Talk:Slaymaster Family/Return to Ibladesh!
If I may...
The strict heirarchy was heavily enforced when it originally came about. General's were lightning bolted by the titans for trying to bypass the new system and indeed the "order" subtype of message was limited to certain groups for certain people. For example, General could only use the red "orders" message when messaging marshals of the realm and the marshals could only use it with their army. There was a lot of discussion about the pros and cons of this in the d-list until Tom decided to do another trial - that everyone would be able to send orders again, but that the enforcement would be up to the players and in game. In some realms you'd have people deriding younger nobles for stepping out of line and trying to order betters, whilst in others (and sometimes the same realms) the nobility would complain about the pointlessness of being marshal when the General does everything anyway. In the East Continent the players play differently to all other continents, much closer to the way Battlemaster used to be played.
From the sounds of Ibladesh's situation the choice was to try and reform the realm politely through in game means or just get out. As to one of the "Ibladesh can't have the worst army because we beat Itorunt" comments... well... I don't want to imply anything but... alright I'll move right along.
As for the issue of what is essentially that nobles don't care about the fortunes of the realm, a realm that wins means chances for greater wealth and glory. Having a smaller unit makes you less noticeable in some places (though it should generally be what you say that makes you noticed) whilst there is less opportunity if less is done for everyone. Gaining H/P is also much more difficult if your unit is constantly being wiped out and your realm starts losing battles.
Anyway, hope I contributed or clarified things in some way.--Aerywyn 10:28, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
Much appreciated. I can see the need to not strictly enforce it. I think the good thing about BM is that most rules are not set in stone and allow for different interpretations so allow for more scope for the game. I come to see part of playing this game is about arguing on what is right and what is wrong.
But at the same time, there should be some checks on it and not allow it to get out of hand. If orders were given out by the General or anybody else from time to time that wouldn't be a problem. But when a General constantly does so, I do think it is gaming the system. Two equal realms where one have the General giving out orders would be at an advantage compared with the other having to go through another layer. Basically the realm that does so have an unfair advantage over the realm that is trying to keep fun in the game.
I decided to get out in the end. This way of doing things didn't just exist in the military but on all levels. They forced everybody to be in one religion - where I got chucked out because I argued on military matters rather than religious matters. There as a guy who died, came back as a new player and automatically appointed as a Lord as if he was the reincarnation of his older self. On their bulletin, it explicitly stated that nobles have to follow the orders given by the Ruler when it should be their Liege lord and Marshal. There were nobles who weren't even in an army but still have to follow orders given by the General. It seems apart from the IR, people did as they wish.
It is all very well to say nobles would decide in game but when the system of government is a Theocracy or even Monarchy I tend to find most players don't really speak up due to the fact that so much power is concentrated on the ruler. Not sure how there can be any checks on things like the above which kills the enjoyment of the game for me when things are so unrealistic.
-Tim
