you, and the other players, make of it. If your players log on once a day, then you had better plan your strategies and moves accordingly. If you don't, then attempting to fight a realm of players logging on every turn is likely to proove very disastrous for you.

[Marlboro]

(And no, I don't have any magic solutions or innovative suggestions to help you with that.)

Two-turn moves help a TON, especially if there's an enemy in a nearby region. I also try and help my armies think a step ahead, sorta telegraphing what orders might be coming next turn barring a major change. Occasionally this results in a less-active player not turning back in time and getting slammed, but it's more rare than ordering an attack and having only two guys go with you.

[dustole]

You're missing the point. I don't want to play only once a day. I'm likely one of the most hyperactive players in this game. However, I recognise that's not going to be the same for everyone and the existence of an entire realm of players where it does happen basically gives them an "I win" card against pretty much every other realm in a 1v1 war - no matter the size of the other realm - or with even worse odds. So they're struggling to win currently when it's 8v1. And the fact they can't score an easy win against 8 other realms is somehow being used as an argument that this style of play isn't unbalancing? That's what I'd be calling Bull!@#$ on.

It isn't exactly 8 v 1.  D'hara has rarely engaged Aurvandil, maybe never?  once?   Barca is out of the fight and is effectively useless.  Iashalur, Astrum, Morek and Corsanctum can't march that far south nor have they had any major engagements.  This war is essentially Aurvandil vs Terran.  Sure there are others on Terrans side but their allies are doing them no real favors.  They kinda sorta meta gamed to get everyone to declare war to cause Aurvandil problems with their peasants.  Beyond that, that is the only damage the other 7 members of the 8 v 1 have really caused.

[Penchant]

It isn't exactly 8 v 1.  D'hara has rarely engaged Aurvandil, maybe never?  once?   Barca is out of the fight and is effectively useless.  Iashalur, Astrum, Morek and Corsanctum can't march that far south nor have they had any major engagements.  This war is essentially Aurvandil vs Terran.  Sure there are others on Terrans side but their allies are doing them no real favors.  They kinda sorta meta gamed to get everyone to declare war to cause Aurvandil problems with their peasants.  Beyond that, that is the only damage the other 7 members of the 8 v 1 have really caused.

Several things:
1.Astrum and Corsanctum have been actively helping though not with their full army
2. Barca is out of the fight because they got ko'ed by Aurvandil so they kinda count as a realm that's fighting its just the one first to be extensively attacked.
3. There was no meta gaming in the war declarations, it's just happened that they couldn't help that much after they had already declared war, it wasn't planned that they wouldn't help that much.
4.D'hara has been in at least 2 major battles