MARDIER COLONY La Isla de Medio

[SkaForHire]

43 minutes ago, Capt Wolf said:

Faladrin, don't leave yet. We'll find a way to have fun with this game yet.

----

Ska, from the land rules: "The government of the other faction is also able to seize your property (except in the case of forts, in which case a military engagement will have to be fought." That would suggest we should fight a military engagement.

Now, that doesn't mean that's what I want to do at this point, because you'd just wipe us out with the forces from your pre-existing colony. I'm currently trying to figure out if there's a reasonable island we could move the whole KMA build to. But I bring it up to point out that the rules are not as cut and dried as you suggest.

Furthermore, may I ask what the purpose of this game is? Is it supposed to be a way to drive activity on the pirate forum, or is it simply a way to get others to build MOCs to illustrate a pre-conceived storyline of a few? A good game master recognizes good ideas and rewards them. I keep getting the feeling, even before this, that the challenges keep getting in the way of the players creating interesting storylines. I will bow to your interpretation of the rules, but I think it's reasonable to ask that more consideration be paid to how the players are trying to evolve the storyline in the future. There's room for all of us in here.

 

but that is exactly what I wrote!  That all properties except forts are subject to that rule.

 

What is this "your" it is the plot story, I am not sitting here fighting you guys. You are all missing the original point, that this island was already claimed by Mardier, it was settled, to be revealed later. You guys squatted on a settled island, that you knew was settled. It doesn't matter how much settlement is on it...  I understand the point that you guys would not have settled had you known how settled it was, but it was claimed by the time you guys did the KMA....

 

How have any of the challenges changed the way the players make stories? They have done nothing but help tell the background story and let the players build with in it. But all other stories have been player driven. 

 

Dear Elostirion:

 

 I did not completely vanish for months, I was monitoring the forums weekly, and active in the leadership forums.  We are all volunteers here, real life kicked in. I am not building right now, but still have been writing the new ruleset these last months.  Also, I did a lot of the heavy lifting coming into this, I am sooo sorry that I could not keep it up throughout the whole year.  That doesn't change the fact that there is a clear squatting rule.

No war was moced, just trials, there is a difference.

 

You basically called me a liar, thanks for that, but the game is RUN from the leadership forums, your leaders have access to that, they knew what was going on there, they didn't even announce it to us, so there was no way to step in before I was made aware that this was happening.

 

The game is about lego, but that would work both ways here... can't you accept that your settlement was put in the wrong place?

 

 

 

 

[Elostirion]

Where did I call you a liar? I said you claim something - I haven't heard from their side.

And it's definitely 100% fine that you are inacitve for a while. Just don't come back and ignore what others have done in the meanwhile.

 

Yes, I can accept that my settlement was put in the wrong place.

I hope you can accept too that unfortunately noone told the public (still the majority of the people here) about the Mardierian presence? And that acting now like it was public knowledge is not right either.

 

Sorry if I got personal, I did not intend to be, or to disregard all the effort you have put in this game. Really not. I just don't like what you are doing right now.

However I am confident that leadership will find a solution (no sarcasm! I mean it) and will accept it. So: Really off from here.

[gedren_y]

Ska, will you at least concede that Island 11 shouldn't have been on the list of being up for grabs?

I think what most were assuming was that these islands had no settlements prior to being claimed.

I think that from now on it should be assumed that any island claimed by a NPC has existing settlements, and that no action should be taken until we know where these settlements are on the map.

If we would have had the Island 11 map (and/or the full description) right after Mardier claimed it, this whole mess could have been avoided.

[Tezclatipoca]

48 minutes ago, Kolonialbeamter said:

so my only urge for now would be: Please don't leave! 

Sorry KB; It has been too far for me.

Like I said before; I totally admit that Mardier, being a NPC faction, ruled by Gamemasters can "cheat".

But,

Please, this Mardier position is like using a "Mighty overpower" !

It is the same as telling us : "You're dead !" That's it !

I don't like to see that in a RPG; I don't like to use mighty power when I Game ruling; And I think Game masters lost credibility here in using such a power.

My conclusion, for me, is simple ! Just leave !

So, Sorry to say it again, but I am leaving the EGS !

Goodbye ! See you soon on the Brick seas. Felipe still has a golden apple to find !

[Capt Wolf]

30 minutes ago, SkaForHire said:

but that is exactly what I wrote!  That all properties except forts are subject to that rule.

And we built a fort (two, actually) before any Mardierian settlements were revealed.

31 minutes ago, SkaForHire said:

You are all missing the original point, that this island was already claimed by Mardier, it was settled, to be revealed later. You guys squatted on a settled island, that you knew was settled. It doesn't matter how much settlement is on it...  I understand the point that you guys would not have settled had you known how settled it was, but it was claimed by the time you guys did the KMA....

"Settled, to be revealed later" is the problem. It was initially presented to us as UNsettled (and unclaimed). You said that you would have picked another island if Ayrlego had already picked #11 with his first pick. Despite what you had planned, you failed to communicate that with the players, and that is really what has people upset.

And if we had fully understood the rules re squatter settlements, then we wouldn't have done this. But we didn't understand fully, and that is due in part to the difficulty of knowing all the rules unless you're the one who wrote them. As clear as you think they are, they aren't. This whole episode proves that point.

36 minutes ago, SkaForHire said:

How have any of the challenges changed the way the players make stories? They have done nothing but help tell the background story and let the players build with in it. But all other stories have been player driven. 

How have the challenges gotten in the way? We can only build so much. Real life gets in the way for all of us. I have put off builds that would advance my storylines in the past so I could participate in challenges. This time I chose the other way around, skipping the challenge because I found the collaboration and energy of the KMA builds much more fun and creative. And player driven? To my knowledge, nobody was working on finding the fountain of youth. No one was looking to plunder a treasure fleet that wasn't already doing that in the MRCA. And if Mardier is the superpower here, the Spain of the 1500s, why wasn't the treasure fleet Marderian? Why pit the factions against each other? This was your storyline, not ours.

41 minutes ago, SkaForHire said:

...the game is RUN from the leadership forums...

I would disagree. The game is PLAYED by the PLAYERS. Leadership should act as referees, not the main storyteller. Perhaps it's just semantics, but this game has suffered from the dark veil of secrecy from leadership from before it was even launched. The players need to be viewed as partners, not subjects.

45 minutes ago, SkaForHire said:

The game is about lego, but that would work both ways here... can't you accept that your settlement was put in the wrong place?

In fact, we can. Can you accept that this game is better when it uses the creativity of all involved to build a fuller, richer milieu?

[Maxim I]

I want to second Gedren.

We landed on island 11 just a week after it was claimed by Mardier. So we did not know it would fall under ssuatter settlements as we thought island 11 was justly claimed.

Port Raleigh had been build later then Elysabethtown as well, so we did not see a problem as we were solely disputing Mardiers claim on the island as we thought it was undiscovered.

As already said by me, we would have picked other islands if we (players, not leadership), knew that Mardier was already on island 11 longer than BOBS started

[Scarst]

7 hours ago, Elostirion said:

Really? I did not notice that. The first to the new world? Yes! Superpower? No.

 

You contradict yourself. In the beginning of the topic you say "[...] the Bay of Good Hope has been considered a safe harbor for Mardieran traders for years now.  [...] The island is well travelled and documented, [...]" - so not a single sailor has talked in not a single tavern? Really? Does not make sense to me.

 

So the secret leadership forum is where the game is actually played? Good to know. There were several posts in the forum, even build-offs if I remember correctly.

 

But don't you realise that exactly is the problem? You vanished for months (which is totally fine!), and others kept developing the storyline (isn't that supposed to be a community game?). Now you return and set your ideas above everything people have developed just for a plot you have had in mind months ago?

 

Thank you for the suggestion. While I think it's a bad idea it's probably still the best option there is...

Or our settlement might actually not be on island 11 itself but a small island before it, just noone had noticed?

Or the real big Mardierian island with huge settlements which noone has seen pictures of yet might just be somewhere else? And island 11 would just be the one that Mardier has freshly claimed, like it was written in the "new islands" thread, the knowledge that everyone was working with?

 

Can't you just swallow your pride and adapt your plot to what has actually been MOCed? Isn't that game about LEGO, rather than about story?

Sorry for the harsh words, but that's exactly what it feels like.

 

So where is that rule stating clearly that? I really cannot find it? The rules might need an update then.

 

Very true, and I don't think anyone has spoken against this?

 

Also Ska, I am sorry to say, but I think we all had one point only: WE HAD NO WAY TO KNOW! Except for our leadership telling us (at least that's what you claim) you did not talk about the real problem here.

 

You might realise that I am not happy with the situation at all. Sorry for harsh words and sarcasm, maybe it even reads like a personal attack at some points. Sorry if that is the case. I have no intention of insulting you or disrespecting all of the effort you have put into setting up BoBS. You did an absolutely amazing job here, no doubt. Just a horrific situation this whole thing has maneuvered into, I hope there will be a solution.

All said from my side, I won't continue reading this thread anymore. I will post another MOC on the island (which was already built before this thread showed up)., but then return to explored lands...

Before you finalize a solution please consider that this whole thing has already driven the first person to leave the EGS... and if some pre-set plot is really so important that it is ok to see great and motivated builders leaving...

Squatter colonies the Rules Established and last edited purely in November the 5th of 2015:

"Owning land outside your faction: Owning land in another faction can be risky; the government can seize your property at any time, as you are not a standing member in society. This may take months in their court system (and perhaps a hefty sum of gold) to retrieve your property. Be careful when establishing property outside of your own faction. The exception to this rule are forts. A nation that allows a foreign fort to be built on their territory will have to take it through force using the small engagement rules. "

It is under Owning land as an individual, I realize that perhaps like in the past another member of leadership may have edited your version to suit their needs but in the official locked version of the rule, Which is why we have the Leadership threads, it is clearly stated. That right there is directly copied and pasted.

As for disappearing, He has not disappeared, he's writing the newest MRCA rules for the benefit of everyone and as such it has taken time from building, He responds to messages sent to him and checks the boards at least three times a week as well as his worldly obligations, I say this as his brother who your accusation probably would be more merited towards.

This game has always been about story, just like Historica, you must realize that the challenge builds are literally graded on Story, Build, and presentation equally, no one has won a challenge without at least a half decent story. Saying BoBS isn't about story is probably the most misinformed thing I've read, the appeal of BoBS is the story creation and doing so in the setting as it fits together and by trying to force a story in a way that undermines a planned challenge meant for the enjoyment of the whole community this action has the potential to ruin fun for others.

As for being told these things by your leaders? YES! They should be telling you this instead of leading the charge to destroy the next challenge. You claim Ska vanished but he's not the one guiding a faction into a situation that directly breaks the rules. It's kind of hypocritical don't you think to say he doesn't communicate when obviously your own leaders are not telling you information that would have stopped this.

 

The truth in this matter is Eslandolia broke a rule and being rewarded for rule breaking will not happen, it's not fair to the other three factions who have followed them. Ska has given Eslandolia an in game way out as well as offering to let you just restate the location of the builds, which is extremely generous. I will say this, this is literally the third time something that Eslandolia has blown up a board and creative solutions have been made to accommodate, I don't believe a fourth is going to happen.

[Mike S]

44 minutes ago, Maxim I said:

I want to second Gedren.

We landed on island 11 just a week after it was claimed by Mardier. So we did not know it would fall under ssuatter settlements as we thought island 11 was justly claimed.

Port Raleigh had been build later then Elysabethtown as well, so we did not see a problem as we were solely disputing Mardiers claim on the island as we thought it was undiscovered.

As already said by me, we would have picked other islands if we (players, not leadership), knew that Mardier was already on island 11 longer than BOBS started

I honestly feel for you Eslandolans, but I also think that you took a big risk setting up on an island you did not claim legally. If it were not for the fact that leadership seem to have something planned for this island, since Prio has a chance at rebelling against Mardier, I personally would think that you guys should at least get a chance to battle Mardier over this island as well. The only difference is that I doubt Eslandola will get the international support that Prio has since Eslandola is invading instead of trying to gain independence. Looks like both Eslandola's leadership has gotten you all in quite a mess, the trade companies starting a war with Mardier and Eslandola's king trying to start a war with Oleon as well.... I think the first error here was thinking that Eslandola could take on another NPC nation. This, if allowed, could have story breaking consequences as all the other player nations picked NPC nations to battle. I always thought that BoBS was more about exploration than about all out world war.

[SkaForHire]

6 hours ago, Capt Wolf said:

And we built a fort (two, actually) before any Mardierian settlements were revealed.

"Settled, to be revealed later" is the problem. It was initially presented to us as UNsettled (and unclaimed). You said that you would have picked another island if Ayrlego had already picked #11 with his first pick. Despite what you had planned, you failed to communicate that with the players, and that is really what has people upset.

And if we had fully understood the rules re squatter settlements, then we wouldn't have done this. But we didn't understand fully, and that is due in part to the difficulty of knowing all the rules unless you're the one who wrote them. As clear as you think they are, they aren't. This whole episode proves that point.

How have the challenges gotten in the way? We can only build so much. Real life gets in the way for all of us. I have put off builds that would advance my storylines in the past so I could participate in challenges. This time I chose the other way around, skipping the challenge because I found the collaboration and energy of the KMA builds much more fun and creative. And player driven? To my knowledge, nobody was working on finding the fountain of youth. No one was looking to plunder a treasure fleet that wasn't already doing that in the MRCA. And if Mardier is the superpower here, the Spain of the 1500s, why wasn't the treasure fleet Marderian? Why pit the factions against each other? This was your storyline, not ours.

I would disagree. The game is PLAYED by the PLAYERS. Leadership should act as referees, not the main storyteller. Perhaps it's just semantics, but this game has suffered from the dark veil of secrecy from leadership from before it was even launched. The players need to be viewed as partners, not subjects.

In fact, we can. Can you accept that this game is better when it uses the creativity of all involved to build a fuller, richer milieu?

I am only putting your quotes here, but a response to Faladin as well about plot...

When you play another RPG, (which lets face it, BOBS is an RPG to some extents) does the game master tell you where every hidden object is? There is some surprise to be had. This was stuff to lead into a new Era of challenges and islands... it won't all be revealed at the beginning of the game. That would take the exploration out completely.

 

I totally disagree with you on the challenges. It sounds like you want a challenge to be "build the best boat"  or "build the best fort" without any type of coherent story for the challenge.  That makes for a boring time.  Nobody forces anyone to do the challenges either. That was another point from the very beginning. Also, those first four challenges were written from the very beginning, before anybody signed up.  They were to advance the general storyline. Now all builders have added to the overall story, some have changed the path, we can't just cut off a path because somebody doesn't like it.

 

And it still seems that many are ignoring the only point that matters here - squatting rules were in the original rule set.  For a faction full of rules jockeys, someone has had to have read them.  If this was an unclaimed island, there really wouldn't have been any real consequence to your personal stories, but you just ran up against a NPC nation with its own plot lines... there is obviously going to be some blowback. 

One last note about leadership... the reason why the initial leadership was so small and secretive is because having too many chefs in the kitchen would have led to nothing being done. Somebody has to steer things to keep it going.  There are going to be decisions made in secret that impact the game, there are no plot-screws though. I didn't wake up and say, crap let's thwart those Eslandolans!!!!!  This would have happened if Oleon, Corrington or the Sea Rats wanted to do so as well.

[Maxim I]

44 minutes ago, Mike S said:

I honestly feel for you Eslandolans, but I also think that you took a big risk setting up on an island you did not claim legally. If it were not for the fact that leadership seem to have something planned for this island, since Prio has a chance at rebelling against Mardier, I personally would think that you guys should at least get a chance to battle Mardier over this island as well. The only difference is that I doubt Eslandola will get the international support that Prio has since Eslandola is invading instead of trying to gain independence. Looks like both Eslandola's leadership has gotten you all in quite a mess, the trade companies starting a war with Mardier and Eslandola's king trying to start a war with Oleon as well.... I think the first error here was thinking that Eslandola could take on another NPC nation. This, if allowed, could have story breaking consequences as all the other player nations picked NPC nations to battle. I always thought that BoBS was more about exploration than about all out world war.

Well, this was an era in real life where every nation was fighting with another nation. Peace was just about rebuilding forts, ships and troops.

So the war aspect is something that would have been introduced sooner or later. And as war between Oleon, Corrington and Eslandola is a path that is not at all stable at this point in the game, NPC-factions are a great way to start developping this aspect of the game.

36 minutes ago, SkaForHire said:

And it still seems that many are ignoring the only point that matters here - squatting rules were in the original rule set.  For a faction full of rules jockeys, someone has had to have read them.  If this was an unclaimed island, there really wouldn't have been any real consequence to your personal stories, but you just ran up against a NPC nation with its own plot lines... there is obviously going to be some blowback. 

 

Trust me, I totally understand the rules.

But here is why this is gone wrong:

1) if we knew in advance (so before Ayrlego choosed his island) that Mardier had claimed this island, we would have known that island 11 has a decent Mardier presence on it. As we would only have picked our islands 1 month later, we would not have any reason to dispute Mardiers claims on that island (as it would have been obvious that Mardier owns that island). And we would not have picked both our islands next to island 11. So if we knew all of this (we did not), then the squatting rules would have been applicable as we would have broken the rules, and then you would indeed be right... But we did not know the island belonged to Mardier for longer than a week...

2) so in our logic and with the information we had available, it seemed to us that Mardier just picked island 11 to expand their Kingdom. As they picked it after Oleon picked their islands, we considered island 11 to be undiscovered. As we founded Fuerte Unido within 2 weeks (I even think within one week) after Mardiers claim (so after the moment we thought their settlers/explorers entered on that island) and as there still were no clues of settlements, we played along the rules as we only disputed their claims on the island (just like Corrington did with the claims of Eslandola on Berelli, Eslandola was there first as well). 

[Elostirion]

Suggestions:

A) is a new creation, B) was already there.

 

"Eslandolan navigators had made a mistake when steering for the bay of island 11 and instead landed on a small island in the direct vicinity of 8 / 13. Some Mardierian explorers (or maybe even pirates?) were spotted on the island, and it also had many of the geographical features known from island 11. So they thought it was island 11. It was only weeks after Fuerte Unido had been set up they realized that they had built a war-settlement in their own territory. At least they were safe from pirates now!"

 

Might solve this whole mess...

Edited October 10, 2016 by Elostirion

[Maxim I]

9 minutes ago, Elostirion said:

Suggestions:

A) is a new creation, B) was already there.

 

"Eslandolan navigators had made a mistake when steering for the bay of island 11 and instead landed on a small island in the direct vicinity of 8 / 13. Some Mardierian explorers (or maybe even pirates?) were spotted on the island, and it also had many of the geographical features known from island 11. So they thought it was island 11. It was only weeks after Fuerte Unido had been set up they realized that they had built a war-settlement in their own territory. At least they were safe from pirates now!"

 

Might solve this whole mess...

Not entirely as we still are located next to the most powerfull island of the brick seas, which happens to be owned by our enemy...

[gedren_y]

I understand what Ska is talking about with regards to squatter colonies, and he is right on the rules. He is within his rights to ask us to leave. That is what he is arguing, and I have no intention of disputing it. It was always a gambit, and we lost. We have to leave.

What I was talking about is the idea of preexisting settlements. We were under the impression that the island was unsettled prior to choosing, like all the islands chosen by player factions. Our faction islands need to have their settlements built up over time after choosing, and we believed that the NPC chosen island fell under the same requirements. Not that the settlements be MOCed, but that they be new in story. That seems to be the problem most of us are expressing issue with.

Garmadon seems not to have fully understood the leadership's plan for preexisting settlements (if I'm wrong, he can inform us), since he was in on the KMA discussion. I think this is where part of the confusion comes from.

My contention was that if the plan was always to have preexisting Mardier settlements, then it would have been better if the island was left off of the choosing list. It would still be on the map, but simply left as not available. In that event, Mardier's longtime control of the island could have been kept a secret until you could post about it. In that case, it would have been up to Eslandola to then deal with how poorly we chose our islands.

Because of the way it was done, it was believed that Mardier was moving in to the island strategically near our claims, rather than Mardier already existing there. That is what prompted the KMA to begin with. Our placement on the map of where the builds lay matching your plans seems merely incidental, simply because they are good strategic positions.

I am not expressing any anger over losing, just trying to point out how this could have been avoided, and how it can be avoided in the future. Assumptions were made that proved to be false. I concede your claim. Eslandola has to leave the island.

Edited October 10, 2016 by gedren_y
grammar fixing

[Capn Frank]

Drastic Action has called for a drastic reaction. 
The Mardiers are much stronger many had believed, and their strength must not be met unopposed. There appears to be no resolution without an act of war.
My fleet is coming unwarrented to the aid of the Bastard Eslandolian settlment instead of participating in trade.
The Demon Sea Turtle 5HA
The Turgut 4A
The Aspiration 5T
The Benefactor 3F
The Prophecy 3F
and 30 troops.
Let the fate of my fleet be tied to my upstart green cousins.  Enough with the talk of war and making doubloons in trade.  Let us have war!
It will be a glorious battle. I pray to the gods that my Oleon brothers follow suit along with the great father of the Oleon Royal navy. However with the certainty of death and slim chance of success, I will not hold it against my brothers if they do not follow my own rogue footsteps. 

Phred

For the record and out of character:
I do hope that a peaceful resolution can be reached. Let the cards fall as they may.  Whatever happens to this settlement will also happen to my ships.

[gedren_y]

About the present situation:

If the gamemasters wish to have a Mardier/Eslandola conflict over this island (I don't), then the best route would be to simply reposition the squatter colony and forts west a few miles. This way the legitimate settlements can have their stated position.

The Golden Grasshopper (5HA) was ordered to Fuerte Unido to help prevent Mardier from settling on the island. The believed unsettled nature of the island is the only reason she was sent in support of these actions.

If the gamemasters want to avoid this particular conflict, I have no problem rescinding the Golden Grasshopper's orders, and considering the forts and squatter colony lost. I spent a long time on this ship, and don't want to see her destroyed so soon. That is why I prefer this option. Even if this path is chosen, the positions of the existing builds should be moved to different locations on the map.

[Maxim I]

5 minutes ago, gedren_y said:

About the present situation:

If the gamemasters wish to have a Mardier/Eslandola conflict over this island (I don't), then the best route would be to simply reposition the squatter colony and forts west a few miles. This way the legitimate settlements can have their stated position.

The Golden Grasshopper (5HA) was ordered to Fuerte Unido to help prevent Mardier from settling on the island. The believed unsettled nature of the island is the only reason she was sent in support of these actions.

If the gamemasters want to avoid this particular conflict, I have no problem rescinding the Golden Grasshopper's orders, and considering the forts and squatter colony lost. I spent a long time on this ship, and don't want to see her destroyed so soon. That is why I prefer this option. Even if this path is chosen, the positions of the existing builds should be moved to different locations on the map.

The fort and colony is not lost an sich. We always can move it to another location/island if Ska is really sticking to island 11 for his future plans. The easiest solution is (IMHO) Ska relocating his ideas to another island and make 11 a disputed island between Mardier and Eslandola where both nations have a freshly build settlement.

[gedren_y]

I don't think Ska is going to budge on this island. He is right on the rules, and the early name was Skaford Heights. I am not just considering the game play, but his feelings on the matter. If you really want these to be different islands, to avoid conflict, then we have to move our settlements to another island. No one wants their effort wasted, but this or my other two previously stated options are the only ways I see to resolve this matter.

[Maxim I]

14 minutes ago, gedren_y said:

I don't think Ska is going to budge on this island. He is right on the rules, and the early name was Skaford Heights. I am not just considering the game play, but his feelings on the matter. If you really want these to be different islands, to avoid conflict, then we have to move our settlements to another island. No one wants their effort wasted, but this or my other two previously stated options are the only ways I see to resolve this matter.

Well, Ska already stated that if Corrington or Oleon would have choosen this island, he would have picked another island. The name btw was a joke from DLL.

Yes there are rules, but as explained (even by yourself), we were not aware that we were breaking them as there was no indication for it. And if there was an indication, we would have choosen different islands.

What is the point in relocating operation KMA if we don't have a reason for it anymore? Our main reason for KMA was to secure our 2 islands against Mardier influence.

[Phadeout]

2 hours ago, gedren_y said:

I understand what Ska is talking about with regards to squatter colonies, and he is right on the rules. He is within his rights to ask us to leave. That is what he is arguing, and I have no intention of disputing it. It was always a gambit, and we lost. We have to leave.

What I was talking about is the idea of preexisting settlements. We were under the impression that the island was unsettled prior to choosing, like all the islands chosen by player factions. Our faction islands need to have their settlements built up over time after choosing, and we believed that the NPC chosen island fell under the same requirements. Not that the settlements be MOCed, but that they be new in story. That seems to be the problem most of us are expressing issue with.

Garmadon seems not to have fully understood the leadership's plan for preexisting settlements (if I'm wrong, he can inform us), since he was in on the KMA discussion. I think this is where part of the confusion comes from.

My contention was that if the plan was always to have preexisting Mardier settlements, then it would have been better if the island was left off of the choosing list. It would still be on the map, but simply left as not available. In that event, Mardier's longtime control of the island could have been kept a secret until you could post about it. In that case, it would have been up to Eslandola to then deal with how poorly we chose our islands.

Because of the way it was done, it was believed that Mardier was moving in to the island strategically near our claims, rather than Mardier already existing there. That is what prompted the KMA to begin with. Our placement on the map of where the builds lay matching your plans seems merely incidental, simply because they are good strategic positions.

I am not expressing any anger over losing, just trying to point out how this could have been avoided, and how it can be avoided in the future. Assumptions were made that proved to be false. I concede your claim. Eslandola has to leave the island.

Well Ska if you want a well thought-out and balanced view from the perspective of a non-leadership member of Eslandola I think that sums it up very well indeed. Some communication issues at our end apparently but please acknowledge the point that the timing of these incidents, the availability of 11 at the outset of the island selection process etc makes this hard for some of our faction.

Also there is one point I'm not sure I understand - did you just forget to claim the island initially, or was this always part of the results process? Obviously you had plans for 11 but when you realised you had forgotten to reserve it from Ayrlego and then Oleon why didn't you just let the choosing process run its course and then choose an unpicked island for the Mardier stronghold? Or if not that then release the map with the settlements on it at the same time as your announcement that Mardier had claimed the island. In either situation we wouldn't be here now. 

By the way remember that over three quarter of the builders who contributed to KMA are not leadership and would have had no way of knowing all the secret plans, but if Kai and Garmadon were supposed to rein us in if we got carried away and planned to do something with 11 then why not just tell us all straight out, avoid any possible issues like this..

[Capt Wolf]

First, let me apologize to everyone on both sides of this, as it was my suggestion to place a squatter settlement on island #11. It was my error in understanding the squatter rules that led to this.

Second, I'm willing to take my lumps as a result. If it were just me, the whole settlement could just go away, or move to another island, or whatever. But it has become evident that the KMA lore created by this sequence of events enriched the game for many players in all factions (before everyone blew up), and that many on both sides would like to find a way for that lore to remain.

Third, as I now understand the rules, it IS within the rules for Ska to allow the settlement to stay (and as for my second settlement, it can just go away, that's fine). The explanation in-game would not jive with the reasoning behind the game mechanics, but it is possible without breaking the rules. The license fees would go to Mardier, even thought it wouldn't be viewed in-game as a Mardier settlement. Given that there are no combat rules in the game yet, there's really no harm, and it's an interesting storyline that furthers the war between Mardier and Eslandola.

Fourth, if Ska is not willing to do that, then surely we can find some compromise that keeps the lore.

Fifth, as much as this hullabaloo was created by actions of the Eslandolan players in-game, we did not think we were breaking the rules.

Sixth, the problem was exacerbated by two things: (1) Ska reacted IC rather than leader-to-players OOC, and (2) the reveal of Mardier's existing settlements was done in extremely poor fashion. It should have been made known when the islands were revealed. Simply put, this was poor game management on leadership's part, and the fact that leadership continues to defend the poor reveal is part of the problem.

I'm an experienced (decades of exp) RPG player and GM. I've played in (and run) good games and bad. The key now is to not take things personally and find a solution that works for everybody. As long as leadership continues to take the stance that "we did nothing wrong, you broke the rules," that will not happen. And we Eslandola players need to stop complaining about "we wouldn't have done this or settled the islands we chose" and accept that we screwed up. Our island choices are fine. We don't need to compare the physical size of our ... islands. Some good solutions have been suggested. Eslandola players need to be willing to accept bad news on this, but leadership needs to realize it messed up to, and that maybe everything that happened in-game isn't a bad thing.

[Capt Wolf]

8 hours ago, SkaForHire said:

When you play another RPG, (which lets face it, BOBS is an RPG to some extents) does the game master tell you where every hidden object is?

No, but he tells me when I stepped in it, not "Oh, you were killed 5 rounds ago" or "that orc you've been talking to, it's really a giant that was crouching down."

8 hours ago, SkaForHire said:

I totally disagree with you on the challenges. It sounds like you want a challenge to be "build the best boat"  or "build the best fort" without any type of coherent story for the challenge.  That makes for a boring time.  Nobody forces anyone to do the challenges either. That was another point from the very beginning. Also, those first four challenges were written from the very beginning, before anybody signed up.  They were to advance the general storyline. Now all builders have added to the overall story, some have changed the path, we can't just cut off a path because somebody doesn't like it.

No, I don't want the challenges to be just "build the best boat" or whatever, but the challenges would be better if they weren't planned out a year in advance and presented at a rapid pace. And while no one is forced to do the challenges, why would we be playing the game if we didn't expect to want to participate in the challenges? Again, there's a rigid storyline from leadership that ignores player contribution. In my experience, a good GM creates the world, controls the NPCs, creates a starting situation, and then sees where the players take it and has the world react accordingly. Adventures that require the players to make choice A (because there is no provision for choice B or C) are poor games.

8 hours ago, SkaForHire said:

And it still seems that many are ignoring the only point that matters here - squatting rules were in the original rule set.  For a faction full of rules jockeys, someone has had to have read them.  If this was an unclaimed island, there really wouldn't have been any real consequence to your personal stories, but you just ran up against a NPC nation with its own plot lines... there is obviously going to be some blowback. 

We misunderstood the rules. Accepted. It is within the rules for you to accept our squatter settlement (as well as understand that we were not attempting to break the rules). You now need to decide what is more important: the storyline you created for an NPC nation more than a year ago, or an unexpected in-game event that created more intrigue and had more players actively building than anything that had happened in the game since the beginning. It really is a simple choice for a good GM. Nothing really changes for your NPC storyline except that there's a pesky nuisance colony on one of your islands. Nothing else changes for you, and all the players (not just the ones in green) are happy. And now we all understand the squatter rules and nothing like this will ever happen again. That should be a win-win. Are you willing to do it?

2 hours ago, Phred said:

Drastic Action has called for a drastic reaction. 
The Mardiers are much stronger many had believed, and their strength must not be met unopposed. There appears to be no resolution without an act of war.
My fleet is coming unwarrented to the aid of the Bastard Eslandolian settlment instead of participating in trade.
The Demon Sea Turtle 5HA
The Turgut 4A
The Aspiration 5T
The Benefactor 3F
The Prophecy 3F
and 30 troops.
Let the fate of my fleet be tied to my upstart green cousins.  Enough with the talk of war and making doubloons in trade.  Let us have war!
It will be a glorious battle. I pray to the gods that my Oleon brothers follow suit along with the great father of the Oleon Royal navy. However with the certainty of death and slim chance of success, I will not hold it against my brothers if they do not follow my own rogue footsteps. 

Phred

For the record and out of character:
I do hope that a peaceful resolution can be reached. Let the cards fall as they may.  Whatever happens to this settlement will also happen to my ships.

Phred, thank you for your support (IC and OOC)! Much appreciated!

[Tezclatipoca]

43 minutes ago, Capt Wolf said:

First, let me apologize to everyone on both sides of this, as it was my suggestion to place a squatter settlement on island #11. It was my error in understanding the squatter rules that led to this.

Second, I'm willing to take my lumps as a result. If it were just me, the whole settlement could just go away, or move to another island, or whatever. But it has become evident that the KMA lore created by this sequence of events enriched the game for many players in all factions (before everyone blew up), and that many on both sides would like to find a way for that lore to remain.

Third, as I now understand the rules, it IS within the rules for Ska to allow the settlement to stay (and as for my second settlement, it can just go away, that's fine). The explanation in-game would not jive with the reasoning behind the game mechanics, but it is possible without breaking the rules. The license fees would go to Mardier, even thought it wouldn't be viewed in-game as a Mardier settlement. Given that there are no combat rules in the game yet, there's really no harm, and it's an interesting storyline that furthers the war between Mardier and Eslandola.

Fourth, if Ska is not willing to do that, then surely we can find some compromise that keeps the lore.

Fifth, as much as this hullabaloo was created by actions of the Eslandolan players in-game, we did not think we were breaking the rules.

Sixth, the problem was exacerbated by two things: (1) Ska reacted IC rather than leader-to-players OOC, and (2) the reveal of Mardier's existing settlements was done in extremely poor fashion. It should have been made known when the islands were revealed. Simply put, this was poor game management on leadership's part, and the fact that leadership continues to defend the poor reveal is part of the problem.

I'm an experienced (decades of exp) RPG player and GM. I've played in (and run) good games and bad. The key now is to not take things personally and find a solution that works for everybody. As long as leadership continues to take the stance that "we did nothing wrong, you broke the rules," that will not happen. And we Eslandola players need to stop complaining about "we wouldn't have done this or settled the islands we chose" and accept that we screwed up. Our island choices are fine. We don't need to compare the physical size of our ... islands. Some good solutions have been suggested. Eslandola players need to be willing to accept bad news on this, but leadership needs to realize it messed up to, and that maybe everything that happened in-game isn't a bad thing.

Wow ! Great explanation Capt Wolf. This more or less what made me leave the EGS ! Thank you to have explained it so well !

[gedren_y]

If Ska wants to allow the squatter colony and forts, their position on the map still needs to move a little.

If we want to go with the different islands theory, I think I have a compromise that will keep Island 11 in Mardier control (Ska did the leadership work), and keep all KMA builds (Corrington had one, too) legitimate.

The Intentionally Bad Charts Theory:

The planned missions to settle The Autumn Isle (8) and The Shadow (13) were postponed when word came that Mardier claimed to own an island between them, ostensibly called Skaford Heights. This it seems, came from some other nation (NPC, Garvey?) who provided new navigational charts to get us there faster. These charts actually sent us to some geographically similar islands not on the Prio Seas map, but somewhere else entirely. The Corrington expedition simply followed our mistaken route and intel.

There happened to be a minor Mardier outpost on what we believed to be Island 11, which was attacked and taken over. A sandcastle was also found on one of the beaches. No other Mardier presence was found.

Back on the actual Island 11, now revealed as La Isla de Medio. This same other nation then reported to Mardier that Eslandola had invaded their well established island.

---------------------------------

Does this satisfy anybody?

Edited October 10, 2016 by gedren_y

[Capt Wolf]

3 minutes ago, gedren_y said:

If Ska wants to allow the squatter colony and forts, their position on the map still needs to move a little.

If we want to go with the different islands theory, I think I have a compromise that will keep Island 11 in Mardier control (Ska did the leadership work), and keep all KMA builds (Corrington had one, too) legitimate.

The Intentionally Bad Charts Theory:

The planned missions to settle The Autumn Isle (8) and The Shadow (13) were postponed when word came that Mardier claimed to own an island between them, ostensibly called Skaford Heights. This it seems, came from some other nation (NPC, Garvey?) who provided new navigational charts to get us there faster. These charts actually sent us to some geographically similar islands not on the Prio Seas map, but somewhere else entirely. The Corrington expedition simply followed our mistaken route and intel.

There happened to be a minor Mardier outpost on what we believed to be Island 11, which was attacked and taken over. A sandcastle was also found on one of the beaches. No other Mardier presence was found.

Back on the actual Island 11, now revealed as La Isla de Medio. This same other nation then reported to Mardier that Eslandola had invaded their well established island.

---------------------------------

Does this satisfy anybody?

Gedren, regardless of why we settled on island #11, it's up to Ska to decide whether to allow it to stay or not. (And my second fort just goes away; that's fine with me. I'll even create a new build of discovering Mardier's full presence to take it's place.) There's no reason to change the story if the settlement stays. Our discovery of Mardier's true strength on the island would drastically change our plans going forward, but no need to change what's happened to this point, IMO.

And I appreciate your efforts to keep things calm in Eslandola.

[Kwatchi]

21 minutes ago, Capt Wolf said:

Gedren, regardless of why we settled on island #11, it's up to Ska to decide whether to allow it to stay or not. (And my second fort just goes away; that's fine with me. I'll even create a new build of discovering Mardier's full presence to take it's place.) There's no reason to change the story if the settlement stays. Our discovery of Mardier's true strength on the island would drastically change our plans going forward, but no need to change what's happened to this point, IMO.

And I appreciate your efforts to keep things calm in Eslandola.

I have had a busy (Canadian) Thanksgiving weekend so I just got back to read what has happened here, and maybe it is too late to suggest anything.  Perhaps the solution can be the same as the one used during my ill-fated raid of Bardo as the situation was rather similar.

After the squatter colony rejection, my brother and I decided to go full on piratey and raid a colony, and went searching for one undefended by a fort; 'cuz fair fights are boring.  This was complicated by the fact the fort building contest was going on at the time, so we were watching the forums like hawks to see what others were doing.  Waiting to the very last minute to put in our MCRA we picked the only colony with a write-up that did not list a fort: Bardo.  The problem of course was that Bardo actually has two medium forts that weren't listed anywhere (still aren't actually), and those invisible forts were going to cut our two class 2As to shreds obviously if the raid went forward.  Cue sad trumpet sound. The solution that was arrived upon by the BoBS leadership was to shift the target to Tarlo (a Mardier NPC town) and we went with it because it struck us as pretty funny at the time.

http://www.eurobricks.com/forum/index.php?/forums/topic/129728-sr-mcra-mar-16-the-other-true-tale-of-the-sacking-of-tarlo/#entry2533347

http://www.eurobricks.com/forum/index.php?/forums/topic/129616-sr-mcra-mar-16-the-true-tale-of-the-sacking-of-tarlo/#entry2532618

So perhaps the solution is just that simple; "Eslandolan navigators got their coordinates wrong and invaded the wrong Island".  That saves the builds already put in place and a stereotype of bumbling merchants can be created. :)

In the end, if I'd have stopped building when I had an EGS set-back, I likely would have been quitting monthly at this point ('cuz my luck seems to be non-existent; I enjoy whinging about being the unluckiest pirate though ).  But I have fun through a hobby involving puttering around with bricks too much to let some made up e-monopoly money get me down. 

My 2 dBs