Jump to content

[RON Exclusive] Politics are dead!


Emperor Adam
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, zevfer said:

the game can go in 2 directions politics wise
  1) make the base political unit be a single alliance, not a sphere
  2) have 50-60 spheres of current size

in either direction, the amount of political units increases from the current 5 spheres we have right now

which do you prefer? why?

 

I mentioned this in RON/in DMs a bit, but I'd adore seeing a return to option 1. It has its downsides but it encourages every AA to participate, and makes for more interesting politics.

  • Upvote 3
  • Downvote 1

thalmorcommie.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This weekend I hope to publish a piece I've been working on for over a week titled A Proposal for the Culture of Orbis. I have been cultivating this piece with help from @zevfer @CitrusK @Kevanoviaand input from @Emperor Adam as well as leaders of individual alliances who agree with my sentiments but are withholding public support until they read the finished piece. This piece will detail exactly how we got here and the best shot we have to getting back to world where Alliances speak for themselves, the politics of this game involve in-character dealings and not OOC, and we get more player engagement with the diverse and amazing world of Orbis. I hope you all read it.

Preface to be written by @Kevanovia

gorillaz.jpg.cf64dcb583d5a9f73b521e5e9fe260c2.jpg

Pictured, J Kell writing.

Edited by J Kell
Needed to update credits
  • Like 2
  • Upvote 4

Listen to J Kell's new single: 

 

About The Author

 An early member of Roz Wei in 2015, J Kell went on to stay within the paperless world of Empyrea before signing with Soup Kitchen while scoring a record deal in 2019. J Kell went on to release multiple Orbis Top 40 hits. In 2020, J Kell took a break from Orbis. He's back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, zevfer said:

the game can go in 2 directions politics wise
  1) make the base political unit be a single alliance, not a sphere
  2) have 50-60 spheres of current size

in either direction, the amount of political units increases from the current 5 spheres we have right now

which do you prefer? why?

 

If we have enough people playing this game for 50 spheres of the current size the game would have to grow a lot, and we'll of we have that many people these kind of spheres would indeed have to lead orbis' politics. Those will probably clump togheter too but I digress. 

 

option one is theoretically possible, but I ask you how? Seems nesrly impossible. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, BelgiumFury said:

option one is theoretically possible, but I ask you how? Seems nesrly impossible. 

Is it? All it takes is for FAs from various alliances that are fairly quiet (BK, ASM, etc) to stop being that, and start participating in FA outside of their sphere.

  • Like 3
  • Downvote 1

thalmorcommie.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Emperor Adam said:

Is it? All it takes is for FAs from various alliances that are fairly quiet (BK, ASM, etc) to stop being that, and start participating in FA outside of their sphere.

I agree. But you know, I don't think it's that easy. I'm quite the useless fa person, but I feel / recall many alliances aren't a big fan of having less grip over others. In unity is strength or something. Id say smaller alliances are often affraid to speak out because the sway in their sphere isn't too big already, but it's bigger that way then not being in a strong sphere at all. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, BelgiumFury said:

I agree. But you know, I don't think it's that easy. I'm quite the useless fa person, but I feel / recall many alliances aren't a big fan of having less grip over others. In unity is strength or something. Id say smaller alliances are often affraid to speak out because the sway in their sphere isn't too big already, but it's bigger that way then not being in a strong sphere at all. 

I agree completely, which is why I've directly called out alliances I want to see step up as well as mentioned sphere leaderships by name.

I think the balancing act and unity is why we're ending up with most of the CBs being boring as hell. I want more personal stakes. I want to see alliance members feel passionate about the wars their in, not because of some numbers, but because somebody wronged their alliance and they want blood.

More radically, I want to see alliances seek retribution on their own, without the help of spheres on either side. I want MDPs to be non-chaining as a standard, and to see more 1v1s/1v2s etc. Enough of every war being a global, take a page from our micros. Be interesting! Be fun! Stop making everything forced to be one big group vs another when most of the groups involved have no stakes in the conflict other than helping their ally. I want to see more alliance leaders being straight up with their intentions, not pre-emptively assuming everyones going to be involved, but being so damn sure of their CB that they believe that allies of the one their attacking look at it and go "[email protected]#$ that, you have this one coming. We'll help you with the rebuild, but we're not burning for it."
 

I want an Orbis with shifting sides, shifting goals, and above all, meaningful interactions. Enough of this numbers bullshit. Enough of this tit-for-tat "you hit us last war it's our turn to hit you". It's so unbelievably fricking boring. 

Orbis can do better, and so can it's leaders. 

Edited by Emperor Adam
  • Upvote 4
  • Downvote 1

thalmorcommie.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Non-chaining MDPs, it's been a while and it would take a fairly big shift in thinking from most alliances. Interesting though.

  • Upvote 4

MofFA United Purple Nations

Former Grosskomtur, FA Minister and Spitler (IA) -Teutonic Order. Former Reclusiarch (IA) - UPN.

le61twR.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Malichy said:

Non-chaining MDPs, it's been a while and it would take a fairly big shift in thinking from most alliances. Interesting though.

It's genuinely a shame it ever stopped.

  • Downvote 1

thalmorcommie.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, darkblade said:

I believe that there should be peace terms. The current meta with peace treaties is absolute garbage. The only improvement this year is the push away from long naps. but other that that, it has gotten boring. Having these white peace's is kind of a slap in the face of the victors and a slap on the wrist for the losers.

Lets take Gun's and Roses for example. Hollywood won that war, there is no discussion there. I think it would have been fun for Hollywood to force terms on Roasis for dogpiling them one by one as the war progressed, like writing a essay on why TKR is such a great alliance, or have every alliance in Roasis make an announcement about whatever HW wants them to say. Instead they offered a white peace, which in my opinion was kind of a slap in the face for everyone in HW who was fighting their butts off. 

Next, lets talk about E522, this should be the base of your peace treaties (assuming there is a victor). admission of defeat. and adding the term that adrienne owed sval a potato. It fueled the politics of the game and would help fuel what would become GW22. Only thing I didn't like about the treaty was the 3 month nap. But other than that this should be a good starting point for GW treaties.


Next, lets talk about Armenia's Revenge. It would have been funny if mystery and oasis had to write an essay on why you should never make your secret treaties public since that was the whole reason for this war. Instead, we got another white peace. Now I understand why all parties white peaced since clock was getting ready to hit rose. And BW didn't want to drag it on. But it felt like mys-oasis got a slap on the wrist for their actions.

Now, lets talk about GW22. Now based on the current state of the war it is clear that BW is losing. And if I see this war end with a white peace, I'm going to be very angry. I would love to see HW push some terms to make this war feel like a lost. For example, I wouldn't mind if HW forced me to make memes making fun of BW, or having one of the leaders of BW read a love letter to grumpy. It's really up to the imagination to be honest.

But having these bland white peace's is boring when there is a clear victor, or having the same old bland treaties makes the politics of having wars boring. And I would love to see more creativity from both parties when it comes to discussing peace treaties.

TL;DR make better peace treaties that fuels the politics of the game

The potato picture has grievously harmed TKR. Truly an offense that is unforgivable. Do they think us so lowly and poor as to work for exposure and not pay? How dare they doubt our artistic abilities to believe themselves above paying for the fruits of our labors. TKR demands reparations for the exhausting toll and gargantuan price we (namely Adrienne) dearly paid for such an exquisite drawing that Roasis had wrongfully demanded - nay, stolen from us! Justice for TKR!

Edited by Joe Schmo
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Joe Schmo said:

The potato picture has grievously harmed TKR. Truly an offense that is unforgivable. Do they think us so lowly and poor as to work for exposure and not pay? How dare they doubt our artistic abilities to believe themselves above paying for the fruits of our labors. TKR demands reparations for the exhausting toll and gargantuan price we (namely Adrienne) dearly paid for such an exquisite drawing that Roasis had wrongfully demanded - nay, stolen from us! Justice for TKR!

TKR's true cb: the reconquest of adrienne's potato.

  • Upvote 3

image.png.840e79f3eeba9d53152a1961d4aacd4f.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Emperor Adam said:

Because my ADHD has been acting way up and I've been stuck on that last paragraph for about an hour now, I'll leave more of an open request for opinions on peace terms vs no peace terms. I'm interested to see the various opinions that people have on if we should begin using them again or not.

Hell naw.

Peace terms should be light-hearted, chill, and with the thought in mind that "what goes around comes around."

 

White peace, joke terms, a reasonably short NAP... All fine, but asking for reps? Humiliating terms? Nah. It's too easy to win wars in PnW simply with a blitz advantage or a dogpile. While the temptation to "be the villain" may exist in this sense, I think there are more constructive ways to do so.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Emperor Adam said:

Is it? All it takes is for FAs from various alliances that are fairly quiet (BK, ASM, etc) to stop being that, and start participating in FA outside of their sphere.

Mood, ADHD is shit. 

I think that certainly works for BK, and maybe some other alliances. But others, like your second mention, not so much.

I mean let's not sugar coat it guys, c'mon, when's the last time anyone took ASM as a serious political entity? Unless your Alliance section on your nation says "Rose" the answer probably ranges from years to never. 

And like we're well aware of that, we're well aware that until recently the alliance had been slowly atrophying in membership and city growth. A fact that only changed... *Checks watch* 6? 8? Weeks ago. Whenever the war ended and Sakura returned to yelling at people that she wanted recruitment on again and also can someone make a sheet for her by these vague directions and vision she has for it. Hell, that last war went kinda crap for us but it was way better than GnR and that was with the milcom still half asleep at the wheel, before being thoroughly disciplined by... The milcom, of course 

 

I'm just saying, if the brightest days you have ahead are because a schizophrenic started yelling about things and celebrating that they learned to color the cells on a sheet recently, and who delivered the best recent war result while half asleep and barely trying, it might be a *tad* difficult to go publicly strutting FA legs, yanno? Hard to move your weight when you've been starving to death.

Takes time to heal that stuff too, it's been going on for years, and we've only just begun so, a moment please! Blitz someone other than rose for once everyone 😛

Edited by Zei-Sakura Alsainn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Zei-Sakura Alsainn said:

I mean let's not sugar coat it guys, c'mon, when's the last time anyone took ASM as a serious political entity? Unless your Alliance section on your nation says "Rose" the answer probably ranges from years to never. 

 

I mentioned this in RON, but to restate it here t$ had actually reached out to ASM with a treaty idea.

That said - I'm not expecting overnight changes and it wouldn't be fair to do so. I am, with as much capacity as I can as a well-known player that's nothing more than a raider currently, reaching out a hand and encouraging everyone else to do the same. I've openly done the same for both UPN and Camelot as well. The game needs more active alliances in the political scheme. The game needs it's older alliances to get involved again. 

Take the time you need, but I anxiously await ASM's return.

Edited by Emperor Adam
  • Downvote 1

thalmorcommie.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ooookay badam can you elaborate on how changing the scope of political interaction leads to/away from a bi polar/multi polar world cause it feels like a false equivalence rn

the rest of it escaped from my mind already sorry not sorry

p.s. drink water

2 hours ago, Emperor Adam said:

The roleplay is... almost non-existent.

@Justin076

rawr

Edited by katashimon13
rawr
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

*reads WoT*

*Sighs*

"What can i do o'lord, Oh what can i do to change this tasteless fruit."

*Shuffles documents*  

*Loud sip of coffee*

"would that work? no no, of course not, maybe? errr no, no."

*Internal Screaming*

"Duck it."

I may not be worth much as my booty has depreciated in value, was it ever valued to begin with? oi @Ducc Zucc does this post make my butt look fat?

anyway ill tell yeah what generic named person @Emperor Adam adam... adam what a stupid ducking name if my mother named myself that i'd be dangling 6 feet high. Anyways i do think alliances could use a little IC RP for spicey interpersonal and thus intra alliance rivalry, like actors on a stage giving a grand dance that dazzels the audience for the members that pay attention, would at least make for a good story.

"yeah loin fruits, gather round the fire your ole paw has a story about how i burned the blubber of the mighty whales."

So ill make myself a fursona ... P&Wsona which i never really thought of one / had one, was always the more analytical type given my p&w work has always been internals but it'll be a fun thing to try out, who knows maybe it'll go somewhere for me.

anyway i suppose ill get thinking, then doing or err typing? in OWF, embassy & your mothers DMs although i doubt your WoT was meant for low ranking individuals and more towards the leadership of the silent & major powers but it'll at least give me a good laugh.

"It'll just be like creating a DnD Character sheet Sweden, how god damn hard could it be?"

Sincerely, a soon to be changed ball... i think? 

  • Haha 1

Hi.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, zigbigadorlou said:


I couldn't help myself

OK, how do you know how I sound like? 

  • Haha 2

Listen to J Kell's new single: 

 

About The Author

 An early member of Roz Wei in 2015, J Kell went on to stay within the paperless world of Empyrea before signing with Soup Kitchen while scoring a record deal in 2019. J Kell went on to release multiple Orbis Top 40 hits. In 2020, J Kell took a break from Orbis. He's back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Malichy said:

Non-chaining MDPs, it's been a while and it would take a fairly big shift in thinking from most alliances. Interesting though.

"im signed to you, not your entire family and your 'special' friend." ~ Partisan

53 minutes ago, katashimon13 said:

ooookay badam can you elaborate on how changing the scope of political interaction leads to/away from a bi polar/multi polar world cause it feels like a false equivalence rn

the rest of it escaped from my mind already sorry not sorry

p.s. drink water

@Justin076

rawr

will drink water, thank you for the reminder.

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 2

Hi.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So what I'm hearing is all the alliances need to return to the old Aurora way of thinking. Where we used to declare war on TCM, raid Oceanias offshore, and be in the news every other day because of some alliance v alliance conflict. So much in fact that if we did get into it, I don't think Oasis would've helped us out lmfao. Something that could be implemented potentially a "tribute" mechanic? For peace you sign a treaty, you give xyz percent of an alliances income until that treaties up? No idea how it could be effectively implemented but could lead to better peace deals, different ways of thinking in terms of chaining wars, etc etc. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.