BattleMaster > Development

Alliance Size Restrictions Discussion

(1/6) > >>

Constantine:
So this change was implemented a while ago and almost no one even noticed because it was not enforced on existing alliances. Until some existing alliances had to be reshuffled and it turned out that once enforced this change was a massive kick in the gut for many people.

Guys. I understand that realms gravitating to two huge blocs and engaging in massive wars South Isle style (which sorta happens on all continents atm) is not how the game was supposed to work. But I really don't think blunt solutions like simply restricting alliance size is the right decision here.
Just like simply cutting continents in half was not the right solution for player density issues.
The fact is that restrictions always detract from the game. Let's try something else.

There are just so many ways to keep the wars local and prevent neverending world wars. I don't think this should even be about alliance sizes. There have to be more subtle solutions.
Just off the top of my head - if a realm declares war on someone it does not share borders with or is just way too far away in general, hit their population with increased morale malus over time, causing unrest and forcing it out of the war eventually. This alone will prevent the "pile-on" wars.
Or increase the "fighting away from home" malus on soldiers/increase pay the farther the troops march from own realm's borders.

I just really think soft caps are better than hard caps. The game is alwats more fun when it's about decisions, not just restrictions. Arbitrary restrictions make people feel frustrated and leave, decisions actually make the game more challenging so even if some people do feel frustrated they at least don't feel powerless, they can still do what they want to an extent.
I don't want people to simply be unable to form whatever alliances they wish. I just want them to have to calculate how long can they afford to wage an overseas campaign to help their ally without destabilising their own realm, for example.

Let's discuss.

Foxglove:
Restrictions on alliance sizes make no sense what-so-ever in RP terms, historical terms (game history), or in any number of other ways. It's clear that a lot of people across the game on various sides of wars are pissed about this change.

I would be interested to know what it's hoped this change will achieve. The EC has been thriving for a long time now on the continental war between the southern and northern blocs. Dwilight was stagnant for years before its 'bloc war' kicked off. I'm genuinely interested in what the perceived problem is with wars between large alliance blocs, and why it's thought it would be better to encourage wars between smaller alliances.

Also, I wonder how the planned introduction of Hinterlands is going to work with this change. I thought the whole point of Hinterlands was to allow realms to control a larger number of outer regions and not be as bothered by the loss of hinterlands as opposed to fully productive regions. To me, it seems like Hinterlands and region-based restrictions on alliance blocs are going to work against each other.

Anaris:

--- Quote from: Foxglove on May 22, 2019, 05:36:41 AM ---I would be interested to know what it's hoped this change will achieve. The EC has been thriving for a long time now on the continental war between the southern and northern blocs. Dwilight was stagnant for years before its 'bloc war' kicked off. I'm genuinely interested in what the perceived problem is with wars between large alliance blocs, and why it's thought it would be better to encourage wars between smaller alliances.

--- End quote ---

The problem is more with peace with a large alliance bloc.

If there is a group of realms, that together make up enough of the continent that no possible coalition of the rest of the continent could hope to match them in strength, that creates a chilling effect on continental politics. Everyone else is essentially existing at the sufferance of the behemoth.

They may never exercise that power. Indeed, a given instance of this alliance situation may not necessarily give rise to the political situation I describe. But the possibility for it is completely unavoidable, in much the same way and for much the same reason that the threat of harsh punishment is implied when a ruler says, "I hope everyone logs in 10 minutes after turn change tonight to move to the battle."

Thus, for the same reason that the Inalienable Rights specify that even mentioning them can be treated the same as if you explicitly stated "everyone who doesn't log in 10 minutes after turn change will be banished, and executed if caught," it was decided that the best way to deal with this problem was to create a hard limit in the code.

Unfortunately, that does create a necessary transition period, where things that are going on will get disrupted. That's completely unavoidable with a change of this nature.


--- Quote ---Also, I wonder how the planned introduction of Hinterlands is going to work with this change. I thought the whole point of Hinterlands was to allow realms to control a larger number of outer regions and not be as bothered by the loss of hinterlands as opposed to fully productive regions. To me, it seems like Hinterlands and region-based restrictions on alliance blocs are going to work against each other.

--- End quote ---

Because the alliance restriction is based on percentage of human-owned regions on the continent, Hinterlands should not have any significant effect on it. None of these changes will in themselves change the proportional military strength of realms relative to each other, so after Hinterlands goes live, I expect that there will be a brief period of expansion into rogue areas, with the overall proportions of the continent controlled by each realm holding roughly constant.

Zakky:
How about a point system then?

Every realm having the same max points. Like 10 for example.

When you have one realm at peace with yours, each realm is using 1 point out of 10 they are given.

Forming an alliance = 3 points per realm. Federation = 5 points per realm etc.

Constantine:
Why is this a better system, Zakky?

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page