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 - Meneldur

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 11
BM General Discussion / Re: forummaster3
« on: August 13, 2013, 02:38:43 AM »

Yes, it does... but let's consider this: which do we prefer? A source for greater access to info that is available to all, regardless of activity, that they can read up on their own time whenever they want, and that can be monitored and moderated, or a place that holds no logs, that has no moderation, and that basically forces you to be on at all times and to read through a bunch of crap before being able to find the interesting stuff. In both cases, really active players will be able to fetch all the information they need, and seed all of the misinformation they desire. In one case, though, less active players will not have the time to get as much "scoop" as the more active player, and will not have anyone to protect him from hostile behavior. Which would you prefer?

In case you haven't guessed, I'm comparing the forums to IRC, here. It used to be that IRC was the place to be in the scoop. It was a much more elitist medium than the forum could ever be. Here, at least, all of the posts are organized into boards and subjects, and the most blatant crap is filtered out. This "in-group" you mention is a LOT broader with the forums than it was with IRC.

I think Chenier has pinpointed here exactly why the local areas of the forum are good, and why for me at least they have improved my BM experience.

I never had the time or the will to venture too much into the IRC- like any instant messaging system is requires a lot more attention to actually gain any fun out of and it can be very intimidating for newcomers. So before the introduction of the forum I had no OOC interaction with other BM players aside from the occasional OOC message in game, and certainly I didn't feel like I was part of any kind of "BM community".

However with the advent of the forums, and the local forums in particular, a more casual player like myself was finally able to get some OOC interaction; to discuss things with other players from other realms and to essentially become part of the Battlemaster community. It certainly made me more motivated to do stuff IC, and lessened the feeling of being a lone player in a wilderness that is unfortunately common in BM with the lessening player density.

Now of course you could say (as I think Tom is trying to) that all this is very bad: we shouldn't have to be using an OOC mechanism like the forums to feel truly part of the community and discussing stuff anything IC related OOC is detrimental to the game. And in a sense this is true. However the problem is that you cannot get around that. Before the forums there was no golden age where IC remained IC and OOC was only used for fun chats unrelated to Battlemaster; rather there was an even smaller group of elite players spending inordinate hours of time talking to eachother about IC issues with absolutely no kind of oversight or accountability, while the vast majority of players, even those such as myself who had the desire to interact with other BM players on an OOC level, were simply unable to join in or at the very least observe what was going on. Goodness knows what impact this had on the game itself: here on the forums I've seen the phrase "we discussed/thought this up on the IRC" thrown about several times, so the argument it somehow had no IG impact simply is not true. At the very least here on the forums it can be moderated and everyone can see what is going on, giving far more people a chance to participate.

I also think its no coincidence that many of those most hostile to the forums, including (if I am not mistaken) the guy who made the initial comment of "forummaster destroying battlemaster" are older players who probably already knew other players OOC before the forums existed. For such players I can imagine why the forums might be seen as irritating, as  yet another unnecessary OOC channel. But for those of us not privileged enough to have already developed OOC relationships with other players for years old family interaction or the IRC, the local forums were a fantastic way to finally feel part of a BM community and interact with players from different realms and continents. Not only that, but blatant propaganda aside the local forums were  a great way to select which realms to play in when creating a new character, rather than getting repeatedly disappointed by inaccurate realm descriptions or outdated wiki pages as has often been my experience (both before and after the forums).

Overall I think the complete loss of the local forums does not, as some here seem to think, send the message: "Do not discuss IC matters OOC, keep stuff like this in game". Instead it sends the message "Do not discuss IC matters OOC where it can be moderated and seen by all, keep these discussions between friends in private groups". If the former is truly the objective then a lot more drastic measures need to be considered, rather than simply removing the local forums and cutting off many from what was a fun part of BM.

BM General Discussion / Re: Closing Islands ?
« on: July 30, 2013, 09:30:57 PM »
SA theology can be easily shifted, in fact I've been thinking of a few explanations since this thread started, ranging from digging up the old wiki texts which mention Morek's founders having visions before they arrived on Dwilight, to coming up with a Rabbinical Judaism style reform in which the religion survives but without some of the vital rituals which were tied to a now lost geographical reality.

In any case thats all quite relevant to the matter at hand. As much as I love Dwilight and SA, it is a silly argument to say it should be exempt from consideration just because we rped some big red stars- I'm sure every continent has its own unique role playing points and its up to us as players to keep these alive if our island is scheduled for deletion.

IMO if a continent is deleted then it should be selected for a practical reason like low player count, low player retention, low attractiveness to newcomers etc etc. rather than a forum argument over whose culture is the "most unique"

BM General Discussion / Re: Closing Islands ?
« on: July 30, 2013, 08:13:51 PM »
Let's try to stay calm in the delicate waters of island loss. :)

I very much believe the retention study should be redone and that, in consideration of Dwilight's one noble per player rule, a player density of the islands included with the character density.

^This. I imagine that if player density rather than character density were measured, Dwilight would rank considerably higher.

BM General Discussion / Re: Closing Islands ?
« on: July 30, 2013, 02:08:57 PM »
I won't be deleting EC. It has all the history of this game, in a certain sense, EC is BattleMaster.
I also don't think it would be fair to wipe out BT - they fought for their island and could've lost it, and won against the odds.

I personally would want to delete Dwilight, but I realize it has the most vocal and aggressive fans. However, here is the player density per island:

According to that, we should axe BT, Dwilight or Colonies. FEI is much better than everyone here makes it, it has the highest player densite in the game.

Is that graph player or character density? Because Dwilight has the 1 character rule which would negativly impact its character count even if it has more players.

BM General Discussion / Re: Closing Islands ?
« on: July 29, 2013, 03:00:23 PM »
However, we realize that people hate losing their realms and social connections. So every realm can retreat in an orderly fashion by declaring a target island. We will manually re-create the realm there and those who flee can join it. Details TBD (landing location? how to get a region or two to get started?). This way, people can move to a different island with their entire realm. Sure, you lose your land and all, but the people are sitll there and you can rebuild.

This I think would be very good. At the very least it gives players who might initially been inclined to quit after the loss of their favorite island a motivation to carry on and try and rebuild elsewhere.

BM General Discussion / Re: Closing Islands ?
« on: July 25, 2013, 11:08:32 PM »
I know this is going against the general trend, but I actually think freezing an island would be worse than sinking it. Looking at the example of the War Islands, players migrated elsewhere in a bid to continue their realms and religions, resulting in things like Everguard and Torenism on Dwilight. Closing another island may have that same effect on the players there, not merely increasing player density but also adding another interesting element into game play as players from the closed island try and rebuild elsewhere. Furthermore this kind of migration may allow cultures and groups from the closed island to continue, albeit in a different form.

Now perhaps it is the pessimist in me, but I don't see a frozen continent ever being re-opened barring a sudden miracle. However by giving players the vague hope of re-opening we will ensure that nowhere near enough will be willing to migrate to allow the continuation and spread of cultures that would occur from a closed island. This essentially means that the end result will be the same as closing an island while banning immigration- not only are game cultures and histories destroyed (an inevitability regardless of which option we choose) but there is no chance of said cultures surviving elsewhere in the game.

People can put her on ignore, which could take care of option 3.

Other than that, the Elders can't remove from her the options to stir the peasants or auto da fe. However, doesn't that make sense? If someone comes in an illiterate village dressed as a SA priest and speak of the Bloodstars in a semi-cogent fashion, the peasants will just assume she's the real thing.

Realms can order her arrest. You can arrest all priests of realms you are at war with, even if they are of your own religion. Her own realm could ban her if they were so inclined (I don't think they are, but that's valid IC play).

I agree that a mechanism to boot a priest would be nice to have. However the situation is not so hopeless right now. There are things that all sides can do, if they're willing to do it.

I don't think her stirring up the peasants is really a problem. I'm pretty sure the most powerful stuff is Elder only and even if she can perform stuff like auto de fes, they can only be declared against non-SA members which limits their usefulness. The rest of the priest abilities, like stir unrest and badmouth realm, are so under powered that I doubt she'll even be noticed if there is not a priest nearby.

As for arresting- the only way that's going to be anything more than an inconvenience is if she's banned and executed, and the game is quite rightly designed so that that can't happen to you unless you deliberately take pretty silly risks.

I do think the whole can't excommunicate a priest thing is stupid, mainly for rp reasons, but the non-Elder priest game is so under powered that I don't think its game breaking.

I'm wondering when Jonsu is going to pony up and found a schism. I mean where else is there to go from here? She's just declared war on all but two members of the Elder council. With the way the voting is structured dismantling the elder council will take a massive concentrated effort of the full members to unseat everyone. I don't see that kind of opposition in the church and several of her biggest supporters are on the fast track to excommunication. Overthrowing the council from within doesn't seem to be in the cards however forming a new church as a refuge for everyone getting excommunicated or otherwise estranged from the church is a sure fire way for her to consolidate her supporters.

I was just thinking this as well. Considering that she has 0% chance of becoming Regent now even if the secularists install 3 supporting Consuls (which honestly is what I thought her next move would be) her only options are to either 1) rescind her claims, 2) schism, or 3) perpetually rant, rave and otherwise troll every letter from an Elder, claiming that she has "removed them from office".

Unfortunately for everyone on the full members channel I suspect she'll go with 3, though I suppose 2 is an option once she gets bored.

Dwilight / Re: Sanguis Astroism
« on: July 06, 2013, 05:06:39 AM »
Well, so it's a good thing the Elders got what they wanted. Otherwise who knows what kind of pointless, destructive quagmire might have ensued?

The hostility towards Jonsu was quite unrelated to question of future crusades, and more based on her personal qualities. The fact that it allowed Medugnatos to call the crusade for Terran was an unintended consequence; indeed there was not even a hint at the possible need for a future crusade when all this took place. Had Rabisu "groomed" any other priest no one would have protested, and we would have had another anti-crusade Light of the Maddening.

Dwilight / Re: Sanguis Astroism
« on: July 06, 2013, 04:32:24 AM »
That something like this would happen if Rabisu stepped down was one reason he stayed on as long as he did. Everyone wanted a Crusade. Not just one Crusade either. Pretty much any political conflict involving members of the Church had a vocal faction lobbying for Crusade. It's not surprising that one of them succeeded, especially since Jonsu was elbowed out of being the next Light.

How'd that happen anyway? Rabisu groomed her for the position. It would have been like an angrier, female Rabisu.

You seem to have seriously underestimated the amount of hostility against Jonsu in the Elders Council; nearly everyone was united in getting her out as soon as possible, and thanks to her tantrum when she wasn't declared Light she provided the perfect opportunity for us.

The only Elder I had expected would speak up for her was Malus, but it appears he didn't feel that strongly about it.

Sanguis Astroism's influence over the Dwi realms need not be broken by this. In fact thats generally not whats being pushed for. Niselur nonwithstanding. No one on either side (save some in Asylon) have a problem with SA, they have a problem with a number of the Elders, and as much as indivduals on the forum want to cry out how no one has tried to change the charter, they're not grasping the problem. Because they're the problem.

I can see this as being the position of the Farronite Republic (who I imagine want an Elders Council that will accept them as a "theocratic realm" and look out of their interests as though they were a theocracy) but who else really wants this?
Luria sounds like its just along for the ride so they can destroy D'Hara without Morekian interference, and Niselur seems to be against "ecclesiastical tyranny" over "soverign rulers"- pretty much the reduction of SA to a compliant flavor religion. In fact a mere glance at the recent string of messages in the SA channel seems to indicate that at least among the more vocal of the secularists, from Libero to Niselur to D'Hara, the main theme is that the Elders should "stick to spiritual matters" and stay out of the affairs of realms.

Dwilight / Re: Luria
« on: June 26, 2013, 06:44:34 PM »
Well this will teach me not to skim the messages in the D'Hara realm channel because more interesting things are happening in SA...

Dwilight / Re: Sanguis Astroism
« on: June 23, 2013, 03:02:11 PM »
It was also, at least in appearance, in total conflict with the church's position on Farronite Republic's ascension to theocracy-worthiness and Aurvandil's level of crusade-worthiness.

A viable realm full of astroists wanted to be recognized as a theocracy, and was told to piss off. Meanwhile, a hostile realm, that housed a splinter faith considered evil, led by a heretic, and against whom nearly all astroists were at war, was not considered worthy of a crusade by Rabisu (and thus the Church). Then, a tiny republic with nearly no nobles, no region, and no food gets to be considered a theocracy and gets to enjoy a crusade to save its ass...

Metal may be both strong and malleable, but if you bend it both ways, it'll break. And that's what happened.

And really, as Gustav said, calling it a theocracy when it wasn't didn't pass well with a number of people. People used that against Farronite Republic: "You aren't a theocracy, you are a republic, the game says so!" And then you came saying "Terran isn't a republic, it's a theocracy, regardless of what the game says!". And so did, I believe, a number of elders who had the opposite stance when it came to FR. Or at least, so it seemed by their lack of noticeable objection in this instance compared to FR's case.

This dosn't really make sense. The Farronite Republic never wanted to become theocracy, they wanted to be recognized as the equivalent of a theocracy while remaining a republic. This is somthing Khari was very very clear about- there was never going to be any government change in the Farronite Republic, and most of her arguments were based on the idea that the Church needed to move beyond the conventional defntion of a theocracy and allow non-theocratic governments be recognized as such. If the Farronites did desire to become a theocracy (and not just a republic with Elder voting rights) then they would have been welcomed with open arms, but that's not what they wanted.

Terran on the other hand was preparing to become a theocracy at the time of the Phantaran attack, and the Elders were not about to allow their new theocracy to be destroyed before it was even created just because Kale managed to act before the anarchy process could be completed. Yes, technically it wasn't yet a theocracy (and if you had looked closely you would note that many Elders noted the distinction) but it would be in a matter of weeks, the Farronite Republic on the other hand never intended on becoming a theocracy ever, so how that makes them more "theocracy-worthy" I don't know. Believe it or not Hirehsmont did try the whole "we are practically a theocracy in all but name" argument but the Elders were very adamant that they would need a solid plan and guarantee that it would go through the required anarchy and actually become a real theocracy before they even contemplated any aid.

I agree with the stuff about Aurvandil though, but that's Rabisu's fault. Most of the Elders currently in power had lobbied for a crusade against Aurvandil as well.

Dwilight / Re: Sanguis Astroism
« on: June 22, 2013, 01:47:06 AM »
Meh. We'll see. I maintain that Dwilight will be much blander once SA is reduced to a weak background flavor. Religion is pretty lame in most of BM; Dwilight is practically the only place it matters on a regular basis.

I very much agree that should SA be reduced to a flavor religion in the coming war, Dwilight will be much more boring and BM will have lost one of its only religions that actually did anything. However at the same time characters interacting with SA by wanting to destroy it are not necessarily a bad thing either from an OOC perspective.

Dwilight / Re: Sanguis Astroism
« on: June 22, 2013, 12:31:49 AM »
So everybody wants a big war involving SA, but nobody wants to be the first to make a move, and then it's SA's fault things stagnate because they keep 'dominating' the island... Holy crap it's Atamara all over again. Sanguis Cagilism?

Exactly! Sick of a domineering Church, power-hungry Elders and lovey-dubby theocracies? Go to war and try to crush the Church, replace the Eldes and destroy the theocracies! That's what Leopold is doing and the North looks like its finally going to get interesting again.

Sitting on the forums and typing: "boring fun-killing evil SA, why don't you just destroy yourselves randomly for little rp reason so we can have OOC "fun"" is not the way to go. A conflict is made interesting because there are opposing sides, and both sides do everything in their power to win. A manufactured implosion for OOC reasons is over quickly and results in even more boredom.

I do think it will be a shame if SA is reduced to just another powerless flavor religion, but then again I've had more fun in SA than most so I'm rather biased. And even SA gets boring without a good crusade once in a while.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 11