Zuma/Daimons

[Dante Silverfire]

Here's a possible example:

Since we know the Zuma only take actions in response to what human players do or say to them, one possibility for the events is thus:

Madina, knowing that it would be fighting a civil war (from either sides perspective) decides that it doesn't want Terran interference in their war so that their side has a better chance of winning. This decision is made because the side expects Terran would side against them. Thus, this Madinan faction decides to give the Zuma 2000 bushels of food to invade Terran for a bit to make them wary about leaving their borders. The Zuma comply because for some unknown reason they need a lot of food for worthless regions. They make up some random excuse for the invasion and thus Terran gets attacked.

(This is purely 100% made up, although I guess it could be true, but is merely to illustrate that what someone thinks is going on isn't always the truth.)

[egamma]

Here's a possible example:

Since we know the Zuma only take actions in response to what human players do or say to them, one possibility for the events is thus:

Madina, knowing that it would be fighting a civil war (from either sides perspective) decides that it doesn't want Terran interference in their war so that their side has a better chance of winning. This decision is made because the side expects Terran would side against them. Thus, this Madinan faction decides to give the Zuma 2000 bushels of food to invade Terran for a bit to make them wary about leaving their borders. The Zuma comply because for some unknown reason they need a lot of food for worthless regions. They make up some random excuse for the invasion and thus Terran gets attacked.

(This is purely 100% made up, although I guess it could be true, but is merely to illustrate that what someone thinks is going on isn't always the truth.)

See this? This is fantastic. Why can't the rest of you see that you can play a game with a GM-controlled faction?

I mean, it's like Everquest, where the gate guards are level 299, and the highest character is 50. Don't be stupid and try and attack them, just leave them alone, or use them to defend yourself.

If you have a legitimate suggestion for the Zuma GM, send him a PM, here on the forums. I've done it before, and he wrote back a decent response. He's a decent guy, trying his best to play the GM characters that Tom gave him to play, in the way that Tom told him to play them.

Ever notice that Tom never posts to this thread? It's probably because he has better things to do, but has anyone considered that the Zuma GM is Tom? Consider that--it's his game, he wants to play an OP GM realm, put up or shut up.

And no, I don't think it's really Tom. But the GM is playing Haktoo and Screamer and Fang Fang and all the rest according to his instructions.

So either learn to play with the Zuma, learn to play against the Zuma, learn to ignore the Zuma, die, or move your character. Pick one.

[MaleMaldives]

Don't be stupid and try and attack them, just leave them alone, or use them to defend yourself.

Except we did leave them alone and they attacked without warning.

[Geronus]

What would you do if Aurvandil did the same with their 25k army? Or all of SA realms insisted they no longer wished to honour the treaty and they had som 50k CS willing to settle the matter?

Well this right here is why I think the entire idea of NPC realms is really just bad right from the get go. On BT, where they are specifically designed as overwhelming but ultimately surmountable challenges that can be expected to destroy entire realms from time to time, and are advertised as such, they are fine. Trying to integrate one into a non-Invasion island as 'just another realm' (sort of) is not the same. I could have guessed that exactly this would happen. Any permanent NPC realm is going to eventually cause friction and resentment no matter what it does. When SA decides to screw you over it sucks but there's no excuse. SA is just a bunch of players like everyone else, subject to the same rules, and deep down we all know that if they beat you, they did it fair and square. When an NPC realm that operates under different and (actually making it worse) unknown rules screws you, it's a lot easier to feel like you've been unfairly attacked. Remember how people used to accuse Tom of giving his realms unfair advantages? It's exactly the same principle. No matter how fair the GM, no matter how even handed he is, someone somewhere is going to get upset over what he does and blame it on the 'unfair' advantages the NPC's get. IMO the resentment such a realm inevitably creates is not worth what it contributes, especially when BM players are more than capable of creating their own conflicts and plotlines without any outside help.

[Dante Silverfire]

Except we did leave them alone and they attacked without warning.

As far as I can tell from the statements of multiple players, this is not true.

Someone messed with them, and the ruler of Terran has done so at least once. Just because not every single member of the realm did something, doesn't mean they weren't messing with the Zuma somehow. Granted, I only have what is in this forum and my char's own experience to discuss it, but that's what I can tell.

[MaleMaldives]

I am referring to the time they attacked us before this when they didn't bother to check if a letter they received was real or not.

[Dante Silverfire]

When an NPC realm that operates under different and (actually making it worse) unknown rules screws you, it's a lot easier to feel like you've been unfairly attacked. Remember how people used to accuse Tom of giving his realms unfair advantages? It's exactly the same principle.

You're right its exactly the same principle:

No matter what anyone says, its absolutely untrue. Just because you complain the most doesn't make you right.

[MaleMaldives]

You're right its exactly the same principle:

No matter what anyone says, its absolutely untrue. Just because you complain the most doesn't make you right.

Well that is like accusing of cheating. This is complaining about GM's doing a bad job. It is pretty different. We can debate whether they are actually doing a bad job or not. Accusing of cheating there could be proof or just speculation.

[De-Legro]

Well this right here is why I think the entire idea of NPC realms is really just bad right from the get go. On BT, where they are specifically designed as overwhelming but ultimately surmountable challenges that can be expected to destroy entire realms from time to time, and are advertised as such, they are fine. Trying to integrate one into a non-Invasion island as 'just another realm' (sort of) is not the same. I could have guessed that exactly this would happen. Any permanent NPC realm is going to eventually cause friction and resentment no matter what it does. When SA decides to screw you over it sucks but there's no excuse. SA is just a bunch of players like everyone else, subject to the same rules, and deep down we all know that if they beat you, they did it fair and square. When an NPC realm that operates under different and (actually making it worse) unknown rules screws you, it's a lot easier to feel like you've been unfairly attacked. Remember how people used to accuse Tom of giving his realms unfair advantages? It's exactly the same principle. No matter how fair the GM, no matter how even handed he is, someone somewhere is going to get upset over what he does and blame it on the 'unfair' advantages the NPC's get. IMO the resentment such a realm inevitably creates is not worth what it contributes, especially when BM players are more than capable of creating their own conflicts and plotlines without any outside help.

Rubbish. You only have to look at the amount of claims that SA is a Dev favoured group to know that losing parties always have the option to cry and claim the other side cheats. In fact every war I've been involved in that has either seen a realm destroyed or almost destroyed has resulted in claims and bitterness the same as what is currently targeted at the Zuma GM. Hell sometime just winning a battle results in OOC message storm about how the realm is full of cheats, or how they exploited this bug, or my favourite, you big realm bullies ruin the game. When people see an army with near 100% movement, the first thing most people seem to think it multi cheats.

I saw no end of bitter OOC hatred towards the main group of SA when I was in D'Hara. Really really petty stuff. No SA realm had invaded, we had not been forced to accept SA as a religion, but there was some serious hatred going on there.

[Gustav Kuriga]

Yes, because we play Battlemaster since it's so much like Everquest. We should all use the Zuma as our own personal shields and sic them on anyone who tries to attack us. Unfortunately, egamma, it is exactly that which is the problem with the Zuma. They are overpowered, so people will do whatever they want, and if their enemies try to retaliate, they find a way to send the Zuma after them. Which is exactly what people hate about them.

You're right its exactly the same principle:

No matter what anyone says, its absolutely untrue. Just because you complain the most doesn't make you right.

That is not what he is saying.

[De-Legro]

Yes, because we play Battlemaster since it's so much like Everquest. We should all use the Zuma as our own personal shields and sic them on anyone who tries to attack us. Unfortunately, egamma, it is exactly that which is the problem with the Zuma. They are overpowered, so people will do whatever they want, and if their enemies try to retaliate, they find a way to send the Zuma after them. Which is exactly what people hate about them.

That is not what he is saying.

Has ANYONE managed to use the Zuma in this way?  Apart from Terrance the few attempts I know about in this regard, ended very badly for the characters involved. I've always suspected there was some underlying problem between the Zuma and Terran that allowed Terrance to pull it off. Are we really basing all this hate on a single instance in how many years?

[MaleMaldives]

Has ANYONE managed to use the Zuma in this way?  Apart from Terrance the few attempts I know about in this regard, ended very badly for the characters involved. I've always suspected there was some underlying problem between the Zuma and Terran that allowed Terrance to pull it off. Are we really basing all this hate on a single instance in how many years?

There has been no underlying problem between Terran and the Zuma until maybe after the Terrance incident. And I am upset about that because it was worse then the current one and lost my army twice to it, both of which were unexpected attacks. This current attack is not as bad but still trigger happy in my opinion and again no warning. The first year I had been playing the Zuma did nothing and were boring but I was fine with that. Then from doing that they be retarded and attack Terran over dumb stuff. So yeah to me the two sorta three attacks on Terran have been so annoying they warrant that for me.

[egamma]

Yes, because we play Battlemaster since it's so much like Everquest. We should all use the Zuma as our own personal shields and sic them on anyone who tries to attack us.

No, what I am saying is, don't pick a fight you can't win.

Besides the ONE incident with the forged letter, can someone name another time when the Zuma did something unprovoked?

Like De-Legro is saying, complaints very similar to these can be found in this same forum, under the SA threads.

For some reason, people think that they are playing Whinemaster, not Battlemaster. I'm not sure why, though--the URL clearly says Battle.

What I fail to understand is why Terran hasn't tried talking to those of us in D'Hara about the Zuma. One, some of us have positive experiences with them, two, we're in an alliance, and three, we have food stocks to last us over 80 days--which means we can take our substantial gold income and divert it entirely into a war effort for at least 2 months. Our income is roughly equal to that of Terran.

[Geronus]

Someone feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but all of my knowledge and experience of them suggests that if you just look at the map of Dwilight and pretend that every region that the Zuma hold and every region they touch simply didn't exist and played accordingly, then you would pretty much not have to deal with the Zuma. If members of your realm (especially your rulers) choose to not do so, or someone chooses to interact with them, that is a different story. Either punish those characters or take the consequences, or simply move elsewhere. The Zuma are bounded by certain game mechanics which limit their power, and as far as I can tell they also only respond to human interactions instead of simply killing for no reason.

As you yourself just pointed out, you might still pay the price for what some other player or realm does. Non-interaction does not protect you in any way, and you may not be able to effectively punish the character who brings it down on your head. And frankly, the move elsewhere sentiment isn't very constructive. That line of thinking follows from an assumption that the GM has a greater right to be there than the players. While that's certainly a valid position (Tom's game, Tom's rules), it's not really a good one if your greatest concern is the player experience, and suddenly realizing that the characters and realms you've devoted time and effort to are doomed to have to constantly subordinate what they want to the dictates of dealing with an NPC realm is not bound to be a good experience in anyone's book I would think.

On another note: I'm fairly sure that if Terran for instance wanted to involve itself in the Luria affair and simply ignore the Zuma during that time and proceed not to taunt or insult them, they would be perfectly capable of doing so without the Zuma interference.

That depends entirely on whether someone or something else sets the Zuma off while their attention and possibly their army is elsewhere. Considering how suddenly and often the Zuma have gone berserk lately, and how trivial some of the reasons for those episodes have been, if I were Terran I would not be at all confident that I could afford to do anything other than watch that border like a hawk and focus all my attention on not only *not* provoking the Zuma, but on making sure that no one else does either.

Heck at this point I would have to start thinking about a policy of constant surveillance of Zuma lands to see who goes in and out, so I know who to blame and which realms to punish when the Zuma next come down on me. And then I would maybe start organizing all the realms that border the Zuma to commit them all to a policy of doing everything possible to prevent *any* character from entering Zuma lands without first obtaining permission from the Moot. I'd seal my borders to non-Moot nobility under threat of war, unless permission is obtained in advance. I'd make it a bannable offense in my realm to enter Zuma lands without permission.

But then, why should I have to do all that? Why should I have to focus so much energy and attention on this when it's not really what I want to be doing? I'm playing Battlemaster, not Zumamaster. And yet as far as I can tell, the *only * way I can be even somewhat certain that the Zuma aren't going to go ballistic on me at unpredictable moments is to prevent *anyone* from talking to them, not just my nobles. And thus the Zuma become more and more of a plot sink. The more I try to avoid dealing with them, the more time and effort I have to devote to that task, which defeats the point, the point being that I'm just not interested in them and would like to be able to pursue my own goals without having to give them any thought at all.

[MaleMaldives]

Besides the ONE incident with the forged letter, can someone name another time when the Zuma did something unprovoked?

Well it is good to know I am getting somewhere with these complaints, that people recognize the forged letter attack was a mistake.

The new attack on Terran was I guess provoked, but what ever it was exactly I am betting it is a huge overreaction. Plus it was without warning. And the things that would have caused the provoking were because we all got upset at the Zuma over the forged letter incident.