Veneke wrote: Might want to work on the formatting in those posts ajqtrz. It can be a little hard to read when it isn't obvious at a glance what is a quote and what is your response. I think it far too early to make any kind of analysis of the long-term impact of land claims in BL. The assumption that these claims will work out poorly is a curious one. The 10 square rule, commonly accepted and implemented largely across the community as a whole, is little different to the three current claims in BL. In fact, there's really only two differences between the 10 square rule and the land claims. One is that the response to the question 'may I settle in an area you've claimed?' is known beforehand. In one claim anyway, it's actually still an open  question in the two others. The second is that the area being claimed is larger than a 10 square radius. Currently the fact that land claims are larger than the 10 square radius doesn't even seem to really matter as all of the claims to date are focused on alliance heartlands. All that's really happening here is that the three alliances concerned are saying that they intend to settle in those regions, and there's really not sufficient room in this area for you to grow properly without impeding either your, or their, ability to cluster properly with allies. I think this would be a very different scenario if alliances were claiming regions which were outside their heartlands, but that's not what's happening here. ajqtrz wrote: I keep using the playground metaphor for this because it's appropriate. It's not. It's this kind of gross simplification though which paints land claims in an extremely negative light when, in fact, the community already accepts the principle of ownership of land without sovereignty. Originally posted by ajqtrz ajqtrz wrote: There are those who wish to make Illy into something they want it to be.  The sad part is that they are already free to do so within the scope of the game mechanics.  They can "claim" all the land they wish using the 10 square rule and the sovereignty mechanism. Abstractdream's response Those statements are contradictory, however, I will say that claiming land within the mechanics of the game and claiming land within the metagame are not the same thing. If you think that is true, you are missing the point. My reply: ... However, you still haven't addressed the question of why we should accept the 'metarule" instead of just relying upon what the game already provides...the 10 square rule and sov. This is interesting. Although I find myself largely in agreement with AbstractDream/BV from TVM I don't think his argument here is one I would share. The only difference between a land claim and the 10 square rule is one of extent. What difference would there be if alliance X declared the province of Clarien for themselves alone versus if they have just settled across it with 19 squares between their cities and respond negatively to any request to settle in that region? There are strategic advantages in a land claim as you can claim the territory quicker, you can avoid having to settle cities on bad terrain just to extend your reach, etc but the practical difference in terms of what ajqtrz is talking about is effectively non-existent. It's important to note, however, that the game only enforces the 10 square rule for Tenaril spells. It is the player base which has decided that it extends to all settlements, not the game.

Are Land Claims Bad for Illy?

In my opinion there is huge difference between claiming a area of the map and claiming certain distance of existing town. May it be 10 squares.   Real difference is that the 10 squares is based on real existing towns and with map claim you can practically claim anything. Secondly The 10 squares have been granted to everyone regardless their alliance or even lack of it. Thirdly 10 squares can have practical effect on the amount of sovereing squares your town can claim not just some potential growing space that might not ever be used. Lets face it you can build your next town anywhere but your towns sovereingty surroundings are gone if someone builds town there. Fourthly 10 square rule is mostly used as a guideline to support good behaviour and to avoid friction many players accept new neighbours if they don't interfere with their plans.

I other hand support this sort behaviour and dont think its bad for illy, Illy community should not say what you can and cannot do in Illyriad. It is a sandbox. Being "New player friend" is fine but it should not be forced on to others.  There is enough space for friendly areas and not so friendly, especially in BL. New players and activity to illy does not come by forcing everyone to the same cast. 

 

Twilights said:

i think alot of players are missing what land claims really are...they are a game move...remember this game is not your typical mmo slam bam so think it out...gosh review the art of war...personally i think its brillant move and i wonder if it is smoke and mirrors...there is so many different levels of playing this game and this move is illy 301, alot of the debate seems that some players are at illy 101....open your minds players, think outside the box, maybe you will understand then feel free to contact me and i might explain how off your thinking is

Actually, I don't miss it at all.  It is a game move, and a good strategy.  I recognize that it works to claim as large a piece of land as you can and THEN to settle it.  Good strategy in any game is to exercise control over as much territory as you can....but it's also good strategy, if you can, to eliminate any new player who may or may not become strong enough to compete with you.  Or to rob any smaller alliance, dominate whomever you want because you are bigger than they...see, the problem?  Just because it's a good strategic move on the part of the alliance making the move does not mean it's a good move for the game and all it's players.

My point is that all the players should be allowed to make claims to land....which they have been allowed to do with the 10sqr rule.  The "alliance claim" rule seems, to some, to be an extension of that rule...but it is, in fact, the opposite.  The 10 sq rule applies to individual towns and players.  If you violate the rule you are dealt with, usually by the player and/or his alliance, and nobody blinks an eye as you violated a rule that we players (well you players who were here at the time).  But that rule is enforced with the blessing of the whole of Illy as an informal rule.  This new rule has two important differences: it's been put in place unilaterally and thus may or may not reflect the sentiment of all Illy players (which is why we are having this discussion, BTW), and it is not applicable to all players equally as a good deal of us do not have the muscle or inclination to go around coercing our fellow players to obey rule we have made over them without their consent.  I doubt any of the land claimers went around getting the assent of all the players in the areas they claimed so they have unilaterally declared a rule.  Good strategy, but not something the whole of Illy has decided.

As for being Illy 101, you may be right...or wrong...all I know is that the more we talk the more I learn, and that's not a bad thing.  Maybe someday I'll be the prof and you'll be the studen.....unless you think you already know so much you have no need to learn anything else.  LOL!

AJ

ajqtrz wrote: But that [10 square] rule is enforced with the blessing of the whole of Illy as an informal rule.

Edited by Veneke - 20 May 2015 at 01:48