Cookies Disclaimer

I agree Our site saves small pieces of text information (cookies) on your device in order to authenticate logins, deliver better content and provide statistical analysis. You can adjust your browser settings to prevent our site from using cookies, but doing so will prevent some aspects of the site from functioning properly.

You have what you hold: A Proposed Territorial Charter for an Incomplete Game

Edam
Generally it works at the moment because there are not that many people strip mining T3 hexes and rendering them useless and not that many people watching the locals take down an escalation over an extended period and then jumping in at the last minute to grab the boss.

I suspect most of this relatively "good" behavior comes from players wishing to avoid political issues for their home settlement rather than any real concern about getting caught.

"You have what you hold" in the current game basically only works at an inter-settlement political level. There is nothing even a large group can do to "hold" a hex against incursions from determined small groups unconcerned about political consequences.
Bringslite
Edam
Generally it works at the moment because there are not that many people strip mining T3 hexes and rendering them useless and not that many people watching the locals take down an escalation over an extended period and then jumping in at the last minute to grab the boss.

I suspect most of this relatively "good" behavior comes from players wishing to avoid political issues for their home settlement rather than any real concern about getting caught.

"You have what you hold" in the current game basically only works at an inter-settlement political level. There is nothing even a large group can do to "hold" a hex against incursions from determined small groups unconcerned about political consequences.

That is pretty close to how I see things. We in no way expect to catch people inside hexes every time that they come through. That would be silly. Some will stay out and use free passage with permissions, some will not stay out or ask to set up free passage. It will get much more difficult as the population grows if we don't grow proportionally or close to.
Virtute et Armis
-Unknown
Bringslite
Maxen
Bringslite
"Similarly, monster home and crater hexes cannot be claimed. If they fall within the borders of claimed hexes, they can certainly be called part of the sovereign lands of that settlement. But since the settlement cannot lay claim to the hex, it is theirs to defend, but they should not consider it entitled land. If another group is intruding on a settlement’s sovereignty, that settlement certainly has the right to defend it. They will either be victorious or defeated. You have what you hold."

Who feels entitled? Who believes that GW will keep other players out of anything that they claim, with a game mechanic?

I think some players feel that because a monster or crater hex falls within their borders, they own them. I'm simply suggesting because they can't be mechanically claimed, they are open to anyone. Bands of adventurers should be free to adventure in them. If someone wants to defend them as their own, that's just another aspect of the PvP experience.

It is simply an ideological difference. That's great because it causes friction. Friction causes fires to start. I'm not saying that I want the world to burn, but honestly I would not mind if SOMETHING were to happen.

As I indicated to Paddy, I get that while I may feel the declaration is enough warning to feel alright about taking action, that doesn't mean those players that are acted against agree that the action is justified.

On the flip side of that, The Dominion really doesn't feel much obligation to accept that because a couple people say We can't claim those hexes, it is so. Especially considering that We have left provisions open for getting around any restrictions that we have set near us. Whole areas of this map have been being claimed from very early in the game.

I am being blunt, but I am not frustrated or angry. I am puzzled.
Virtute et Armis
-Unknown
Decius
From decision and game theory (the branches of mathematics):
The claims of territory are here being used as points on which to base threats/credible commitments. Right now the typical demand is "respect our claim or else", a vague but extremely useful declaration. The existence of defined claim borders is an implicit disclaim outside of those borders, removing doubt over whether someone is 'too close' to such a group. Likewise the majority of territorial claims are fairly permissive, allowing free travel and ordinary harvesting of all but the most valuable resources.

But the entire thing is held together by a thin thread: the credible deterrent, in order to remain credible, must be applied every time it becomes known that a violation of a territorial claim has occurred. Once it becomes common knowledge that trespassers and poachers are not being hunted down, not only is the deterrent no longer credible, but the people who made the threat can no longer make credible threats of that kind.

When tensions get high, a perceived violation of one claim can result in a measured retaliation; a measured retaliation demands a stronger response, and each response in turn escalates.

The next large war in PFO is going to start either when someone is found gathering depleted T3 materials in a hex claimed by a group they are not a member of, or when someone is perceived to have been caught poaching an escalation.
Bringslite
Decius
From decision and game theory (the branches of mathematics):
The claims of territory are here being used as points on which to base threats/credible commitments. Right now the typical demand is "respect our claim or else", a vague but extremely useful declaration. The existence of defined claim borders is an implicit disclaim outside of those borders, removing doubt over whether someone is 'too close' to such a group. Likewise the majority of territorial claims are fairly permissive, allowing free travel and ordinary harvesting of all but the most valuable resources.

But the entire thing is held together by a thin thread: the credible deterrent, in order to remain credible, must be applied every time it becomes known that a violation of a territorial claim has occurred. Once it becomes common knowledge that trespassers and poachers are not being hunted down, not only is the deterrent no longer credible, but the people who made the threat can no longer make credible threats of that kind.

When tensions get high, a perceived violation of one claim can result in a measured retaliation; a measured retaliation demands a stronger response, and each response in turn escalates.

The next large war in PFO is going to start either when someone is found gathering depleted T3 materials in a hex claimed by a group they are not a member of, or when someone is perceived to have been caught poaching an escalation.

Possibly. The first major war started over an infringement of declared territory, or rather that was the Casus Belli that was issued. Some of us may have learned a thing or two and prefer not to have huge costly wars over the pretense of small things. Then again, as you wrote, things escalate and that is not always in the control of all sides of an issue. There isn't any clear way to bring justice to specific individuals. That means that Companies and Settlements, as the only reachable target for "Justice", end up paying the price for the work of possibly one or a few individuals.

It would be nice if there were better ways for things to "go down". There might be more small skirmishes and actions.
Virtute et Armis
-Unknown
Midnight
Things also get complicated when one side or both sides WANT to fight and are simply looking for causus belli.

War is easily avoidable between sides that don't want to fight.

Some of the newer flare ups may be out of boredom, or people may be testing each other's "credibility" in the furtherance of getting the resources they feel they need to be competitive.

The problem with feeling like some hex is yours is that it makes the "owners" feel impotent when they can't control it. That feeling of player impotence can be so overwhelming that it can even goad a few individuals into behaviors the individuals are too ashamed to own up to later, as well as cause leadership to have to start defending a player behavior they probably never imagined they'd be defending, 17 months ago.

Territory is a messy thing, especially for people who aren't used to the concept and haven't already mentally accepted that all property is imaginary and thus temporal depending on whether others choose to be hoodwinked.

Usually, the people most willing to play along with the property fairy tale are those who are hoodwinking others with it. That's why the most dangerous element in a sandbox are the new players and why it is so important for control freaks to recruit new players into their fantasy. Too many independents would unravel the entire fantasy.
He who wrestles with us strengthens our nerves and sharpens our skill. Our antagonist is our helper.
-Edmund Burke
 
You must be logged into an enrolled account to post