Forest's rise to power?

[Gothika]

Originally Posted by ViperZakuto

it's not actually possible to lose a kingdom over rp war anyways...

Show's what you know. Thats the only type of war where you do lose your kingdom.

[ViperZakuto]

Originally Posted by Gothika

Show's what you know. Thats the only type of war where you do lose your kingdom.

shows what you know... Tell me one person wo has lost a kingdom due to rp war? there has not been one person too this date.

Bosh has already tried this method multiple times... and has failed everytime.

[Ziro_of_the_Turks]

Originally Posted by ViperZakuto

shows what you know... Tell me one person wo has lost a kingdom due to rp war? there has not been one person too this date.

Bosh has already tried this method multiple times... and has failed everytime.

Didn't it happen on G2k1?

But still... GK DOES need to have a lot more wars. And I don't mean a simple one-day boat-to-land battle that was planned for this Forest vs. CP event. Hell, Forest and CP didn't even set eachother to "enemies" on the GUI. We need see all kingdoms using that system to set allies and enemies, and have on-going wars.
There can't be an excuse of kingdom leaders being afraid to lose power. They dont have to lose their role as leader. Like I said, there's more you can gain out of a war than just replacing a leader. Change-of-king is not the only reason to start a war...
War = activity
Peace = no activity
It's all about fun. Right now GK is mostly about leveling and trading items. What's the point of kingdoms leveling and getting good items if the PvP system wont even be used for wars?

[Gothika]

Originally Posted by ViperZakuto

shows what you know... Tell me one person wo has lost a kingdom due to rp war?

Eh.. Googi did, Klay too. Whoever was the leader of Bel'la Olplyn too I think.
(I know there's a lot of theories about staff having something to do with Googi being over thrown. But the war was still RP based.)

Originally Posted by Tigairius

Two words... "kingdom levels"

A leveling system, all based on kingdom experience. A new member is added > More experience, a member leaves or is removed > looses experience.

It should cost experience to pillory people.
It should gain a fraction of a percent of experience when someone in the kingdom kills someone else, or more of the person killed was an enemy kingdom.

There should be a defining way to show which kingdom is actually the best.

Good Idea. But what would the kingdom gain from it apart from a number. Will the levels mean anything. Like can the kingdom use the exp to buy buffs for their kingdom. Like use so much exp to buy a buff that = 10% more exp for the members of that kingdom for a few days.

[Ziro_of_the_Turks]

Originally Posted by Gothika

Eh.. Googi did, Klay too. Whoever was the leader of Bel'la Olplyn too I think.

Googi lost power of a kingdom?

There truly is no hope for Graal Kingdoms.

Anyways, you were justifying the lack of wars with a king's fear of losing power. That is terrible justification for the lack of war, which promotes lack of roleplaying and activity, which promotes lack of fun- or rather promotes the idea that Kingdoms are all about event items and PKing (or item-trading, and leveling up), or maybe just groups of friends hanging out. War is the basis of roleplaying and kingdom activity. The purpose of having separate kingdoms is NOT for world peace.

And furthermore, a good king shouldn't be forced to lose power after a war, but instead should know when it's his time to hand it over to another.

[Gothika]

Originally Posted by Ziro_of_the_Turks

And furthermore, a good king shouldn't be forced to lose power after a war, but instead should know when it's his time to hand it over to another.

Most the current kingdom leaders (Apart from Draxx) have only been kingdom for a few months. It's isn't their time yet. I'd say a decent reign over the kingdom would be 1-2 years.

[Ziro_of_the_Turks]

Originally Posted by Gothika

Most the current kingdom leaders (Apart from Draxx) have only been kingdom for a few months. It's isn't their time yet. I'd say a decent reign over the kingdom would be 1-2 years.

I'm not saying that anyone needs to be removed- I was just making a point.

Also, I somewhat disagree with your time-range; I think a person can definitly lead for less than a year and still call it a good reign. And 1.5-2years is definitly too long. Better were the times when leaders had shorter reigns...

[Gothika]

Originally Posted by Ziro_of_the_Turks

I'm not saying that anyone needs to be removed- I was just making a point.

Also, I somewhat disagree with your time-range; I think a person can definitly lead for less than a year and still call it a good reign. And 1.5-2years is definitly too long. Better were the times when leaders had shorter reigns...

The reason I've said 1-2 years is because I've seen leaders last that long. I'd hate to see anyone cut short when others have had double thier time.

[CABAL49]

Originally Posted by Gothika

Bel'la Olplyn

That NEVER happened.

[jonnyrocks2]

Originally Posted by CABAL49

That NEVER happened.

Totally didn't.

[ViperZakuto]

Originally Posted by Gothika

Eh.. Googi did, Klay too. Whoever was the leader of Bel'la Olplyn too I think.
(I know there's a lot of theories about staff having something to do with Googi being over thrown. But the war was still RP based.)

These people did not lose there kingdoms because of rp wars... they lost it because the other kingdom leaders decided that they were unfit for the job. talked too staff about there non-ability to run the kingdom.

leaders getting booted, seems to happen in time of war. the leaders, that were kicked out, were not taking control over the members in the war. laming and such.

Trust me i know. I practically lived between draxx's and my house. He has been one of my best friends, IRL, for almost 12 years now. So anything he knows i pretty much do too... except for the past few months.

when Wren(Zormite), Zoe(Dustari), MarkB(CP), and Chris(Forest, which was inactive at the time) were all leaders. Zormite and Dustari were really close friends with staff. So they decided that Nayoko(Samurai) was unfit for leader. Other kingdoms may have said that too. Zormite and Dustari called a war against nayoko. even if Nayoko would have won... she would have been kicked. it appeared that she lost the kingdom from the war, but thats not how it was.

**Edit**

Originally Posted by Tigairius

Two words... "kingdom levels"

A leveling system, all based on kingdom experience. A new member is added > More experience, a member leaves or is removed > looses experience.

It should cost experience to pillory people.
It should gain a fraction of a percent of experience when someone in the kingdom kills someone else, or more of the person killed was an enemy kingdom.

There should be a defining way to show which kingdom is actually the best.

what about counting kills and deaths in kmode. that would be nice to have

when someone dies they should be placed in pmode, on that island, until the mode is switched off. there is "no" way anybody could heal from almost death in the short amount of time the battle is happening.