War system questions

[daal]

There seems to be a fundamental misunderstanding here. It is entirely the choice of the clan, and their reputation is what is at stake, among other things. The clan will make the choices, no rogue members will. We are arbiters in this, you are the participants. However, we've spent months setting the stage for this, making sure treaties, laws, and clan guidelines were updated as much as we can. All at each clan's discretion. Inactive clans, such as yours, that are now showing signs of life again need to catch up.

Isn't it possible that when you made sure everything was updated that those that did update did not understand the entire picture? It's very possible that now clans will want to rethink their initial decision.

It's my understanding and experience that clans have absolutely nothing stopping them from do just that except themselves.

[Vampa]

There seems to be a fundamental misunderstanding here. It is entirely the choice of the clan, and their reputation is what is at stake, among other things. The clan will make the choices, no rogue members will. We are arbiters in this, you are the participants. However, we've spent months setting the stage for this, making sure treaties, laws, and clan guidelines were updated as much as we can. All at each clan's discretion. Inactive clans, such as yours, that are now showing signs of life again need to catch up.

Isn't it possible that when you made sure everything was updated that those that did update did not understand the entire picture? It's very possible that now clans will want to rethink their initial decision.

It's my understanding and experience that clans have absolutely nothing stopping them from do just that except themselves.

Exactly this.

[Kaan]

So unclanneds who have have no desire to join a specific clan but do want to protect their home land or a land, automatically get warranted despite never stepping foot in the attacking nations lands.

I think they should be banished but not warranted.

By the nation they are defending? These people are vigilantes attempting to take the law into their own hands in those nations.

if unclanneds assisting in wars aren’t attacking the other nation but defending a nation, its not right they get hunted by theifbane and npc/PC mercenaries/thiefbane.

This is absurd.

Trying to force people into clans to avoid warrants though they will be warranted anyway for being in the clan at war, sounds wrong.

They'll get the warrants if they join a clan, so I'm not sure what you're trying to say. They have a choice to not get a warrant by not attacking someone.

And question again altered. What happens to clanned warrants after a war ends? Do both sides keep all their warrants despite the war beIng over?

They may pursue pardons. Let's get to that bridge, and then try crossing it?

You are setting base definitions here, though, which make it confusing and difficult to do...

"
By: Vampa

There seems to be a fundamental misunderstanding here. It is entirely the choice of the clan, and their reputation is what is at stake, among other things. The clan will make the choices, no rogue members will. We are arbiters in this, you are the participants. However, we've spent months setting the stage for this, making sure treaties, laws, and clan guidelines were updated as much as we can. All at each clan's discretion. Inactive clans, such as yours, that are now showing signs of life again need to catch up.

Isn't it possible that when you made sure everything was updated that those that did update did not understand the entire picture? It's very possible that now clans will want to rethink their initial decision.

It's my understanding and experience that clans have absolutely nothing stopping them from do just that except themselves.

Exactly this.
"
Hence why we've been having this heated discussion. I sent a pm, anyway.

[Vampa]

I do hope this isn't what you'd consider heated, and I don't mean this to be a discussion, but rather answering questions. This is a forum, rather than a conversation. Semantics, but I hope my point is conveyed, because none of that is pedantic but rather an attempt to clarify. You may ask, and Elysia or I may answer. If either of us asks a question, we're trying to clarify so that we can clear up confusion or answer your questions properly. The majority of this lengthy thread is what we are using as feedback to improve the system in its next iteration. After this current period ends we will have a one month war moratorium in which we try to improve things. This system is not perfect. It never will be. But we will do our best to continually improve it.

[Elyse]

What worries me most about the war system is how "demands" play. I suspect there's serious potential for negative outcomes here without careful oversight on this. Make three absurd demands and two not quite as absurd ones and you can force through some silly changes, and the threat of the other side also "aiming high" may be an insufficient check, especially when a more active clan is fighting a less active one. It seems the degree of guidance concerning demands is limited right now, but as things get tested, I do hope some more concrete guidelines come together to avoid potentially abusive results. There's also my lesser worry that when war "pays" (qp, demands, etc.) there's a strong incentive for more active clans to find a way to stay constantly at war with someone or other (likely someone less active), which may not be a good thing long run. This also limits willingness to negotiate peace and encourages just letting the scoreboard handle things.

But while I have my concerns, I similarly recognize that new system is indeed creating excitement and enjoyment for lots of people. Moreover, Vampa, Elysia, et al. have made a ton of very positive changes and have earned considerable benefit of the doubt and patience as they implement, test, and update/adjust this project. I'm very interested in what we find out after the first "test" wars end, and how the system develops in response. In other words (and to flip a popular phrase), "give war a chance."

[Elysia]

I've been keeping an eye on counter demands. I mean, if *oL were to demand that all Seanchan patrols, Falme and Seandar would be made entirely *oL mobs, I'd say hell no. Way too unbalancing and way too much work. The idea is that players can make small changes through effort, not mess over an entire clan in one fell swoop.

[chyga]

I just want to throw out there how much I am enjoying this change.

[Taziar]

There's also my lesser worry that when war "pays" (qp, demands, etc.) there's a strong incentive for more active clans to find a way to stay constantly at war with someone or other (likely someone less active), which may not be a good thing long run. This also limits willingness to negotiate peace and encourages just letting the scoreboard handle things.

I think this is a very important aspect to take into consideration. If only one path is presented to gain qps and/or other things that motivate play then you will only have players choose that route due to the nature of it. PK and PvE (generals) is the easy part really, rewarding for the opposite is going to be the hardest part and finding a balance to keep any motivation to work the harder route (diplomacy) for less rewards.

Taziar

[Rico]

Great change.

I appreciate everyone taking the time to discuss my clan's RP in depth here. I will only ask that if you have a Thiefbane and are concerned to please post on the boards, and if you don't, to leave the matters of Thiefbane to me and mine, or contact us directly. As has been evidenced, a number of you do not have the correct facts, or understanding of the facts.

[Elysia]

rewarding for the opposite is going to be the hardest part and finding a balance to keep any motivation to work the harder route (diplomacy) for less rewards.

We have been rewarding for treaties negotiated and established for some time now.