Author Topic: Too large realms (possibility of penalizing bigger realms more?)  (Read 25434 times)

Vellos

  • Honourable King
  • *****
  • Posts: 3736
  • Stodgy Old Man in Training
    • View Profile
I personally despise the idea of duchies warring against duchies in the same realm. It would essentially destroys the last vestiges of team play in BattleMaster. If you want to fight another duchy, then one of you two should secede and proceed to get to fighting.

While in the past I have been a proponent of allowing inter-realm warfare, I tend to agree with Indirik about team play, which I am increasingly convinced is important to maintaining the game.
"A neutral humanism is either a pedantic artifice or a prologue to the inhuman." - George Steiner

Bedwyr

  • Mighty Duke
  • ****
  • Posts: 1762
  • House Bedwyr
    • View Profile
The penalties on bigger realms are already quite extreme.

1. Realm control is harder.
2. Recruiting troops costs more.
3. Tax rates have to be lower.
4. Takeovers are harder.

And that's all leaving aside indirect things like it being more difficult to keep a large realm cohesive, the distance from capital penalties, the pain of mutli-front wars, etc.

The reason you don't see more smaller realms is, I think, due to communication options.  To explain, let's say there's a war.  Realm gets destroyed, another realm doubles in size.  They don't want to colonize, because that means they can't be in the same realm as their buddies and can't talk.  They don't want to secede for the same reasons.  The new landholders are all friends of the Ruler, or they wouldn't have been appointed, so that reinforces the ruling faction and makes them all want to stay in the same realm with the rest of their faction.

Obviously, those are sweeping generalizations, but I think they hold reasonably true.

And the communication stuff is why you see things like SA and the CE-bloc working (religion/guild communication) when other stuff falls apart.

As for the Far East...Well, I'm trying to change that, but it's not particularly easy and requires getting a lot more power first, which these silly people don't seem to want to give me for some reason...
"You know what the chain of command is? It's the chain I go get and beat you with 'til ya understand who's in ruttin' command here!"

De-Legro

  • Honourable King
  • *****
  • Posts: 3838
    • View Profile
While in the past I have been a proponent of allowing inter-realm warfare, I tend to agree with Indirik about team play, which I am increasingly convinced is important to maintaining the game.

You are still part of a team, just a much smaller team, IE your Duchy. From time to time your team might ally with other teams in the realm, or not. Its not like we don't have intrigues and arguments between duchies now, just they can't be resolved in a military fashion without one or other succeeding.
Previously of the De-Legro Family
Now of representation unknown.

Sacha

  • Mighty Duke
  • ****
  • Posts: 1410
    • View Profile
It'll come to no surprise to those who've played with me on Dwilight that I'm a big fan of rival duchies slugging it out within the same realm. But there are already plenty of ways to do that without the use of actual intra-realm warfare. Rival dukes have a wide range of options available to !@#$ with each other. Snatching knights away, swaying lords to change allegiance, hoarding food and gold, undermining their authority and influence, using personal armies to take all the glory away from others, good old fashioned slander campaigns, et cetera. These are all things you can do that don't require anyone seceding. The kicker is that if you push things far enough, secession can be the result... but that just makes things more interesting.

Fleugs

  • Mighty Duke
  • ****
  • Posts: 668
    • View Profile
I personally despise the idea of duchies warring against duchies in the same realm. It would essentially destroys the last vestiges of team play in BattleMaster. If you want to fight another duchy, then one of you two should secede and proceed to get to fighting.

I beg to differ, and say the opposite would happen. Take a look at Ibladesh: 90+ nobles. Ask the players there about the team spirit, and I bet about 30 characters will just say that they are following orders but don't really feel involved in a realm, or have no specific individual character line that they are currently pursuing. The realm is huge and so crowded that not everyone can be involved because that would just turn everything into one very slow and inefficient war machine (or whatnot - I'm thinking of Melhed here). Some people just follow orders and rice prestige & honour, which is always nice later. There are a lot of nobles that actually get a promotion (this would contradict the idea that new nobles don't have a chance in large realms - totally untrue) but even then the "domains" are so split up, also due to the fear of spies, that even a simple region Lord has absolutely no clue about the greater military strategy.

Now, when you chop that realm up into 4 pieces, you will see 3 smaller realms with about 20 nobles and one medium realm (two duchies, e.g.) with 30 nobles. Smaller realms have a tendency to get more "loyal" players, reducing the risk on spies, thus opening up more of the policy for a realm-wide discussion. About twenty players discussing a matter won't necessary flood you with messages each day, and thus it would be possible for more people, to feel more connected. You would have one smaller army (that raises around 10k cs) fighting another duchy, with the same power. You would be more involved in battles and in the decision making progress.

These interducal wars would not lead to the utter destruction of another duchy. The idea to avoid falling back into forming gigantic empires, is having one larger duchy (the "capital" duchy, with 2 cities preferably) having the strongest power, capable of easily squashing another duchy into submission. Combine this eventual military dominance with a mutual religion, your Church can act as the number 1 glue to ensure that no duchies swallow one another. A duke steps out of line and effectively goes against all the policies of the "combined duchies", you auto da fe him and if necessary force some rebellious nobles into submission. Doesn't it work that way, then you have a small civil war on your hands - no problem, most likely the other duchies will team up in a promise of spoils of war.

You see that I am trying to construct some "player-agreement", which would in essence be an out-of-character understanding about some ground rules. It would pretty much be an extension of the current game rules (which are also OOC). I do not have a problem with going beyond the current game-mechanics to get into an OOC-agreement, as long as it doesn't turn into an OOC-clan. But it shouldn't. Rules shouldn't be bound to a player, but to a concept, making sure that the concept is respected. Besides, if anyone would break such an OOC-rule, it would just end up in what I described in the above paragraph.

However, what I find most important about this is our misinterpreted concept of a "realm" in Battlemaster. Taking a look at the Middle Ages, it doesn't take you a lot of understanding to see that we have to drop our ideas of nationalism. We, as players, are heavily influenced by several ideological/philosophical concepts of the past two to three centuries. Freedom of speech, emancipation, antisemitism, racism, ... These are a few examples of an endless lists of things that are well settled in our mind (for good reasons), but are completely absent to most of the Middle Ages - there will always be an exception to find, but even then, you cannot name those medieval conditions with an enlightened term. Getting back to the point of this paragraph, nationalism is another idea that simply didn't exist like it does now.

Again taking Ibladesh for example, I too make the mistake of, many times, inciting players "For Ibladesh!" or whatnot (your typical nationalist slogan). In fact, it is wrong. Knights in the Middle Ages didn't fight with their greater realm (let's say France) in mind. They fought for their land, and their liege. That liege might have fought for someone higher up, etc., until you end up with the king being under god. That fighting nobility might feel some loyalty to his king, but they would mostly act out of sheer selfishness, namely the promised spoils of war or simply gathering prestige. The regular knight would fight in the army of his liege, mostly his count or something of the like.

To summarize: I don't think that the team spirit will be destroyed, but I believe the opposite. Smaller realms will enable more possibilities and create a more coherent group. I'm thinking of Thalmarkin here - they're a wonder, attracting so many players for a one-duchy realm. It would not only reinforce that true bond that is so recognizable in medieval history - the one between the knight and his liege - but also allow a greater role for religion, as it becomes the glue or the "common ground" (also very medieval). 

I could go on and on about this subject, and there is much more about it that I have in mind, but until I get a chance of actually implementing this idea for real, I am still constantly evolving the concept and deepening out the historical aspect more and more.


Quote
Having said that, the loss of the message channel to be able to talk to each other is definitely a hindrance in what you're trying to do. Then again, if you're fighting each other, that common message channel will just be filled with so much crap, it will be intolerable. We had that happen in SA. Trust me, *not* having free access for both sides of a war to send each other messages at will is a rather large boon.

I'm not aware of what specific construction SA had, but I believe that these guilds should only be used in cooperation. In essence, when your "realm" fights another realm or goes on some form of crusade, you use these guilds to coordinate properly with eachother. When the duchies start fighting eachother... well, then it's time for either applying some established OOC-rules that will avoid this of happening, or a powerful figure to put an end to it (temporarily remove/disable/diffuse the situation). I think there are many ways to go around this. The idea here is not to have ALL nobles united in one guild. That should already have happened in the religion, for one, and defeats the concept of creating these smaller duchies with a more coherent group of players. Duchy first, then the "greater" realm. That summarizes the concept, really.
Ardet nec consumitur.

Woelfen

  • Knight
  • **
  • Posts: 40
  • Falling awake
    • View Profile
@Fleugs: I agree completely with the idea of Ducal Independence. For historical reasons, and the idea of creating smaller more cohesive realms. Obviously if you were warring, with that kind of political status, all contact between you would be neutralized except for at the very highest levels.

I've a similar concept rolling in my mind lately that I've put up on the wiki in a really rough draft. http://wiki.battlemaster.org/wiki/Darkhollow


Shenron

  • Noble Lord
  • ***
  • Posts: 283
  • Come and play people ;)
    • View Profile
However, what I find most important about this is our misinterpreted concept of a "realm" in Battlemaster. Taking a look at the Middle Ages, it doesn't take you a lot of understanding to see that we have to drop our ideas of nationalism. We, as players, are heavily influenced by several ideological/philosophical concepts of the past two to three centuries. Freedom of speech, emancipation, antisemitism, racism, ... These are a few examples of an endless lists of things that are well settled in our mind (for good reasons), but are completely absent to most of the Middle Ages - there will always be an exception to find, but even then, you cannot name those medieval conditions with an enlightened term. Getting back to the point of this paragraph, nationalism is another idea that simply didn't exist like it does now.

As much as I agree with this I just can't see a way to make people drop their nationalistic ideas. The main problem is that nationalism is great tool for leaders trying to gain power. Asking people not utilize nationalism is asking people not gain power is... yeah... not gonna happen.
My language: (Apologies for any confusion this results in.)
Awesome = Ossim
Tom = Tarm

Fleugs

  • Mighty Duke
  • ****
  • Posts: 668
    • View Profile
As much as I agree with this I just can't see a way to make people drop their nationalistic ideas. The main problem is that nationalism is great tool for leaders trying to gain power. Asking people not utilize nationalism is asking people not gain power is... yeah... not gonna happen.

Not entirely true. If you start telling people that there's more in it for them (let's think medieval here), then they might be more easily swayed to drop their nationalistic ideas. I think it's an attitude that you have to take as a player, too. In the past I tried not to be part of the entire nationalism-battlemaster-game, but it is impossible unless your duke recognize the bond he has with you (I was a knight).

In Ibladesh I tried implementing a better bond between knight and duke to have the duke be responsible for the actions of his knights, and to give him the ability to determine the punishment. The problem here is that most dukes didn't care enough, because they were rusticated into their passive position. Which it is not. A ducal seat should be the most active position ever.
Ardet nec consumitur.

vonGenf

  • Honourable King
  • *****
  • Posts: 2331
    • View Profile
but it is impossible unless your duke recognize the bond he has with you (I was a knight).

Exactly.

Asking people not to use nationalism is to ask Dukes to gain power from their position rather than pass all power to the ruler. It should happen, but often the people who become Dukes are also reliant on their rulers, and must allow that kind of nationalism to stay safe in their position.

Nationalism is the natural consequence of seeing the Ruler as the apex of the social ladder. With Dukes being more powerful than rulers in many case, it should not happen so much.

That being said, I dislike the idea of using OOC agreements. I think this is very much part of the gameplay as it actually is.
After all it's a roleplaying game.

songqu88@gmail.com

  • Guest
Hey guys, here's something to think about: Does greater realism really make the game more interesting for significantly more people than would a slightly less realistic system of an "umbrella realm"?

Fleugs

  • Mighty Duke
  • ****
  • Posts: 668
    • View Profile
Hey guys, here's something to think about: Does greater realism really make the game more interesting for significantly more people than would a slightly less realistic system of an "umbrella realm"?

Well the issue seems to be, partially, that new players are not involved enough or that the prospects for becoming "someone" are too small in large realms. When you have multiple small realms, there are simply way more positions to hand out... for starters. Next to that, it just sounds like fun to me. I mean, no huge battles and such, but rather smaller clashes. I think it would intensify the "feel of play" for many people, because they can relate more to a smaller realm.
Ardet nec consumitur.

songqu88@gmail.com

  • Guest
There are two main things I have against the model of small realm conflict with an emphasis on the relative ease of subverting your own realm.

First, if we were to make a bunch of small realms fighting, then I think eventually (perhaps not very long of a time either) we just see a conglomerate of small realms that federate unconditionally, serving as pretty much a single realm but with separate capitals and the ability to repair damage in their federated cities. Maybe slightly inconvenient at first, but there will be a natural tendency in most people in power to desire sticking to that power. The methods to do so may change but the intent is still unwavering.

Next, just how interesting is it for people anyway? On this forum, mind you, are pretty much only the most vocal with rare exceptions of newer players. There are hundreds more, and they don't talk for the most part, feeling fine to go travel where you tell them and set their units to the correct settings. Are you sure they're really into your whole political revolutionary bombastic speech? Backs-and-forths among established characters and/or brash upstarts who have a strange idea that being as vocal and obnoxious as possible is the way to go to gain power?

Sure, they're good people to manipulate into your designs, but then you're probably being fairly selfish. I can name right now several families that are like that, who seek to increase their own ambitions, which is fine ICly, but for some reason may or may not OOCly believe that it would be as fun for many other people.

Truth is, as one of the people who started off in Fontan, for my first 1.5 years doing not much else beyond setting my unit and going into battles, it's not fun. The letters were either long, or pointless, but all of them were stupid. At a certain point I just filtered types to orders because I knew I wasn't missing out on anything else. I will make a gamble in the belief that what people like seeing is their unit, as part of a bigger group, crush other people's groups, in actual tangible ways.

All this stuff with words flying around is where the real battles are, that is true. That is realistic. That is in fact the "right" way to go. But as a game, I don't think it is the way that most players would really care to play.

I don't say not to do it. But I do say that even if you are going to do it, try to actually get some regular battles going. The most exciting time I had in all of my BM experience actually came during my first 1.5 years in Fontan when we faced off 24/7 against OR, Sirion, later Caligus and Perdan. That meant a nearly endless amount of battles where winning really does make everything feel better. I didn't care one bit about what the council and lords and people who pretended like they had power in the realm said. I just really liked how there was a rush from standing alongside other guys with units, and beating the crap out of our enemies. And that was also when I actually didn't like having my crap beaten out.

Now, in Arcaea is about the only place where I'm militarily active anymore. And that does have some excitement to it as for the most part people aren't screaming their big inflated heads off trying to gain power, which is good because if they were I'd probably either get in on the action and scream just as much, or just shrug and do my own thing, depending on how worthwhile the realm is. (Arcaea I'd count as a worthwhile realm, but there is really not much screaming.)  For some places, like Nothoi (Boy why do I hate Notoi so much? I have good reasons I assure you.) when we were getting hammered by undead everywhere I was like "Meh, serves you right you idiots". And that actually occurred because BK split when Wudenkin went to Fronen, and in order to "distance themselves from the legacy of Bara'Khur", Reeds split off to form the Greek word for "bastard" or something.

Are they still nobles? Bastards are like, adventurers huh? Hm...

But yeah, anyway, the thing is, I think most people who play this game by vast majority like the actual battles between units.

egamma

  • Guest

But yeah, anyway, the thing is, I think most people who play this game by vast majority like the actual battles between units.

I think the idea of ducal independence is that a duchy could declare war on a duchy in another realm, and go fight them--an actual battle between units, and you don't have to wait for the king to decide he wants to war.

songqu88@gmail.com

  • Guest
Yes, that would work well, maybe. Depends. The king sometimes still selects the duke and can still force secede him. There might also be things to iron out so a stupid duke (and they're quite common mind you) doesn't get all trigger happy and keep fighting other duchies for the hell of it while a foreign army smack them to the ground. Or at least don't make it too easy to use it as only for subversive means.

Although, if you mean that duchies can fight foreign duchies (which you are), that would be great. For duchies in the same realm, it should be considerably harder, and there should probably come with penalties, so that if you must go against each other, you better have good reason for it.
« Last Edit: June 20, 2011, 03:06:58 PM by Artemesia »

Fleugs

  • Mighty Duke
  • ****
  • Posts: 668
    • View Profile
I think the idea of ducal independence is that a duchy could declare war on a duchy in another realm, and go fight them--an actual battle between units, and you don't have to wait for the king to decide he wants to war.

Exactly. A federation would kill that. The entire point of ducal independence is having dukes fight against each other over insults, small pieces of land, or just plain boredom (anybody recalls the Darka-Eston friendly war? Good solution, in my opinion).
Ardet nec consumitur.