Someone please explain the concept of War Island

[Jens Namtrah]

It seems that the overwhelming number of players there don't understand that you play until you defeat the other two realms, making you the winner. Then the island is reset.

They honestly don't understand that - it seems like the last time was so long ago, no one realizes it and none of the older players thought to pass on such obvious information.

Or did someone decide to change the purpose and I just didn't get the memo?

[Anaris]

No, that's absolutely correct. I'll make a GM announcement to make sure it's clear.

[Indirik]

Just because that's the overriding purpose of the island doesn't mean you can't do anything else. You can still do your RPs, or your themes. You can even not care who wins, or who loses, or even if anyone wins out loses at all.

Just because it's a war island doesn't mean you have to exclusively focus on victory at all costs, and screw everything else.

[Jens Namtrah]

Just because that's the overriding purpose of the island doesn't mean you can't do anything else. You can still do your RPs, or your themes. You can even not care who wins, or who loses, or even if anyone wins out loses at all.

Just because it's a war island doesn't mean you have to exclusively focus on victory at all costs, and screw everything else.

that's correct. But the primary purpose of the island is a war island for strategy gamers, and there are many who were not here last time we had one and genuinely don't understand that.

[Anaris]

Just because that's the overriding purpose of the island doesn't mean you can't do anything else. You can still do your RPs, or your themes. You can even not care who wins, or who loses, or even if anyone wins out loses at all.

Just because it's a war island doesn't mean you have to exclusively focus on victory at all costs, and screw everything else.

That's absolutely correct.

I was willing to make the announcement because I've heard from other sources that there were, in fact, people who were genuinely confused about this.

I am in full support of the decision to not destroy Ikalak immediately.

[Dishman]

I assume you are referring to Sandalak withholding the killing blow. Although I personally agree that 'cease-fires' between two realms are too 'diplomatic' for WI, folks have already declared those fine and dandy. Is it any different to declare a cease-fire because you want to gang up on one realm versus declaring one because you don't want one realm to join your enemy? Both seem valid tactics if we are ignoring 'diplomatic relations'. The second one just seems more 'playing with friends' considering Ikalak's rough start.

I thought there was no specific 'right' way to play BM, anyhow.

[Jens Namtrah]

I'm not, but for different reasons than you think.

This is not about that - there are people who have only ever played a "You can't win Battlemaster" version of this game and I don't think understand why they are there.

[Dragonsbane]

Just putting this out there, thanks to Sandalak player for giving Ikalak a chance to turn around after the tough times, you are okay in my book.

[Jens Namtrah]

Yeah, Sandalak player - singular.

He didn't consult with anyone but his OOC friends on IRC apparently. He certainly didn't share who he discussed it with. In game, everyone was telling him to do the opposite.

I don't think the OOC crap you had was any worse than what we had - and your current Ruler just ahppens to be our former General who didn't lead the war preparation effort cuz he was too busy leading our own OOC !@#$storm, nearly getting us knocked out the war in the first month. Sound familiar?

I don't think you especially deserved a second chance - you were marching through our realm happily enough. We kicked your ass in Saenna with some good tactics and suddenly it's "cry me a river" about your OOC issues.

But I'm not that fussed about that - it will make for a better game to have 3 realms. I'm pissed off at a player who did a major OOC manipulation of the game to fix something he personally felt was wrong without asking anyone else in the realm.

Had he come to us and said "OOC here is a list of the issue that went on, so I think we should give them another chance. Is that okay with everyone?" we might have gone along with it.

Instead we just have yet another OOC manipulation based on some guy & his friends - like that will make it all better.

[Dragonsbane]

Please lay off the hate, this is a game meant to be fun, if you don't like a player fine, don't like them, that your choice, but don't lump us all together, win or lose, I planned on playing through, and I've never cried about OOC unfairness, I've kept it all IC, it small groups causing big problems, and they've bounced from realm to realm, just play the game a deal with it IC is my policy.

[Dishman]

Ah, I think I get you. War Islands is designed for a 'win scenario' (3 cities, no peace). You can not care about winning, but you can't say 'there are no winners' for this Island because the intent is for one realm to take all cities and the island to reset. There is quite literally a winner.

Honestly, I think the phrase 'there are no winners' is poor. Sure there are, even on other continents realms/folks win and lose. That isn't the point to BM (as I understand it), though. A better phrase would be 'the winning doesn't matter'. The only incentive in BM is fun, and people shouldn't really needto win to have fun. It should be fun all over.

[Jens Namtrah]

Ah, I think I get you. War Islands is designed for a 'win scenario' (3 cities, no peace). You can not care about winning, but you can't say 'there are no winners' for this Island because the intent is for one realm to take all cities and the island to reset. There is quite literally a winner.

Honestly, I think the phrase 'there are no winners' is poor. Sure there are, even on other continents realms/folks win and lose. That isn't the point to BM (as I understand it), though. A better phrase would be 'the winning doesn't matter'. The only incentive in BM is fun, and people shouldn't really needto win to have fun. It should be fun all over.

Phrase it as you like. My original point of the thread was simply that I didn't think some people understood the actual game mechanics behind the island, and how it differs from the others.

[Indirik]

In game, everyone was telling him to do the opposite.

Yeah, see, that's just not true.

From a vague perusal of the Sons of the Wyvern and Griffin group, I can name at least three players, without even spending more than two minutes at it, who were in complete support of the decision. (And since the decision was announced, maybe two people objected, while *every other message* about it was full, unqualified support.)

And not only that, your character wasn't especially vociferous about wiping them out. Something about keeping them as puppets to fight taselak? In fact, I don't see a single objection from you about letting Ikalak live. You were even helping to iron out the terms of the agreement to keep them alive.

Not a single real objection from you during this entire affair, until we get an OOC drama-queen grandstand about how Kurlock's player is OOC manipulating the game with his IRC clan buddies.

I'm pissed off at a player who did a major OOC manipulation of the game to fix something he personally felt was wrong without asking anyone else in the realm.

Yeah, he did ask. He asked IC what we should do. And you darned well know that we *couldn't* have finished off Ikalak simply because we didn't have the troops to do it. Sure, we sacked the city. But we didn't have the forces to take it.

Not only that, but trying to do it would have been stupid. Leave them alive, and they owe us, big time. We even get sympathy points IC for doing it. And if we actually *had* managed to put a bullet in them, then most of them would have gone to Taselak, swelling their noble count, and screwing us in the end.

Letting Ikalak live makes perfect sense both IC *and* OOC.

Besides, Kurlock is the god-favored ruler of a theocracy. He doesn't have to ask anyone about what he wants to do.

[Tandaros]

Letting Ikalak live makes perfect sense both IC *and* OOC.

Besides, Kurlock is the god-favored ruler of a theocracy. He doesn't have to ask anyone about what he wants to do.

Yep.

[Jens Namtrah]

Stop playing the fool.

He came on with an OOC message stating that he did it for OOC reasons. He starts it with:

"Some of you are wondering why..." so he clearly didn't talk to us about it. We were having IC discussions about strategy and he ordered us out. This is NOT how we were talking about going forward, nor are the things happening now.

All he's done is leave himself open to accusations of OOC cheating. All you have done is mess things up the next time someone does it somewhere else, and points to the Devs saying they think this is a good idea when it is challenged in front of the Titans.

If the OOC problem was so bad there should have been Titan or Dev involvement & player bans, not "fixing" things in this manner.