This war

Siduri

@Jayden - I feel absolutely the same. The slaves bit had the Targossian heroic gears grinding.

Xaden

Nazihk said:

The problem is that we went from "huge incentive to avoid losing" to "no incentive to actually win".

If you don't consider counting the number of spelling and grammatical errors in Proficy's defeat post as "incentive to actually win" then I don't know why you're even playing.

Kiet

Joke's on you, we'll just have him post 'ok we lost'

Nazihk

I honestly didn't care about the slaves at all.

I just didn't want to deal with Mhaldorian preachers rubbing our loss into our faces for the rest of the RL year. 

Xaden

Kiet said:

Joke's on you, we'll just have him post 'ok we lost'

'Ok, we lost.' Three. I counted three.

See all the fun we can have?

Ada

We could maybe make it so people can negotiate a raid OOCly to ensure there are enough people to engage in a fun way on both sides (could even schedule it like Nishnatoba battles) and then go ahead with it. It's unfortunate when one side lacks people and refuses to play at all to avoid losing a point.

Alrena

Nazihk said:

I honestly didn't care about the slaves at all.

I just didn't want to deal with Mhaldorian preachers rubbing our loss into our faces for the rest of the RL year. 

This was actually the one defeat condition I didn't mind. I love debating, so I was actually looking forward to more chances of this even if we lost.

Nazihk

I wouldn't mind if Targossas and Mhaldor decided right now that they'd allow each other to preach and debate in each other's cities right now. 

What I would have minded is being reminded of losing every time I saw one of them preaching in the city. 

Kiet

Did you learn nothing from Eleusis? It's not losing if you pretend like you actually won all along



Personally, that's my plan for if we lose.

Mathilda

No matter who loses, there is potential for non-combat confrontation between Mhaldor and Targossas once the preachings start. Maybe it's time those long-awaited debates happen at last! Imagine @Melodie preaching the Seven Truths at Silverbright and getting ideologically eviscerated by @Talamond. 

Tahquil

I think there needs to be an admendment to the saying "The grass is always greener on the other side - but pissing on it all the time isn't helping either".

Frederich

Tbh.

The one thing that has pissed me off the most since the 2000 slave / citizen thing was changed was Ryldagh shouting and screaming that the gods were shit and wusses.

You don't fucking insult gods (who are genuinely trying to do a good job)

Keep calm and @Deucalion

Reyson

Who's Ryldagh?

Krypton

Reyson said:

Who's Ryldagh?

"The ol' Archon Ascendant, yes. You select again."

"I'll take 'Le Tits Now' for $400, Alex."

Micaelis

Nazihk said:

Micaelis said:

This is why we can't have nice things. 

Everyone's already been chill about it, so let me blow my top since no one else wants to, then everyone can rage about it or agree. I don't really care.

What this boils down to, flowery pillow talk aside, is that the playerbase of Achaea (obviously, specifically the two War cities) was literally deemed too incompetent to back the RP justification of a storyline they had planned. That is an absolute travesty.

-Stuff-

A lot of people saw it coming, tbh, how could you not, but I get your point.

When the 'brainstorming' first began (after Farrah/Nyder got an initial set of terms laid out) my main problem was the value of the individual terms. At first, a duel was 1, raid was 1, and Nish was 2. There were, at the time, a possible maximum of 160 points available from tanks. The maximum from duels was limitless, since the first draft had no limitation on the total number, but the Nish maximum was 4. I, and a few others, suggested a cap on the maximum amount of deto's in a raid/day/sanction, a raising of the Nish value and Naval value, so that they'd be the main focus of the war with the duels/raids turning into "swing" points. It was decided by the group that the intended purpose was for the pre-scheduled battles to -not- be the main focus of the war, which is something I disagreed with then and disagree with now.

Obviously it's changed now, too little too late and all that, but even with the opt-in being an issue, as it always will be with any given thing where that's an option, I disagree with the notion that just because of the consequences that the decision to vacate or refuse to fight is validated by the consequences. To make that choice, as a Targossian or Mhaldorian, is completely against the entire IC RP of -both- cities irrelevant to the possible dangers of indulging the enemy in 'imaginary' points. To their credit, I've heard a number of Targossians (Daeir) and Mhaldorians (Can't remember, maybe Melodie) say this exact thing prior to the events of yesterday, so kudos on being ahead of the curve.

By that logic, you could extend that even further. How can Targossas, martially, hope to ever eradicate Evil is Evil simply refuses to take the field? You can't pray them away, you can't ritual them into nothingness. How can Evil spread its influence of Oppression and Suffering if there's no one to Oppress, no one to Suffer? And, if it's possible to accomplish these goals without the need for martial war , then why even bother with martial war in the first place? It calls into question the entire purpose of both cities, and their entire MO, from a IC/RP perspective, even though we all know OOC what the deal is.

I understand what you're saying from a point of logic, specifically OOC, but IC it makes no sense to abandon the teachings/Axioms/Truths/whatever that we/they -claim- to be so important, and vital to the extension of Creation, for the sake of 2000 individuals, no matter how you slice it.

Nyderrasethi

Going back and looking at the initial attempt, which is like alpha testing a game. There are quite a few flaws that I would fix. First off I think we leave the points out of it entirely. Second we would have all normal IG war conditions with lots of death raids tanks and what have you. Then at the end of 24 days whatever we have a big event because the winner can't be determined in the old system, and that event determines the winner of war and everyone rejoiced or cries whatever

Micaelis

That's a good idea.

To make the events leading up to the finale seem important, you could have arbitrary 'tasks' necessary to complete in order to have a chance in the final battle. Maybe you need to charge a weapon/item with the energy from tank detonations, but the 'amount' is arbitrary and will be enough to fit the necessity either way. Would then need that weapon/item to enter Nish (where I assume the final battle would be) without the Crusade, or whatever.

On the flip side it's probably likely people would just go 'meh, who cares' during the entire unimportant part, but disinterest is better than outright anger and hostility, I suppose.

Antonius

Nyderrasethi said:

Going back and looking at the initial attempt, which is like alpha testing a game. There are quite a few flaws that I would fix. First off I think we leave the points out of it entirely. Second we would have all normal IG war conditions with lots of death raids tanks and what have you. Then at the end of 24 days whatever we have a big event because the winner can't be determined in the old system, and that event determines the winner of war and everyone rejoiced or cries whatever

Because everybody enjoyed the Reckoning, where there were a lot of different stages but the only thing that actually seemed to matter for the outcome was the final part. If you're going to base the outcome on a big scheduled battle, just have that be the entire war. Very few people enjoy the "normal IG war conditions" (by which I assume you mainly mean "soldiers are open PK and can be ganked by whoever feels like it on the other side") for longer than a day or two, and while that seemed to be true of this war as well, at least with the current war terms you could go outside of your city and do other things without being open to people deciding they want to gank you.

It sounds like you're saying that the entire thing was a failure and nothing at all worked. You really don't think a single part of what was tried here was worth keeping for next time?

Xaden

That's a dreadful idea.

The terms were there to basically keep people from being dickheads. For the most part, that succeeded. Though some people will always find a way.

You use the standard war terms for two weeks and see how many people show up for the big battle at the end.

Nyderrasethi

Antonius said:

Nyderrasethi said:

Going back and looking at the initial attempt, which is like alpha testing a game. There are quite a few flaws that I would fix. First off I think we leave the points out of it entirely. Second we would have all normal IG war conditions with lots of death raids tanks and what have you. Then at the end of 24 days whatever we have a big event because the winner can't be determined in the old system, and that event determines the winner of war and everyone rejoiced or cries whatever

Because everybody enjoyed the Reckoning, where there were a lot of different stages but the only thing that actually seemed to matter for the outcome was the final part. If you're going to base the outcome on a big scheduled battle, just have that be the entire war. Very few people enjoy the "normal IG war conditions" (by which I assume you mainly mean "soldiers are open PK and can be ganked by whoever feels like it on the other side") for longer than a day or two, and while that seemed to be true of this war as well, at least with the current war terms you could go outside of your city and do other things without being open to people deciding they want to gank you.

It sounds like you're saying that the entire thing was a failure and nothing at all worked. You really don't think a single part of what was tried here was worth keeping for next time?

I put in the no ganking clause origionally, but it is causing a lot of animosity between me and people on my team who want to just kill all day. I wanted it to allow people who are soldiers but not into the ganking be safe, but it turned into a "you can't touch me" rule instead

Melodie

Mathilda said:

No matter who loses, there is potential for non-combat confrontation between Mhaldor and Targossas once the preachings start. Maybe it's time those long-awaited debates happen at last! Imagine @Melodie preaching the Seven Truths at Silverbright and getting ideologically eviscerated by @Talamond. 

Someone gonna have to step up his game before that ending glimpses reality. Would be quite fun, though, yes!

And aside from maybe... four or five (admittedly overly loud) people I can think of, I don't think most of our team wants to be ganking all day, Nyd. Maybe there are times we get frustrated and want to, but in general overall, I think the majority (especially our non-dragons) were happy for that not being a thing.

Atalkez

Mhaldor would break before Targossas if we went balls to the wall gank fest.

Proficy would love it, but 90% of everyone else would be on ships or another game by the end of the weekend.

Farrah

Melodie said:

Mathilda said:

No matter who loses, there is potential for non-combat confrontation between Mhaldor and Targossas once the preachings start. Maybe it's time those long-awaited debates happen at last! Imagine @Melodie preaching the Seven Truths at Silverbright and getting ideologically eviscerated by @Talamond. 

Someone gonna have to step up his game before that ending glimpses reality. Would be quite fun, though, yes!

And aside from maybe... four or five (admittedly overly loud) people I can think of, I don't think most of our team wants to be ganking all day, Nyd. Maybe there are times we get frustrated and want to, but in general overall, I think the majority (especially our non-dragons) were happy for that not being a thing.

Your leaders keep trying to make it a thing (drop the terms and start ganking), so it may still actually happen. The main thing stopping it is my stubborn desire to finish what I started.

Kinda conflicting signals though when Exxia runs around ganking Targossians, claiming the terms are off, and Proficy keeps goading us to drop the terms and do a "real war." You guys should probably get your city on one page.

Proficy

Atalkez said:

Mhaldor would break before Targossas if we went balls to the wall gank fest.

Proficy would love it, but 90% of everyone else would be on ships or another game by the end of the weekend.

You can talk about it all day. All im going to say is do it...
Mhaldor has been hostile to targ since targs creation, and you all would only change your status with these soft added rules in play.
I can 100% guatantee if it went to how the war system is now more than half of targ would lose army status by the end of the week.  And targ would do what it does now and hide until you and farrah come around.
That's the difference of our sides. Mhaldors player base has had its resilience built and embedded in us.
And to let it be know they have raided like 3x more without me and done more in these efforts without me..... what has your side done without your big names? Jus wait till my schedule clears up some.

Micaelis

There's no shame in dropping anything at this point Farrah. Was a great idea, and it worked in a lot of positive ways. Learned a lot, so only real thing left to do is let it rest, build on it, and like, I don't know, smash Mhaldor into five bajillion pieces or something.

Micaelis

Proficy said:

Atalkez said:

Mhaldor would break before Targossas if we went balls to the wall gank fest.

Proficy would love it, but 90% of everyone else would be on ships or another game by the end of the weekend.

You can talk about it all day. All im going to say is do it...
Mhaldor has been hostile to targ since targs creation, and you all would only change your status with these soft added rules in play.
I can 100% guatantee if it went to how the war system is now more than half of targ would lose army status by the end of the week.  And targ would do what it does now and hide until you and farrah come around.
That's the difference of our sides. Mhaldors player base has had its resilience built and embedded in us.
And to let it be know they have raided like 3x more without me and done more in these efforts without me..... what has your side done without your big names? Jus wait till my schedule clears up some.

Funny you should ask, since I keep perfect notes and can answer your question with 100% accuracy! So, here you go....

Well, easier than I thought. Farrah and/or Atalkez were involved in every single, successful, Targossian raid. 

Proficy has...lost one war duel and won one war duel, and has not been involved in a single raid, either for or against.

I suppose the statistics kind of support your point but...what in the hell have you even been doing this entire war?

Shirszae

Both cities like to talk though, but I think its pretty evident both would suffer from giving up and partaking into War as it is currently defined on the help scrolls. There are very few individuals who enjoy the relentless griefing, no matter how you try and slice it. I think it'd be compounding shame with shame to throw everything else to shit just because some of it did not live up to its promise.

But hey, I am just a bystander.

Atalkez

I guess the difference is I want to beat your best people. Hence an open challenger for a 2v2, which you all ignored. I already beat you 1v1, you haven't even challenged Farrah.

You want to crush our scrubs, that's it. You're not showing superiority by dodging every real fight that comes your way.

Melodie

Farrah said:

Melodie said:

Mathilda said:

No matter who loses, there is potential for non-combat confrontation between Mhaldor and Targossas once the preachings start. Maybe it's time those long-awaited debates happen at last! Imagine @Melodie preaching the Seven Truths at Silverbright and getting ideologically eviscerated by @Talamond. 

Someone gonna have to step up his game before that ending glimpses reality. Would be quite fun, though, yes!

And aside from maybe... four or five (admittedly overly loud) people I can think of, I don't think most of our team wants to be ganking all day, Nyd. Maybe there are times we get frustrated and want to, but in general overall, I think the majority (especially our non-dragons) were happy for that not being a thing.

Your leaders keep trying to make it a thing (drop the terms and start ganking), so it may still actually happen. The main thing stopping it is my stubborn desire to finish what I started.

Kinda conflicting signals though when Exxia runs around ganking Targossians, claiming the terms are off, and Proficy keeps goading us to drop the terms and do a "real war." You guys should probably get your city on one page.

Exxia def not a leader, if he's out causing trouble in ways he shouldn't, reach out and we'll get it sorted out - that goes for him and anyone pretty much. As for Proficy, he always wants to do that, but he's not even been around to goad anyone lately (not even us!). Like I mentioned, there are a few names who would love that, but the vast majority would not. The ones who do just are very loud and sometimes a little annoying.

Farrah

Micaelis said:

Proficy said:

Atalkez said:

Mhaldor would break before Targossas if we went balls to the wall gank fest.

Proficy would love it, but 90% of everyone else would be on ships or another game by the end of the weekend.

You can talk about it all day. All im going to say is do it...
Mhaldor has been hostile to targ since targs creation, and you all would only change your status with these soft added rules in play.
I can 100% guatantee if it went to how the war system is now more than half of targ would lose army status by the end of the week.  And targ would do what it does now and hide until you and farrah come around.
That's the difference of our sides. Mhaldors player base has had its resilience built and embedded in us.
And to let it be know they have raided like 3x more without me and done more in these efforts without me..... what has your side done without your big names? Jus wait till my schedule clears up some.

Funny you should ask, since I keep perfect notes and can answer your question with 100% accuracy! So, here you go....

Well, easier than I thought. Farrah and/or Atalkez were involved in every single, successful, Targossian raid. 

Proficy has...lost one war duel and won one war duel, and has not been involved in a single raid, either for or against.

I suppose the statistics kind of support your point but...what in the hell have you even been doing this entire war?

You can't compare raids with Atalkez or Farrah to just raids with Proficy though. How many successful Mhaldor raids didn't involve Aegoth or Nyderrasethi?

Also worth noting that while I was logged as being part of the raid, I joined late for the three-tank raid on Mhaldor, and Atalkez was never there. It was primarily led by Tesha without us.

There have also been successful Targ defenses without us and both unsuccessful defenses and unsuccessful raids without us too (as opposed to the city just "hiding" and never doing anything).

But yeah, each city tends to have combat leaders who initiate things. It doesn't really say anything bad about the city.

General-led army vs General-led army makes a lot more sense for a good fight than General-led army that refuses to engage another army that has a General. Micaelis could check, but I think Mhaldor has only detonated a single tank while I or Atalkez was around, and I think all of our tanks were detonated with either Aegoth or Nyderrasethi around.