Goblin Squad Member
|
But you have already chosen that location, and at the point I withdrew my membership and support from TEO because of that decision, your plans were to expand south-east and drag every group of similar ideology down there with you. Those points were crucial to the arguments of those defending the decision to settle in the south-east. The idea that you would establish the culture of the area and bring your allies to you.
Is that not still your intent?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Since you aimed this at the community:
1. Is it "positive gameplay" to prey on the weak and inexperienced?
I would say not for two primary reasons. First, I enjoy a challenge, this is not. I cannot imagine it being fun for me or them. Second, admittedly, I might make a profit...but I play to enjoy community, not profit or to achieve some "win factor". Making the community miserable would not be fun for me; nor does providing some necessary lesson of "L2P, or I will force you to" sound fun for me (or them).
2. Would players seeking a "positive gameplay experience" feel fulfilled if they were robbed by bandits who had promised to provide that "positive gameplay experience"?
I think this is very subjective and difficult to answer. I think the "thrill" and "rush" provided by the occasional bandit encounter is a general positive. I think too much of this good thing is a huge negative. To be fair, I would prefer none to too much...and I think I would still be able to enjoy the game.
Directly answering your question, synchronically, no one will ever be happy about having x hours of effort collecting resources or buying goods for sale elsewhere forcefully taken from them...no one...ever. This will be true no matter how much "thrill" the mechanic provides. The trick is balancing it diachronically. Merchants need to be able to get away after feeling the "rush" ad "thrill" often enough to counter the frustration of the inevitable loss...and similarly, bandits need to be able to win often enough to make the effort worth it. I wish GW luck balancing that in an artificial prescribed system (natural systems find their own prey-predator equilibrium...or the system dies).
3. Would robbing members of their valuables or raiding members' Outposts contribute to "our mutual success"?
Obviously no...but primarily due to looting losses. Hypothetically, as long as two players steal from each other without loss in a semi-closed system, any resources added to the system increase their "mutual success". Wait, I take that back. "Mutual success" means all players increase their gains, my hypothetical was referring to "collective success". I deny my own hypothetical, so...obviously no (no buts).
4. Is Banditry compatible with Milani's stance against oppression?
Milani's stance on oppression was a metagame metaphor. Anyone can broaden or narrow it to justify a position. Take for instance, if slaves are property, taking that property is technically stealing...the fact that you free the slaves afterward is irrelevant. Milani's anti-slavery stance is hence pro-banditry in realization.
I will not really advocate this position, unless she was also a goddess of philosophy (which she is not). I am just offering something for discussion.
More simply, I would say any use or threat of force is oppression. Convincing someone to give you 5g for a charity is not oppression, Stealing At Daggerpoint is.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Andius, we're well aware that you feel - strongly - that we chose the wrong location. Please just let it go now.
Cannot do. Those looking at the potential of joining this alliance need to think about such issues as well. Not just your salesman's pitch about how safe it's going to be down there.
They really need to think about the challenges your remoteness presents to recruitment and trade, the culture they expect to find between Inevitable and Thornkeep, and what long term goals they really hope to accomplish from the south east of the map.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Andius, you gave up control of one of the game's largest starting militaries because you are convinced that this game can actually be "won" or "lost" during the land rush. If you were half the strategist you say you are, that would not have happened.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I feel that I should speak up from the perspective of a group not intending to reside in the Southeast mountains.
Audacity did not enter into this agreement for protection, we got involved because of the commitment to positive gameplay. We do not feel that banditry is bad for the game or its players. We do not wish for special consideration against such activities.
We do intend to provide services of mutual benefit to other members of the accord. We have made arrangements to do exactly this. We would gladly make such arrangements with those outside of this accord as well, these arrangements would be in good faith with those we have already entered into.
UNC would need to decide for themselves what they would be willing to put towards the goal of mutual success, just as we had to decide for ourselves how such success could be brought about.
We would love to see UNC find the middle ground that lets them thrive in relationship of mutual success, particularly with members of this agreement, but more than that we are very glad to see UNC show support of the Roseblood Accord and the goals it is made up of.
@Andius the first thing Audacity offered this effort was expansion out of the Southeast corner. New players will be given every opportunity for exposure to these ideals. Trade routes will be established the same day the land rush is finalized.
It is also far too early to say that this accord will remain even confined to the region it was set forth in. We believe more groups will want to be a part of this, and we hope they come from more areas than simply the Southeast.
As for the points Nihimon brought up:
1. Is it "positive gameplay" to prey on the weak and inexperienced?
It is not positive gameplay to single out the weak and the inexperienced. However, adversity is how we learn, anyone so presented with a losing situation is also presented with an opportunity to learn from it.
2. Would players seeking a "positive gameplay experience" feel fulfilled if they were robbed by bandits who had promised to provide that "positive gameplay experience"?
If said players made the mistake of equating "positive gameplay experience" to "being attacked is bad", then I am sure they would. If they understood that "positive gameplay" is in the context of everything the game has to offer, and not simply how it affects an individual session of one player, I do not think they would be able to honestly state that being robbed by bandits did not add value to their experience. Though perhaps not their net-worth. This falls into the category of meaningful PvP as defined/designed by the developers and is thus included as part of positive gameplay.
3. Would robbing members of their valuables or raiding members' Outposts contribute to "our mutual success"?
This is the one I will leave to UNC, as I do not pretend to know to what extent they would be willing to curtail banditry.
4. Is Banditry compatible with Milani's stance against oppression?
Robin Hood.
Oppression as applied to griefers has already been answered. Oppression as applied to raiding an invading army? Certainly. Oppression as applied to an all lawful-good aligned society that excludes those of other alignments? Absolutely.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Considering the incredible amounts of players that are likely to be in the Northern Regions I'm not so sure that similar cultures won't develop up there. What this group does do is ensure that there is a positive culture available for players in what may look to be the bleakest parts of the map.
In fact if the Roseblood Accord model works there are likely to be those that seek to model it, and the ideal region to do so would be in the North beyond even the regions we will even be able to access in EE.
If Roseblood is a failure it won't be because of the Location.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Andius, you gave up control of one of the game's largest starting militaries because you are convinced that this game can actually be "won" or "lost" during the land rush. If you were half the strategist you say you are, that would not have happened.
My decision to leave was largely based on seeing how easily this alliance could be sold into such a horrible decision despite the warnings given. I believe that is the decision that will kill you, but if it's not, you've demonstrated that you'll probably make another that will. I already wasted two years and hundreds of dollars building something you guys will wreck with careless decisions. No need to wait around and invest more time and money before seeing which decision will ultimately wreck it.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Andius, you gave up control of one of the game's largest starting militaries because you are convinced that this game can actually be "won" or "lost" during the land rush. If you were half the strategist you say you are, that would not have happened.My decision to leave was largely based on seeing how easily this alliance could be sold into such a horrible decision despite the warnings given. I believe that is the decision that will kill you, but if it's not, you've demonstrated that you'll probably make another that will. I already wasted two years and hundreds of dollars building something you guys will wreck with careless decisions. No need to wait around and invest more time and money before seeing which decision will ultimately wreck it.
Respectfully, Andius, your point has been made. Continuing to make it will not change the facts. It can, however, push people to not trust the alliance. In effect, your actions now are directly against the organization of good aligned and good intentioned individuals. You now stand against everything you stood for. Please, if you cannot support us, then do not bad mouth The Roseblood or TEO. It does not reflect well on you, helps no one, changes no minds, and can be detrimental to the efforts of promoting positive gameplay.
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
Andius, we're well aware that you feel - strongly - that we chose the wrong location. Please just let it go now.Cannot do. Those looking at the potential of joining this alliance need to think about such issues as well. Not just your salesman's pitch about how safe it's going to be down there.
They really need to think about the challenges your remoteness presents to recruitment and trade, the culture they expect to find between Inevitable and Thornkeep, and what long term goals they really hope to accomplish from the south east of the map.
At the very least, limit yourself to discussions of the alliance. The Roseblood Accord is strictly about philosophical agreement, and I truly hope that we can get groups to agree in principle to play nice even if they don't want to play on our team.
I truly hope that the number of players and groups that want to have a good game far exceeds the number that can meaningfully be on the same team.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Andius, you gave up control of one of the game's largest starting militaries because you are convinced that this game can actually be "won" or "lost" during the land rush. If you were half the strategist you say you are, that would not have happened.My decision to leave was largely based on seeing how easily this alliance could be sold into such a horrible decision despite the warnings given. I believe that is the decision that will kill you, but if it's not, you've demonstrated that you'll probably make another that will. I already wasted two years and hundreds of dollars building something you guys will wreck with careless decisions. No need to wait around and invest more time and money before seeing which decision will ultimately wreck it.
I don't know what internal TEO discussions went on between Andius and the rest of TEO. But I do know from the few Teamspeak I took part in, you were very 'hostile' to anyone that didn't agree with you Andius. You even tried to 'bully' everyone into taking the K area. But most didn't agree with your choice Andius and the fact you are still going on about this just screams "Negative Game Play" instead of "Positive Game Play" even before the game officially starts.
My advice, though I suspect you won't heed it and will probably have a harsh reply to this post, but just move on. Your negativity isn't good for you or anyone else.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It can, however, push people to not trust the alliance.
And if this alliance encourages them to settle in the south east, then they shouldn't. That is infact my intent in going public with these statements. To discourage others from following you in your folly.
A group which would attempt to persuade other groups with the intent of positive gameplay into a position where they lose much of their power to make a real impact would be something that stands against everything I stand for.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...
I never tried to bully anyone into taking K. I delivered my arguments for K and gave no threat of consequence should you choose a settlement other than K. Anyone who says otherwise is outright lying.
What I did say, is that if your groups chose to settle south of V I would leave you to defend yourselves. THAT is the reason I am no longer with you. You chose the 1 location I said was undefendable for your groups. I stand by that, so have fun attempting to do so.
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I never tried to bully anyone into taking K. I delivered my arguments for K and gave no threat of consequence should you choose a settlement other than K. Anyone who says otherwise is outright lying.
What I did say, is that if your groups chose to settle south of V I would leave you to defend yourselves. THAT is the reason I am no longer with you. You chose the 1 location I said was undefendable for your groups. I stand by that, have fun attempting to do so.
I don't know you, but to be fair, you are essentially saying that everybody in the world is wrong, and that you have the absolute truth. Which is maybe true, but statistically, it won't be recognised before approximately 300 years in the future.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...I never tried to bully anyone into taking K. I delivered my arguments for K and gave no threat of consequence should you choose a settlement other than K. Anyone who says otherwise is outright lying.
What I did say, is that if your groups chose to settle south of V I would leave you to defend yourselves. THAT is the reason I am no longer with you. You chose the 1 location I said was undefendable for your groups. I stand by that, so have fun attempting to do so.
..said the "Military Commander" who raised the White Flag 2 months before EE even started. Have fun attempting to find people to follow your lead, in this game or in life.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I don't know you, but to be fair, you are essentially saying that everybody in the world is wrong, and that you have the absolute truth. Which is maybe true, but statistically, it won't be recognised before approximately 300 years in the future.I never tried to bully anyone into taking K. I delivered my arguments for K and gave no threat of consequence should you choose a settlement other than K. Anyone who says otherwise is outright lying.
What I did say, is that if your groups chose to settle south of V I would leave you to defend yourselves. THAT is the reason I am no longer with you. You chose the 1 location I said was undefendable for your groups. I stand by that, have fun attempting to do so.
Well the majority. There were a few other people in TEO who echoed my concerns publicly and privately to me in PMs. But yeah. The intent of TEO in taking in so many PVE oriented players with little to no experience in these kinds of titles was to bring them in and protect them while they learned how to survive in this kind of environment. It was a good idea until we for some reason switched from a republic to a true democracy and they started voting on which locations would be the most defensible.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
..said the "Military Commander" who raised the White Flag 2 months before EE even started....I never tried to bully anyone into taking K. I delivered my arguments for K and gave no threat of consequence should you choose a settlement other than K. Anyone who says otherwise is outright lying.
What I did say, is that if your groups chose to settle south of V I would leave you to defend yourselves. THAT is the reason I am no longer with you. You chose the 1 location I said was undefendable for your groups. I stand by that, so have fun attempting to do so.
After it became clear his mission objective were to be set by people who don't even have a clue which way to aim the gun.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
The problem is, then, that things would have been run by a military dictatorship. And that is not what the people wanted. You did not convince people to settle elsewhere. And the more abrasive you became, the less people listened to you.
The same is happening now. If you want to collect good minded individuals to protect the starter towns (which TEO could still have done), bashing on the good aligned groups does not make people want to ally with you. Because they don't know when you will turn on them for a difference of opinion.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
There are a great many kinds of military respect, courtesy, and professionalism that simply aren't being used here. Anybody, on all sides, that wants to be taken seriously here needs to step away from this situation and let what has happened in the past go.
Andius resigned from his position of leadership as is his right. In doing so relinquished ALL authority over those formerly under his command.
Everybody else needs to respect his choice to resign and show him the respect he deserves as a long standing leader.
Everybody needs to drop the topic.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Who would have guessed my posts in this thread would have been some of the more positive ones?
I will get back to the questions posed directly to me tomorrow.
Bluddwolf, you are a bastion of positivity...thank you! I really do look forward to your response.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Bluddwolf, you are a bastion of positivity...thank you! I really do look forward to your response.Who would have guessed my posts in this thread would have been some of the more positive ones?
I will get back to the questions posed directly to me tomorrow.
I'm a bastion of a lot of things, but in this case it has been positive, so you are welcome.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The Roseblood Accord is going to enrich the river kingdoms of PFO in every way. Her markets will have the top crafters wares, her caravans will have the hardest, most experienced guards, and her defenders will have the greatest of motivations to succeed: a supportive community.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Is there a Pathfinder Society of Divorce Lawyers?
Ok, maybe that was a little negative, but no more so then the dissolution of the Pax UNC contract. At least our separation was amicable and in accordance with the terms of the contract.
For clarity, Aeternum and Golgotha have no wish to jump into a drama contest. Bludd's opinions are not ours.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Andius is free to his own opinion and stating it. Let's not get dragged down into endless arguments and disagreements over something that has already been decided please. He has made his choice, as has the guild. I have little else to say on the matter.
In an out-of-character fashion I'd welcome to the UNC, though I don't think from an IC perspective it would work. I'll try elaborate on that.
The Robin Hood example is faulty based on the IC depiction of UNC and Bluddwolf who do put wealth before good (a lot heh, they aren't doing it for the poor or whatnot...I'm fairly sure). I don't have any qualms about trying to work toward a better game and positive environment for everyone with them though and I hope to see many bandits adopt a similar attitude. It shouldn't have to be considered a negative game style if done right I think. From my character's in character perspective they won't like it, however, and I do look forward to the rivalry it could potentially create.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
For clarity, Aeternum and Golgotha have no wish to jump into a drama contest. Bludd's opinions are not ours.Is there a Pathfinder Society of Divorce Lawyers?
Ok, maybe that was a little negative, but no more so then the dissolution of the Pax UNC contract. At least our separation was amicable and in accordance with the terms of the contract.
Thanks, very respectful of you. I did not even get Bluddwolf's reference until you chimed in. To be fair, I do not think a little razing from other social groups is a bad thing. We can take it.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I will not really advocate this position, unless she was also a goddess of philosophy (which she is not).
Hah! You're a devotee of philosophy, aren't you? *grins*
Thanks to you and the others who have answered my questions. I asked them sincerely. Thinking on it more, I think #2 might very well be answered "Yes" in a great many cases by thoughtful players who have seriously considered the implications.
I would also like to thank those who have urged respectful discourse, and would like to add my own word of advice to any groups entering the Land Rush. Many of us will lose our Settlements, it's not the end of the world. Some of you might find yourselves in locations you don't really want, that won't be the most important factor in your success or failure.
How you respond to adversity will be what matters most. Being able not only to see what you've done wrong, but also to admit your mistakes will be a very powerful tool in rebuilding. And being able to accept your loss and move on without acrimony will ensure that you have friends at your side to help you rebuild.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think we all need to get a little perspective here.
First, the number of people who have posted on these boards is I believe less than 12.5% of those who are eligible to take part in EE. The idea that we are now "setting the tone" for PFO is untenable given those numbers, and the claim that the game will fail because of the actions of any or all of us active on these boards is arrogance in the extreme.
Second, the northern part of the map already has Callambea at H. Maybe I have missed something, but I do not recall the thread in which Pax said it was dedicated to negative game play. I don't want to speak for them, but I expect Charlie George and the other Pax leadership will be just as harsh with griefers and others who are attempting to break the "rules of the game" as anyone in the Roseblood Accord. And with the announcement of Fidelis, they are providing a settlement that will cater to those of LG and NG alignments.
At the risk of being beaten over the head with a blunt object, I will repeat something I have said several times in TS - you don't play the landrush with the map you want, you play it with the map you've got. Fort Riverwatch is nowhere close to being on that map, so quite frankly, any arguments posited on proximity to new players coming from there are specious at best. The members of the Roseblood Accord made a decision based on what was felt was best for them, given the options available. As Darcnes has pointed out, not all of those choices are the SE mountain range. The decision has been made - can we let it rest now?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
While we who are active in the forums represent a minority in the bigger picture, we also represent a minority that is likely to put more effort into the game than the average Jorah.
These three big companies are also going to be the easy choice for a great number of players. They will have the most players, the most progress made in the shortest amount of time, and the simple appeal of being popular, which they will continue to appear more so with each joining player.
If we made the claim that people will follow our example, that certain would be arrogant of us, but really we are just trying to show a consistent front of behavior for others to take their cues from. Most of them have probably not given a lot of thought to what their goals are, or what actions they are and are not willing to take. Regardless of these masses outnumbering us, having 100 people all tell you the same thing is enough for most people to realize "oh hey, maybe I should not just go try and kill everyone after all". It will not be de facto behavior for all just because we say so, but it can be consistent for anyone that learns by example.
I realize there are actually a few people out there that do not particularly care for Nihimon or Lifedrgn or Hobs, but when enough people hear those names on enough tongues, with enough repetition, chances are they are going to have that some sense of a person being well thought of that many of us have come to adopt over the last couple of years. Our leaders setting examples of conduct is going to have an impact. Bluddwolf will be looked up to in some circles. As scary as it sounds, be prepared for that. (kidding BW)
We will not be the ones to determine whether the game succeeds or fails, but we will be setting a very visible stage for others to look at coming into the game, who will in turn pass on their behaviors to the next even larger group. Positive gameplay starts somewhere, we can all see to it that it starts with EE, whether we are a part of this accord or not.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Well spoken Lhan and thank you for the bit concerning Pax. I will let Brass elaborate on that, if they wish.
I can assure you all that the message consistently delivered from Pax Leadership is always very clear (to all of us) concerning acceptable (in-game & meta-game) behavior. Not to mention, clearly spelled out in our Charter.
