| Author |
|
Salararius 
Postmaster
Joined: 26 Sep 2011
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 519 |
 Posted: 16 Oct 2012 at 04:11 |
 Llyorn Of Jaensch wrote:
To elaborate. How much influence did H? have on VIC, the Crows or ANY of the top 1000 alliances on how they played the game? With the relatively irrelevant exception....NONE. |
KillerPoodle wrote:
Having been around for a while and having been the preeminent alliance pretty much from the beginning we have naturally made enemies - people who don't like our style (White hated the fact we wouldn't play dirty), people who've been on the wrong end of our defense of the defense-less, people who made bad decisions on which side of a war to join and paid for it, people (like those in VIC) who were desperate to join the White war against us but couldn't due to the integrity of their leader at the time refusing to break their NAP with us. In short - quite a few people with beef against H? |
It goes on talking about how H? was always watching. How Consone was a reaction to H? H? was simply waiting for Consone to show it's true colors. I'm sorry, did you not read the full story:
Is Consone a reaction to H? as KillerPoodle states or is it something separate over which you have no control as you state. You can't state something is a reaction to you if it doesn't react to you. If it reacts to you, you exercise control. Notice, I'm not saying complete, utter and total control. Just that Illy is reacting to you because you are #1 and until you are not #1 you will set the course.
I'm sick of going round and round on your propaganda train. It's clear you guys have different views.
Edited by Salararius - 16 Oct 2012 at 05:01
|
 |
Salararius
Postmaster
Joined: 26 Sep 2011
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 519 |
Posted: 16 Oct 2012 at 04:59 |
glorfindel wrote:
My guess is that the "mature gamer" is not emotionally over-connected to the game -- not concerned that war will somehow bring their own personal support structure crashing down. Instead, the mature gamer has a majority portion of their life outside of the game, and see the game as just that. That's my interpolation of it, at least: the player who wants peace above all else in a fictional game like Illy is desperately trying to preserve the peace in their own lives. The mature gamer just wants to play the game like a game, and leave it to return to the peace and happiness they find in their exceedingly more self-actualized lives. |
Illy is a social network with a game wrapped around it. ... I think this part is 100% spot on and is exactly what I wanted to say but didn't really care to support. I really enjoyed the lecture on the word "sandbox", thank you. But you missed my point. My point was this Illy isn't "just a game", there are a lot of other elements to it and it's missing a lot of elements necessary for a game. You've actually taken it further, which in light of the "it's just a game" perspective I was struggling against I didn't want to do.
For example, everything you say above shows how Illy isn't a game. But I feel you have left out one group of players.
The first group you identify is the mature gamer. He/she is someone not over-connected to the game. The second group is the not mature gamer (can I say immature, is that rude) is lonely, isolated and disconnected from people. The immature gamer finds something in Illy that they can't get in traditional society. The mature gamer has a life and just does this for "fun". The mature gamer understands how important Illy is to the immature gamer, and his or her goal is to find other mature gamers and "play the game like a game". The mature gamer is not interested in "peace" in Illy because he has peace. The mature gamer plays the game against immature gamers in an effort to removes peace from the virtual lives of people who are "desperately trying to preserve the peace in their own lives."
If you are right and this is Illy, how is that mature or right? If it's not right, what do you call someone who sees that isn't right? He isn't mature, because clearly he doesn't share the perspective you outline. But what if he has a life, children, coaches soccer, teachers at school, runs, bikes, lifts weights, skis, goes to theater, fundraises, etc... What is missing from that person's life that he can get upset about a wrong in a virtual world when he knows there are people in it like you have described are in it? How long did you think about this when you wrote it?
|
|
Darmon
Forum Warrior
Joined: 15 Aug 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 315 |
Posted: 16 Oct 2012 at 05:24 |
Salararius wrote:
Llyorn Of Jaensch wrote:
To elaborate. How much influence did H? have on VIC, the Crows or ANY of the top 1000 alliances on how they played the game? With the relatively irrelevant exception....NONE. |
killerpoodle wrote:
Having been around for a while and having been the preeminent alliance pretty much from the beginning we have naturally made enemies - people who don't like our style (White hated the fact we wouldn't play dirty), people who've been on the wrong end of our defense of the defense-less, people who made bad decisions on which side of a war to join and paid for it, people (like those in VIC) who were desperate to join the White war against us but couldn't due to the integrity of their leader at the time refusing to break their NAP with us. In short - quite a few people with beef against H? |
It goes on talking about how H? was always watching. How Consone was a reaction to H? H? was simply waiting for Consone to show it's true colors. I'm sorry, did you not read the full story:
Is Consone a reaction to H? as KillerPoodle states or is it something separate over which you have no control as you state. You can't state something is a reaction to you if it doesn't react to you. If it reacts to you, you exercise control. Notice, I'm not saying complete, utter and total control. Just that Illy is reacting to you because you are #1 and until you are not #1 you will set the course.
I'm sick of going round and round on your propaganda train. It's clear you guys have different views.
|
Maybe you both can agree that regardless of whether H? was
intentionally trying to shape the world a certain way, people reacted to their presence and actions in general? I think very few people aspire to be the best at something so that they can be a role model, that just ends up being one of the consequences of the position.
It would be impossible to characterize anyone as "anti-H?" in an imaginary alternate timeline where H? loses the White War (not sure if that was even a possibility, but lets play pretend) and departs for other more favorable realms. It would be like saying anyone these days is anti-White: more or less without substance.
While I was typing this, I thought of something. Perhaps a scenario that is agreeable(ish) to everyone. I hear there are a fair number of Brits around here, so maybe some
Doctor Who fans as well? I refer you to the events surrounding "The Pandorica":
---
The Doctor: "You think I wanted this? I didn't do this! This... this wasn't me!"
River Song: "This was exactly you. All this, all of it. You make them so afraid. When you began, all those years ago, sailing off to see the universe, did you ever think you'd become this? The man who can turn an army around at the mention of his name? Doctor: the word for healer and wise man throughout the universe. We get that word from you, you know. But if you carry on the way you are, what might that word come to mean? To the people of the Gamma Forests, the word "doctor" means "mighty warrior". How far you've come. And now they've taken a child. The child of your best friends. And they're going to turn her into a weapon, just to bring you down. And all this, my love... in fear of you."
---
Interesting, or the random correlation of a tired mind? All this in fear of you, Harmless?
Edited by Darmon - 16 Oct 2012 at 05:25
|
|
Berylla
Wordsmith
Joined: 31 May 2011
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 121 |
Posted: 20 Oct 2012 at 21:36 |
I concider myself a mature player.
To me, a mature player is one who plays the game carefully, someone who doesn't blow up for the smallest thing, be it a word in GC or forum post, the attack on a camp or the loss of some diplos.
No matter what you call it, this IS a game. Illy is a virtual world, and yes, it is in many ways a social network, or a sandbox as well, but it is a game, because it isn't real. We invest time, and maybe money, in this, but when we send out thieves, they are not real people.
We roleplay... some more than others, and to me, that is a game as well. The "competition" is in who plays the best part, who is most convincing.
And why do some people want peace and fear war so much? Illy has drawn different people for different reasons, and compared to other virtual worlds with the possibility of war, this one has for some reason chosen peace rather than war.
When I started playing, I expected to be attacked as soon as I was out of protection. I was told through this forum that I would be safe for much longer, and that has certainly been true. I'm not an agressive player, and that has kept me safe. I did however chose to be part of an alliance and in doing so, I have extended my playing of this game into diplomacy and war.
Why do I still play? I like it here, this game, this roleplay, my friends here. I have a life outside of Illy and concider myself a mature player with plenty of patience. Hoping for peace, I prepare for war... I have been ever since I started playing.
And now, I expect people to bite my head off, call me names, and generally tell my I have it all wrong, just because I belong to the Dwarven Lords. I don't mind, it is part of the Illy-game, and I grew up being bullied in school, so I know the drill.
|
I speak peace, but carry a war axe.
|
|
Gon
Wordsmith
Joined: 14 Oct 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 117 |
Posted: 20 Oct 2012 at 23:12 |
|
Not sure why anyone would rip your head of for that post. It was very nice to hear your thoughts and why you play. The part I think most people will feel similar to you is that hopefully you aren't the only one that hopes for peace.
|
|
Llyorn Of Jaensch
Postmaster
Joined: 31 Mar 2010
Location: Sydney
Status: Offline
Points: 924 |
Posted: 20 Oct 2012 at 23:24 |
Salararius wrote:
Is Consone a reaction to H? as KillerPoodle states or is it something separate over which you have no control as you state. |
I think you're getting a little confused.
Just because Consone was established (in our view) in reaction to Harmless does in no way mean we do, nor have, exercised control over it.
Just because we generated a reaction
in no way implies control.
See, isn't the propaganda train fun!
|
|
"ouch...best of luck."
HonoredMule
|
|
Rorgash
Postmaster
Joined: 23 Aug 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 894 |
Posted: 20 Oct 2012 at 23:57 |
I PvP, i love killing and having fun, what do I lose from destroying all you worked for?
I rejoice in it!
I survived while you are gone!
I were strong, you were weak!
This is what i hoped for, with more time and more risk more value behind the target rather then just empty kills with no gain or loss, how is it fun to attack someone when they lose nothing?
I fight to destroy,
I fight to make you cry.
I fight to stand above the corpses of the fallen as the strongest being, as the last one alive.
|
|
glorfindel
Wordsmith
Joined: 02 Sep 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 129 |
Posted: 21 Oct 2012 at 00:37 |
Salararius wrote:
If you are right and this is Illy, how is that mature or right? If it's not right, what do you call someone who sees that isn't right? He isn't mature, because clearly he doesn't share the perspective you outline. But what if he has a life, children, coaches soccer, teachers at school, runs, bikes, lifts weights, skis, goes to theater, fundraises, etc... What is missing from that person's life that he can get upset about a wrong in a virtual world when he knows there are people in it like you have described are in it? How long did you think about this when you wrote it?
|
Those are a lot of questions to answer!
I think you're misconstruing my appropriation of "mature" and "immature" as "right" and "wrong." I'm simply saying that the "mature" gamer may be (and it isn't as if I have empirical proof of this -- it is just my own anecdotal observation) the gamer who doesn't feel the same moral and emotional consequences to rolling sieges on other players and going to war in Ily as the "immature" gamer. He or she is not nearly as engaged in that level of
verisimilitude where game and real life have conflated. I would argue that a person who feels as if war in this game disrupts a very real peace in their actual life -- even if they have some of the external elements of self-actualization that you listed above -- has some level of emotional immaturity. It is a more rational, grounded, and mature person who doesn't ascribe in-game events like war to being invasions of their own personal peace and happiness. That really is the crux of my point.
Admittedly, maybe "mature" and "immature" isn't the right binary opposition.
I will say this, however: for those players in the game who rely on in-game peace to maintain their own internal peace and happiness, then I think that they may have chosen the wrong social community. For as much as global chat, these forums, and alliances function like a social network, Illyriad also has a robust military component and, just as in real life wars will
always occur in this sphere. Therefore, it is fraught with peril for the "fragile" player.
|
|
Raatalagk
Wordsmith
Joined: 13 Dec 2011
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 154 |
Posted: 21 Oct 2012 at 02:15 |
|
There is no "law of conservation of value"; value can be created and destroyed. Imaginary objects can be given value. Indeed, if you can feel pride at an accomplishment in a particular setting, then by golly, there's some value there. But where one can feel pride, one might also feel loss. And this is really a good thing: to selectively value only those facets of your life that you are doing well in---to elevate accomplishments and downplay defeats---this represents, I would argue, a much more crippling emotional immaturity than what's been discussed in this thread.
|
|
Magnificence
Wordsmith
Joined: 21 Nov 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 122 |
Posted: 21 Oct 2012 at 03:47 |
Is it just me that's surprised about the Dev's lack of concern about the current situation?
It seems like if H continues with these sieges to a point where VIC is damaged beyond reasonable repair, that would seriously hurt current player retention. It puts players such as my self in a position where, I know that the dominant force in illy will not change for at least a year, but after seeing how this situation has played out, probably indefinitely.
With that knowledge, theres really no hope of becoming anything more than an H vassal/little brother.
I really love Illy, I've been playing for over two and half years, I have two accounts totalling 280k population and I've spent a steady amount of cash on prestige, but this is the first time I have seriously considered packing it in. I mean, why play if not to win? and if winning becomes next to impossible....
Over the years I've made solid relationships with a good number of the stalwart (no pun intented) veterans, I am not alone in feeling this way.
If you can't beat them join them would apply, but there's a 99 member cap on alliance membership.
|
|
Tweet
Why do you associate maturity with peace in a game
Topic Options