Kingdoms

[DDDsDD999]

So there was a new post on the IP: http://pastebin.com/raw.php?i=FT6dHP2Q

I was discussing this for a bit with some of the loftar anal buddies (separate club from dzorby's, we have parties on thursdays) and then Tonky posted this link on #haven in IRC.

There were some concerns we felt needed some attention:

1.

Players can found Kingdoms, by constructing a central object similar to a village idol, projecting a Royal claim.

What would separate these from being village idol 2.0?

2.

Vassalized players are taxed some amount of their XP, which is drained to the Kingdom as some form of royal authority for the Kingdom. Vassalized players count as subjects of the Kingdom.

EXP seems really exploitable as a parameter and prone to botting through EXP obstacle courses which already exist.

3.

Wars do not become active until 48 hours after declared. During the 48 hours members of both Kingdoms can take actions to delay or advance the war by some amount (4hrs, maybe) back or forth.

"Get the alt vaults! Go to the underground vaults!" I don't see how vaults are any less vulnerable.

4.

Being at war is costly, draining authority continuously.

Is authority meant to be the main grounds by which war is kept? As stated previously, EXP seems really exploitable.

5.

Only subjects of a Kingdom can commit crimes under their kingdom's Royal claims. That is, criminal actions can by non-subjects, quite simply, not be committed at all, while subjects can commit them, leaving scents as usual.

Non-outlaw scents would have to be possible, possibly assault and battery.

----

Definitely more concerns. Interested in some discussion

In general, the sentiment seems nice, it's just that it feels like forced social interaction, rather than that of a sandbox. It also doesn't help that world is so large.

[jordancoles]

We've been discussing it for days now, I don't feel like repeating myself again but we have found many holes with the general idea and its all being considered

I am interested in some thoughts though so I'll read this thread when more come in

My main question for you guys is, should PvP and raiding be a common and sportsmanly thing, or should the "big raid day" wipe an entire kingdom out in one raid as it currently can be once the initial wall is broken

[venatorvenator]

Is authority meant to be the main grounds by which war is kept? As stated previously, EXP seems really exploitable.

Not as exploitable as auto curios, I suppose, so it might be the lesser evil.


Someone also posted this on our chat and we discussed it a lot. Some points that caught my attention:

. It doesn't mean no-pvp zones, as crime can still be commited between vassals of the same kingdom. They could be summoned, yes, but honestly I don't think every kingdom will care equally about petty hermit v. hermit conflict within their realm.

. There's a restriction of crime from foreigners on royal claims. But if two kingdoms have enough people, they could be permanently at war against the other, so that still doesn't mean the no-pvp game many here fear. Raiding would still be free range between factions and so on.

. Vassals are assets so a king has to take care of them, or else, during a war, they might help the enemy and secede.

. There would be more trade, more interaction, and less death.

. Less death, but raiders will still have their fun of PvP, ko'ing, and stealing. It's just killing that's a bad thing for the kingdom.

. Players unwilling to be absorbed by any kingdom can still move to the map borders, which will probably remain a wasteland since there aren't enough people there to sustain a royal claim.

PvP should primarily happen between oppositions on the same order of magnitude. Kingdom vs Kingdom, Hermit vs Hermit, Village vs Village.

And this is really great in my opinion.

Bottom line is that even if this idea isn't perfect, I think it's a much better alternative than the current system, where active villages are impenetrable unless you plant a mole in it to open its gates. The kingdom idea promotes social interaction, while the spy-thing just encourages hermitting.

[yesitsanalt]

so lemme understand there is a private forum only for select few??!!
welp isn't it splendid
too bad no one in our village knew about it before getting year subs...

[Sevenless]

so lemme understand there is a private forum only for select few??!!
welp isn't it splendid
too bad no one in our village knew about it before getting year subs...

In the same way that players have seperate forums and chats that the devs cannot see, the devs have a circle of people they discuss game balance with.

For the record I'm not actually part of it.

[jordancoles]

so lemme understand there is a private forum only for select few??!!
welp isn't it splendid
too bad no one in our village knew about it before getting year subs...

It has been around for years, and it also existed during Salem.

The forums are bogged down by less than useful posts, so Jorb decided to make a subforum which had some of the people who he recognized as active and understanding of how the game worked

Don't take it too personally Mr. 1 post on the forums, jorb still takes your critique threads with a grain of salt regardless of having an inner party

[MightySheep]

This is so what the game needs.

Each world always devolves into wars between big 'factions' anyway, it will be a lot more fun now there is actual mechanics to support it. I would expect to see a kingdom TS server and very big organized raids. It would be more inclusive to the randoms too, rather than the usual circlejerk between top villages.

The siege part is especially long overdue, it is true that current lack of proper siege mechanics basically makes it a necessity to use lame tactics like putting alts in enemy villages.

One problem I forsee, as it is also a problem in Wurm is that occasionally you might have 1 kingdom that is simply too strong and it becomes very boring and stale where everyone hops on the bandwagon of the OP kingdom and anyone who isn't in it stands no chance and will probably just end up quitting.

[Archiplex]

so lemme understand there is a private forum only for select few??!!
welp isn't it splendid
too bad no one in our village knew about it before getting year subs...

It has been around for years, and it also existed during Salem.

The forums are bogged down by less than useful posts, so Jorb decided to make a subforum which had some of the people who he recognized as active and understanding of how the game worked

Don't take it too personally Mr. 1 post on the forums, jorb still takes your critique threads with a grain of salt regardless of having an inner party

To be fair.. it is an alt account.


Anyways, I like the system mostly, but more changes would be need to be made in order to have it be a proper thing

My biggest concern is that it won't change raiding as it is, unless raiding a village and destroying walls are not changed, this really won't impact the world at all. If a village is unraidable now, it will be when the kingdom patch releases. Only difference might be the use of that big bad siege machine.

As well, as it forces villages to HAVE to become part of a kingdom, since they cannot fight back (At least, they can't counterattack) due to royal claims preventing scents. If anything, Royal claims should make crime harder and more punishing (Bigger SHP loss, bigger penalties like stat debuffs, longer outlaw/red handed debuffs.) Or, it should be changed so it's "If you are a subject of a different kingdom, you may not commit crimes" rather than not being a subject of that particular kingdom, otherwise this is a recipe for abuse and disaster.

And really, forcing people to move far away and losing their territory just isn't a viable solution to not being wanting to be absorbed by a kingdom.

Now, that is to say, it's a better system than what we have in place- I just personally believe the *last* thing haven needs is a hard-coded obstruction to crime.

Also, kingdom titles or bust.

[Tonkyhonk]

Tonky posted this link on #haven in IRC.

correction...

08:31 LadyGoo > http://pastebin.com/raw.php?i=FT6dHP2Q wow, found this beauty on the russian forum

08:34 Tonky > lmao what is that about?

[venatorvenator]

In general, the sentiment seems nice, it's just that it feels like forced social interaction, rather than that of a sandbox.

For me interaction was always forced. With full pvp you can't choose not to interact with assholes stealing your stuff, attacking your nodes, or killing your char. But this idea gives us othes options, formalizes alliances, and also gives us new village management tools.

since they cannot fight back (At least, they can't counterattack) due to royal claims preventing scents.

After they are incorporated they are able leave scents and therefore, I'm assuming, rebel. I like this because it's not simply one-sidedly absorbing villages to expand your kingdom, the king would have to talk to the target village for a smooth annexation.

Unlike villages, hermits have no chance of rebelling due to being harmless. But if they are true hermits, well away from everyone, they wouldn't be in that position in the first place. If they hermit too close to a cluster of villagers, sure, they are in danger. But they shouldn't be that close. How would they even mine or dig clay if all the nodes in their region already belong to the nearby villages?

Just think about this: can you imagine a village making a line of banners 10 minimaps long just to annex a hermit? That's too much work for too little result. I think hermits will be safe from annexation if they want to.