Root Admin Muratus del Mur Posted March 9, 2016 Root Admin Report Posted March 9, 2016 Necrovion is one of the lands with the most powerful tradition and history... but even the greatest things sometimes fall. Whatever happens now with Necrovion will create a precedent (but not a rule) for lands that are eventually left without alliances. Dst managed to make this happen, in a very legal way (according to Chew), and here is my view of all this. This situation was designed to be eventually, technically speaking, possible. Not desired, and for sure not aimed against Necrovion, but definitely possible. Therefore, you will not see a miracle save from all this, i will not just place an ally back so that Nc can be "back". Some sort of solution is however needed. There is a technical one and a social one. The technical one requires ages for me to do it (or a few days of work, but that won't happen unless a miracle happens to my time) or Chew to do it, but as he put it, this is indeed my problem to solve. The technical solution would be the best i think. It involves using the tag dispatchers created as part of A25 to create a way for ANYONE to obtain a role within a land, including a way to take over an alliance even if it is disbanded. This could be done based on land loyalty, combined exactly with this sort of situations when an ally is disbanded (and of course a time delay to let whoever wanted to disband it enjoy the moment). There are also a few other technical options i can think of, one of them would be that if a land get in this situation, whoever is responsible for it, would somehow be able to take over the crown....that would make sense actually..or give the crown back after whatever negotiations. The social solution, is the hard and ugly one, but back then when dst started to plan this action, i had only this solution in mind, not the technical one (and no i had no clue about her intentions). A land without any alliance, intentionally destroyed in this way, would either be declared deserted and its gates and locations open to all. Even its name could be changed to something like "Necrovion Wasteland" OR fully closed and everything inside it unavailable to anyone for a very long period of time. Both solutions might sound outrageous to many, but i insist that such an event would have a severe impact on entire MD. Afterall, this is the point of defending a land or defeating a land, the risk of such things to happen. I must think about this... it is not an easy choice ... the option to close it is the one i like right now, but i am discussing with Azull and Chewett and see what other possibilities there are. I will hear your opinions on this..they might influence my decision, but remember this is not a vote. I must thank dst for pushing md borders, again, to such limits where i must decide such things...regardless how angry i am on the mess, or how devastating this IS for the community, its a needed mess, to make us decide where the existing features actually lead. ps. please try to keep it short so i can actually read it. Thank you. Mallos and Sephirah Caelum 2
MRWander Posted March 9, 2016 Report Posted March 9, 2016 shade rampage vengence against the nc citizens for losing allies? No one, Tal and Sephirah Caelum 3
Popular Post Azull Posted March 9, 2016 Popular Post Report Posted March 9, 2016 Why does a land have to have an alliance? Blackwoodforest, Esmaralda, Ary Endleg and 10 others 12 1
Burns Posted March 9, 2016 Report Posted March 9, 2016 Either way, please also consider that many people have invested a WP to gain access to the Graveyard (Tormented Souls location). Mind you, i don't think that should be an argument to open the land, i'm just throwing that out so you folks don't ignore it when making a decision. Either of the 'social solutions' might/will make people ask for refunds, and it'll likely be messy and time-consuming unless you prepare for it. Esmaralda, Sephirah Caelum and Muratus del Mur 3
Lazarus Posted March 9, 2016 Report Posted March 9, 2016 If you were to close it, then the time of humans in Necrovion must come to an end, it has lost most of its mystery and intrigue since it was opened and it's better off permanently closed. Lintara, Sephirah Caelum and dst 3
Blackwoodforest Posted March 9, 2016 Report Posted March 9, 2016 First thing, as mentioned above: Why does the land need to have an alliance and why can´t it still exists in this way without one? Where is the king of Necro? Why should the land be punished or changes for something technical. How about the "established housings"? Will you "close" the path of loneliness then? What will happend to Bob if the alliance disappear on day? That´s just a forced social pushing from my point of view. As Burns already mentioned too, some things are bound to this game. Esmaralda and Sephirah Caelum 2
Syrian Posted March 9, 2016 Report Posted March 9, 2016 First thing, as mentioned above: Why does the land need to have an alliance and why can´t it still exists in this way without one? Where is the king of Necro? Why should the land be punished or changes for something technical. How about the "established housings"? Will you "close" the path of loneliness then? What will happend to Bob if the alliance disappear on day? That´s just a forced social pushing from my point of view. As Burns already mentioned too, some things are bound to this game. Azull is the king, and im the queen. but i dont understand why a land cant hold without an alliance either, we've had none in the past just fine, a land is about a bond, a connection between its people, you dont need a badge to uphold that. JadenDew, dst, Aeoshattr and 1 other 3 1
Nimrodel Posted March 9, 2016 Report Posted March 9, 2016 a land is about a bond, a connection between its people, you dont need a badge to uphold that. Does that mean it's OK for the land to remain geographically closed too? Since it's all about bonds and connections between people... Aethon 1
Rophs Posted March 9, 2016 Report Posted March 9, 2016 What happens to the players already inside necro when the borders close? Will dead players still be teleported to the graveyard at regular intervals?
Aeoshattr Posted March 9, 2016 Report Posted March 9, 2016 If a land is defined by its alliances, what's the point of citizenship then? Ary Endleg, Esmaralda and Sephirah Caelum 3
No one Posted March 9, 2016 Report Posted March 9, 2016 Why does a land have to have an alliance? A land does not require to have an alliance , see the No Man's Land. But on the other hand, it doesn't have a king either. The kings are / were elected from a well defined group called "alliance". As it has no alliances ... NC king is just RP. A queen of NC ... just another RP role. On the other hand ... Dst could claim more rights on NC then you currently have. Lets be real : Dst conquered Necrovion.This is the first time a land has been really conquered. Now ... I don't say that NC should be closed for good, but there should be some spoils of war and Dst should be included in deciding the future of NC. DARK DEMON, dst, Azull and 2 others 3 2
Rophs Posted March 9, 2016 Report Posted March 9, 2016 If a land is defined by its alliances, what's the point of citizenship then? Citizenship is derived from the crown and the crown's power is derived from alliances. lashtal, Lintara and Aeoshattr 3
Azull Posted March 9, 2016 Report Posted March 9, 2016 (edited) On the other hand ... Dst could claim more rights on NC then you currently have. Lets be real : Dst conquered Necrovion. This is based on the idea that an alliance defines the land. Which is not the case. Dst conquered an alliance, nothing more. [redacted] but there should be some spoils of war And here we see what your post is really about. Edited March 9, 2016 by Azull No one, dst, Aeoshattr and 3 others 3 3
Blackwoodforest Posted March 9, 2016 Report Posted March 9, 2016 Alliance does not need to have a king, as you said, its only a role ..with benefits.
dst Posted March 9, 2016 Report Posted March 9, 2016 (edited) Good thing you redacted that Azull because I have NEVER used the "role leader" card. Btw: this shows the level of ignorance you and others in your ally have (but this is a different discussion). You are NOT role leader of TW (at least yet, I cannot know what the future will bring). You are not entitled to ask for the ally back based on that reason. Now, this is my opinion of what should happen to Necro (yes, since I was the one to CONQUERED it, I think I have at least the right to an opinion): I would not close Necro. On contrary. I would open it for everyone. Including restricted places. At least for a while. Or more. [dst's edit since quote work crappy]: "but there should be some spoils of war " And here we see what your post is really about. No, we don't. I haven't asked for anything. Not from you not for Chew or Mur (they can confirm since you will never ever believe me). There are several reasons for the takeover. Mine is simple: I wanted to knee you and your hive. And I managed. Also your reaction: Probably.. I'm to tired to deal with this crap anymore today. Good day. just confirm what I said above. Thank you for making this public. Have fun! Edited March 9, 2016 by dst Dragual, Aethon and Rophs 1 2
Ungod Posted March 9, 2016 Report Posted March 9, 2016 I'll try to write a short one; since this is not about Necrovion, I'll use spoiler tags. This might create some work for mods :)) [spoiler] I saw this question a number of times here, and I also talked to someone about it - why do allies have to exist in the first place? Isn't a land perfectly fine without them? The argument I heard was that :vets don't see allies anymore, they see only people (btw, jump in if you feel like it ^_^ ). People that did this or that, people they like or hate etc.; allies are pointless, in general. Now, I think this is a fact. It's not only an argument, I believe it's how things came to be. What I argued is that lands get more individuality with alliances and more 'character'. So, a land without allies is more undefined or less structured and powerful than one with allies. For example, I am very much interested that no MB alliance gets taken over and we retain our diverse purposes inside the land. It's not necessarily a "view from the top", it gives me further 'RP boost'. I guess what I say is not something new, you kind of know this, but you react to the situation at hand, in which having allies feels pointless, you see people instead of roles and so on. [/spoiler] This being the case, perhaps closing the land is a solution, because the moment it will be opened, new ideas will appear and a new identity, maybe, new energy into a "new" ally? No one and Mallos 2
No one Posted March 9, 2016 Report Posted March 9, 2016 If a land is defined by its alliances, what's the point of citizenship then? Following Ungod's post I can respond to Aeo: I see the citizenz like this : - alliance ppl are ... the legal ones inside the land. - citizens with no alliance ... they are like immigrants. They are allowed in the land but have not much power. Unfortunately, in MD, it is easier to kick out a person from an alliance then it is from being a simple citizen. ------ maybe this should be moved to a separate topic about citizen vs allied
Blackwoodforest Posted March 9, 2016 Report Posted March 9, 2016 I agree to Ungods opinion about Vets. For most new or non-vet players an alliance is still a very shiny thing whichs you makes want to become a member of it, to deal with land stuff etc. People want to belong to "groups", social thing. Question to Mur: How will you make a land loyality enter portal to new players or rare active persons who´d never or rarely entered necrovion before? This means only Vets might be able then....
Blackwoodforest Posted March 9, 2016 Report Posted March 9, 2016 boots As I understood, it is not a question about APs , its a question of loyality gained etc.
lashtal Posted March 9, 2016 Report Posted March 9, 2016 My 2%: the fate of a land and the fate of its alliances are 2 separate things. When I joined Necrovion I was taught the land belongs to the Shades, while humans are merely guests. The fact Tainted Warriors has been disbanded is pure "mechanics" (the deep reason being dst's "I can do it, I dislike Necros, let's do it"). Necrovion and the Shades is much more than that (given you, Mur, still consider valid considerations such as dark balance etc.). Close/erase Necrovion, and MD's balance gets messed (could be interesting, but then you might have to re-think / re-shape everything). Open Necrovion to all, restricted locations included, and you cast a big light where there should be only darkness. Hard to decide what to do... I would start by re-considering the powers a few vandals have. DARK DEMON, dst and Esmaralda 2 1
dst Posted March 9, 2016 Report Posted March 9, 2016 My 2%: the fate of a land and the fate of its alliances are 2 separate things. When I joined Necrovion I was taught the land belongs to the Shades, while humans are merely guests. [dst]:then in theory you should not care what happens to the land. It's not yours so you should not raise any requests towards it. The fact Tainted Warriors has been disbanded is pure "mechanics" (the deep reason being dst's "I can do it, I dislike Necros, let's do it"). [dst]: I love how you jump to conclusions the same way hens jump to buggers :D. You're so shallow that you cannot see past your ego and your hate for me. Necrovion and the Shades is much more than that (given you, Mur, still consider valid considerations such as dark balance etc.). Close/erase Necrovion, and MD's balance gets messed (could be interesting, but then you might have to re-think / re-shape everything). Open Necrovion to all, restricted locations included, and you cast a big light where there should be only darkness. [dst]: boohoohoo! Necros will not have restricted places anymore! The horror! Hard to decide what to do... I would start by re-considering the powers a few vandals have. [dst]: as I said to eara, you can say things to my face. I don't mind cause I know that anything coming from you is full of hate. And boohoohoo again! You're sore losers. You snickered when GOTR and GG was disbanded. Now you call me a vandal because I managed to disband your precious alliance despite your paranoia. I'll nominate this as quote of the year for hypocrites and sore losers and idiots in general. It was nice when I was your "friend" and you could benefit from my powers. It is not that nice when said powers are turned against you. Rophs, Aethon, DARK DEMON and 4 others 4 3
DARK DEMON Posted March 9, 2016 Report Posted March 9, 2016 MD logic: you can win a war/ conquer a land by just removing the name of an organization without fighting/hurting a single enemy soldier lol Menhir, Esmaralda, Muratus del Mur and 1 other 3 1
Nimrodel Posted March 9, 2016 Report Posted March 9, 2016 MD logic: you can win a war/ conquer a land by just removing the name of an organization without fighting/hurting a single enemy soldier lol When has MD followed normal logic? You of all people shouldn't be talking about logic Lazarus, dst, Menhir and 2 others 3 2
stormrunner Posted March 9, 2016 Report Posted March 9, 2016 on the opening or close the I personally I'd say open it for a little while see what happens. people don't brother with it then go ahead close it tell people start wondering what is beyond the howling gate again. if mostly just the people who were part of the land visit leave it open. more chances of something happening from this that way. if people go crazy and rush in to steal everything not nailed down... after the first rush of looting that is sure to happen, go a head and close it. though in any case it may be best to leave the graveyard open for those who have it but remove that wish from the shop. no sense in screwing over people who are possible not a part of this at all. and no I don't have that.wish or unspent wish points.
Recommended Posts