What is the context of the debate? The "best way" to govern in-game, like a kingdom or a guild?

Posted By Hieronymus at 1:35 PM - Thu Jan 11 2018

What is the context of the debate? The "best way" to govern in-game, like a kingdom or a guild?

Yes, as well as if there needs to be a push yo achieve one or the other, and how best to do so if needed.

I LOVE this subject when it pertains to COE, and I really enjoy pulling out this old but excellent quote by Caspian regarding "Equity vs Fairness".

We've always said, the game is fair but not equitable. Fair by definition relates to the rules of the system. The rules are the same for everyone... But it is not equitable. Not everyone is born into the same wealthy family. Not everyone will have access to the same resources. Not everyone will have access to Talents or Magic. Not everyone will achieve the same level of fame and infamy.... the game is not equitable. But what it is, is... a world like you've never seen or imagined in a game before.

A world where those around you, the powerful and the weak, are constantly creating conflict and challenges for you to overcome. A world where your ability to rise up as the hero, is only limited by your understanding that the game is not equitable any more than our own world, and you are guaranteed neither fame, equality, nor success. You're not even guaranteed the same amount of play time.

Your skill, your desire to take risks, your acceptance or non-acceptance of your destiny are the only things you control. link to the post

I 100% agree with his statement, I don't want an Elyria where everyone is the same cookie-cutter snowflake as seen in other games like WoW. I want to see player conflict, determination, goal setting, and achievements brought on by way of inequality, risk taking, and individual player motivation.

I think it depends completely on your goals. If you create a snake-worshipping evil cult that's bent on devouring the world and you invite players to join you in that endeavor, then establishing a meritocratic democracy to run this cult or kingdom would be a colossal failure.

"I BELIEVE IN DEMOCRACY AND EQUALITY AND INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS!"

Posted By Hellmoon at 3:41 PM - Thu Jan 11 2018

I 100% agree with his statement, I don't want an Elyria where everyone is the same cookie-cutter snowflake as seen in other games like WoW. I want to see player conflict, determination, goal setting, and achievements brought on by way of inequality, risk taking, and individual player motivation.

Couldn't agree more but I can only give it 1 like. :)

Posted By Hieronymus at 1:48 PM - Thu Jan 11 2018

I think it depends completely on your goals. If you create a snake-worshipping evil cult that's bent on devouring the world and you invite players to join you in that endeavor, then establishing a meritocratic democracy to run this cult or kingdom would be a colossal failure.

"I BELIEVE IN DEMOCRACY AND EQUALITY AND INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS!"

That's hardly a fair comparison. I can't morph into a giant snake!

I'm not sure that the morphing into a giant snake is the linchpin to making that work. Swap evil snake worshipping cult with a fanatical warrior society akin to Sparta. There's no democracy there either.

Elyria is a fictional world so I really believe the only required ingredient for success is passion for the goals you want to pursue, not emulating the ideals of contemporary life. That will make the world so much more interesting too.

Personally, I'm not going to push for equality, equity or any of that nonsense in game.

While I will in my duchy have various power-sharing options (mainly with the lesser nobility and aristocracy) I'm certainly not going to base anything on RL factors aside from loyalty and competence. I'm certainly not going to have 'preferential hiring' policies based on some lunatic's vision of oppression just as I wouldn't IRL.

I certainly hope that there isn't any 'best way' of governance and that even mad despots (assuming they have the cunning and charisma to stay in power) can rule without the game deliberately forcing them into some form of socialised democracy. As Hellmoon has said the inequalities will drive this game, and ultimately are a good thing.

A few observations I’ve made in the time I’ve been around.

1. Those who believe themselves to be the best typically are not.

2. Those who spouse their philosophy and leadership as the the best and build a group around that typically implode.

3. As soon as people look beyond the demonstrated ability of the person behind the monitor to things like gender, race, creed or religion things go badly very quick.

While CoE offers new freedom for players to do whatever they wish to whoever they wish the paradigm doesn’t change from older mmos. You need people who are capable of putting the group ahead of themselves. The folks who fall into 1 - 3 above typically do not have the group’s interests at heart.

If you have to give someone special consideration for a position or anything really they don’t need to be there. Myself included.

I’m a pledged count yet I have zero leadership ability. To be a successful leader you have to want to be a leader as well as have the ability to balance the personalities of those who follow you. I do not. I understand this. If I were part of a “special” class and had someone say because of X you will get my vote as monarch, or you should be given a position of power to represent the group of X gamers... I would run the other way.

CoE is designed for those with ability to lead, to fight, or to scheme to move to the top. Those who lack those abilities will not rise if they are propped up they will only fall harder simply because they shouldn’t have been in that position to begin with.

Disclaimer: this is not a slam against any group quite the contrary if a group is propped up artificially neither they nor the rest of the population will enjoy the game.

Posted By Malais at 08:06 AM - Fri Jan 12 2018

Disclaimer: this is not a slam against any group quite the contrary if a group is propped up artificially neither they nor the rest of the population will enjoy the game.

Are you intimating that the discussion which spawned this thread was a debate between certain kingdoms and their management style or structure -or- did I read too much into your response?

Posted By Hieronymus at 09:08 AM - Fri Jan 12 2018

Posted By Malais at 08:06 AM - Fri Jan 12 2018

Disclaimer: this is not a slam against any group quite the contrary if a group is propped up artificially neither they nor the rest of the population will enjoy the game.

Are you intimating that the discussion which spawned this thread was a debate between certain kingdoms and their management style or structure -or- did I read too much into your response?

Are you paranoid or something?

The OP references a post that was locked because of various classes of folks (gender, race and such) arguing about equality and how diversity is needed in game and how various people are anti women or bring liberal ideals into a virtual world.

That is why the disclaimer.

Play the character, not the player. If you as a player have IRL opinions that some groups of people are naturally better or worse than others, and don't wish to restrict yourself in-game, then select and play a character who would plausibly do the same in-game. There are several built-in opportunities for racial biases to plausibly come into play; use them as you wish, but understand that there will be consequences that you may not be able to anticipate.

for a good story you need :

1 a good map 2 a good item 3 a good actor

every thing else is only bla bla..... do like me, start by find what you wan. after you start working for have it and on the way you will find ally.

Posted By Malais at 10:24 AM - Fri Jan 12 2018

Are you paranoid or something?

Well I really really hope not! I'm not sure what I was thinking anymore but I was in the middle of multiple discord conversations too sooooo maybe I got a little carried away. Silly words! :D :D

Equity is lost in any practical application of equality.

And in video gaming, fun is eventually impacted or simply lost in any practical application of equity.

Regardless of whether equity or balance are upheld or even given attention in the game, things will pan out as an expression of what the playerbase feels like playing rather than any expression (or lack thereof) of PC values. People will do what people will do, and no amount of arguing for or against efforts to balance what people will do is going to change that. We log in to play when we sit down to game, not to argue. Politically correct jargon stays at the door, for or against.