Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Wilson09

Limit Production buildings enhance RvR

Recommended Posts

Since the game start, the RvR changed drastically. From flag to territory system.

From "free trade" (AI production) to player based production buildings.

 

I want to focus on production buildings and the impact on RvR.

Bringing them into the game killed off any incentive to "expand" the own realm on behalf of other nations.

Before the "smuggler flag", one nation had to expand the realm or trade with other nations to build ships.

(I am not taking the ALT-topic into account, I just assume, they are non-existing).

 

Now, why should "Prussia" on PvP Europe as an example expand to their west, capture Neutral cities instead for its own sake.  (years ago this was labeled as "map painting").

Yes it´s map painting. Who cares about a nation leaderboard?

Not the individual. 

 

How can one tie the individual, selfish player to the nations well-being? Right now, all players build production around their capitals, 3,4,5 towns, enough.

Self-reproducing (sustainable) economy. Fine. Irrespective of whether or not a nation is big (i.e. > 1000 players) or small (i.e <100 players),

one city can hold how many IRON ORE prod. buildings? 10.000?

 

How can I pressurice my CLAN to cap this odd town in the west? I could threat them to change nation, if they won´t get a better production spot for me...

 

My suggestion to the devs and open to discussion (simplifying numbers):

1. Limit the amount of RESSOURCE (i.e. IRON) each town can produce overall, depending somewhat on the town size. Example: 20k iron per day / per smaller port.

2. The 20k production will be allocated and split to the players with IRON ORE building per hour. Example: 40 players build IRON at town A producing 1k iron each. Each produce only 500 iron, as a result of too many producers at that place.

3. UI indicating your share (this production building runs at 76%...)

4. Of course, inactive players might not produce anything, if their storage is used.

5. Nations need to expand to "feed" a growing player-base. Example: Assume Sweden double player-numbers by good recruiting. What happens to the game? They need to expand, offer new players a fair share of old production.

6. Allow "send goods to port" from any nation outpost + production building u own for that ressource (maybe all?) for a small few, so one can sustain a shipyard at your capital and main trading hub allowing you to sustain production buildings all over the world.

 

Ressources and production should be a self-regulating system that is THE DRIVING FORCE to engage in WAR.

It has ever been in human history and is valid until today....

 

Best regards

Wilson

 

P.S.: Just think of 10.000 German / Prussian bankers sitting in Maracaibo doing nothing than counting their money and bank balance.

Their is no incentive to go somewhere else. Drive me out of this place, because my margin is dropping heavily !!!!

  

Edited by Wilson09
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

God Bless the poor developer who has to come up with a working algorithm for this....   I see the concept, but it basically FORCES EVERYONE to devote themselves to the RvR game....

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

War...are you ready for it !? Really !?

First of all you need to learn to fight together and smash the usual Maracaibo raiders.

 

That area is a open world shipyard... *sigh*

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Vernon Merrill said:

God Bless the poor developer who has to come up with a working algorithm for this....   I see the concept, but it basically FORCES EVERYONE to devote themselves to the RvR game....

 

Nope. only if the player base is stronger than your country can hold.

OVER populated nation needs to expand. Players react, change nation or expand. (or stay inactive, passive)

Self-regulating system.

 

Not at all.

I will stay in my harbor and get OTHERS to do the fights for the good for all !

For gloria et patria! The bankers will always win this battle....

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We had RvR with meaning. People left the game because resources were to restricted, to hard to get etc.

RvR with meaning kills the game. Everything has to be accessible to everyone anytime. Otherwise people start to cry and leave.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting thoughts on this matter.

However a tricky situation as already mentioned. How to make RvR dynamic and MEANINGFUL again, without "forcing" players to leave the game, by losing too many buildings or assets..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, z4ys said:

RvR with meaning kills the game.

Pretty much this. Not everyone is interested in RvR and there isn't much balance in terms of RvR power between nations, so currently giving RvR more meaning can only do more harm than good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, PG Monkey said:

No incentive to go anywhere else?  Only if gold is you're ambition :)

No game mechanics currently encourage expansion except Teak / WO sources. The "map win" is not a goal the bottom 6 or 7 nations can realistically aim for now.  There's nothing wrong with adding game mechanics that encourage attacking.


This game could do with a bit more curated PVP.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Quineloe said:

No game mechanics currently encourage expansion except Teak / WO sources. The "map win" is not a goal the bottom 6 or 7 nations can realistically aim for now.  There's nothing wrong with adding game mechanics that encourage attacking.


This game could do with a bit more curated PVP.

There is one mechanic. Its called hardcore nation that forces you to RvR. But at a certain point you get everything you need. No need for more.

In my opinion its a good compromise between meaningfull RvR and player retention.

Edited by z4ys
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Quineloe said:

You didn't exactly RVR, right? you took a bunch of neutral ports.

They did but on the other hand... how could they fight one of the major nations or even the swerg and win? It's not like they have a real chance...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Landsman said:

Do you really want to be enslaved and ruled by the swerg so bad?

Self-regulating system. If Swedes wanted to take all ports of Prussia they probably could do right now. No need to defend ports on the other hand for Prussia right now. If they were forced to (don´t want to loose the odd Hemp port) they have to find ways to beat the Zerg. ALLY with all the others. CRY like little babies for help. Brits / Dutch and others certainly would help poor Prussia to get their Hemp port. Help the underdog. BRITISH love that.

This is RvR.

As Vernon Merrill stated rightfully, (" come up with a working algorithm for this.... ") it is about balancing by Devs.

Everything for all unlimited at all time is World of Warcraft gaming.

The game does not offer enough softcore grind options to keep players busy like WoW did.

RvR did.

 

Edited by Wilson09

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.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...