@Bombastus

Maybe I am missing something, but I continue to be puzzled on this issue of legality. How can a war be illegal?

Posted By Barleyman at 11:05 AM - Mon Jun 24 2019

@Bombastus

Maybe I am missing something, but I continue to be puzzled on this issue of legality. How can a war be illegal?

A war without proper casus belli, or accepted justification on the international stage.

As far as other kingdoms are concerned, anything you gain is illegitimate and they don't need to respect your authoritah there.

Posted By Scheneighnay at 1:25 PM - Mon Jun 24 2019

Posted By Barleyman at 11:05 AM - Mon Jun 24 2019

@Bombastus

Maybe I am missing something, but I continue to be puzzled on this issue of legality. How can a war be illegal?

A war without proper casus belli, or accepted justification on the international stage.

As far as other kingdoms are concerned, anything you gain is illegitimate and they don't need to respect your authoritah there.

Okay, but they can't stop you. There is no mechanism for preventing you from doing whatever you want if you have the military power for it.

Other Kingdoms can only declare your hostile takeover to be illegal if the Kingdoms decide to continue doing the Sedecim. Even then, declaring it illegal doesnt mean the aggressor removes their occupation forces.

I think we will see wars within the first few weeks of Launch, perhaps even before if they are permitted. Animosity between Kingdoms has already been growing for years. Not to mention the conflicts that arose during map selection and I am sure many more will arise in Domain and Settlement Selection. Then you have all the PvP centric player groups, this isn't a small minority of the player base. It's a significant portion.

As for the other discussion happening here. There is a difference between Occupying and Owning. For a hostile force to take Ownership they will need to utilize in game mechanics such as Casus Belli. Occupying the land however, just involves the brute force of your military sitting on the land. However Occupying land likely won't allow you to govern the land (utilize the existing government systems hard coded into the game). It wouldn't make sense for the developers to include a Casus Belli System and then undo it by allowing occupying forces to have all the same benefits of a "lawful acquisition".

Posted By Barleyman at 12:44 PM - Mon Jun 24 2019

Posted By Scheneighnay at 1:25 PM - Mon Jun 24 2019

Posted By Barleyman at 11:05 AM - Mon Jun 24 2019

@Bombastus

Maybe I am missing something, but I continue to be puzzled on this issue of legality. How can a war be illegal?

A war without proper casus belli, or accepted justification on the international stage.

Legal wars have a Casus Belli, as Scheneighnay says. This means that the game mechanics recognize you as a legitimate claimant. Pursuing that claim does not trigger illegal action Character Events, meaning you can't be hunted by bounty hunters for the murders you commit against enemy troops. Legal war also allows the Bloodlust ability to trigger, allowing you to sustain your attack and win without costing your people significant lifespan penalties. Finally, legal war allows you to hold the title when you win. All the NPCs will recognize you as the legitimate lord of the land. You will be able to make political appointments, use the management table for your domain, assign contracts on behalf of the domain, etc. etc. etc.

Without legal war, you are a criminal. Anyone can hunt you with no legal backlash. You have to use out of game resources to administer your military takeover of the land, you lose the support of NPCs (possible half of your citizens), and you can't make laws. There's a good chance the NPCs will organize against you and try to enforce the law by removing you. Any nearby domain will have incentive to run you out of town, and they won't have to come up with a casus belli to do it.

Posted By Kambien at 06:56 AM - Tue Jun 25 2019

I think we will see wars within the first few weeks of Launch, perhaps even before if they are permitted. Animosity between Kingdoms has already been growing for years. Not to mention the conflicts that arose during map selection and I am sure many more will arise in Domain and Settlement Selection. Then you have all the PvP centric player groups, this isn't a small minority of the player base. It's a significant portion.

As for the other discussion happening here. There is a difference between Occupying and Owning. For a hostile force to take Ownership they will need to utilize in game mechanics such as Casus Belli. Occupying the land however, just involves the brute force of your military sitting on the land. However Occupying land likely won't allow you to govern the land (utilize the existing government systems hard coded into the game). It wouldn't make sense for the developers to include a Casus Belli System and then undo it by allowing occupying forces to have all the same benefits of a "lawful acquisition".

There is such a thing as a hostile takeover in game. Its just that at the Kingdom level, you may end up having to justify it at the Sedecim. The CB just makes the process much cleaner.

As to how well hostile takeovers will work and how much push back it will receive in game? We shall see. It exists though.

Posted By Maulvorn at 01:06 AM - Fri Jun 21 2019

Tbh it's a game and people will naturally want wars.

This. I know most people in the forums have wonderful plans for harmonious living, but let's be honest. Where there is the option for PvP, there will be people who want to fight. I know that there's at least one king bent on conquest on Angelica and I'm confident there are several more across the real world. Now the question is, can a king bent on conquest attract the type of players that will collaborate well enough to mount a national war?