Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
At my alma mater, for my curriculum, we had a Sophistic field sport called 'Spartan Madball'. The objective was to have the ball. Whoever had the ball was the mutual target of all the other players, who would pile on and wrench the ball away, whereupon the new ball holder would become the target of everyone else.
Brutal. Patently pointless, except if you were aware of what was happening in class: Then it was a lesson.
Our curriculum used discussion/conversation/seminar to explore whatever was the current subject. If someone presented a hypothesis everyone tried to disprove it or come up with an antithetical argument.
So the object of Spartan Madball was, I think, to teach us that if you have a conversation, the objective should not be so much to pile on the holder of the hypothesis, but to further the hypothesis constructively into thesis.
Having a thesis we would then generate its antithesis. Some would champion the thesis, others would champion the antithesis, and by conversing constructively we used the conflict as the dynamic for generating a practical synthesis. If successful, that synthesis would then be adopted as our new Thesis, and the process was to resume.
This is called dialectical reasoning.
I wonder could PvP/Politics be instructional to good effect in PFO? If PvP is just Spartan Madball, then I would argue the game will be less successful. But if PvP in PFO is a constructive and multipartate dialog then it might progress, and evolve.
Am I too obscure and the topic is worthless, or should I clarify?
I've gotta agree with Nihimon here. Nice introduction for your point, though.
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
Both Spartan Madball and Football (all variants) are valid sports.
The conversational equivalents are also valid.
One key difference is that a wide receiver (fast smaller guy with good hands and legs) will never get the Madball against a linebacker (not quite as fast big guy that specializes in powering through people).
Formal rules of engagement allow specialized roles, at the cost of creating specialists who fill those roles, instead of generalists. I think that the Madball rules fail in that they foster the creation of Madball specialists, rather than people that can control the (metaphorical?) ball in all circumstances.
Wow. That was pretty deep.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
This thread should have more ideas how to handle settlement politics concerning other settlements/rivals. Some kind of meter to track all actions of one settlements members towards players/buildings of another settlement to determine the relationship between two settlements. Red means your at war. Behave nice and you have an ally that might help you in need. :)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I can't see anything but an antithetical argument in PvP as the point is opposing sides. I CAN see something being resolved on the same side in order to make PvP more worthwhile tho. Getting diverse individuals to coalesce around a single or small group of goals using the "everyone pushes in the same direction" analogy (I'm thinking a large battle formation working together as one large, well-oiled war machine) then yes, I think this theory has value.
I can't think of a decent analogy for it from opposing sides of the battlefield, however. A third party observer might be able to take away valuable lessons from what would be left of two large armies, but he may also take away all the spoils of war littering the field after the battle is over.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
We didnt call that Spartan Madball...
I cant even say what it was called in my neighborhood.
When I was a kid, we called it "smear the queer," which, if you think about it, may have some historical veracity. It's apparently what the Spartans did. :)
I hope the kids are calling it something a little more groovy these days, like "tackle the perfectly accepted person, whatever their sexual orientation, and take the ball, yo."
I added "yo" to make it the "shiznit," yo.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
When I was a kid this was called "Organized Chaos". There would be a gymnasium filled with over 100 students. There would be 6 kick balls. The kids with the kick balls would throw them, trying to hit the other kids. If you got hit, you were out. If you caught the ball, the thrower was out.
The "team" was constantly changing and it was random, as was the targets, until about 30 kids were left. Then suddenly the attacks would become coordinated on the part of the throwers. They would begin to target, focus fire, on the most athletic kid on the field.
When it came down to 6 remaining, the kids would be put at opposite sides, 3 per side. Each with a ball, it would be every man for himself. In almost every instance, kids would attack one of the other two on their own side. Betrayal became easier then throwing from a distance.
And then there was one......
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
In Australia it's known as "Kill the dill with the pill".
It was quite a lot of fun ;)
As for the conversational side of things, its determined by a number of factors. The crowd-forging going on here on the forums will be little to no similarity how some guilds determine their directions internally, and none of this would be the same to how GW themselves come to their oen decisions.
It's one massive continuous conversation, going on in dozens of directions in different groups in different ways. Consensus is possible, but I expect it to be somewhat rare.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
We didnt call that Spartan Madball...
I cant even say what it was called in my neighborhood.
When I was a kid, we called it "smear the queer," which, if you think about it, may have some historical veracity. It's apparently what the Spartans did. :)
I hope the kids are calling it something a little more groovy these days, like "tackle the perfectly accepted person, whatever their sexual orientation, and take the ball, yo."
I added "yo" to make it the "shiznit," yo.
Yeah, that was it... just didnt want to say it lol. And yeah, I bolded the new name.
HA