I heard wars hardly happen in M&F because people quit once they lose a war?
No, there are wars. But we're learning to limit them to a smaller scale than "Pile on! World war!" so nobody gets wiped out. The much bigger map helps in this too, and even if a realm looks like it's going to be wiped out its much easier to move it somewhere else than in BM. People have quit because of losing wars, but that's part of what the change in culture is trying to address.
Wars also aren't the be all and end all of the game, because there's also stuff like dungeoneering.
I don't play M&F, I suppose there are some mechanics which are quite different. If you end a war with a "no win, no loss" scenario, why were you fighting in the first place? Does that translate in BM terms?
Yeah, it's probably easier to fight a war without destroying someone or seriously damaging them in M&F than here. For example, you can fight in the open field without damaging settlements (regions in BM terms). So you could probably fight an enjoyable war in M&F without absolutely needing to take land. There's other stuff too, but it would take ages to write it all down. The M&F manual explains some of it if you take a look.
And here, you're just sounding condescending. "I know you poor, unenlightened savages here in the backwards game of BattleMaster are still clinging to your notions that a war should have some kind of purpose, or meaning, but we superior beings over in the shining city on a hill of Might and Fealty know that its true purpose is just to give fun to the players, and then be over without any consequences!" That may not be your intent, but it's certainly what this sounds like to me.
Sorry, that wasn't the intent. But I do think the M&F playing atmosphere is a lot healthier than BM's.
This war was begun when three realms attacked one realm, approximately equal in size to the smallest of the three, in what was, at least from my perspective, a totally shameless attempt at a land grab.
At the start of the war, the Kindaran intention was to force a change in government inside Zonasa (at least that's what Edmund told his council). It escalated to a much more serious war from there as more realms became involved. Galiard might have wanted a land grab of rurals for Cathay, but I wasn't privy to Cathay's decision making process at that stage.
And yeah, sorry, not buying it. When you remove the IC consequences for war, you remove the IC purpose and justification for war, and everything just becomes a meaningless wargame where you're moving tokens around on a sand table. That's not what BattleMaster was ever meant to be.
No, there are IC consequences for war, and IC purpose and justifications, but with a good level of OOC restraint and peer pressure not to kill realms or humiliate them.
Every time a war ends with the destruction of a realm, people will quit the game.
Fully agree.
