Realms

[LadyGoo]

Again, you could also make elaborate authority ranking leadership systems with captains, lieutenants, generals, knights and whatever, but there only permission settings are "use realm powers" or "not use realm powers", etc. Why? Because there's not enough players to fuel the elaborate systems and the dev time would go to waste.

Who determines whether there are enough players to have a separate authority stash and mini-region management within a realm? You?

[NOOBY93]

Again, you could also make elaborate authority ranking leadership systems with captains, lieutenants, generals, knights and whatever, but there only permission settings are "use realm powers" or "not use realm powers", etc. Why? Because there's not enough players to fuel the elaborate systems and the dev time would go to waste.

Who determines whether there are enough players to have a separate authority stash and mini-region management within a realm? You?

The devs. They determine everything when it comes to game development believe it or not, but I think you'll be surprised to hear that people who are NOT the devs are allowed to discuss game development.

This being said, in this case, yes, I determined that a "duchy" system with mini-regions would go to waste. I also stated reasons as to why I think it would go to waste. Alternatives that work with village claims would, IMO, be better.

[LadyGoo]

Yet you are deciding for them whether there are enough players to make the use of the idea, rather than discussing the idea itself.

[NOOBY93]

Yet you are deciding for them whether there are enough players to make the use of the idea, rather than discussing the idea itself.

I discussed the idea, stating that it would go to waste because of the lack of players. Number of players is a legitimate variable and thing to base your argument on in development discussions, whether you're the developer or not.

Hypothetically if someone said "THERE SHOULD BE SOMETHING LIKE VILLAGE CLAIMS THAT TAKES 5000 PLAYERS TO ACTIVATE" I'd say with full right, "there's not enough players for that".

[ven]

Well, but then realms are just another extension for a village

This is a recurring topic. If I'm remembering it right a couple of people who have very different playstyles, like kaios, ladygoo and maze, made threads arguing for more unique kingdoms, precisely because in practice they are simply larger village claims.

I think the fair realms update might have been a response to these ideas, but I don't think it worked that well because they focus on numbers and not so much on gameplay experience, like unique interactions within the same kingdom and between different ones.

Ideally, I would love to see people organizing their own duchies within kingdoms and having their own local blessings and own authority stash (50% of exp goes to the kingdom, 50% to the duchy. You can set the tax rates) maybe.

That would be the dream, yeah.

[Embers]

Make only the actual members of the realm to be able to earn realm authority. Boom. Involvement.

[tigerlrg245]

I think there are enough players for this stuff, because you gotta consider the newbies / casuals / hermits which don't really care about the strong things that realms can do, and
thus will choose to inherit existing realms and add to buffs / authority.
Maybe if every village got authority based on either hearth fires that are built inside of that village, or hearthfires that are built on cairns that intersect with the village itself.
this way it would sort of act like a duchy, give villages the option for some of the end game realm stuff, and still give the main village advantage over other villages.

also unique village buffs sound really cool, will give more texture and variety to the game in my opinion. this way there would be reasons to join one village over another,
depending on your playstyle, while still receiving the main buffs from the kingdom.
could create a more interesting in-realm economy.

[NOOBY93]

Make only the actual members of the realm to be able to earn realm authority. Boom. Involvement.

Why would anyone become a member of the realm then? I know I wouldn't. Free bonuses + no helping the person giving the bonuses = maximum advantage

[Embers]

Make only the actual members of the realm to be able to earn realm authority. Boom. Involvement.

Why would anyone become a member of the realm then? I know I wouldn't. Free bonuses + no helping the person giving the bonuses = maximum advantage

Quite debatable, more people keeping up authority means more opportunity to keep up buffs and buff the well. That could force the realm leaders to actually discuss mutual benefits with villagers rather than play a game of whoever-covers-more-while-everyone-is-asleep.

[NOOBY93]

Make only the actual members of the realm to be able to earn realm authority. Boom. Involvement.

Why would anyone become a member of the realm then? I know I wouldn't. Free bonuses + no helping the person giving the bonuses = maximum advantage

Quite debatable, more people keeping up authority means more bonuses.

It does? Since when?