[Discuss] War Island Change

[John P. Murphy]

On Oct 5, 2007, at 5:58 AM, James wrote:

> Tom Vogt wrote:
>>
>> Here's what I think:
>>
>> Why the fuck are people playing on a WAR ISLAND if they don't  
>> actually
>> want war?
>>
>> I just don't get it. Explain that to me and I'll fix things.
>>
> Because people don't want war, they want to win.

This hits the nail on the head: indiscriminate attacking is the  
surest way to lose on a South Island.  And instead of wailing,  
"Nobody's fighting, it's broken and all the rulers are being dumb!"  
it would be better to look at how the island is set up and ask  
whether it's unfolding logically -- not whether it's failing to live  
up to some pre-determined idea that isn't explained to the players  
and which no two people seem to agree on.

I've had a character rule two different SEI realms, and the path to  
winning is generally the same: grab as much territory as you can  
currently hold, and then play the "Let's you and him fight" game with  
the remaining realms while you build up your own army.   Usually the  
best way to make that happen is to appeal to fairness: "Oh, those  
*laks, they're dishonorable -- remember how they looted your regions  
last year?  But us, we're the good guys, just like you!  So let's  
tear down the *laks, so that the two of us can have a nice clean fair  
fight."  And then you hope that they're dumb enough to buy it until  
you're in a position that you can throw off the nice-guy facade and  
crush your remaining enemies.  It won the island for Sandalak, and  
would have won the island for Ikalak until Ikalak's ruler forgot the  
rule: "Never piss off a Duke".

If you want nothing but mindless war, you've already been given the  
only solution: disallow realm-to-realm messaging.  Nothing short of  
that will prevent the "diplomacy" that people are decrying.  No  
matter what, the players will always, always, always find the optimal  
strategy for victory, and then attempt to follow it.  But mindless  
war is not going to make the south islands any more fun: mindless war  
ultimately means much more time spent sitting in the capital waiting  
to get enough taxes to hire another unit, which is just going to get  
destroyed anyway.

Tom Vogt wrote:
> Great, so here is our solution:
>
> Every week or so, your realm is judged. If it has improved  
> (expanded, won battles, etc.) since last week, you stay. If it  
> hasn't, you are removed from office.
>
> Boom, suddenly we have the very same people seriously wanting war.

Wrong.  Suddenly you have people seeking the most conservative and  
incremental strategies imaginable.  Think what happens when you plan  
an assault:  The result of a victory under this system is the status  
quo.  The result of a failure is removal from office.  You can't plan  
a large campaign, because it might take more than a week to make  
progress.
On top of that, you've added a nice positive feedback loop to that  
once a realm starts to lose it gets engulfed in weekly chaos, which  
in turn will ensure that they continue to lose.

The likely result is twofold: first that the south island realms will  
start choosing their leaders informally: no matter who actually holds  
the post of ruler or general, they'll wind up picking a "real" ruler  
and council and just rotating the throne-warmer.  Second that they'll  
become so risk-averse that only sure-fire victories will be pursued.   
The most risk-averse strategy?  Two realms ganging up on a third,  
where that third is losing its government every week.

I don't think you've defined the problem nearly well enough to be  
talking about solutions.  Before you start implementing fixes, it  
would be a very good idea to sit down, think about, and articulate  
exactly what you mean by "war island".

John