Forums
Question for Iyoforeayo - Printable Version

+- Forums (https://forums.mc-atlas.com)
+-- Forum: Atlas Forum (https://forums.mc-atlas.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: Off Topic (https://forums.mc-atlas.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=8)
+--- Thread: Question for Iyoforeayo (/showthread.php?tid=592)



Question for Iyoforeayo - bismar7 - 10-06-2018

I still check in here once a month or so as Atlas has aspects to it that are absolutely amazing and even with my protest, I still have hope that this server becomes what I thought it was (where I would return). 

My question for you Iyoforeayo (and anyone else is welcome to chime in if they wish) is twofold.

Are nations of great power still encouraged to create barriers, or to attack as a means to hamper, on other nations ability to progress; specifically nations that begin to advance enough to challenge the "great power?"

Is there some aspect of public accountability yet, or are decisions made by the moderation still private as a means to hide what punishment is given through favoritism?

This second question was one I protested and eventually left over because I felt (and feel) that there should be some public awareness about the accountability of punishments visited on someone breaking the rules; because lacking that, the mods could simply say someone has been punished, when in reality nothing has happened. 

The first I remember was problematic and the combination of these two things lead to several people leaving the server over it.

Your "In regards to the server" post a few weeks ago made me curious enough to ask if these things have yet been addressed, or if they are still... not.

I would reiterate, both of these things, by "great powers" ruining the fun of lesser ones or mods hiding their decisions, very effectively fall under being a dick, and while I understand and agree with the sentiment that every path should be available for players to enjoy; that has not traditionally been the case as the consensus when I played was that peace was never an option for anyone and that punishment was selective based on who the mods liked. 

Thank you for any response you may have here, and even though I still protest these things, thank you for helping building something that even flawed, is so uniquely amazing.

Bismar7


RE: Question for Iyoforeayo - Adara_ - 10-06-2018

(10-06-2018, 02:21 AM)bismar7 Wrote: Are nations of great power still encouraged to create barriers, or to attack as a means to hamper, on other nations ability to progress; specifically nations that begin to advance enough to challenge the "great power?"

Is there some aspect of public accountability yet, or are decisions made by the moderation still private as a means to hide what punishment is given through favoritism?
uh, big nations are actively discouraged from attacking smaller ones (they were never encouraged to stomp small ones in the first place) although they could still hamper your progress by wilds killing you, raiding, etc.
And uh no moderation chats ain't public. Side note punishments are not a form of favoritism nor have they ever been. they're simply, you broke the rules you go to cobble gulag.


RE: Question for Iyoforeayo - bismar7 - 10-06-2018

Well honestly if you hadn't replied I would have deleted this after looking through the discord server.

The announcement on Raxius is absolutely everything I ever wanted in terms of transparency. It doesn't matter who, what, or why, it is purely the communication to the public. That kind of transparency was really all I ever asked for, and seeing it I'm ending my protest. 

Secondly, I can distinctly remember very extreme threats being leveled, and some conflicts over, people advancing enough to challenge others. In particular I recall Aureus being more than willing to impose on others who they thought might be catching up to them... paranoidly so. Then there was the whole Aureus/boozeglade thing. The evidence of that is still all recorded if you really want to try to dispute that pattern back then. However, it was several months ago and I assume a lot has changed. That was very much a thing when I played. Larger nations picking off threats before they became threats. I never left over that, but it did make a "peaceful" style of gameplay impossible to have fun as, which lead to others having enough and leaving.

As far as I'm concerned really, the past is in the past. It sounds like there has been some changes and some learning from mistakes that have happened. I look forward to playing on Atlas again, even if the core systems are not up for a little while yet post reset.