Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Fleugs

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 44
East Island / Re: Stegman Hemmings is ruining the conflict
« on: June 17, 2016, 05:13:33 PM »
The Hemmings family is capable of bringing more flavour and liveliness to a realm than ten of our average players compared.

Beluaterra / Re: Netherworld
« on: June 07, 2016, 06:46:01 PM »
You can join Gotland. The secret password is "I love Goats" and the hat with that tagline on it is required. Also a beard. For men and women alike! Everyone equal in the eyes of the Herd!

BM General Discussion / Re: Apologizing for my behavior
« on: June 07, 2016, 06:44:01 PM »
Group hug?

Development / Re: Age. Sucks.
« on: June 07, 2016, 06:42:55 PM »
Health like in CK2! And also death for old characters! I smell a chance to add another fame point or two!

BM General Discussion / Re: Firebrand society
« on: June 02, 2016, 06:37:01 PM »
Compared to "years ago", perhaps a shift has taken place where your character has more ingame responsibilities compared to the responsibilities a player holds towards the community. I don't wish to generalize, so I'll talk about myself, but I have the feeling this may apply to the game in a whole;

I used to play my char as an extension of myself (horribly so, because I was in my teenage years back then) where now I play my character as a being on itself. This has caused a shift in how I approach ingame decisions, for example: where ten years ago I would treat them as a player and evaluate them as such (thus taking into account a larger picture) I now treat them almost exclusively through the eyes of my character. I feel that this was necessary: there were more and more RPG-minded players coming into the game thus shifting the focus from playing e.g. Risk to Dungeons&Dragons - less theoretical and calculated planning and more playing with a story attached to it. While that is nice, it has (for me) a side effect that I might get too stubborn in how I build up my character. Unlike real people, who are open to change in character, my ingame characters do not. Perhaps because their timespan is simply much smaller than my own. I dunno, I just don't tend to change my character's behaviour & principles. Perhaps I should.

So recently I decided that, well, I didn't have qualms with OOC arrangements a decade ago. So I approached a few people on IRC (yup, I know, still a giant OOC clan) and talked about Perdan/Vix. I had already decided for my character to ditch old ideas about Perdan and thus I could approach EC with a fresh look (also didn't care whatsoever about the history). It allowed me, for example, to stop going to war against Vix to "reconquer" them. Why not allow a new realm to exist, I thought? More realms equals more realms you can fight. Which we did, but not for reconquest. We came to the conclusion, OOC, that war was crucial to attract a player base to make your realm fun. It simply gives activity (aka message count) a jolt and at the same time it allows your realm to attract nobles from places where there is peace.

I know, it's not nice to construct a war to draw nobles from another realm, potentially squashing anything fun to happen there, but as a ruler you hold some responsibilities. Your first and foremost task - and I too sometimes fail in this - is to guide your realm to what your players want. Not your nobles. At least that is how I changed my thinking, recently. There is more to take into account than ingame arguments. Sometimes it's better to use these ingame arguments to create a story, but I now believe it's preferable to base the outlining of your realm's "existence" on an OOC-vision and then mold the ingame story lines to it.

So this gets me to a conflicting point which I mentioned earlier in this post: my OOC vision. I never wanted to take Perdan City. That's it. I still feel I let myself down by doing so, because in my OOC vision, I wanted Eponllyn to remain a vibrant realm. However we kind-of wrecked them. Why? Because I felt  the characters (or players? I know for sure some also made the OOC motive) wanted to reconquer. So take back into account the history of Perdan, which I chose to abandon. Personally, the path we went on is a defeat for me. However, I took into the account not so much the opinion of other characters ingame, but also the opinion of players. Strong arguments were made. For example, and this argument was made ingame and is what I believe a perfect example of an "old playstyle" which I would like to see return: Perdan had 30+ nobles and one city. Our income per capita was ridiculously low, yet we fielded one of the strongest and possibly the most effective army on the continent. The argument is then that, simply, to keep Perdan itself viable with the noble count it had, expansion was simply a necessity. Even now the argument continues that Vix should give up more regions to us as originally agreed too (so technically the current situation). Vix, for crying out loud. Vix and Perdan are twins. Inseperable. We rock together, I have the feeling both ingame and OOC that these two realms click great.

Perhaps that argument is right. I don't know. Is it not fair that we drew in about 20 players, we should at least give them something? Most saw their tax income drop, and drop some more, because people kept joining. You have the chance to make your realm sustainable for your new noble count, perhaps you should just grab it. But then again that goes at the expense of another realm.

I'm straying off my train of thought, but to summarize I like it that I recently decided to take OOC arguments into account more. I still respect people who play their charaters with "pure RP", playing it as itself. But I am more and more going back to a point where I play my characters as little soldiers in my OOC wishes. They still have a story line and their ingame letters will mostly still be perfect in an ingame environment, but I might add in a tad more of a sense of "I'm playing a strategy board game".

tl;dr: took more OOC into account for playing game, still conflicted, exploring long lost boundaries!

East Island / Re: East Continent Concerns About Xavax and Perdan
« on: June 02, 2016, 06:14:39 PM »
I don't understand the strategy towards militia size in Isadril, but otherwise they should be fine.

East Island / Re: East Continent Concerns About Xavax and Perdan
« on: May 29, 2016, 01:32:50 PM »
Well, there's so many variables here, I'm not going to outline the intentions of Perdan (or rather, me) entirely. But right now we're in the Southern War and until certain variables change, we will be.

East Island / Re: East Continent Concerns About Xavax and Perdan
« on: May 28, 2016, 11:26:58 AM »
The first thing that's scary is that Xavax Imperium claims lands that are resembling the good old Ibladesh - with Isadril added on top as an extra super bonus. Not exactly something that can be ignored by any realm remotely close to the south.

Secondly, you must understand what a pain in the ass Duke Jeroen (of Eponllyn) has been to Perdan, and how ingenious he was in delaying our conquest of Perdan city and ultimately forcing Perdan to take the city by slaughtering/starving half the peasantry. Any realm that has Jeroen will probably be a valid war target for Perdan.

Thirdly, Xavax made a giant fuzz when Stegman bought Isadril (perhaps rightfully so, though let's be fair, it should have had a lord anyway) and Fallangard decided to join that nuisance when they got some regions of Eponllyn. Essentially delaying Perdan for such a long time might be perceived as an anticipation of Perdan joining the Souther War. If that was the intention, well, they succeeded at least in delaying Perdan from intervening by two to three months. In summary though, the way Xavax/Fallangard treated regions that came under their rule while Perdan clearly said they would take it, didn't help relations.

I know Perdan joining in so closely after Vix did isn't well received in the player base of Xavax (and to a lesser extent the other realms), but this entire war and the many, many side events that spilled over into the Perdan/Vix-Eppy/Nivemus war made temperatures rise. Slap on to that the well stated intention of Xavax to conquer pretty much the entire South (though they offered Perdan Al Arab if we joined on their side, way back), it's pretty fair to say Perdan aims for a divided South rather than a behemoth who clearly hasn't any qualms about declaring war.

If there's any upside for Xavax, really, it's that it has become a very interesting place to play in now. Even I am intrigued, I might considering booting up a  character there. They'll have plenty of enemies to fight with.

BM General Discussion / Re: Taking a break
« on: May 04, 2016, 05:14:10 PM »
I'll be looking forward to see you return Zakky.

East Island / Re: Xavax Imperium
« on: March 09, 2016, 05:35:16 PM »
The end result will remain the same. It will just take a bit longer to get to.

Out of curiosity, what effect does stirring up hatred really have in terms of game mechanics? Does it effect TO's or battles?

It makes TO harder of their regions. Not sure if that's only for sympathetic TO or for all of them.

BM General Discussion / Re: Crusader Realm
« on: March 08, 2016, 07:54:00 PM »
I wouldn't exactly use the Crusades to refer to the idea (where muslims would then be daimons?), but yeah, it is fun. And it is indeed sort-of what Thalmarkin wanted/tried/did.

However, after each (good) invasion, most lands have turned rogue and only a few realms really survive. It's usual that after invasions a colonisation of sorts begins, reconquering rogue lands to start new realm, or recreate old ones (but perhaps in different regions).

BM General Discussion / Re: Coming back, but... Where?
« on: March 02, 2016, 06:02:42 PM »
EC: Oligarch, Vix, Perdan, Xavax. They seem the most interesting/lively realms at the moment. Personal preference though. It might be equally interesting to join a smaller realm (Alara? Minas Nova? Shadowdale? Eponllyn?) and see it kick to life.

BT: Thalmarkin, Nothoi, Fronen. They look the most promising realms in the onslaught, though I agree with the notion of Delvin that Thal might ultimately be the last realm standing up to the invasion.

Dwi: I'm in LN. It caved in on itself after it caved in the world. The cards are so reshuffled on Dwi, I don't really know anymore. Plenty of options.

East Island / Re: Xavax Imperium
« on: February 21, 2016, 08:44:52 PM »
I wouldn't have expected any less from Stegman. Too bad he won't be in Perdan anymore... hilarious char to play with, until, of course, he cocks it up massively.  ;D

East Island / Re: Perdan, Vix Vs Eponllyn, Nivemus War
« on: February 17, 2016, 05:04:12 PM »
I don't get why Vix/Perdan would be an old alliance. Besides, Perdan is not in this to split up the "Northern alliance". It's in this to split up Sirion itself.
And for what it's worth, Nivemus declared war on Perdan (I guess to make it a 2v2 war?).

It's funny, because Vix made it clear they would strike at Nivemus through Epponlyn, while Perdan never claimed such. Yet Vix and Nivemus remain neutral, while Perdan and Nivemus are at war...

Beluaterra / Re: Invasion?
« on: February 16, 2016, 06:20:35 PM »
Magical Accident   (8 minutes ago)
personal message
While in Baqua, your record-breaking collection of scrolls and the local magic combined to form a dangerous magical disturbance that resulted in one of your summoning scrolls casting itself.


Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 44