Archived Suggestion To The Players: Ending A War

This suggestion has been archived / closed and can no longer be voted on.
Status
Not open for further replies.
CassiusCraven

CassiusCraven

Joined
Apr 13, 2013
Messages
54
Reaction score
126
Points
0
Age
39
We've seen wars rage on and create completely unnecessary flame wars and the like. Never-ending needless wars are obnoxious, particularly when they distract you from enjoying the game. So I propose an alternative solution to players.

Duels!

Let's face it, most defenders are going to hole themselves away in their homes, but being raided is still a pain in the hole. So I suggest, when the fighting's gone on long enough and it's time to put it to rest, that both sides agree to a duel. One on one, chosen champion of one army against the chosen champion of the other. If the attackers' champion wins the duel, the defenders are required to comply with the terms of surrender, and the war is ended. If the defending champion wins the engagement, the attackers are required to cease their assault as though a peace treaty had been declared. This will lead to a few interesting factors in ending the war:

- In preparation for the duel, each army will be able to band together to outfit their champion. Will you work together to build the mightiest armor known to man, or will you whip together a shoddy iron set and hope for a miracle?
- The war's ending, rather than being an anticlimactic petering out, will become a spectacle for the ages. With so much riding on the line, tensions are certain to be high.
- Factions large or small will have the opportunity to fight for their freedom or claim, with gear and skill becoming a more dire factor than simple numbers.

'But Cassius!', you may wail, gnashing your teeth and getting doritos crumbs all over your keyboard. 'Wouldn't that make the raiding portion of the war completely pointless?'

Well, yes and no. It's not hard to see that raiding is already both a blessing and a curse. It is currently the only part of the war, and is also met with a great amount of disdain, largely because it's hard to know when to stop. With the final duel considered, the raiding portion of the war becomes a time for the attackers to wear down their enemy's resources such as armor and weapons, to claim prizes and to batter their morale, and vice versa. Raiding would continue much as it always did, but now, there is an option for a very final climax to the war. These duels are also more likely to encourage players to pay attention to surrender demands. A defender can end the war and live in peace one way or the other, and will have the chance to fight to the last inch, but they will have a definite point at which to say 'We lost, we've been defeated, and it's time to give in.'

The attackers come away with spoils either from the raids or the surrender demands whether they win or lose, and the defenders, one way or another, have a means of ending what amounts to a frustrating process.

Something to consider, when it's time for the war to end.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
This suggestion has been closed. Votes are no longer accepted.
mcaxestop... one shot... everyone else... no chance... for anyone else... in an even playing field...


basically what i am saying is this means the factions with awesome pvpers in them would get a big advantage. Maybe allies should be able to fight on behalf of the factions as well.

EDIT: by mc axes top i mean anyone with very high mcmmo combat skills. Particularly axes.
 
It's maybe seem like a good idea, to have a duel if the war is going on for too long. Honestly in that point i think it's good because some people get tired of getting raided everytime but i tink that the surrendering terms could be overreacted for example if they duel and let's say that the attacking faction wins. They could make the surrender term by giving over the leadership to one of their trusted members. And in that way i don't think it's good because i don't think anyone would like to fight and risk to lose their faction just because they lost from a fighter who maybe had 2000 MCmmo skill in maybe fists or swords, while yourself are not more then on 500 mcmmo skill. In that way it's kinda unfair and wouldn't be any good for both sides, also that i think it's already illegal for maybe a strong player from a different faction join the one who they are going to duel with. But in case that happends. That would be still unfair.
 
Perhaps this: Both parties place out their five best pvp-ers. A neutral party will select one from each side with the closest MCMMO skills. Either prem v prem or non-prem v non-prem. Similar armor and weapons will be provided by a third party, and 2 potions each: swiftness / strength only. If both parties agree, 1 god-apple per duelist. (but the god-apple must be provided by the fighters' factions, not the neutral party.)

So basically:

CookieCakes (mcstats swords 750) vs PeanutButterz (mcstats swords 747), both non-prem, both with 2 speed potions, enchanted iron armor, and sharpness II diamond swords. No god-apple in the fight.

CookieCakes represents the faction Dessertlandia. Other candidates for DessertLandia were FriskyFries, Hariboo, Jellybenz, and FishFishFish. PeanutButterz represents the faction Cupcakeorion. Other candidates were YoloWorld, MnMnM, SkittlePacket, and WaffleWorlding.

PeanutButterz wins the battle = Cupcakeorion wins the war.
 
[QUOTEPeanutButterz wins the battle = Cupcakeorion wins the war.][/QUOTE]
NOOOOOO why!!!!!!
But anyways I really like your idea Corn, would bring a quick end to alot of pointless raiding.
 
CassiusCraven said:
- snip -
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I think this is a great idea! Though I do know it is unofficial and most factions won't use it, I'd love to see to really good PvP factions go head to head and then see an epic showdown between two of the best PvP'ers on the server. Though, I have one question: What would happen if a side didn't play by the rules? Say, their champion was about to die, so his friend stepped up and helped finish off the other guy, even though he would've won if they hadn't cheated? Would it result in a continuation of the war, or would the cheating side just lose the war and lose some of their honor/dignity in the process because they're cheaters? Again, cool idea :)
 
Corn Alriena said:
Perhaps this: Both parties place out their five best pvp-ers. A neutral party will select one from each side with the closest MCMMO skills. Either prem v prem or non-prem v non-prem. Similar armor and weapons will be provided by a third party, and 2 potions each: swiftness / strength only. If both parties agree, 1 god-apple per duelist. (but the god-apple must be provided by the fighters' factions, not the neutral party.)

So basically:

CookieCakes (mcstats swords 750) vs PeanutButterz (mcstats swords 747), both non-prem, both with 2 speed potions, enchanted iron armor, and sharpness II diamond swords. No god-apple in the fight.

CookieCakes represents the faction Dessertlandia. Other candidates for DessertLandia were FriskyFries, Hariboo, Jellybenz, and FishFishFish. PeanutButterz represents the faction Cupcakeorion. Other candidates were YoloWorld, MnMnM, SkittlePacket, and WaffleWorlding.

PeanutButterz wins the battle = Cupcakeorion wins the war.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...


Now this is what i'm talking about. I would completley agree to this when it comes to the battle itself. But when the terms of surrendering when they have won the battle. If there is somebody who would set the term as ''You leave your leadership to one of us.'' Is not so good. That's why if this will be implemented, I would like to announc that no such thing as those kind of terms are set. However a ''Leave your leadership to a trusted officer'' or ''Leave the lands of the (faction) who won the war. (But only if they are neighbours in the same world or if they live near eachother. )
 
I dont like this. If someones being raided. They can hide in there homes.. Or go out and fight.
 
I like this. Having a "Champion" in one's faction taking on another would be very interesting to see. It would also end the whining of factions being raided, because they'll always have a way to end the war, albeit at a cost.
 
Corn Alriena said:
Perhaps this: Both parties place out their five best pvp-ers. A neutral party will select one from each side with the closest MCMMO skills. Either prem v prem or non-prem v non-prem. Similar armor and weapons will be provided by a third party, and 2 potions each: swiftness / strength only. If both parties agree, 1 god-apple per duelist. (but the god-apple must be provided by the fighters' factions, not the neutral party.)

So basically:

CookieCakes (mcstats swords 750) vs PeanutButterz (mcstats swords 747), both non-prem, both with 2 speed potions, enchanted iron armor, and sharpness II diamond swords. No god-apple in the fight.

CookieCakes represents the faction Dessertlandia. Other candidates for DessertLandia were FriskyFries, Hariboo, Jellybenz, and FishFishFish. PeanutButterz represents the faction Cupcakeorion. Other candidates were YoloWorld, MnMnM, SkittlePacket, and WaffleWorlding.

PeanutButterz wins the battle = Cupcakeorion wins the war.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

While it's a solid idea, it complicates what's meant to be a very simple system. The idea of the duel is that it presents an easy to monitor final fight between two people. The results are easy to prove, and no external moderation is needed.

As for evening the odds, I'm not fond of the idea. Yes, some people are naturally going to have more powerful champions with high stats, but that's part of the point. Whether or not we like to admit it, those people worked for that power in some way. The other side is already getting a chance to defy the odds in a one on one fight. Nobody should have to cripple themselves for the engagement.

I do agree with no god apples though.[DOUBLEPOST=1370626876,1370626733][/DOUBLEPOST]
XSacrificeXzb said:
Now this is what i'm talking about. I would completley agree to this when it comes to the battle itself. But when the terms of surrendering when they have won the battle. If there is somebody who would set the term as ''You leave your leadership to one of us.'' Is not so good. That's why if this will be implemented, I would like to announc that no such thing as those kind of terms are set. However a ''Leave your leadership to a trusted officer'' or ''Leave the lands of the (faction) who won the war. (But only if they are neighbours in the same world or if they live near eachother. )
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Terms of surrender are typically stated at the war's commencement, or would have to be made clear before the duel. Both parties must agree to the duel, so nobody would lose their faction unexpectedly. Often, a silver price is named as an alternative term to more extreme, but cheaper suggestions.[DOUBLEPOST=1370627018][/DOUBLEPOST]
Joshy54100 said:
I think this is a great idea! Though I do know it is unofficial and most factions won't use it, I'd love to see to really good PvP factions go head to head and then see an epic showdown between two of the best PvP'ers on the server. Though, I have one question: What would happen if a side didn't play by the rules? Say, their champion was about to die, so his friend stepped up and helped finish off the other guy, even though he would've won if they hadn't cheated? Would it result in a continuation of the war, or would the cheating side just lose the war and lose some of their honor/dignity in the process because they're cheaters? Again, cool idea :)
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Cheating in the duel would, of course, disqualify the cheating side as the losers, and there would be plenty of witnesses to attest to their dishonorable acts. A victory earned through cheating is null and void, and yields no prizes.
 
This is why the disagree button should be added back to the forums...

The tons of agrees on this make it look like everyone enjoys the suggestion, while most everyone I know does not like this idea.
 
I think this is a great idea, however, as it has been explained to me by staff, there is currently nothing to prevent an attacking faction from disregarding the results of the duel and continuing to fight.

We sought to end our six month war with with Alamut, months ago with a 1 v1 honor duel. Regardless that it was witnessed and overseen by a mod, and that two additional fighters jumped into the ring, in a wilderness chunk that was walled off, making it a 3 v 1 fight, between arguable three of the top pvpers on the server against our lone champion who only had 400 unarmed. Despite the dishonorable additions to the fight, our champion thrashed them all in front of a mod, and we celebrated that it was over, yet the war has still not been allowed to rest despite repeated requests to just drop it and be neutral. Our demands were very fair only for a neutral, but it is still allowed to continue to date for six month. This is what people are starting to get sick of, we have moved on and disregard it at this point so it is essentially finished for us yet they refuse to drop it until they get their way, which they won't, persisting is pointless. This has lead to incessant raiding and interruption of playtime for people who have no interest in playing on a raiding server every night, the rp aspect of this server is what sets it apart from the average factions server where bedrock/obsidian bunkers are all the rage.

I am all for finding interesting and fun ways to end wars or raids, so if both sides have enjoyed the encounter I think that only then is it a success. If either side is not enjoying the experience it is a failure and the rules of engagement do need some adjustment so there is a clear point where it has to end. In all honesty, any raid that has gone on for more than two hours is too long, and pushing it to five or six hours is way out of line. Alternative options for ending conflicts should be explored, not everything is clear cut, even in a 1 v 1 duel there can be a tie, and that can be accepted too, with both parties walking away without the need for a rematch.

Edit: Our champion was Tacomassacre vs. austinrules13579, XShortbusX and Cowboys1919
 
Cowboys1919 said:
This is why the disagree button should be added back to the forums...

The tons of agrees on this make it look like everyone enjoys the suggestion, while most everyone I know does not like this idea.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Which basically consists of some of the uber rich and good at pvp factions. I won't name them since you know exactly who I mean.
 
Cowboys1919 said:
I agree. Poorer and/or weaker factions want this so they can pull out fluke wins. Luckily this is a medieval role-play server and siege we shall!

Mo'afagh bashed!
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

The weaker faction would still, inevitably, produce the weaker champion. But yes, it does provide a change to the customary formula of larger, more powerful factions steamrolling smaller, weaker factions without any manner of end in sight, or any way to stop the carnage.

This option provides a clear end to the fighting while still allowing the attacking faction to gain spoils through the normal raiding process. Simply put, the current formula of war is not working. From the little top rank PvP throne above the clouds it's hard to see the ground, but down there the people who come to this server for play outside of PvP are not happy about being constantly raided, and the goal of any good server should be to provide a fun and enjoyable experience to its players.

If a weaker faction does manage to win the duel, then what? Yes, they can stop the war, but the duel's presence in the first place means that both sides have agreed to end the war in a final fight. They can avoid the terms of surrender if they are lucky or clever, but those terms are often abandoned anyway because the defenders give up and just avoid going home out of frustration with the raids. They can't get back whatever treasures were taking in the fighting, so one way or the other, the stronger faction stands to profit from the war. This simply offers a definite nail to drive into the battle's coffin, marking a clear end to the engagement in a memorable way.[DOUBLEPOST=1370647064,1370646684][/DOUBLEPOST]And yes, I do understand that in the medieval period, war was typically fought through long, arduous sieges, but here is the point those with this argument so often seem to miss:

Massivecraft is not a medieval roleplay server. Massivecraft is a fantasy roleplay server. Fantasy, by its very definition, exists because the real world is a brutal, boring, awful place that causes some to seek some manner of escapism in the form of mediums such as stories, games and roleplaying. We could, certainly, commit every war to a drawn out siege that lasts for months on end and leads to strife for your enemies, but that does not promote a healthy, fun game environment.

Fantasy is full of epic moments, come from behind victories and brave heroes and champions, because indeed, we did not have those things in the medieval period. But if you're struggling to maintain a realistic grasp on war in a world of Elves and Orcs and magic, you've already missed the point entirely.
 
I would like the idea of a Dual and say it's a rule that in the situation of a raid, the Raidee ( ;) ) Can call 'Justice by Dual' and allow their faction to pick such champion to fight and blah blah. Terms agreed on before the dual.
 
CassiusCraven said:
The weaker faction would still, inevitably, produce the weaker champion. But yes, it does provide a change to the customary formula of larger, more powerful factions steamrolling smaller, weaker factions without any manner of end in sight, or any way to stop the carnage.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Large, powerful factions play the game as much as they do so they have an advantage over their enemies.

It's really not a problem, as no powerhouses ever make ridiculous requests (for example, our wars can almost always be ended by hanging our flag and a global surrender).

Anyways, if you want to level the playing field, invest in training and weapons, or just surrender to the terms. (wasntme)
 
Cowboys1919 said:
Anyways, if you want to level the playing field, invest in training and weapons, or just surrender to the terms. (wasntme)
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I don't want to level the playing field. I want to provide a definitive means of ending wars that otherwise have no clear ending. A large part of the duels is that they do not level the playing field. They cut away numbers, yes, but not resources, which would still favor the stronger faction.

Your own faction might have simple requests, but that is not always (and not often) the case, and it doesn't take a powerhouse faction to cause strife in a smaller, humbler one.
 
Or just don't make silly wars, when a person declares war for killing a cow (Calling people weaboo's is still a legitimate reason)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

GhosTech
Played Character Vellai Curiyan | The Never Ending Flame
Replies
2
Views
352
Character Sheets
GhosTech
GhosTech
Birdsfoot_Violet
Amontaar Skirmish 4: Duel for the Digsite
Replies
0
Views
53
Server Events
Birdsfoot_Violet
Birdsfoot_Violet
H
Played Character Blatodeus Silpe, the Everwatch's Strongest Cockroach
Replies
0
Views
67
Character Sheets
HoLee_Of_Ducks
H
FrostedDewDrop
Work in Progress Kaen, A Thorn in the Side
Replies
0
Views
79
Character Sheets
FrostedDewDrop
FrostedDewDrop
Sorc3r3ss
Played Character Victoria Silverberry |The Silver Blade
Replies
0
Views
143
Character Sheets
Sorc3r3ss
Sorc3r3ss
Top Bottom