Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 28, 2018 17:35:24 GMT -5
Let's take your example and reiterate it a little bit.
Team A has a number of good players and a good couch. Because of that, everyone want to be team A.
Team B has maybe one subpar player, basically no couch. Because of that, nobody wants to play in Team B.
Team A have grown tired of perpetual training and practice and decided to have themselves a game. They challenge team B and both teams come to the stadium. There are no people at that stadium, because there is no game. Team A is the only active entity, there is no opponent.
It's like being surprised that war between Tuluk and Allanak is shitty and uneventful, when both AoD and Legion have less soldiers then there are templars. Where 60% are independents who dont like dealing with nobility and the bigggest/only military organization are mercenaries who while 'should' be a big impact in battles, cannot be fully trusted due to the merc's inability to pick a side, and ... you cant really expect a full victory over a citystate with a merc company.
|
|
tedium
Clueless newb
Posts: 164 
|
Post by tedium on Sept 29, 2018 3:28:14 GMT -5
Why would Team A challenge Team B when Team B has no players? That doesn't sound like it would be very fun. And if Team A is able to provide good RP even before they come into conflict with Team B, thus generating so many players, why would they need to change their gameplan to focus on a conflict with a non-existent entity? I get the concern there, but I think it's unrealistic. Additionally, if you're implying that Team B is less attractive because it has no couch, why not give them a couch? Or better yet, make them asymmetrical so that they draw players interested in different aspects of roleplay. Let Team A have a couch, and give Team B a good bed, or some sturdy stools in front of a bar. Flesh out the clan so that it's an appealing alternative to Team A while not being a lesser mirror of Team A.
Finally, I think that a conflict with Team A might actually generate interest in Team B. As long as Team A's conflict doesn't boil down to PKing Team B members on sight (and why would it without any members of Team B to escalate things?), then the roleplay generated should make Team B more attractive, not less. If Team B is an established staff-originated clan, then it should have some sort of behind-the-scenes power they can leverage in negotiations with clans C, D, and E in exchange for assistance in their conflict.
|
|
|
|
Post by jcarter on Sept 29, 2018 15:16:09 GMT -5
Let's take your example and reiterate it a little bit. Team A has a number of good players and a good couch. Because of that, everyone want to be team A. Team B has maybe one subpar player, basically no couch. Because of that, nobody wants to play in Team B. Team A have grown tired of perpetual training and practice and decided to have themselves a game. They challenge team B and both teams come to the stadium. There are no people at that stadium, because there is no game. Team A is the only active entity, there is no opponent. It's like being surprised that war between Tuluk and Allanak is shitty and uneventful, when both AoD and Legion have less soldiers then there are templars. Where 60% are independents who dont like dealing with nobility and the bigggest/only military organization are mercenaries who while 'should' be a big impact in battles, cannot be fully trusted due to the merc's inability to pick a side, and ... you cant really expect a full victory over a citystate with a merc company. what does any of that have to do with clan caps? what is the take-away message of this bizarre metaphor? |
|
tedium
Clueless newb
Posts: 164
|
Post by tedium on Sept 29, 2018 16:07:29 GMT -5
what does any of that have to do with clan caps? what is the take-away message of this bizarre metaphor?
I think he's trying to imply that Team A having a disproportionately large population means that no one can compete with them, which is bad for conflict. Therefore artificial caps would be good for the conflict. I don't agree with that, however.
Even in his example, if we cap Team A to 3 people then they still outnumber Team B 3:1 and have greater resources and better players. Some of those 7 players locked out of Team A will still probably find their way to working for Team A in an unofficial capacity. Now you have 7-ish players filtering into a custom clan, creating more overhead, and doubling the bureaucracy involved by making everything Team A + Indie Team A does go through Team A staff + Indie staff. Originally it was all handled by Team A and Team A staff. And they still outnumber Team B 10:1 in the end, except Team B thinks they're only outnumbered 3:1, which puts them at an even greater disadvantage because now they don't even know how fucked they are. At best they can find RP by trying to figure out who works for Team A.
|
|
|
|
Post by shakes on Sept 29, 2018 16:11:44 GMT -5
I don't really get the tortured metaphor though.
Anyway, you can take apart a large team bit by bit the same as a small team. No sweat. They don't all log on at once and go everywhere together. Catch them alone, give them the knife!
Edit:
In addition, some of the most fun you can have in game is sitting in the bar listening to a large group of clannies who think they're the shit talking about "Where's Bob? I haven't seen him in two week? Tha fuck is Bob?"
And you're just sipping there thinking ... "Murdered him two weeks ago in his apartment. Who's next, bitches?"
Seriously. Fun.
I don't like to just randomly murder some poor bastard who is still trying to get his shit together and find something to be a part of, but I seriously do like it when the head of some group orders all their cronies to go after some other group and you get to be involved in that.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2018 17:15:17 GMT -5
what does any of that have to do with clan caps? what is the take-away message of this bizarre metaphor?
I think he's trying to imply that Team A having a disproportionately large population means that no one can compete with them, which is bad for conflict. Therefore artificial caps would be good for the conflict. I don't agree with that, however.
Even in his example, if we cap Team A to 3 people then they still outnumber Team B 3:1 and have greater resources and better players. Some of those 7 players locked out of Team A will still probably find their way to working for Team A in an unofficial capacity. Now you have 7-ish players filtering into a custom clan, creating more overhead, and doubling the bureaucracy involved by making everything Team A + Indie Team A does go through Team A staff + Indie staff. Originally it was all handled by Team A and Team A staff. And they still outnumber Team B 10:1 in the end, except Team B thinks they're only outnumbered 3:1, which puts them at an even greater disadvantage because now they don't even know how fucked they are. At best they can find RP by trying to figure out who works for Team A.
Yup. That's pretty much how it ended up happening, time and time again. And it's also why the last war Allanak vs Tuluk ended up being a puff of smoke.
|
|
tedium
Clueless newb
Posts: 164
|
Post by tedium on Sept 29, 2018 20:25:43 GMT -5
I think that has more to do with Tuluk being a political superpower in a game where city state politics mean virtually nothing from a player level. Players can't negotiate with Blackwing Post to swing things in their favor. At best, if one particular Noble House wants to strike against Tuluk, another Noble House can be bribed to sabotage them, but you're discussing Allanak as a whole. Plus magic is ridiculously strong, and at the average player level, there is zero way for Tuluki players to counter it.
Tuluk was terribly designed and doesn't really pose a strong foil to Allanak in terms of theme, mechanics, or roleplay. It isn't a 10v1 with couch v no couch, it's a 35v8 with tanks vs. rocks, and no clear objectives that can be achieved without staff intervention other than PK.
Edit: Not to mention that Tuluk constantly cannibalized its own population because of its own terrible design.
|
|
blargle
Clueless newb
Beast Master
Posts: 63
|
Post by blargle on Sept 30, 2018 7:21:42 GMT -5
I think that has more to do with Tuluk being a political superpower in a game where city state politics mean virtually nothing from a player level. Players can't negotiate with Blackwing Post to swing things in their favor. At best, if one particular Noble House wants to strike against Tuluk, another Noble House can be bribed to sabotage them, but you're discussing Allanak as a whole. Plus magic is ridiculously strong, and at the average player level, there is zero way for Tuluki players to counter it. Tuluk was terribly designed and doesn't really pose a strong foil to Allanak in terms of theme, mechanics, or roleplay. It isn't a 10v1 with couch v no couch, it's a 35v8 with tanks vs. rocks, and no clear objectives that can be achieved without staff intervention other than PK.
Edit: Not to mention that Tuluk constantly cannibalized its own population because of its own terrible design.
Didn't help that some bonehead decided it would be a good idea to flood the coolest part of Tuluk. |
|
|
|
Post by jcarter on Sept 30, 2018 8:38:27 GMT -5
the argument about being unfair for competition makes no sense. since when has fair or balanced been relevant for any aspect of arm, whose entire tagline is about how unfair it is? why are player numbers supposed to balance out the rest of these virtual houses?
now all of a sudden it is important things are balanced for pvp sake?
|
|
|
|
Post by pinkerdlu on Sept 30, 2018 10:45:21 GMT -5
Let's not forget there is very, very little competition in the first place.
Clan vs clan conflict in Arm is a joke.
Look at the Byn, AoD and Garrison dynamic.
Using potential clan conflict to possibly justify clan caps is pretty irrelevant.
|
|
|
|
Post by shakes on Sept 30, 2018 13:11:22 GMT -5
I really dislike the whole Garrison concept. I'm not sure if it's just played poorly by people in the Garrison because they don't understand what's going on, or if it's designed poorly.
Was the purpose there to have a military unit who sways back and forth between the merchant houses in terms of control? Because all I've ever seen, since its inception, is a (probable) OOC clique who does what they want when they're not just fighting gith and lend nothing to house politics.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2018 13:37:14 GMT -5
Out of curiosity, Pinkerdlu. What is up with the Byn, AoD, Garrison Dynamic? Can you elaborate?
|
|
tedium
Clueless newb
Posts: 164
|
Post by tedium on Sept 30, 2018 15:21:24 GMT -5
Out of curiosity, Pinkerdlu. What is up with the Byn, AoD, Garrison Dynamic? Can you elaborate? I think the issue is that there isn't one. All are basically shoved apart into separate spheres that touch as little as possible. I wrote a whole thing about how clan conflict, especially military clan conflict, is a joke. I didn't include the Garrison because I don't actually know much about them (I remember the Fist, who also had little clan conflict with the Byn or AoD). |
|
|
|
Post by pinkerdlu on Sept 30, 2018 15:23:41 GMT -5
Out of curiosity, Pinkerdlu. What is up with the Byn, AoD, Garrison Dynamic? Can you elaborate? Military organizations exist for external conflict. They are created to serve an authority, and seek to achieve the goals of this authority through physical force, specifically in opposition to the military organizations of rival authorities. That is their purpose. The AoD serves Allanak's ruling class and seeks to enforce their control over the Known. The Byn is a mercenary outfit who serves whomever pays them. These are the two major military organizations of the game, and ever since the consolidation of the game to Allanak, their aims are not in conflict by any stretch of the imagination. Both serve the same authority, which is Allanak's ruling class. On the rare occasions when the Byn does not serve Allanak, they serve the merchant houses or individuals against the wilderness, and are never in opposition to Allanak. That whole post is worth a read. The jist? The 3 major PC clans right now are the Byn, AoD and the Garrison. These clans, as they have been operated in Arm, do not generate conflict or tension with each other. When they do, it is superficial. The Byn? Band of noobs and misfits that go out on contracts, twink and engage in rp. The AoD? Band of tough guys that instagank any potential criminals and exist to drive forward staff plots. The Garrison? Band of misfits and twinks that exist to react to staff plots. Sources of conflict? Nothing significant. edit: Yeah. tldr? The issue is there is no functional dynamic. |
|
|
|
Post by shakes on Sept 30, 2018 15:37:33 GMT -5
I haven't found that ALL the AoD instagank criminals. There's been a few who will sneak into the rinth and attack people or go after you on a rooftop or at night, but overall most of the AoD seem to be geared towards getting involved with the Guild and getting those lovely, lovely handouts.
Probably because there's no action in the city other than criminal action and you're either in on it or stuck staring at the other tavernsitters who are just there between mudsex sessions.
|
|
