A serious and constructive discussion on recent change in staff involvement

[Zakky]

Having an option that doesn't limit much is fine I think. But what putting limits do is that those limits will also limit the size or duration a bit. There are too many wars in BM where it starts over a region then becomes a total annihilation after.

[GoldPanda]

Such hard restrictions are bad in a political game because they are easily abused. I.e. the loser can break the peace terms without fear of retaliation.

We can have them be rules rather than enforced game mechanics.

[Constantine]

Guys. What Sirion, Eppy and Nivemus did should not be illegal. Coordinating a sneak attack to stop a takeover they all didn't want to happen should not be a wrong way to play the game. It was good intrigue.
Please stop making up rules that go against the legit ways to play the game and only serve to antagonize and confuse the playerbase.

I'm seeing players IC suggesting to consult the Titans before making this or that political decision. This is just breeding confusion, toxic fear and metagame approach within the community. Reconsider your methods.

[Anaris]

Guys. What Sirion, Eppy and Nivemus did should not be illegal. Coordinating a sneak attack to stop a takeover they all didn't want to happen should not be a wrong way to play the game. It was good intrigue.

Just as they did, you are completely ignoring the alliance bloc restrictions.

Neither Sirion nor Nivemus is allied to Eponllyn, or has any other particular reason to aid them in their war against Shadowdale.

If we allowed this sort of thing, they would be nothing more than tissue paper.

Sirion, Nivemus, Eponllyn, Caligus, and Yssrgard need to figure out who their actual allies are, and who is just a friend who they enjoy hanging out with, but do not aid in military matters. Because together, they are an alliance bloc that controls over half the human-owned regions of the continent. "But they should be allowed toâ€"" no, because that's blatant circumvention of the rules.

Is it new? Yes.
Does it take time to develop new cultural background, especially in a place like the EC? Yes.
Does that mean it's OK for them to be allies-in-all-but-name now, six months from now, a year from now? No, no, and no.

This is exactly the same issue that was being dealt with recently on Dwilight, and they were (with one notable exception) able to deal with it in a mature manner.

[Constantine]

Both Sirion and Nivemus have a clear geopolitical interest to see Oligarch safely in Eppy's hands. I would probably want to do the same to get Shadowdale out of Commonyr. I am sure other nobles in Sirion share the same sentiment and nothing will change if you keep banning their leadership. They will just grow bitter, fearful and more passive aggressive. Or leave.

Stating that someone didn't have a reason to make an underhanded move, to sucker punch or betray someone, just because he is not mechanically allied with someone else, is exactly what I outlined as destroying the political fabric of the game. 

You are sort of substituting the living and breathing politics of BM, built on geopolitics, internal political agenda and even personal relations between leaders, for an alliance system akin to Civilization, where you just toggle alliances with NPCs and forget about it until you retoggle.
I really hope you can see this at some point.

[Zakky]

Both Sirion and Nivemus have a clear geopolitical interest to see Oligarch safely in Eppy's hands. I would probably want to do the same to get Shadowdale out of Commonyr. I am sure other nobles in Sirion share the same sentiment and nothing will change if you keep banning their leadership. They will just grow bitter, fearful and more passive aggressive. Or leave.

Stating that someone didn't have a reason to make an underhanded move, to sucker punch or betray someone, just because he is not mechanically allied with someone else, is exactly what I outlined as destroying the political fabric of the game. 

You are sort of substituting the living and breathing politics of BM, built on geopolitics, internal political agenda and even personal relations between leaders, for an alliance system akin to Civilization, where you just toggle alliances with NPCs and forget about it until you retoggle.
I really hope you can see this at some point.

I am sorry. I don't think you understand the problem here. The alliance bloc limit was implemented to stop people like you from doing what you've been doing for years. Dog piling.

1) Before the alliance bloc limit, people like you built mega alliances. Causing stagnation since some were too afraid to get themselves into continental wars.
2) When the alliance bloc was implemented, people like you circumvented the limits through guilds. I forgot the name of the northern guild name but I vaguely remember it starting with circle of something. For Dwilight, there was Alliance of Free Nations.
3) You were all warned about circumventing it. You ignored and continued to the same old ways despite the warnings.

The admins are asking for a very simple thing. If you want to help someone, become allies. You can have as many allies as you want under 30 or so region limit. If you want to have more allies, then make your allies drop some regions they don't need. Or your realm could do that.

Now what does this new war declaration provide? It is telling you, you need a proper justification to start a war. Stop piggybacking on someone else's war.

[Anaris]

Both Sirion and Nivemus have a clear geopolitical interest to see Oligarch safely in Eppy's hands. I would probably want to do the same to get Shadowdale out of Commonyr. I am sure other nobles in Sirion share the same sentiment and nothing will change if you keep banning their leadership. They will just grow bitter, fearful and more passive aggressive. Or leave.

A geopolitical interest is why you sign alliances. Not why you show up to random battles to help people you have nothing to do with.

I understand the problems with the alliance restrictions' conflict with human nature, and as I have said repeatedly, I would be overjoyed to have an alternative system to put in place that achieves the same goal, and also works alongside human motivations, rather than against them. However, until those alternatives actually exist, the alliance restrictions are the law of the land, and circumventing that law carries with it a harsh punishment, especially after all the many other things Kinsey and the three rulers in question have doneâ€"or, as the case may be, utterly refused to do.

[Constantine]

The alliance bloc limit was implemented to stop people like you from doing what you've been doing for years. Dog piling

Do you have any idea who I am?

A geopolitical interest is why you sign alliances. Not why you show up to random battles to help people you have nothing to do with.

Wait, no. "you have nothing to do with someone" just because he's not your mechanical ally any more? This is not human. This is Age of Empires level of diplomacy.

I understand the problems with the alliance restrictions' conflict with human nature, and as I have said repeatedly, I would be overjoyed to have an alternative system to put in place that achieves the same goal, and also works alongside human motivations, rather than against them. However, until those alternatives actually exist, the alliance restrictions are the law of the land, and circumventing that law carries with it a harsh punishment, especially after all the many other things Kinsey and the three rulers in question have doneâ€"or, as the case may be, utterly refused to do.

I get the concerns. And I get that the solution is not readily available and it's a placeholder solution to strongarm the playerbase into.. I dunno.. playing the game by mechanics and not by personal whims?
But I seriously fear that the cure for the issue may be way worse than the issue itself. That is honestly the only reason I spoke up.

[Anaris]

Wait, no. "you have nothing to do with someone" just because he's not your mechanical ally any more? This is not human. This is Age of Empires level of diplomacy.

In BattleMaster, there are a number of things that are controlled by game mechanics.

One of those is who your allies are.

Claiming that you won a duel when the game says you lost is forbidden.
Claiming that your character is a Duke when the game says you are not is forbidden.

Claiming that someone is your ally, or treating them as your de facto ally even when the game mechanics say you are neutral or at peace, especially when the reason they are not your ally is because making them your ally would put you over the alliance bloc limit, is forbidden, and is a circumvention of game mechanics.

Yes, this is new. This is not the way things have always been done.
No, I do not expect this to be the way things work forever.
But right now, when the alliance bloc restrictions are still new enough that we still have realms acting like they are part of a massive more-than-half-the-continent bloc despite not being allied, extraordinary measures are required to ensure that people understand that the restrictions are serious, they are real, and breaking them has real consequences.

[Constantine]

I get that too. But I don't see why a standing alliance in your mind is the only reason to get involved into someone else's business. Sometimes you're not allied with either side but you're pursuing your own interests. In this instance - making sure Shadowdale does not get too powerful and dominate the region. I think it's legit. I also liked that they coordinated a pincer sneak attack instead of just mass-declaring/dogpiling on SD.

It just seems to me that controlling how alliances are shaped and then absolutely confining all group conflict strictly along the alliances lines will lead to stagnation. We have war island for that sort of gameplay, where politics are decided by game mechanics. I don't play on war island and I don't want to.
I don't know, maybe you did not enjoy that aspect of the game when you actively played BM. But you can't deny it's important for many here.

[Anaris]

I get that too. But I don't see why a standing alliance in your mind is the only reason to get involved into someone else's business. Sometimes you're not allied with either side but you're pursuing your own interests. In this instance - making sure Shadowdale does not get too powerful and dominate the region. I think it's legit. I also liked that they coordinated a pincer sneak attack instead of just mass-declaring/dogpiling on SD.

It just seems to me that controlling how alliances are shaped and then absolutely confining all group conflict strictly along the alliances lines will lead to stagnation. We have war island for that sort of gameplay, where politics are decided by game mechanics. I don't play on war island and I don't want to.
I don't know, maybe you did not enjoy that aspect of the game when you actively played BM. But you can't deny it's important for many here.

While there may be cases that fit what you are describing here, this was not one of those.

We have messages from well before the actual intervention with the three realms talking to and about each other as if they were allied, and the whole thing was very deliberately coordinated.

[Zakky]

I think you need to differentiate characters and realms.

Characters can have allies in other realms.

Realms cannot be allied when they are not allied.

[BarticaBoat]

Shadowdale has picked fights with Nivemus, Caligus, Eppy, and Sirion but Eppy needs to 1v1 them....?

[Anaris]

Shadowdale has picked fights with Nivemus, Caligus, Eppy, and Sirion but Eppy needs to 1v1 them....?

Please stop putting words into our mouths. No one has said that Eponllyn cannot or should not call in support from allies.

The recent punishments were very explicitly, very clearly for doing so without an alliance and thus circumventing the alliance bloc restrictions.

[BarticaBoat]

Affirmative.