The problem with peaceful revolts is that even during violent revolts, peaceful people have something to do. They can sanctuary, and then they're in their own peaceful little world. In a peceaful revolt, there's NOTHING for the violent people to do.

I have thought on a strategy.

sit in there, close to a nearby exit. Wait for someone to debate you. Run around from him/her in random directions and then try to get him out of the town. Once out, have some fun

I willingly follow people out of villages and continue debating them while they try to kill me - I succeed in debating them out and tumbling back into the village more often than not

that's why you gang on them

This is very much a nascent idea, but what about dividing influencing up in a different way?

For example, giving organisations a choice between (1) influencing a village or (2) taking over a village.

The mathematics of it would have to be worked out, but say this allowed for Celest to, after a certain period of time has passed, try to take over Seren-owned Stewartsville. Serenwilde would be forced to defend it martially, and if they failed, it would go to Celest for X period of time.

Alternatively, Serenwilde could decide, after Magnagora has held Dairuchi for so long, that they wish to attempt to influence the denizens to their side. They announce their intention, and if the villagers of Dairuchi are interested, they call peace over their village, etc (essentially beginning a peaced revolt).

This would serve the purposes of;

1) creating a form of player warfare between organisations with achievable goals
2) dividing properly combat from peace, as the two sit uneasily at the moment in revolts.

If this were opened up and explored, I think the taking over of villages could have a lot of potential in terms of fun, conflict and game atmosphere.

War Systems are horrid in IRE games. Anyone from Aetolia who remember the 5 irl month war between can tell you just how absolutely retarded it was. It got so bad they had to yank the entire system (it may be back now, haven't been there in a while) because the playerbase as a whole was honest to god miserable.

Lusternia quite frankly cannot handle this. Players bitch and moan and cry and weep and threaten to quit and go otherwise psycho when they get raided every now and then. Imagine an actual war where someone could feasibly do "real" damage to a player organization. Forums would go into a nuclear meltdown.

If you ask me - which nobody has, but I'm going to whine like a bitch anyway, damnit - there needs to be more ways for the communities to feasibly harm one another, whether via a war system or something else. Even in worst-case scenarios, like the slaying of a Demon Lord or Supernal or Avatar, the community which is harmed recovers in a real-life day. Power loss is neglible since all the nexuses have around a million power, give or take, and villages depend wholly on your number of influencers rather than military might, meaning that the most interesting and original conflict system we possess is virtually pacifistic anyway.

A war system could help to create a scenario whereby communities could be actively damaged. It would not only increase the level of conflict (which is sadly flagging, at least for Magnagora, as far as I've seen), but also allow communities a chance to actually make a lasting difference in the perpetual fighting.

We need things to care about that we can lose permanently that will not effect us terribly much. We thus need to be able to either sever the loyalties of a village through raids, or be able to build things that give us a benefit until they are destroyed.

I've been in muds where people drag around armies, or even small groups of guard-like npc's into other areas, might sound fun but it really isn't. All that happens is little people get plowed over more and more without anyone even noticing.

Edit:Or, per chance if you're taking the territory gain as the more important thing then the military might of having X guards at your call.. well we have that already, they're called villages.

And no amount of conflict matters in the slightest when it comes to villages. The war hasn't done a thing to effect the villages. There is no way to use military might to gain more or less villages. The system does NOT lend itself to war of any kind.

It's sad that certain people exist solely to PK people on prime brought the need for the 10 suspect limit about. I dislike the limit for my personal tastes, but the need is there to protect those certain people from being abusive.

I guess I've always had a different point of view on conflict. Obviously there have always been people that seek to affect the maximum amount of hurt on people, but I can't see the ten suspect limit to have been a good solution. It is even more repugnant now that the loss from praying has been reduced and vitae is no longer strippable by inquisition. It is simply an additional layer upon a system that needed no more.

Truthfully, it has been this need to baby-sit us through mechanics that has steadily lessened my enjoyment of the game. Take a look through a forums, and examine the primary areas of discussion on conflict. Saplings, Inability to Taint/Flood on Ethereal, Inability to change the terrain in Ethereal Serenwilde/Glomdoring, Reduction of the significant of conflict quests, Inability to change the terrain of Elemental, etc. Most if not all of these additions to the game were made as a result of player actions during conflict.

My questions are simply, how can we reclaim the excitement of the past. When did conflict cease being the spice of life, and the primary basis for this game. Also with conflict being steadily dampened and discouraged, what will fill the gap?

Cities/Communes can declare war with each other. Cities can choose to conscript or not, like they can enrol/force everyone over level 60 or 70 to join the military (Subject to debate). People in the military can not get status on others in another military that are declared at war with. Also people of either territory at war who aren't enrolled in the military who defend cannot gain status on the other. If you kill someone not in the military without them attacking you first, in an enemy territory and you aren't enrolled in the military then you are subject to pk status from them. After joining the military you are enrolled for a minimum of 12 months, after which you can leave the military. Cities have to consentually agree on going to war, as in the Serenwilde/Celest conflict the council of both organisations would have to vote to agree. One council would suggest the war and the other council would have to accept for the conditions to take place. Perhaps make it so the military can only kill people over a certain level in the enemies territory such as level 50, without gaining status unless the person is in the military or defended.

Just an idea that I thought was decent.