Conquest mechanics / diplomacy / vassal states

[Wilson09]

One of my posts

http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/13100-adding-new-factions-russia-prussia/

had some deeper thoughts lying behind and I want to explain it further. Maybe, I make a minor contribution

to the game, maybe not. Still, worth trying.

 

 

Okay, let´s start...this is a post about RvR only.

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Conquest mechanics / diplomacy / vassal colonies (states)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

 

The Brandenburg-Prussia idea has mainly been cleared from the table with "we don´t need more nations, splitting player base will harm the game..."

 

This will not be the case, if the conquest mechanic vassal states is being added. Anyhow, as further factions are not necessary at the current stage I start my reasoning from the political agenda at PvP 1, most of us witnessed.

 

PART 1

 

Situation A: Denmark beats Sweden down to a few ports. However, they cannot eliminate them, as the capital cannot be taken. So, what? Being numbers, game time, skills, does not matter, Denmark could limit Sweden obviously to 1 port (capital), blockade the hell out of them, but not kill them. Finally, they lost interest? Sweden faced severe resource problems, players might quit due to the perspectives given.

 

Solution 1:

Denmark enforces the "vassal status" upon Sweden. How?

i) limit the enemy down to 5 (4,3,2,1?) ports automatically triggering the event Sweden is vassal colony of Denmark.

ii) Sweden surrenders and voluntarily want to be a vassal colony of Denmark

iii) limit the enemy down to 5 (4,3,2,1?) ports enabling the capital of Sweden being attacked in a special way (like Port Battle announced, fixed time and so on or other special, exciting ways)

 

Once the capital is being taken or i) or ii) applies, Sweden acts as vassal colony of Denmark.

 

What does that mean?

Lord and vassal are treated as an entity, one faction. They cannot attack ships/ports. Both factions have access to respective ports and resources, thereby enabling Sweden to have the desired "comeback mechanism", they suddenly have access to even more resources than they had before. Having the war and diplomacy features being added by DEVS, both have the same enemies, but only the LORD can decide.

 

Assumption:

Denmark at war with the United Kingdom. The vassal MAY decide to help Denmark, no one can force them. A vassal my stay idle and do nothing on behalf of the Lord. What happens if a port is won by combined Denmark/Sweden?

 

Solution 2:

i) taken ports from UK are assigned by Denmark to Denmark or the vassal

 or ii) the vassal can take ports himself winning Port Battles

I am not sure about this point, any variants are possible. Right now, I´d treat this matter like:

Any captured port (or any port) can freely be assigned by the Lord to whoever he likes. This would mean, that any

war activity by the vassal had to be discussed before (we only help, if this happens, if we get this port and so on...)

 

Why should Denmark force status vassal colony on Sweden?

Peace. Finally, the enemy has been beaten and the war put to bed. Swedish ships can no longer attack Danish or take ports

until they want to break free again.

 

Why should Sweden not want to be a vassal colony?

Every faction wants to be master of his or her own destiny. Realizing, the war cannot be won and no alliances and helping forces in sight, they might prefer to surrender. Eventually, Sweden should find ways to regain sovereignty again.

 

Situation B:

Sweden is vassal colony of Denmark. Both did win some considerable territory. Finally, the player base is not happy anymore being "under the rule" of the Danes. What now? Now, it is getting tricky. Sweden wants to regain sovereignty.

Still, the LORD has more ships and the dominant (more) player base.

 

Solution 3:

i) Sweden announces "conquest for sovereignty" (by buying a flag or something else),

A decisive Port Battle is being announced (1-2 weeks ahead), the finest ships and players of both factions meet

at the Danish capital in an instance window at the agreed time. Sweden wins = freedom. Danes win = vassal stage 2 (

first warning). Sweden might try another (or 2?) "conquest for sovereignty". If they loose it again, they are annexed

by the Danes. The Swedish players might decide to play on behalf of Denmark (not loosing anything) or switch faction

(loose stuff like now). This is the "hard approach", where finally a faction can be beaten. But still, they had a choice.

(1, 2, 3 escalation stage) Will they risk it?

 

ii) Another faction (or more) decide to "free" Sweden, buying a flag "conquest for Sweden´s sovereignty".

Attacking the Danish capital the usual way, fighting their way through and finally winning a Port battle on behalf

(and with the help of Swedes) of the Swedish. Maybe, Sweden might be free to go their own ways or decide to be a

vassal colony of the UK.

 

Despite, I am not fully convinced by my own ideas. If the DEVS pick "vassals" up, they might find better answers.

 

How should a Lord treat a vassal?

Tricky. On one hand, they want the vassal’s firepower. On the other hand, they don´t want them grow big, finally getting greedy

and break free. Remember, if Sweden breaks free, they loose access to the Danish resources.

 

Looking at the broader picture, I´d also add the possibility for any faction to switch capitals.

This would allow political agreements like:

i) the Danes want to control the East and Sweden out of the way. They vassalize them, offer them considerable territory in the west and freedom if they relocate (nothing lost by relocating)

ii) any 1-port-starting-vassal colony might be implemented now, any relocation thinkable

 

So, this is it.

 

advantages:

- any enemy can be beaten now, but they live on...

- offers comeback mechanic for any beaten faction

- offers long-term commitment to a faction and no frustration (can´t do anything anymore)

- opens the door for "backstabbing" and political incorrectness

- can be implemented easily (asap)

- offers "playability" for small factions, opening up the game for casuals (you want world domination and be a big leader

of a grand faction? Hardcore? Pick big nations UK/Spain. You want to fight for freedom? Pick a small faction or a vassal colony)

- small factions survive the 24h conquest (no American player base needed for small factions...) by being a vassal colony

- not much to work on for Devs...

 

disadvantages:

? (help me...)

 

Any comments on PART 1 welcome !

(critical assessment needed)

 

 

-----------------

 

PART 2 (adding further factions, starting as a single vassal colony)

 

Starting from GamesLab homepage...

--------

http://www.navalaction.com/#open-world

....

You can sail under the flag of nations that historically had presence in the Caribbean (had at least one port from 1600 to 1830)

• Britain
• France
• Spain
• United States
• Denmark
• Holland
• Sweden

--------

I had a look at following page....(click on the map top-right...)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Caribbean

 

Yes right. Brandenburg-Prussia did not hold "territory", but, they "leased" land from Denmark. Their natural starting point would be Amalienborg.

 

Checking Caribbean history further, more options are feasible: Duchy of Courland (and Semigallia), being vassal of

Poland-Lithuania, natural starting port Scarborough.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Couronian_colonization_of_the_Americas

http://www.colonialvoyage.com/tobago-dutch-courlanders/#

http://niniwa22.cba.pl/kolodziejczyk_kolonie_w_afryce.htm

 

Military order of Malta (St. Christopher, St. Martin, St. Barthelemy, St. Croix)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Territorial_possessions_of_the_Sovereign_Military_Order_of_Malta

 

Summing it up:

Brandenburg being vassal colony of Denmark: 1 port; AMALIENBORG

Duchy of Courland (or Poland-Lith. themselves) being vassal of Seven Provinces (or Sweden): 1 port: Scarborough

Military order of Malta being vassal of France: ???

Russia? being vassal of Spain (assumption: leased colony): 1 port; ?? (Mexikan coast)

 

Introducing the concept of vassal colonies (not states, the states or nations are in Europe) allows further factions

and won´t split the player base in any case. Vassal + Lord act as one faction.

 

One faction might try to "win the map" by vassalizing each faction now. They don´t need to control ALL ports, which

would certainly not be feasible.

 

Pirates is another story, they might go on as a faction (I don´t mind) or be something else. As Admin stated:

http://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/did-the-utopian-pirate-nation-of-libertatia-ever-really-exist

 

Not my cup of tea...

What matters most to me are the RvR-issues.

Hopefully, I provided an approach that the "painting the map" critics are not valid anymore...

 

Personally, I believe something like this must be on the Devs mind already. Planning for further expansions

(see Dreams video at suggestions) show, that the Baltics and Medit. are on the map.

 

Maybe, introducing vassal colonies might be of some use at this development stage.

(if you do put them in, I want you to add at least Brandenburg-Prussia...

 

Sincerely

Wilson09

 

P.S.: Sorry, for bad punctuation and basic written English.

Edited April 18, 2016 by Wilson09

[Wilson09]

just "quoting" (so I can delete my notes)....I did some reading to find out, if this approach was already suggested...

 

Booyaah

1) We need real reasons and incentives to capture and defend ports.  Right now it's just a pissing match

to see who can get the most dots on the map.  Losing a port doesn't really lose you a benefit or have a consequence...

 

'Sharpe

1- There needs to be some strategic reason for port capture. The proposed updates look generally to be in the right direction,

but we're all still lacking an understanding of what "winning" the map actually means.

For example, maybe the goal is that regional capitals (very difficult to take) give your nation a sphere of influence over the surrounding area, and once you influence enough of the map your nation wins. But the goals should probably be defined now, because that's as important a part of gameplay testing

 

2. This way, having an empire will matter. Now we need to think of small nations and

comeback options. First, increase National Capital output. Increase it a lot....

Edited April 18, 2016 by Wilson09

[Wilson09]

Just "completing" the list...(ranked by "historical importance").

Even the GamesLab statement on the homepage does not need to be changed:

 

You can sail under the flag of nations that historically had presence in the Caribbean (had at least one port from 1600 to 1830)

• Spain
• Britain
• France
• Holland
• United States
• Denmark
• Sweden
• Brandenburg-Prussia (vassal)
• Duchy of Courland (vassal)
• 10th faction (Military Order of Malta, (Russia)
• Pirates?

A 10 faction game...to start out both factions (Brandenburg-Prussia, Duchy of Courland) as vassal colonies is

historically "realistic", as Brandenburg only "leased" part of St. Thomas from Denmark (never had territorial possesion),

and Courland is even more tricky...

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_colonization_of_the_Americas

No Scots on the list, no Portugal, no Italian, no China, no India, maybe anyone find someone else???

Edited April 18, 2016 by Wilson09