Alliances - final design

[Guest]

Sounds good.

 

One question though - is the voting still going to make use of the 'landowners' idea (e.g. more votes for lord protectors and such), or has that been scrapped for direct democracy of everyone voting?

[ajffighter86]

You just described my clan

 

You get the true pirate seal of approval.

 

[Cmdr RideZ]

There is flaw in your reasoning. Sweden is allied to VP, We are friendly/neutral Towards Uk and US. That is not the same as your describing.

 

I thought that UK & US is not attacking VP or SE?  That all these 4 are in agreement to not attack each others ports?

 

...

 

I think the events over sea should affect to these alliances as well.  Like if the king of UK says that we are now in war with Spain, then they are.  The devs could, at least sometimes, stir the setup a bit.  Yes, in situation where an alliance has 2/3 from server population, the players are sure not going to break the alliance, so command over the seas should be considered here.

[Dragonfire]

Well Lord protectors may have bought the flag and set the timers but not all ways the one who put up the cash for it so multi players could lay claim to a portion of the land now owned along with the ppl that took that land in the PB so not sure Landowners should have  more votes than anyone else ?

Edited August 2, 2016 by Dragonfire

[squedage]

 

 

I think the events over sea should affect to these alliances as well.  Like if the king of UK says that we are now in war with Spain, then they are.  The devs could, at least sometimes, stir the setup a bit.  Yes, in situation where an alliance has 2/3 from server population, the players are sure not going to break the alliance, so command over the seas should be considered here.

 

that could be fun have "random" events that lead to "conflicts and/or war/peace" to keep any 1 side from being able to completely dominate the game

Edited August 2, 2016 by squedage

[Skully]

Undercover? Pirates be hired as mercenaries or some sort?

Pirates have no national loyalty, don't want it, don't need it.

Hmm, pirates have no interest in making allies, as they attack each one they want. This is a big advantage, isn't it? Just sail out and look what poor target crosses your way ....

Its GREAT that we pirates dont have to follow any silly rules set by fat kings and queens !

The pirates who want allies and enemies probably would be better served being nationals.

I like to think of Pirates as seekers of freedom, living without restrictions and serve nobody but their own.

Seek any and every option to further our own benefits.

So which this patch we get:

• no choice who enters each other ports
• no choice who are pulled into battles as our friends
• no choice to enter any port battle we wish
• no choice who can or cannot be attacked

So instead of getting options, Pirates will serve under the restrictions of the alliances mechanism and lose their freedom.

[maturin]

I like to think of Pirates as seekers of freedom, living without restrictions and serve nobody but their own.

Seek any and every option to further our own benefits.

So which this patch we get:

• no choice who enters each other ports
• no choice who are pulled into battles as our friends
• no choice to enter any port battle we wish
• no choice who can or cannot be attacked

So instead of getting options, Pirates will serve under the restrictions of the alliances mechanism and lose their freedom.

 

Yes, because as a pirate, you *chose* exile from civilization and all its benefits.

 

The freedom of the outlaw is the absence of restrictions. You can always attack everyone no matter what other pirates think.

[Skully]

Yes, because as a pirate, you *chose* exile from civilization and all its benefits.

 

The freedom of the outlaw is the absence of restrictions. You can always attack everyone no matter what other pirates think.

No, we can not: http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/15472-pirate-pirate-free-for-all-battles/

We were forced to become a Nation and now we should reverse it.

[Skully]

http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/15549-port-hugging-abuse-free-towns/?p=290656http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/15549-port-hugging-abuse-free-towns/?p=290656

[Konali89]

I like it:)

I am really curious what will be the outcome when this hits:) 

I expect some slaughter here and there, some heated lobbying for votes within nations:)

Can't wait:)

[NorthernWolves]

Hello Captains

 

Would like to share our final view on the design of alliances that will be deployed next patch. 

 

Allied Nations will be enforced by a ruleset. 

Allied nations:

• Can enter each other ports
• Are pulled into battles as friendlies
• Can enter port battles
• Cannot be attacked

Enemy nations: Needed to block situations where your ally also has an alliance with your enemy. 

You cannot ally with nations who have alliances with your enemy and vice versa. They must dissolve that alliance first and only after that you will be able to ally with them. Alternatively you must change the views on the enemy and then will be able to join the alliance 

 

Alliance creation is a political process that requires national effort in voting screen and in real life. 

Alliances are created by national voting and are enforced by systems. 

 

How voting will work. 

Voting is done in weekly rounds.

 

Every voting round your nation does 2 things

• votes for the enemy nation (same enemy can be picked)
• votes for the potential ally

Alliances are signed for top choices for matching nations for a certain time (several weeks). 

 

Example on how it will work.

 

Week one

1. France picked Sweden as a top ally choice (picking denmark as enemy)
2. Sweden picked France as a top ally choice (picking great britain as enemy)

Then during next maintenance alliance is signed for 2 weeks between France and Sweden. Once alliance is signed all votes are reset and credited back to the player for the next round of voting. 

 

Week two

France is already allied with Sweden

1. France wants to ally with Great Britain
2. Because one of their ally members has listed Great britain as enemy this alliance cannot be signed and is not available for voting
3. To be able to ally with Great britain france must persuade Sweden to drop Great britain as enemy and replace it with someone else (for example Denmark)

As a result in 3 weeks (3 rounds of voting) 2 or 3 large blocks will be created. Over time the situations might change. Because of the forced enemy decision there will always be 2 large blocks at the minimum. 

 

Votes

Vote limits are granted based on level. Voting is allowed above a certain rank. To be able to vote for allies player must first vote on the enemy. 

 

Other considerations.

Alliances also will play important part in hostility generation

Sinking enemies will grant extra points in pvp and pve. Attacks on allied NPCs will be forbidden and will force players to move closer to hostile waters. 

Well I'll be damned, this might actually work.  

Let's just make sure this doesn't become Port Action, those should be hyper-expensive (requiring dozens of players donating over time to a flag fund), somewhat rare and 48 hour long (weekends only) open battles type of thing that are un-recapturable for like a month.

With this proposed alliance system and a fleshed out economy, we could have some fun zone patrolling, commerce raiding and commerce escorting going on on the open seas.

[Henry d'Esterre Darby]

Bear in mind - you can still attack any other nation that is not your ally.  You can still harass their shipping, you can even have clans that are continuing to make deals with other clans (e.g. Britain is allied with Denmark, but most of her clans agree not to attack the United States).  From the sounds of it, you get EXTRA rewards from attacking a declared enemy, but this idea that you can't continue to do the same thing you're doing now - where agreements are signed between clans, will not change unless that agreement is between two enemy nations - in which case, as a clan, you can still not attack the declared enemy if it disagrees with your politics.

[Isink A Lot]

Quote #1

Hello Captains

 

Would like to share our final view on the design of alliances that will be deployed next patch. 

 

Allied Nations will be enforced by a ruleset. 

Allied nations:

• Can enter each other ports
• Are pulled into battles as friendlies
• Can enter port battles
• Cannot be attacked

Enemy nations: Needed to block situations where your ally also has an alliance with your enemy. 

You cannot ally with nations who have alliances with your enemy and vice versa. They must dissolve that alliance first and only after that you will be able to ally with them. Alternatively you must change the views on the enemy and then will be able to join the alliance 

 

Alliance creation is a political process that requires national effort in voting screen and in real life. 

Alliances are created by national voting and are enforced by systems. 

 

How voting will work. 

Voting is done in weekly rounds.

 

Every voting round your nation does 2 things

• votes for the enemy nation (same enemy can be picked)
• votes for the potential ally

Alliances are signed for top choices for matching nations for a certain time (several weeks). 

 

Example on how it will work.

 

Week one

1. France picked Sweden as a top ally choice (picking denmark as enemy)
2. Sweden picked France as a top ally choice (picking great britain as enemy)

Then during next maintenance alliance is signed for 2 weeks between France and Sweden. Once alliance is signed all votes are reset and credited back to the player for the next round of voting. 

 

Week two

France is already allied with Sweden

1. France wants to ally with Great Britain
2. Because one of their ally members has listed Great britain as enemy this alliance cannot be signed and is not available for voting
3. To be able to ally with Great britain france must persuade Sweden to drop Great britain as enemy and replace it with someone else (for example Denmark)

As a result in 3 weeks (3 rounds of voting) 2 or 3 large blocks will be created. Over time the situations might change. Because of the forced enemy decision there will always be 2 large blocks at the minimum. 

 

Votes

Vote limits are granted based on level. Voting is allowed above a certain rank. To be able to vote for allies player must first vote on the enemy. 

 

Other considerations.

Alliances also will play important part in hostility generation

Sinking enemies will grant extra points in pvp and pve. Attacks on allied NPCs will be forbidden and will force players to move closer to hostile waters. 

 

Quote #2

Pirates cannot sign alliances

 

Quote #3

no

both nations must be a top choice for each other - but because the voting lasts for a week and you get multiple votes you will be able to put votes to make the second choice a first choice

 

basically - only 1 alliance per week.

 

Quote #4

if you are not allied you are at war

enemy choice is needed for blocking purposes - but i am sure your nation hate one of the nations more than others

 

Quote #5

you can only have 2 (current) or maybe 3 alliances

but everyone can pick the same enemy yes. 

These quotes don't add up to me, can you clarify for me please?

 

8 nations: your nation plus the pirate "nation" (quote #2), plus your voted ally nation leaves 5 nations you are at war with at all times Per your quote #4. So you have 2 states for each nation you can be 1. ally and 2. war, but only one nation as an ally at a time per quote #3.

 

How does this work? 6 nations only 1 can be an ally (last 2 weeks per quote #1), only 1 can be an enemy (how long does this last, not stated anywhere I read?), what are the other 4, per quote #4 should be war therefor an enemy? Now if you had a neutral state this could make since to me but you state per quote #4, which was a reply to this question, that there is no neutral state. So how does quote #5 work where you can have 2 or maybe 3 current allies when quote #4 says you can't? Can you do a full 8 week of voting scenario with all nations shown to show how this works?

 

Using your example France & Sweden are allies with different enemies. Is Denmark an enemy of Sweden since Sweden is allied with France? So Sweden would have 2 declared enemies after this voting (as would France), but what are the other 3 nations to Sweden and France, per quote #4 they must be at war, but how?

 

The way this reads to me is you can have one ally only, one declared enemy (and one per your ally maybe?) and 3 or 4 nations you are still at war with. What the difference between a declared enemy and a nation you are at war with? Only declared enemy can you pull flags for? I cannot see how only two state for a nation works.

 

Can I suggest a 3rd state - the neutral state:

Neutral nations:

• Can enter each other ports
• Are NOT pulled into battles as friendlies - must manully enter as you can now
• Can NOT enter port battles
• Can be attacked on OW - will create tensions for changing who the enemy is maybe?
• Can be an enemy of your ally 
• Cannot pull flags

Allied nations:

• Can enter each other ports
• Are pulled into battles as friendlies
• Can enter port battles
• Cannot be attacked
• Cannot pull flags against

Enemy nations:

• Cannot enter each others ports
• Can pull flags for ports

[Guest]

I thought that UK & US is not attacking VP or SE?  That all these 4 are in agreement to not attack each others ports?

 

"Not attacking" = Neutral.

 

Game design might claim in the next patch that everyone who's not allied is at war (or as it is now, everyone is technically at war with everyone), but that doesn't necessarily carry through to the actual game.

Edited August 2, 2016 by Guest

[Skully]

Bear in mind - you can still attack any other nation that is not your ally.  You can still harass their shipping, you can even have clans that are continuing to make deals with other clans (e.g. Britain is allied with Denmark, but most of her clans agree not to attack the United States).  From the sounds of it, you get EXTRA rewards from attacking a declared enemy, but this idea that you can't continue to do the same thing you're doing now - where agreements are signed between clans, will not change unless that agreement is between two enemy nations - in which case, as a clan, you can still not attack the declared enemy if it disagrees with your politics.

Given the player base distribution across time zones, this might result in the 18-20's deciding what wars fights will be allowed, right?

And herein I'm worried. If a clan is structured around a specific time slot which conflicts with the majority of a nation's time slot, then its current alliances might be different. Especially if it is diametrically opposed time slots.

Before Jeheil can say you need to expand your community. I think it is perfectly fine for a clan to choose for itself a specific time slot.

I hinted at this in the Three Admirals Treaty, but I fear Olav deleted my comment.

http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/15033-dutch-position-on-exploiting-game-mechanics/?p=280857

Now when we have the hostility mechanism, the fighting goes across time slots, but the ultimate port battle will not.

And your only "enemy" clan that is in the same time slot might be a forced ally because of the national alliance.

[Skully]

And remember folks, if you don't like the outcome of a vote on your Nation, you can come to Pirates for free.

[Obi-Heed Kenobi]

Along the same lines as Sully's last post, will there be a mechanism for pirate amnesties? That is, will people that have left the national flock, for instance by attacking an allied nation, ever be given a chance to come back?

Granted, you can just reset your account right now, but will there be any mechanism in-game for this?

[Johny Reb]

I approve of the first iteration of the alliance mechanic. Now that we know what it will be we can all work to make its next evolution better.

 

I think it would be very important that the devs work hard to make an alliance chat function.

 

I also appreciate that the pirates were not included in this. It is a step toward making the rats the class that they should be. I applaud this loudly but this also begs the next update of this mechanic to have a way for pirates to ally or make an enemy of other pirate clans or alliances including port control.

As for the next iteration of national politics I would propose, as I have in the past, that the following definitions be used in expanding the status of nation relationships:

Allied: Friendlies, can't attack their ports, Can enter their ports, Can enter their port battles. Pulled into battle with them

Friendly: Can enter their ports, Friendly on the OS, Don't get pulled into battle, Can't join PBs

Hostile: Enemies on the OS, Can't attack their ports

War: Anything goes.

 

These above "status" definitions would be more important if a nation can only have 2 allies

 

I also agree that the voting system will have to be reworked. I am of the opinion that everyone can have 1 vote but pvp activity grants you extra points to vote with. The pvp'ers drive the drama in the game that keeps it alive. It is a pvp server and the pvp'ers are the ones required and expected to defend and protect a nation's boundaries. They should get more votes in my opinion.

[GrapeShot]

Why should active crafters, or PVEers for that matter, get excluded from political decision making?

They plunked down money the same as anyone else did. They should be full participants in politics.

It is good to see that clan influence has been watered down.

[The MetaBaron]

There needs to be a minimum time you have spent with a nation to vote, or people can just hop to another nation to mess with the votes. Might not be that big of a deal, but knowing how some players like to exploit game mechanics as much as possible I think this is very important.

[Cpt Blackthorne]

I'm just saying alts can easily reach those conditions and potentially rig a vote.

But, do we leave it completely open so that all alts can rig votes or only those very few who plays alts regularly? There is no option at all that will curb 100% of rigging votes. So it is better to curb at least 70% of the vote rigging. I second the motion to prevent votes to those who play a percentage of time in one nation. I would say on average ppl play 2 hours a day. 2 x 7 = 14 hrs. What is wrong with limiting the ability to vote to those who play in one nation at least 14 hrs per week?

Ad to this the player's necessity to be of a higher rank to vote. Most alts are not higher than rank 3 or 4, because they use them for labor hours more than PvP. If people have alts of a high enough rank and with enough hours, then all I can say is that they need a life, follow the advice in game, "You need to find yourself a girl", or whatever it says. hehe

[Sir Texas Sir]

Ehrm, some alts I know off have 45 hours / week. They play in parallel, not in sequence.

Maybe I should write up a definitive alt guide as well.

One statement I heard last weekend was grand: "Should I attack this French player with my British alt? He is delivering mats for my French alt's Victory."

And this is exactly what I call cheating and why most games won't allow you to have alts of diffrent nation/factions on the same server.   I don't mind some one having multi alts in the same server if they are of the same nation/faction.    I play mainly US on the PvP2 server and thinking now that we  can change our nations on other servers I was thinking of makeing my EU server char go Pirate since I rarely play on there.  Though if the NATION of Rats have a policy to hunt down other rats that will attack rats than there is no point for me to do this.  I only want to do it solo for the off hour PvP when the US server is a bit slow late at night.

 

I belive this will be followed by a pirate mechanic change ? Otherwise current Pirates (nation) will be in a very unfavorable position.

Which they should be, they are suppose to be HARD MODE not easy mode.

 

We are missing a huge opportunity here where each Pirate clan individually can sign an alliance with a Nation.

Or Pirate clans declaring war on one-another.

Basically structuring the whole Pirate civil war.

 

Why can't you still do that?  I mean Pirates are the only ones that can attack each other.  This means you can still do this but there just won't be a game mechanic since it's on a clan level and not National.   Oh and PvP 1 seems to not want this with the stupid attack a Pirate the rest of the Pirates will hunt you down and destroy you.  Seems way to much like they are trying to be like a Nation than what Pirates are more like.

Hmm, pirates have no interest in making allies, as they attack each one they want. This is a big advantage, isn't it? Just sail out and look what poor target crosses your way ....

Well that is how they prob should be, but when is the last time you actually seen pirates attacking other pirates?

 

How are you going to deal with multiple accounts placing votes for other Nations?

 

ex. if a clan has 100 members and they are all have 2 accounts on different nations. Can they switch and vote? I think yes. 100 cheat votes make a big difference and might just ruin the whole system.  

 

My suggestion - implement 'active hours'. Active Hours should be the minimum amount of hours you need to spend (in one nation) in order to place the vote for that same nation. Now in order to place double vote, players will need to spend x2 hours per week on both nations if they want to cheat. 

 

ex. if player is inactive and just came back to the game he will not be able to place a vote. 10 hours per week could be a reasonable start. Active hours reset every week. 

 

Also, place vote window in the end of each Week - Sunday. This will make sure players get 10 required hours.

 

 

P.S. I am looking what will happen in a long run and I know it takes time to level up a character, but trust me we are dealing with gamers who will do just anything in order to get an easy win. 

They really need to enforce the no multi accounts in different nations on the same server.  I don't see an issue if they are all of the same nation helping you with your econ, but there is to much cheating with folks that have multi accounts in different nations on the same server.  You basically can't make any comments in Nation Chat without spies using that info against your Nations.

[GrapeShot]

14 hrs per week is too much. Freezes out more casual players.

[Cpt Blackthorne]

Along the same lines as Sully's last post, will there be a mechanism for pirate amnesties? That is, will people that have left the national flock, for instance by attacking an allied nation, ever be given a chance to come back?

Granted, you can just reset your account right now, but will there be any mechanism in-game for this?

There definitely needs to be an in-game system to allow easy nation swapping, but it needs to be an application process put to vote by the new nation's citizens and it must require that you have been in your current nation for at least a set period of time. I think it must also require that you do some sort of good deed for the nation that you are intending to defect to. Perhaps you must capture a port for that new nation or you must pay in gold and in goods? Who knows, but yes to in-game Letters of Marque, but also yes to requirements that will prevent nation hopping every day or even every week.

 

Why should active crafters, or PVEers for that matter, get excluded from political decision making?

They plunked down money the same as anyone else did. They should be full participants in politics.

It is good to see that clan influence has been watered down.

This is why I think the voting system should develop into a points per vote system.If PvP'ers are killing enemy ships and or taking enemy ports, then what weight can we have for the crafter? Maybe they need to donate to a national treasury? Maybe there should be a national traders market that is separate from the full market, and everything you sell on the nation only market will count? Who knows, but yes, all should be able to vote.

[Loco Bandito]

Ok so if Pirates are not a nation and can't do port battles what happens to my resource farms? How do I make money and gather materials?

I want to play the game and enjoy all aspects and craft but am feeling like I am being pushed to re-roll a nation.

If this is implemented I would like to see the devs give all nations a free re-roll so players can join smaller nations or leave Pirates.