Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum
admin

"Such is a lord" - Simple politics and alliances part 1 - HEAVILY MODERATED

Recommended Posts

I'm still reading and re-reading the proposal and digesting it... my first reaction is that this is extremely complicated and is turning Naval Action into Port Action. 

This seriously disadvantages people who don't take part in port battles, it causes problems for clans and clan leaders. I don't have a solution for each and every part, other than scrap it and start over.

The alliances thing is a good idea, but the land ownership thing is far beyond what Naval Action needs, I would leave that out completely.

 

You will have a ton of green on green tribunals as all the players in Santisima's cue up to push each other out of the way to batter one of the tiny towers to get the most damage.

 

Purchasing a special item to gain entry to parliament, hmm what's to stop everyone from just using this method if they don't want to bother with the rest? 

Edited by NorthernWolves
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No more 10 battles per day + longer cooldowns. 

This very much good news, many of us are suffering from port exhaustion, we only do it because it is a must, the repetition and frequency has taken all the joy out.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would love to hear further explanation as what heroic feats are.

Also when voting is open, how long will the polls be open for? A few hours, a day? I can see a lot of complaints from players feeling cheated if votes come up and they can't vote due to their time zone. I would suggest at least a 12 hour window for casting votes, possibly preferable 24 hours.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How does the port timer window and the ability to get in to port battles affect the chances of people in off-set time zones (AU TZ). How does Admin see these players taking part in the lord system. 

 

does Admin recommend these players focus on making the money to buy the access to voting or PVP to gain access to voting?

Edited by Jack Feathersword
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ports are controlled by lords. Lord protector can determine entry rights

 

Question: will entry rights be defined on a national basis, clan basis, and/or individual player basis?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Two things.

 

The proposed system does not recognize those who participate in successful port defensive action.  Perhaps land titles can be awarded in those circumstances as well. Perhaps a percentage of the earned in attack land titles, so if you become inactive natural attrition will happen as your titles transfer to successful defenders.

 

I like the limit to the number of allies, however I think it should be more dynamic than a simple hard number.  I see the possibility of two groups of 3 nations being in accord and stomping the crap out of the third group.  

 

Some form of perpetual comeback is required, such as a limit on alliance numbers by total owned towns, rather than simple agreement. (Say max 60% of all available towns). That way the two strongest nations could for example band together, but would not be able to bring in a third, while the entire rest of the nations who are dramatically beaten back would ALL be able to gang up against the two nation uber alliance.

Edited by KrakkenSmacken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds interesting, but overly comlicated and people will always find numerous ways to abuse the system. Also, could you please provide some more information on the "heroic feats"?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think OP's idea, while historically accurate wouldn't please most of the playerbase.

 

There should be a more democratic system in place or else those people who don't really matter will have too much power in their hands. players who have reached a certain rank should be able to participate in the diplomatic system via voting, either by electing representatives or by voting on matters of diplomacy directly. The players should be able to depose lord protectors and representatives by vote, The lord protector(s)/representatives would have a chance to protest and maybe even fight against this, sprakling the mentioned civil wars.

 

Historically accurate is nice, but we can probably hold back a bit on that on a sandbox environment.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I may be reading it wrong, but as I understand what's written there, if the port is awarded to the player that does the most damage, that would tend to award it to the strongest player in the group...which would be the same player every time that group does a port battle. You might end up with most of the ports being held by a handful of players.

 

Unless there is going to be some mechanism to account for that? Maybe if you are already a lord protector of another port, you get a handicap in the ranking for being lord protector for the next port.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a fascinating proposal.  I like that it shifts power to those who excel technically, in port battles and other PVP.

 

This system of lord's and parliaments seems to shift power away from clans/guilds.  Thus far, clans or guilds have used their own internal political structures to negotiate leadership, make strategic decisions and alliances, and control ports.  This is role-playing in a sense.  But it's really a game mechanic.  It's not controlled by the developers, it's just it's own beast that runs through the clans, depending on how they each chose to structure themselves.  With these proposed changes, much of the function of clans becomes mechanized through the game, for better or worse.  Is this the intent of the developers, and are they comfortable undermining the role of clans in this way?

Edited by Preserved Killick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have two questions:

 

1) how the diplomatic status (war, peace, alliance) will affect engagement rules against players and/or spawns in open sea?

 

2) in order to establish a manufacturing/extracting facility in one port, a player must own land in that port or not?

Edited by victor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Greetings!

 

As many other has wrote it looks interesting.

 

It does however give me the impression that perhaps we need a new system other then the current clan system to show what we support. Perhaps we need the ability to join political blocks/movements to lend weight to what we feel is the heading our nation should take. This gives more intricate systems that can change without actual voting taking place but still gives people opportunities to show how they feel.

 

I also feel that we need to make sure that not just the people doing the attacking/defending that reaps the rewards but those that support are also given ample reward. I hope that the changes to portbattles gives those casual players the ability to contribute to the attacks and the defence of the realm to make sure everyone can get involved no matter the time they can invest.

 

 

I am looking forward to more information.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

  • If you don’t have heroic feats you can marry into the Lordship by buying a special item

 

Could buying a "clan tag" be one of these special items?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So what happens to the clan which does not want to be involved in RvR?

A Clan which exists for the sole porpose of PvP?

 

There was a proposal of Letter of Marque in this thread already.

 

I propose that a Clan such as the above can buy such Letters with their heroic feats.

If said clan is buying a permit to hunt enemy cargo they commited to it for a certain time. 2 weeks, a month?

If this clan committed to this he can be hunted by all enemy nations just as we have it now.

(Basically its a private war with the option to fall back into the nation's safety once you have enough)

(and yeah that might very well offer many exploits)

 

To make this work we need the clanTAG on the OS and each port has to provide the information about clans which are on the hunt.

 

 

Other than that I think your idea looks solid.

There are others who have more ideas towards RvR but I am speaking from the perspective of a small pvp clan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if there can be an option for the heavy crafters, those of us who spend hours gathering resources, refining them and cranking out ships. We're the ones who benefit most from increased labour hours, and depending on our playtime, our focus on the econ side takes us away from taking part in RvR.

 

Could there be something for us similar to the PvP group, plus increased labour regen?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Simple proposal :

 

   Allow States being tradeable.  This will indirectly give dedicated builders/traders an entrance to the "nobility".

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With these proposed changes, much of the function of clans becomes mechanized through the game, for better or worse.  Is this the intent of the developers, and are they comfortable undermining the role of clans in this way?

 

 

From what we are seeing now - clans decide what to do and will continue to do so

Thus - clans will become largest land owners through their members

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think OP's idea, while historically accurate wouldn't please most of the playerbase.

 

There should be a more democratic system in place or else those people who don't really matter will have too much power in their hands. players who have reached a certain rank should be able to participate in the diplomatic system via voting, either by electing representatives or by voting on matters of diplomacy directly. The players should be able to depose lord protectors and representatives by vote, The lord protector(s)/representatives would have a chance to protest and maybe even fight against this, sprakling the mentioned civil wars.

 

Historically accurate is nice, but we can probably hold back a bit on that on a sandbox environment.

 

This feature is simple and while it will take time to do it solves 1 main problem for the 20% of the player base.

20% of the player base - players interested in port conquest.

It gives the tool to formalize alliances, slow down conquest and give extra incentives to do port battles and actually care about defending

 

People who are only interested in pvp or pve already don't care about port battles. It does not matter to them who gets the 23rd Duke of Port Morant title. 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1) how the diplomatic status (war, peace, alliance) will affect engagement rules against players and/or spawns in open sea?

 

I'm also curious about this - Will alliances be enforced via RoE changes (e.g. turning pirate when attacking an ally)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  •  

 

 

quoted parts in italics

 

 

  • You can support each other in port battles

 

   but can you gain states in your allied nation this way ? (hope not)

 

 

   -Ports are controlled by lords. Lord protector can determine entry rights

 

 

Entry rights? deny entry to a same  nation player seems radical ...maybe only building construction rights, or contract creation management.... how did you plan manage this? on a personal base? guild base?.... Anyway this seems  more dangerous of proposals.

 

As a lighter option port owner could be able to set extra taxes for the market (with that extra ending in his coffers).

 

 

 

If you own land you have more people

 

More people means 2 things:

  • Increase labor hours generation for estate owner which could spill to the nation as well

 

Efects to whole nation goes for a snowball (or zerg) effect that I think should be avoided in a game if at all posible.  I would change this to much cheap (% less hours ) for buildings where a player has both buildings AND states (promotes the selling of states that I advocate in prevous post)

 

  • Increase crew regeneration – because crew has to be hired and fed and rehired in case of full loss of the ship

   A %gold  discount per state in the port you ue to enlist?

 

 

Short inspirational guide on the differences between lords

 

 

At all cost this must by diffeent per nation  ... as military ranks are currently  no american viscounts.. spanish "earls" or French "Grande" please, I am most sure we the playerbase can support you in this matter if you only give us the number of ranks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My only concern is as someone with little to no time for pvp. I have a two young children at home so pvp doesn't work out well for me.  I do however participate regularly in a clan, doing some pve but I really enjoy econ and crafting.  I am lvl 37 crafter and I feel I give a lot of help and support to my clan.

 

However, if the only way I can get boosted labor hours is through port battles, that will not be an option for me.  

 

I get you guys want to encourage pvp and rvr but I would love some other options for players like me that really want a help out with the already rough situation on labor hours. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think a lot of the concern over land and port battles would be reduced if it were possible to buy land from NPCs/players - As I assume marrying into the Lordship provides either no land or only a one-time lump of it.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First of all: I really like the base idea of this system. It is the right direction. It gives the players who fight for its nation the votes and this is generally the right way. It motivate players to fight for their nation in PvP.

 



National decisions are enforced by design.

If captains don't like national policies - capture more ports and change the decision. Maybe a large guild in opposition to a government should get an option to become a rebel, starting a civil war allowing them to capture ports from existing owners getting votes to change national decision deposing a current ruler. Foreign nations can incite civil wars and pay rebels to weaken enemy nations

 

With this opposition and rebels thing i fear it has a really big potential to destroy a nation. Make sure that ONLY really much players base is needed to start a civil war. And no ALTs.

 

How do you try to avoid that alternative Chars of an enemy nation starting a rebellion?

Edited by Sven Silberbart

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...