Leaders of Beluaterra

[jaune]

Ah, forgot to mention that it aint that black and white.. since AA is peace with Fronen... not sure about Thalmarkin, but Thalmarkin, if i remember right has said to support OG, which AA has not, atleast yet announced.

Anyway, this will be intresting. A lot border wars.

[Disturbedyang]

Ah, forgot to mention that it aint that black and white.. since AA is peace with Fronen... not sure about Thalmarkin, but Thalmarkin, if i remember right has said to support OG, which AA has not, atleast yet announced.

Anyway, this will be intresting. A lot border wars.

Yeah, to tell the truth though, I was rather angry Riombara ruin it all for us. All I was trying really hard to do is to make the continent interesting by trying to betray Thalmarkin and making it fun for everyone. Now Nothoi go back to their old self, being wary of Riombara(how long does it take to sign a peace agreement for God sake) and Spearhold still reluctant to do anything. Not to mention that AA is unwilling to change their stance despite Melhed being overwhelmed by Thalmarkin. Hopefully they will change their stance when they see their closest ally who fought side by aide with them for so long dying one by one. *hint hint*

Anyway, enjoy the idle life everyone else while the same old war reveal itself.

[Cren]

The thing is that when superpowers join in and they bring in their grunts over local conflicts, the wars aren't fun any longer, both IC and OOC. Is there any way Melhed can survive a combined assault? No and soon the continent would go back to the boring peace.

[jaune]

The thing is that when superpowers join in and they bring in their grunts over local conflicts, the wars aren't fun any longer, both IC and OOC. Is there any way Melhed can survive a combined assault? No and soon the continent would go back to the boring peace.

Yeah, Melhed has very little chanche unless they get help, but Melhed pretty much built this mess. They took high risk, kudos for that. There are conflicts going other too and as far as i know those are getting bigger too.

Like said earlier it is now pretty much Thalmarkin/AA/OG and otherside there are Fronen & Melhed and rumours say that Spearhold is attacking OG too.

[Disturbedyang]

Yeah, Melhed has very little chanche unless they get help, but Melhed pretty much built this mess. They took high risk, kudos for that. There are conflicts going other too and as far as i know those are getting bigger too.

Like said earlier it is now pretty much Thalmarkin/AA/OG and otherside there are Fronen & Melhed and rumours say that Spearhold is attacking OG too.

The thing is that when superpowers join in and they bring in their grunts over local conflicts, the wars aren't fun any longer, both IC and OOC. Is there any way Melhed can survive a combined assault? No and soon the continent would go back to the boring peace.

Almost the whole continent's conflict started from Melhed, hence I can only see it go back to the boring self when we collapse. Like I said, thalmarkin and AA acted the right way IC. I just don't understand why Riombara acted that way though. It takes off the fun from everyone else.

[trying]

How were they suppose to react?

[Indirik]

The thing is that when superpowers join in and they bring in their grunts over local conflicts, the wars aren't fun any longer, both IC and OOC. Is there any way Melhed can survive a combined assault? No and soon the continent would go back to the boring peace.

The players in other realms aren't required to ensure that you are sufficiently supplied with your brand of fun.

If what they are doing is objectionable to you, and presumably to other people involved in the war, then take IG action to remove them from the war. if they are intervening on your side, then tell them to get lost because you do't want help. If they refuse, then maybe band together with your enemy in a temporary truce to fight off the interlopers. If they are intervening on the enemy's side, talk to your enemy and see if that is still an available option. Talk to your allies about getting support, either diplomatic or military, to discourage them from joining in.

If no one is willing to intervene to discourage the action you don't like, then maybe you're the only one who doesn't like it, and the "Greater Fun" is being served by what's happening.

[Gustav Kuriga]

If no one is willing to intervene to discourage the action you don't like, then maybe you're the only one who doesn't like it, and the "Greater Fun" is being served by what's happening.

Yes, exactly like what happened with Atamara and CE. I'm sure that's a wonderfully idealist policy you've got there, Indirik, but it doesn't work.

[Disturbedyang]

Yes, exactly like what happened with Atamara and CE. I'm sure that's a wonderfully idealist policy you've got there, Indirik, but it doesn't work.

The players in other realms aren't required to ensure that you are sufficiently supplied with your brand of fun.

If what they are doing is objectionable to you, and presumably to other people involved in the war, then take IG action to remove them from the war. if they are intervening on your side, then tell them to get lost because you do't want help. If they refuse, then maybe band together with your enemy in a temporary truce to fight off the interlopers. If they are intervening on the enemy's side, talk to your enemy and see if that is still an available option. Talk to your allies about getting support, either diplomatic or military, to discourage them from joining in.

If no one is willing to intervene to discourage the action you don't like, then maybe you're the only one who doesn't like it, and the "Greater Fun" is being served by what's happening.

That's the problem. A lot of rulers are like you. Rulers that are afraid of making it 'fun'. You forgot to think on the players that are non-rulers. As a ruler, you can feed them what you want, making the game more interesting. Unfortunately, your suggestion just doesn't work because everyone just wants to act self righteous. That makes a very boring game.

All the long lasting rulers are like that. Only thals and AA are the bolder ones albeit still self righteous sometimes. Fronen was the only one really changed after multiple rulers changed which is to our delight. Spearhold hopefully has also changed for the better. Others just the same old boring rulers. Yes, everyone has their way of playing, but there should be a rule that state rulers are ultimately the one responsible for bringing in players and keeping the game fun.

For those playing in Beluaterra, if you think what I was doing is not always for the fun of everyone, please tell me which and why and I shall change. After all, I am servant and responsible for that. I believe players in Melhed can testify for me.

[Anaris]

All the long lasting rulers are like that.

Well...that's because taking risks is, well, risky. Inherently.

In essence, all you're saying is "being cautious and avoiding situations that are likely to lead to risk of death means you're less likely to die." Which is pretty much obvious. And there's nothing we can do about it, because it's sort of part of the way the universe works.

Yeah, we could add more random "you didn't take enough risks, so you get zapped out of a clear blue sky" type dangers, but those don't actually hold much deterrent power—plus, they suck really hard.

So, yes: the rulers who last a long time are going to be the rulers who go for the safe option, rather than the fun option, every time. Forever.

Find me a way to bend the very laws of probability so that taking fun risks is safe, and doing boring safe things is risky, and I'll use it make BattleMaster way more fun. (And then you'll get the Nobel Prize for figuring out how to do magic! )

[Lorgan]

I, for one, think the continent as a whole would've had more fun and would've been more interesting if you had gone along with our plan in stead of betraying us.
I'm biased of course but I see less potential for evenly matched conflict on the road you've chosen.

[Gustav Kuriga]

Well...that's because taking risks is, well, risky. Inherently.

In essence, all you're saying is "being cautious and avoiding situations that are likely to lead to risk of death means you're less likely to die." Which is pretty much obvious. And there's nothing we can do about it, because it's sort of part of the way the universe works.

Yeah, we could add more random "you didn't take enough risks, so you get zapped out of a clear blue sky" type dangers, but those don't actually hold much deterrent power—plus, they suck really hard.

So, yes: the rulers who last a long time are going to be the rulers who go for the safe option, rather than the fun option, every time. Forever.

Find me a way to bend the very laws of probability so that taking fun risks is safe, and doing boring safe things is risky, and I'll use it make BattleMaster way more fun. (And then you'll get the Nobel Prize for figuring out how to do magic! )

Anaris, this has nothing to do with risks being dangerous, and everything to do with the culture of the Rulers where for whatever reason not taking risks is seen as a good thing, even though it has been proven detrimental to the game. The impetus is entirely on the rulers to create fun for their players, since the average player has very little influence on the political climate of the continent as a whole.

[Anaris]

Anaris, this has nothing to do with risks being dangerous, and everything to do with the culture of the Rulers where for whatever reason not taking risks is seen as a good thing, even though it has been proven detrimental to the game. The impetus is entirely on the rulers to create fun for their players, since the average player has very little influence on the political climate of the continent as a whole.

You're thinking at too high a level. Don't look on it as being the decisions made by rulers of realms, but rather as an abstract problem of evolving agents.

Those agents who make choices that are risky are more likely to die. Those agents who make choices that are safer are less likely to die.

That means that any agent that has lived a long time is vastly more likely to come from the latter group.

So the statement that "all the long lasting rulers" think first of keeping their position and keeping their realm alive, and only second of fun, is pretty much like saying "water is wet."

So...it totally does have to do with risks being dangerous. Because the realms ruled by people who take those risks? They die. They die, and the realms that are ruled by "safe" rulers survive.

But if you're so sure that this is purely a problem of "culture", what would you propose to change it?

[Antonine]

Personally I just wish people would be more willing to launch rebellions and secessions - that's a great way to keep things dynamic.

[vonGenf]

For those playing in Beluaterra, if you think what I was doing is not always for the fun of everyone, please tell me which and why and I shall change. After all, I am servant and responsible for that. I believe players in Melhed can testify for me.

I take it you're the ruler of Melhed? Your profile does not show your family affilitation.

If that's the case, then yes, I do think that your actions are good for the game. You took risks and broke the business as usual. That's good! It leads to action.

Now, it doesn't mean everyone will act the way you expected to, in the same way that you didn't act the way everyone expected you too. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

Your actions opened new opportunities for many realm. The chips may not fall into place the way you intended to, but they will fall differently than if you had not done anything different. In that sense, from an OOC point of view, this was a positive act.