Kingdoms

[MightySheep]

(LP is also abuseable, but at least you have to consume something (curios) to abuse it ^^)

Since that crazy mining change it's quite easy to mass produce very high lp gain metal or mining related curios. I agree that exp is a bad mechanic and not very well thought out and I think everyone is glad that it is currently something they don't even have to worry about (unless you're spamming mirkwoods). However if starting a kingdom had a requirement similar to vidol like "100k lp from 50 characters" it could very easily be abused by alts.

What I like most about this idea is that there are so many random villages out there that have no interaction with the world, nobody knows who the hell they are or how strong they are. Maybe they are german or polish or russian and have no interest in affairs of other people. This change encourages interaction and helps creating an actual in game community, rather than what often feels like a single player game where your interactions with other players are limited to either running or fighting. It also introduces a functioning siege system so it can't possibly be worse than current broken siege system. Lastly I think it puts value on the strength of villages. They are now 'worth' something on world stage, the strong ones will be desired for kingdoms or will be able to prove themselves by becoming kingdoms. The weak will need to seek the protection of the strong. In the current system, nobody cares about your village strength, there are only 2 categories of villages, 'palisade' and 'brick wall'. Thanks to the siege system, all "brick wall" villages are equally untouchable.

[banok]

This is like one of the crazy silly ideas I might come up with but never bother to post because I know jorb & loftar would never take the game in such a different direction, and everyone would reply that I am retarded person. So i'm kinda surprised, maybe thats why they didn't post here.

I have my fair share of concerns and think it might end up breaking the game. BUT. I think they should just go for it because they need to take some risks and try some radical new things, if they don't work there is always world 9.

My immediate criticisms are:

simular to what sheep mentioned, I think the system will probably mean 1 huge ass kingdomzerg will dominate server with no rival kingdoms big enough to openly challenge kingdomzerg to face their scarysiege. But the main reason is I think that is the community is too small, if there are enough 3rd parties they will eventually form coalitions to take on the zerg. but if the server is dead, then having 1 zerg rule it makes it more dead (see darkfall EU server).

exp? who cares about exp. better make that % of LP earned. and even then LP doesn't seem that great this world. Right now I would rank what determines combat outcomes like:

1. numbers of players
2. gear
3. agi/str/con
4. MC/UA
5. player ability/knowhow

I think a huge well equipped faction might not give a shit about vassals even if they did give LP, they will care only about the OP crimeimmunity and scarysiege.

Maybe they should implement part of the system, like vassalisation, first and make sure it works before adding such crazy kingdom v kingdom shit.

[Archiplex]

You can probably combat the kingdomzerg by making authority maint costs increase more rapidly the larger a kingdom is/more R-claims they have.


(I still dislike no crime in a kingdom if you are not a subject)

[jordancoles]

The no crime thing is actually incredibly exploitable in terms of being the attacker and being the defender
I don't think I want to explain why here though lol, but it's one of the major things that we are trying to work around atm

[Archiplex]

The no crime thing is actually incredibly exploitable in terms of being the attacker and being the defender
I don't think I want to explain why here though lol, but it's one of the major things that we are trying to work around atm

I've already thought out of a lot of abuse scenarios and it doesn't seem hard to abuse - there's a lot of better ways to implement it.

In general, if you want a dedicated 'safe hub', why have it be all R-claims? Couldn't you use a special claim indicator to say "This is the safe hub of the city", and have it be so the size of that claim scales with the size of the kingdom?

[DDDsDD999]

simular to what sheep mentioned, I think the system will probably mean 1 huge ass kingdomzerg will dominate server with no rival kingdoms big enough to openly challenge kingdomzerg to face their scarysiege. But the main reason is I think that is the community is too small, if there are enough 3rd parties they will eventually form coalitions to take on the zerg. but if the server is dead, then having 1 zerg rule it makes it more dead (see darkfall EU server).

We've always had separate factions existing, at least as long as I can remember. I don't think the siege mechanics are too "king of the hill" in nature, but can be tuned accordingly. I'm sure there's plans for alliances and such which could prove interesting.

[DeadlyPencil]

This seems idea seems opposite to the idea that jorb had that me occupying space denies other people from using that space and that they may want to kill me for doing so. Basically what we have here is a kingdom occupying space and no one can do any crimes against that kingdom unless they are at war with them. unless i got that wrong.

that seems horribly restrictive. i dont know if i would want to join a kingdom personally, but i would like the freedom to be able to fight/oppose one if i wish to. but it sounds like thats not possible unless i join an enemy kingdom.

[barra]

A village can be harmed / brought down by subterfuge. Are kingdoms similarly vulnerable, such as by appointing the wrong sheriff and having him summon and kill the King?

The trust and antitrust of non-combat pvp is at least as interesting as card-combat and stat grinding.

[maze]

I have an idea in my head how to make this all work~
and I've had it for along time....but is to early and I'm tired~

A kingdom with a capital.
other citys.

Outsiders have to turn Criminal acts on, such as theft and murder from outside of the kingdom then enter the kingdom. this will Alart online Citizens.
No LP or Exp Drain.

Each zone, or tile will have an invisible flag that can be claimed by a kingdom. if 2 kingdom meet they can over lap only by 1 tile.
Towns that join the kingdom can access to kingdom chat.

Kingdom Siege would work just as J&L explain. 48 hours notice.
Defending kingdom picks a time of 8 hours after the 48 warning hours. at that point is when the Siege can start.
once the Siege ends both Kingdoms will be put into a NOP for 12-24 hours where both kingdoms can not attack/steal/blackarts.

[pedorlee]

A Kingdom sucking my few lp isnt something very atractive. This only will be a bourden for hermits or new players. It isnt also fun as a idea...
This game leaks in something other games have. Or it nearly doesnt have it, let me explain.
When I wake up irl and I connect I, m kind of eager to know how the animals are, if I have a golden egg, if the steel is ready
Will I find new materials in the cave?
Just imagine multypling that sensation, like the one you get when your curio box is full and you log to get all the experience and spend it in the desired skill.
This game needs more of that, the satisfaction of whats coming or what Will I get.
So I propose, and I think its been talked before, to add events mining.
Like finding burial cambers with ornamental objects, special blueprints you cant craft otherwise, old any q weapons or shields with pictures of long ago dissapeared factions. Old legacy factions or events could be explained in old scrolls...etc
I think this is quite easier to implement, highly atractive to all kind of players and a new source of player stability ( less bored people abandoning).
By just adding those cave creation events, minning has become something quite cooler.
Just imagine walking by a village and spot a "letrina" inside, like in starbound. Dk the name for letrina in english...