Realms Critique 3

[dafels]

I think the cost of the menhir/grotesque statues and the auth drain should not be linear, it should increase with every object built to limit the large kingdoms somehow.

[Kaios]

I think kingdom system must have setup where, for 100km x 100km plot of lands, it is more efficient for multiple kingdom to control this land than single giant kingdom for systems to promote goal of conflict.

Similar claim extension as how it works for personal claims could be a possibility, rather than allowing a Kingdom to extend a line anywhere across the map there should be some limit in that regard, forcing Kingdoms to extend in a more circular manner.

[shubla]

I think the cost of the menhir/grotesque statues and the auth drain should not be linear, it should increase with every object built to limit the large kingdoms somehow.

I agree.
Should be made cheaper upkeep for them. But that would drastically increase the more you build them.

[Ysh]

I think kingdom system must have setup where, for 100km x 100km plot of lands, it is more efficient for multiple kingdom to control this land than single giant kingdom for systems to promote goal of conflict.

Similar claim extension as how it works for personal claims could be a possibility, rather than allowing a Kingdom to extend a line anywhere across the map there should be some limit in that regard, forcing Kingdoms to extend in a more circular manner.

If the playerbase is large enough for consistent population density, I think this does not solve the issue. I think cost must not scale in linear fashion.

[LadyGoo]

We need some way to customize kingdoms. Targeted stats instead of the broad bonuses we have at the moment would be nice, but that's still just numbers. Is "more numbers" all that a kingdom can offer as a game mechanic when compared to a village claim?

Seriously, kingdoms are a complicated political system, they need to be open to customization. What if a certain kingdom wants to encourage farming for some weeks? Or if it wants to improve crafting, and pushes a law that allows every citizen to craft a unique item for a month? Or if it wants to let everyone build structures faster, chop trees faster, receive more meat when butchering, and so on? Or increase LP gain at the expense of lower EXP income? There's so much potential to this mechanic, but it's being used as just another claim.

Hehe, I've actually voiced things like that when the devs just implemented the kingdoms:
viewtopic.php?f=48&t=50651&p=669619&hilit=policy#p669619
Like, the kingdoms would actually had to change their mode according to their playstyle, political situation and etc.

I'd like you to guess how many of the people you've claimed over likely have a cave organ, it's probably like 1% and you may not even be trading with people you've claimed.

Erm, that is your speculations again, based on how you would like the things to be. For now, the reality doesn't fit what you'd like to believe in. You can join the trade conference at any time and ask people around by yourself. It is not rare that the people sell me stuff in big batches:

Not bragging about anything, just stating the facts.

Facts based on what evidence? I've also pointed out to Zebratul's kingdom that is smaller than your, yet does much better since it trades. Your reports are inaccurate at least in that sense, based from a perspective of a kingdom that doesn't socialize, trade and etc.


@Ysh,

Act like this objective and not as if my word is attack on your in particular.

That is your own perception. Am I not allowed to disagree with you?

Player conflict is primary source of repeatable/endgame content

Actually, not always the case. There was W3 where all minor player conflicts would be stomped by larger factions. And the larger factions were too afraid to start the actual war between each other. So everything was rotating around shady political games.

Kingdom system is design to be the primary driver of player conflict

Yeah, but the way the kingdoms are designed atm. doesn't lead to much conflicts around them. The only time there were conflicts is when AD was killing the people that were breaking their cheirns. In a faction vs faction situation, the cheirn-defending party won't go to the place, since they'll suspect the enemy to come with 10+ people and gank them. PvP happens along urgent matters, normally. Like sieging, making traps and etc.

As I say right now, it is most efficient in this current system for all player to create single superkingdom and all share in benefit.

You are undermining the human factor. And the human factor says that there will always be unhappy people ready to hop to the opposition side. People would prefer to make their own kingdoms at some point sooner or later anyways. Yeah, rationally, everyone would benefit from it. But right now, trader-rulers are buying the resources from the noobs. Whoever gives the best price has the advantage.

. If the system is design to promote conflict, and the only way conflict will be promoted is if player does act irrationally, this is not a good system for promote conflict.

The current system is designed in a way, that it is better to not to go defend the challenged cheirn. Or challenge them in downtime of the enemy kingdom. To actually have a conflict, there should be static nodes (I've written about it previously as well) that are worth to fight for. And it would be an urgent matter if you wouldn't do so. Only in that wat the PvP may happen.

Furthermore, how a player can compete? If larger kingdom has larger bonus and more men, how is some smaller group going to take their land? They are more numerous and more powerful as individuals.

They can build their own kingdom and challenge the cheirns around them. On the other hand, why kingdoms that do not negotiate or do not have enough manpower (even the third of the opponent's kingdom size is enough) should be able to compete? Why not to work on recruiting and making noobs camps around, settle and actual civilization locally?
Imho, the statues shouldn't have such a cost, but the cheirns. That way people would overextend thoughtfully, looks after the local lands better.

[Kaios]

Wow 50 guano! Who gives a shit I have three cbs of it just sitting there waiting for me to do something with. I'm not talking about the guano or the steel bars or the silver bars or even the foul smoke, I'm only saying the foul notes are the easiest of all those materials to get and that is because of the spawn time. It's pretty stupid to give a structure with such importance a bunch of materials that players only come across by chance.

Are you going to claim zebratul's kingdom was stockpiling stuff too since early in the world? Because that 90+ total bonus came about rather quickly and of course majority of it isn't from the menhirs. And maybe he isn't botting I don't know about him or his village all that much but I do know he said this:

Great patch as always, keep it up.

RIP our willow exp farm

You think I had one of those considering I complained about the nerf? Nah, I wasn't even aware that they could be "farmed"

[Ysh]

@Ysh,

Act like this objective and not as if my word is attack on your in particular.

That is your own perception. Am I not allowed to disagree with you?

Of course you can disagree with my point. But I say some thing like ''this is some thing that can happen'' and your reply is ''this does not happen to me.'' This statement has no thing to do with my own.

Player conflict is primary source of repeatable/endgame content

Actually, not always the case. There was W3 where all minor player conflicts would be stomped by larger factions. And the larger factions were too afraid to start the actual war between each other. So everything was rotating around shady political games.

I did not mean that this is always how things are, but how the goal is for them to be.

Kingdom system is design to be the primary driver of player conflict

Yeah, but the way the kingdoms are designed atm. doesn't lead to much conflicts around them. The only time there were conflicts is when AD was killing the people that were breaking their cheirns. In a faction vs faction situation, the cheirn-defending party won't go to the place, since they'll suspect the enemy to come with 10+ people and gank them. PvP happens along urgent matters, normally. Like sieging, making traps and etc.

Correct. This is my problem with the current system and what I am talking about with this posting you respond to.

As I say right now, it is most efficient in this current system for all player to create single superkingdom and all share in benefit.

You are undermining the human factor. And the human factor says that there will always be unhappy people ready to hop to the opposition side. People would prefer to make their own kingdoms at some point sooner or later anyways. Yeah, rationally, everyone would benefit from it. But right now, trader-rulers are buying the resources from the noobs. Whoever gives the best price has the advantage.

Correct. This is what I said in the posting you are responding to.

. If the system is design to promote conflict, and the only way conflict will be promoted is if player does act irrationally, this is not a good system for promote conflict.

The current system is designed in a way, that it is better to not to go defend the challenged cheirn. Or challenge them in downtime of the enemy kingdom. To actually have a conflict, there should be static nodes (I've written about it previously as well) that are worth to fight for. And it would be an urgent matter if you wouldn't do so. Only in that wat the PvP may happen.

This is a possible solution. Why is it better than solution I propose?

Furthermore, how a player can compete? If larger kingdom has larger bonus and more men, how is some smaller group going to take their land? They are more numerous and more powerful as individuals.

They can build their own kingdom and challenge the cheirns around them. On the other hand, why kingdoms that do not negotiate or do not have enough manpower (even the third of the opponent's kingdom size is enough) should be able to compete?

If the biggest group is only allow to compete, there will never be competition.

[azrid]

I agree that flat stat bonuses are boring.
Example of fun stuff to be added:
Hearth magic imbued lure statue that lures nearby wild animals

Maybe, the island-vaults should also be addressed?

Yes and all cheesy tactics should be addressed and given an alternative to.

My suggestion:

Ballista ships.

[LadyGoo]

Well, you keep telling me that I didn't buy the majority of the mats for the statues. I am providing the proof that you are wrong in your assumptions, if a single person can bring that many bat guanos.
Zebratul has been trading and working hard enough for his kingdom. He hasn't received any help from us either. What he has said relates to that topic: viewtopic.php?f=42&t=51451&p=680700#p680700
It is not like he is botting it, but got the set-up that allows him to have some of the exp triggers nearby in 1 place. Hehe, funny how you see botting and abusing when it doesn't fit your stance. I can also show the logs of him trading rock crystals for silver bars, or him asking to exchange foul notes for bat guanos and etc. You've got to face it, that the kingdoms that communicate most get the advantage over the people that do not invest in trades.

@Ysh,

Of course you can disagree with my point. But I say some thing like ''this is some thing that can happen'' and your reply is ''this does not happen to me.'' This statement has no thing to do with my own.

So, you're saying that me saying that "there were no precedents" for your "this might happen" is treating you like you're attacking me? Oo

This is a possible solution. Why is it better than solution I propose?

What was your solution? I think I've missed it.

If the biggest group is only allow to compete, there will never be competition.

As I've told you, if you got 1/3 of the population of the opposing kingdom, you can compete if you want to. But, why? Put it in other way: competition over what? You want some competition, but what for is it? What is the in-game mechanics to enhance the competition? Right now the world is too big for the current playercount. Any kingdom can have its own place and grow gradually, look after their lands and etc. My faction won't lose anything bc some other kingdoms are existing somewhere. There would be competition if there would be regional super-objects or the smaller map with higher playercount.
Let's say you've nerfed the kingdom buffs. So what? Does it compensate the new players being unable to hunt, craft and etc. sooner? Does it compensate the trades and source of income for the people that travel a lot? Would it actually help other kingdoms to attract more players?

[Kaios]

Well, you keep telling me that I didn't buy the majority of the mats for the statues. I am providing the proof that you are wrong in your assumptions, if a single person can bring that many bat guanos.

Can you read? How many times do I have to say I'm just talking about the notes.

It is not like he is botting it, but got the set-up that allows him to have some of the exp triggers nearby in 1 place. Hehe, funny how you see botting and abusing when it doesn't fit your stance.

Yeah, automation of incredibly boring tasks such as farming to reduce clicks is no big deal to me and if people want to do that I have no complaints. Do I need to go find pictures like the one Apxeolog posted of the steel production or things of that nature? There's botting to save your wrists and then there's your level of botting.

Abuse of mechanics like creating a willow farm on the other hand while related to botting is still another matter and certainly a type of abuse I look poorly upon. If it was intended then why did they nerf it?

Zebratul has been trading and working hard enough for his kingdom. He hasn't received any help from us either.

I can also show the logs of him trading rock crystals for silver bars, or him asking to exchange foul notes for bat guanos and etc.

So trading directly with Dis is receiving nothing from you? lol

You've got to face it, that the kingdoms that communicate most get the advantage over the people that do not invest in trades.

You literally know nothing about me or what I do in-game except that I wasted a shitload of time destroying my cairns for you, time that could have been better spent on the things you're accusing me of not doing, that's all your stupid ass knows about me.