An Argument Against The Current Monopoly On Territory

IceResistance · Jul 31, 2019

Leonhart_Arkada said: ↑

Hello friends. I am Leonhart_Arkada, the Aedile (chief negotiator) of the Titans Valor guild.

The recent formation of a particular alliance, the LUNA alliance, causes great harm to the guild warring system. This alliance, formed at first by the four most powerful guilds on Wynn, has created a monopoly on guild territory, meaning that no guild outside of the alliance can maintain territory without retaliation from multiple allied guilds. I suggest that this monopoly is a detriment to the warring community as it denies non-LUNA guilds from growing, invokes futility in both war and negotiations, and disregards the controversial yet unenforced Rule 18 on the usage of sub guilds for territory assault and defense.

Although small guilds that desire to war can still war without restrictions, they cannot attain any lasting benefits from their toil. Any guild that attempts to gain territory for a long period of time will face retaliation from multiple LUNA guilds, preventing a lasting xp and emerald gain from their territory. Meanwhile, the stronger guilds maintain their land, reaping the benefits of land that cannot be taken. Essentially, the poor stay poor, while the wealthy get wealthy. On a side note, I have heard comparisons between LUNA and The Federation, an older alliance I am unaware of. If you have any information about them, that would certainly be useful in this discussion.

Additionally, the LUNA alliance evidently makes war futile for the aforementioned reasons: that land acquisition among non LUNA guilds is brief and pointless due to the large supply of active warrers among the many involved alliance members. You may suggest that non LUNA guilds can enter negotiations with LUNA guilds in order to gain territory. However, this strategy is ineffective and futile as well. Those who do not have cards in the first place are in no position to make a deal. Remember, LUNA is an alliance of Wynncraft's largest guilds, each willing to reclaim land for other guilds in order to maintain the alliance. These guilds are aware of their incredible power, and have no need for negotiations with smaller guilds without territory. Even if negotiations could occur, the alliance can impose whatever conditions they please without fear of retaliation.

Now for the most difficult topic. If you remember the assault on Fox in the Canyon, you will remember Fox's use of sub guilds in order to quickly reclaim land. I do not wish to start a debate on whether sub guilds themselves should be banned or not. Nonetheless, I argue that the usage of sub guilds has not been legalized or outlawed due to the poor enforcement of Rule 18 and due to the apparent silence of the staff team (except for one mod on brokenmotor's general suggestions page). The legality of sub guilds, although less relevant to my aforementioned grievances with LUNA, should be considered in the event that the LUNA alliance desires to rely upon sub guilds to maintain territory or if a major guild in the LUNA alliance, decides to act as a sub guild for other members of the alliance.

I am uncertain of the solution to this monopoly. I would love suggestions and constructive modifications to my arguments. My purpose here is to maintain a healthy and nontoxic warring community on Wynncraft. Thank you for your time.
Click to expand...

Hi Arkada,
It is nature for people to bond and work together, which is why alliances are always forming left and right. Mega alliances are inevitable, as guild history shows that when one falls, another will most likely rise shortly after. Also, while sub-guilds do suck, they are somewhat needed. Unfortunately, warring with a high number of players does barely any advantage towards the time of the war, meaning you could be warring with 8 players against a guild with only 4, half the number, and still be warring at the same pace. Thus, I must agree that sub-guilds are somewhat essential until they make more of an advantage in having more players warring at a time.

We've been part of alliances, as well as fought others. Its become a large part of guild history.

I would like to define the way I see it, and help you see this perspective as well. Territories are only the product of warring, which is the fun and most important part, the warring feature that adds end-game content and an experience/activity for a guild to bond over, increasing community at times. If anything, Luna's existence has only provided us with more war opportunities and freedoms that are healthy for both parties.

Leonhart_Arkada · Jul 30, 2019

Drew1011 said: ↑

I have seen posts like this countless times, and am finally in the mood to write a legitimate essay defending territory monopolies and why they benefit the game. Hopefully in the future I will just direct anyone who posts a similar thread to this post.
First I'll try to establish some credentials here. You seem newer, so I don't think you know who I am nor why I actually know what I'm talking about here. I was an active member of the guild community for 4 years straight. I have, on multiple occasions, been in your position and fought against alliances that own the entire map. I know how you feel, and I know that it sucks, but I'm also going to need you to understand that in the end, this is best for the community.
I have also, on many other occasions, been the one controlling the map. I was the founder of the Federation, and for 9 months straight I was the unofficial leader of this alliance that controlled the entire map. For 2 months before that, it was the same exact scenario but with a different alliance. I was also the Co-Leader of Fox for 2 years, so I am extremely experienced and knowledgable about the logistics of attacking and defending.
Now, let's begin.
I will clear one argument to begin with. Monopolies in Wynn are not the same thing as monopolies in real-life. Yes, this is a simple concept for most of us as we can understand that real-world economics is a thousand times more complex than territories in a Minecraft RPG, but I still see this argument circulate from time to time, and feel the need to square it away.
Monopolies on territories, simply put, encourage competition. This might seem backward, but in reality, it's completely logical. So right now, the side that doesn't control the map, the side that is unable to hold territories without warring nonstop and burning themselves out, is unhappy, correct? Obviously. This makes complete sense. However, let us explore the complete opposite scenario. If alliances were, for whatever reason, nonexistent, both sides would be like this, correct? The map would be one giant and chaotic free for all, with no guild being able to hold a significant amount of territories without warring 24/7. The same exact thing you are feeling now, every single guild would be feeling. What would happen if every single guild got burnt out and tired of not being able to hold territories? Guilds would die, simply put.
I even have a graph to illustrate this exact point.

What happens with every mega alliance is simple, really. At its start, competition is typically low. Over time, resistance against said mega alliance grows stronger and more organized, until finally a critical mass is reached and the alliance collapses. Now, this is where it seems paradoxical. Competition against a mega alliance both increases its lifespan and decreases it. If a mega alliance had 0 competition, with absolutely no guilds ever attacking it, the alliance would die extremely quickly. Why? It's incredibly boring for the members of the said alliance. Owning the entire map and never getting a chance to war or do anything is so boring that the boredom itself will cause guilds to leave just to spice things up. This is precisely what happened to the Federation at the end of its life when the competition began to stagnate. So, somewhat paradoxically, having strong competition to an alliance will both increase its lifespan because the members don't get bored enough to leave, and also shortens it because generally over time the competition will grow stronger and more organized.
The end result of mega alliances is that the total amount of wars across the guild community increase. When there is no controlling alliance in power, the map is essentially a free for all. And that gets tiring extremely quickly, causing total war activity to decrease.
Now, on to your point of "the rich get richer" and "the poor get poorer". In regards to experience, sure? I guess? It's not as if you can lose XP by not holding territories, but you can definitely gain it by controlling the map. But emeralds? This greatly depends on the defenses each side is using and the frequency they're being attacked. Even the cheapest 1000 mob defense will drain a guild's bank during a large enough attack. It costs 1520 emeralds to defend a single territory with this cheapest defense. With large scale attacks on a guild that owns lots of territories, the only way to NOT lose money when defending is to defend with significantly less than the max defense, which in turn makes it easier for the attacker to attack. Unless it's completely weak and unorganized attacks, it is impossible for a guild to be constantly attacked and still earn money. This is where the competition I spoke of comes in to play. As I have already established, towards the beginning of an alliance's life, it will usually have little competition against it. This means that at the very start of an alliance, yes, it will get significantly richer. But later on, when large attacks become more frequent, it is extremely difficult to maintain a profit without having your members donate.
Let us also not forget that a guild attacking a mega alliance can simply not defend the territories it takes and constantly farm emeralds due to the fact that you receive a free emerald for every mob you kill in a war. A single person warring can farm about 100k emeralds off of these wars in the span of 15 hours. And that would go down to roughly 7 hours with 2 people. Seems like a long time, but for 100k emeralds it's not much considering for most guilds that's a hefty amount. So if anything, the poor get richer and the rich get poorer.
However, this does segue into one point I will somewhat concede. The donation system needs to be fixed. Because of the way Wynn economy works, and how relatively easy it is to earn TONS of LE, you can maintain your bank almost indefinitely purely through donations if you have enough members. This system does need some slight tweaks, I think. In the past, I have heard some interesting suggestions from @LoveLusting that would make it more expensive to hold territories constantly.
On to another point of yours. War being futile. This is simply put, not true. It is not futile if you know what you are doing and know how to properly organize and strategize. You have to realize a simple fact here. There are less than 10 guilds in Luna. The rest of the active guild community outnumbers Luna by an insane margin. It's a numbers game. If you know how to recruit new guilds into an alliance, if you know how to flip enemy guilds to your side, warring is the complete opposite of futile. This is why competition generally grows stronger the longer an alliance lives. After a certain point, you'll outnumber your enemy vastly, and even subguilds won't change that. Warring is not futile, anyone with the proper knowledge and motivation can overcome even the most desperate looking situation in time.

In short, monopolies don't hurt the game. They keep it alive. They keep it interesting. I have seen monopolies break in mere hours and seen the entire map completely switch back and forth between alliances multiple times in the span of a few days. There is a cycle to every alliance, and it ends the same way every time. With that alliance eventually breaking, and a new one taking its place. Without this cycle, wars would be an endless free for all, which sounds fun in concept, but is in truth a hundred times worse.
Click to expand...

I greatly appreciate informed responses such as this. You have certainly changed my perspective more so than the rude individuals who present lackluster arguments riddled with contempt.

Pally · Aug 26, 2019

MultiSmith said: ↑

Why weren't you complaining and writing these kinds of posts when Fed still existed? Oh, right, you were in it...
Click to expand...

*cough* Arkada wasn’t even in the Wynn major guild community when Federation existed *COUGH*

Log in or Sign up

An Argument Against The Current Monopoly On Territory

IceResistance Titans Valor [ANO] Founder CHAMPION

Leonhart_Arkada Join Titans Valor VIP+

Pally Former Titans Valor [ANO] Owner HERO