Clan-based RvR

[vazco]

Recently the community, while being hostage to VCO and REDS decisions, started talking about clan-based politics. Before someone forces some strange decision on admins, I decided to suggest how this could work without destroying many good aspects of NA, like some drastic ideas flowing on the forum would do. I base this on dicussion we had in Prussia.

 

Clan-based politics could be still within a nation. If you're in a small clan, you could still fight for getting eg. that Cartagena Tar port for your nation. You could still be allied by default to other nation members.

What could change is to:

• allow clans define hostile clans. Such clans could war each other on OW and in RvR while hostility lasts
• make it so that a clan owning a port has monopoly for 50% of rare goods that are produced in that port. This way eg. if you own Cartagena, 50% of goods sold in this port go to your clanmates, on their top price. Remaining 40% go to other members of your nation. This way it's profitable to capture a port, while in the same time it doesn't create a monopoly of access to a given resource.

This solution wouldn't change national politics, while in the same time would allow for clans to solve their issues within a nation. Moves like switching a nation to harm it would be impossible. Similarly, two clans leaving in a constant hostility could war out their differences.

Edited February 13, 2018 by vazco

[Teutonic]

War Companies was one of the best suggestions the Admin had brought up and it could have solved all of this

[RedNeckMilkMan]

Just now, Teutonic said:

War Companies was one of the best suggestions the Admin had brought up and it could have solved all of this

Could have solved all of what? A bunch of salty dudes jumping nation because they lost 2 battles. VCO is so fickle. FeelsbadSwedes

[Teutonic]

1 minute ago, RedNeckMilkMan said:

Could have solved all of what? A bunch of salty dudes jumping nation because they lost 2 battles. VCO is so fickle. FeelsbadSwedes

don't bring NN shit here.

you post has absolutely no relevance here. either bring something to the table or buzz off

[vazco]

4 minutes ago, Teutonic said:

War Companies was one of the best suggestions the Admin had brought up and it could have solved all of this

I don't remember the idea, I just vaguely remember it was a drastic change and had loopholes. Maybe I remember it wrong though. Do you have a link?

Edited February 13, 2018 by vazco

[RedNeckMilkMan]

13 minutes ago, vazco said:

Recently the community, while being hostage to VCO and REDS decisions

 

2 minutes ago, Teutonic said:

don't bring NN shit here.

you post has absolutely no relevance here. either bring something to the table or buzz off

XD

[Teutonic]

1 minute ago, vazco said:

I don't remember the idea, I just vaguely remember it was a drastic change and had loopholes. Maybe I remember it wrong though. Do you have a link?

There were loopholes. and through discussion in the thread players suggest ways to get fix them, what you suggest was what "roughly" war companies was promising.
 

 

[Farrago]

As I recall, the big problems with the War Company idea were it was rough for newbies and clanless players and the idea of capturable ports only in the middle of the map seemed limiting.

Here’s how I’d do it.

Clan wars are possible for both PVP and RVR outside their safe zone.

Safe Zones remain similar (or smaller) to now. Within a nations safe zone, there is no green on green allowed for that nation. For example, within Dutch safe zone, no Dutch can attack or fight another Dutch. If a Swede on Swede battle was encountered in Dutch safe zone , Dutch could join either or both sides.

Port status choices would be: Available For All, Available for Nation, Available for Clan and its Friendly Clans.

Yea, outside the safe zone one could attack newbs and clanless players but I personally think a species that eats its young will ultimately dwindle away anyway.

Edited February 13, 2018 by Farrago

[RedNeckMilkMan]

3 Nations with 4 ports each as part of their safe zone for players below M&C rank

Cut the total number of ports to 2/3 or 1/2 what it is now.

Clans have loose alliances with nations. Each week a nation will have a goal i.e. capture this port etc. If your clan partakes in goal you will receive bonuses from the motherland

Give clans more control over their ports i.e. What they produce (trade goods, crafting goods etc.) Clan docks, Give them more control over the items produced there.

Make more ports that are worthwhile. currently there are about 10 ports that are worth holding.

[vazco]

The issue with making fully clan-based combat are quite numerous:

• what about clanless players and their experience? They need some way to access the content
• fixing all the issues makes system very complex and hard to understand. Eg. where can I attack? Why I can't capture a given port? Which port is closed to which clan? etc.
• having a clan take over a port and close it fully for the clan can create a monopoly of access. Eg. with Cartagena it can be a dangerous snowballing effect
• what about even fights between nations? Right now alts solve this problem by giving access to nations for key resources (Cartagena, Carpenters etc.). If it's completely not available, we would get a snowballing effect

That's why I proposed to modify the system, so that it's half-clan, half-nation based.

Edited February 13, 2018 by vazco

[RedNeckMilkMan]

• what about clanless players and their experience? They need some way to access the content?

                     They still have national ties and are neutral to all clans of their nation. Admin has suggested adding a clan directory/leaderboard which would allow                                   players to find what best suits their playstyle

• fixing all the issues makes system very complex and hard to understand. Eg. where can I attack? Why I can't capture a given port? Which port is closed to which clan? etc.

                       Clans can still have allied clans but all ports would be open to capture from other clans. Clans get to choose who enters their ports.

• having a clan take over a port and close it fully for the clan can create a monopoly of access. Eg. with Cartagena it can be a dangerous snowballing effect

                       Now that clan becomes a target. Anyone who owns a high value port will be a target.

• what about even fights between nations? Right now alts solve this problem by giving access to nations for key resources (Cartagena, Carpenters etc.). If it's completely not available, we would get a snowballing effect

                        If a clan is able to hold their port they should reap the benefits not the alts of other clans/nations. Also only having one port to produce high value mods                            is idiotic and should be changed.

 

The goal is to keep nations like Sweden Spain France etc. from owning 2/3 of the ports most of which they do nothing with. Clans that want to hold high dollar ports will constantly be under attack and have a hard time holding many other ports.

Edited February 13, 2018 by RedNeckMilkMan

[blubasso]

In my opinion the people who want clan based are the ones who want just to fight. Fight all day long headless. A huge blob which inside there’s ppl fighting each other. They are here only for win in battle. No RvR, no relactions among States. Just fight on the battlefield until the last man (ship). And now that the NA Legend server will close, there will be more and more.

It’s not bad per se but there are other players who wish for political stuffs, PvE stuffs and so on. All have the rights to enjoy their play style...

Edited February 14, 2018 by blubasso

[blubasso]

6 minutes ago, rediii said:

there will be even more politics involved with clanbases conquest. What people want is to decide with who they want to play. They want it to be their decision and not the decision of the guys joining them

Yes and no: this reminds me RL situation in Italy or Germany for exemple, in the past history: a lot of little States, fighting each others for supremacy. First time a Big Fish comes, all they will perish and they will be inglobated and forgotten. Not sure if i like it...

Edited February 14, 2018 by blubasso

[GrubbyZebra]

20 hours ago, vazco said:

The issue with making fully clan-based combat are quite numerous:

• what about clanless players and their experience? They need some way to access the content
• fixing all the issues makes system very complex and hard to understand. Eg. where can I attack? Why I can't capture a given port? Which port is closed to which clan? etc.
• having a clan take over a port and close it fully for the clan can create a monopoly of access. Eg. with Cartagena it can be a dangerous snowballing effect
• what about even fights between nations? Right now alts solve this problem by giving access to nations for key resources (Cartagena, Carpenters etc.). If it's completely not available, we would get a snowballing effect

That's why I proposed to modify the system, so that it's half-clan, half-nation based.

Clanless players can be pirates, or create clans of 1 to join alliances.

[vazco]

23 minutes ago, Graf Bernadotte said:

Try to imagine how a world without the nations as protectors of their members would work. 

1. A clanless player would be fair game for really everybody. He could be attacked leaving the docks of his national capital until the moment he has the chance to hide in a port again.

2. Members of small clans with few allied clans would be hunted down in home water almost in the same way than a clanless player.

3. A nation would very soon be turned into two factions of competing clans, since every clan and clanless player would be forced in one of those factions not because he wants to, but because he wouldn't be able to survive alone. Wars would not happen between nations anymore but between those two national factions, who would fight each other until one side conquered the nation to install an autocracy. That would give all power into the hand of the prevailing party. What means players would not only decide about RvR and taxes but about the existence of other players. Who doesn't follow their orders would end up very soon as clanless again with the result getting hunted by everybody else.

Removing the protection of the nation for every player would turn naval action into a North Corea where the most evil players decide arbitrary about death and life of their fellow citizen.

The question is, if such a game should not be forbidden by law at least in democratic states. I'm pretty sure that it would violate jouth protection in a lot of countries.

 

That's why I proposed my solution. By default all clans within a nation could be friendly and clanless players could not be attacked. Since resources would be mostly shared, everyone would have incentive to help defend other clans ports in the same nation. 

Regarding roe - good remark. It could be probably addressed with a new interface though. 

Edited February 18, 2018 by vazco

[Fletch]

Don’t you think there is enough port swapping going on for victory points just look at Spain and Russia recently. How  bad will that sitution get if it’s clans involved?

 

 

[vazco]

12 hours ago, Fletch67 said:

Don’t you think there is enough port swapping going on for victory points just look at Spain and Russia recently. How  bad will that sitution get if it’s clans involved?

 

 

No need to give VM's for capturing your nation's ports. They could be given only for other nations ports. 

[Fletch]

3 hours ago, vazco said:

No need to give VM's for capturing your nation's ports. They could be given only for other nations ports. 

The point is the big clans working together will not be on the same nation

[the Kidd]

What do you all think about a mechanic that gives every member of the Nation the possibillity to chose a King / President.

It's only an idea an this idea is definetly not finished but it could be solve for some Problems....

This system can work like:

- King/President
- get chosen by all members of the nation -> once per month -> you have allways the possibility to collect votes if you get enough votes to "fire" the president this result in a new election...
- He can do the diplomatic system he can set nations/clans on friendly / if you attack a friendly nation you get kicket to Pirate with possibilty to get back to your nation / or you get set as a enemy of your own nation
- He can give a Clan the status of "enemy of the own nation" -> Attackable from the own nation

- Clans
- Clan do still hostility - that means the clan that does hostilty get the port if they win the PB
- Clan set the "Rule" who can enter this Ports (Free for all / Free for the whole Nation / Free for the Nation without the "enemy of the Nation")
- A Clan can get attacked if he is set on "Enemy of the Nation"

Clanless Players

- Clanless are a form of neutral that cant getting attacked by the own nation (exeption enemy of the own nation)
- Clanless can still not capture ports
- Clanless can enter every Port of a Nation

 

What do you think about something like that?

Edited February 23, 2018 by the Kidd

[vazco]

21 minutes ago, the Kidd said:

What do you all think about a mechanic that gives every member of the Nation the possibillity to chose a King / President.

In the past I also thought this could be an interesting idea. When you think about it though, it's creating a mechanism based on human relations, which are extremely complex. Power is complex, and in NA it's mostly based around your ability to make people dedicate their time for you. There's no just one king. There are also civil wars, rouge clans, independent players, troll-kings etc. Let people handle politics through TS, not in game. It's more natural, more fun and better adjusted to needs.