Pre-Announcement: Siege Changes

[Kaios]

Good for you! I'm glad you have a game you like.

Just think about the Sodom play style in world 3 and then think about how much you've done to maintain that and I believe the reasons for their recent dislike of the game and where it is headed are obvious.

[Potjeh]

Politics implies points of conflict, so how do I create those?

We're missing something far more important for functional politics: bureaucracy. People do it IRL because they have to, but ain't nobody gonna do that in a game. Kingdoms should be about automated bureaucracy, interactions with siege are more like side-features.

[jorb]

Just think about the Sodom play style in world 3 and then think about how much you've done to maintain that and I believe the reasons for their recent dislike of the game and where it is headed are obvious.

Uh, what? I have no idea what you are saying here.

[Kaios]

Uh, what? I have no idea what you are saying here.

Social interaction used to be a thing because big villages protected the smaller guy, now they don't. I only said it about a million times.

I remember porting in to Constantinople all the time and there was of course a chance someone could be around to kill you and yet I did it anyways because I always had the safety net of friendly rangers to rely on.

[burgingham]

Just think about the Sodom play style in world 3 and then think about how much you've done to maintain that and I believe the reasons for their recent dislike of the game and where it is headed are obvious.

Uh, what? I have no idea what you are saying here.

I guess he means that we were politically engaged because we had to be. All of us would have probably rather farmed in peace, but there was always a looming (at least perceived) threat hanging over our heads. So while we tried to just secure peace at first, we became more and more entangled in this web of fighting back and forth. It was actually a lot of fun too to have this kind of situation.

I am uncertain though what exactly changed that makes this situation unlikely to happen again. It might not even have been game mechanic changes, but rather shifts in the player base.

[Enjoyment]

Maybe Im too dumb, but just can't get the devs position. Do the think their player-base is far beyound they wanted? Why not to implement the soultions that can please one group of players without other to suffer? I trully believe that such amazing game as Haven (Im not sarcastic now - I do love the crafting recipes aquiring system) should raise its players base to thousands and thousands of active players, but I barely could imagine how it could happen if devs will make the life of newbs even more painful. Trully. Just can't understand. Can someone explain me? Will be more than greatful

[Potjeh]

An idea for kingdoms feature: when any member claim takes shield damage it sends a notification to all kingdom members who have those notifications enabled. With siege taking min 12h this would give a fair chance for PvP oriented people to get there and engage in battle. It protects hermits and increases PvP frequency at the same time

[Enjoyment]

An idea for kingdoms feature: when any member claim takes shield damage it sends a notification to all kingdom members who have those notifications enabled. With siege taking min 12h this would give a fair chance for PvP oriented people to get there and engage in battle. It protects hermits and increases PvP frequency at the same time

Emm... How it can protect hermits? How it intend hermits at all?

[Ysh]

An idea for kingdoms feature: when any member claim takes shield damage it sends a notification to all kingdom members who have those notifications enabled. With siege taking min 12h this would give a fair chance for PvP oriented people to get there and engage in battle. It protects hermits and increases PvP frequency at the same time

Emm... How it can protect hermits? How it intend hermits at all?

Part of kingdoms feature is that more or less all player will be part of some kingdom. Hermits included.

[wolf1000wolf]

That's sad to hear. In other words, that's unfeasible because people would abuse it? I suppose that means no kingdom's update either?

Pretty much. When we attempt to digitalize relations down to simple states "war", "peace", "alliance", we miss a lot of the fullness of actual reality, where two factions can be, say "mildly friendly", or on a "could help them out if we got paid"-basis, or a thousand other highly fluid and hyper-variant possibilities. A village in the game is just an organizational tool, and there are plenty of scenarios under which actual factions -- human players acting in concert -- may decide that they need several villages, for example. Modeling a bunch of clumsy abstract states between villages creates huge rifts between objective reality and the games' abstract representation, and that will almost immediately create strangeness, ugliness and problems.

Oh, hai, we have three pseudo-villages in a state of formal "war" with our main village to accomplish obscure goal XYZ, and the like.

I mean, I am not going to exclude shit like that entirely. I think some sort of system of vassalization and formal tributes could perhaps be useful, but I do not suspect that the holy grail of a good siege and warfare system lies down those kinds of roads.

We don't need digitally builtin kingdom relations. Just give us the tools/means to enforce such relations. A lot of voices have suggested raid mechanics that allow for the attackers to gain some sort of loot off the defenders. The "loot" can take the form of curios as those can be calculated on a point system (100lp/hour/slot per 1 pt or something). These mechanics will enable those ruler-tyrant-vassal relationships.

Stronger factions can go to weaker groups and go "pay us X amount or we declare a raid on you and take twice as much". Smaller groups can try to call the buff or capitulate. Stronger factions don't want to actually always go through with the raid as it costs them time/resources and they can't raid everyone. Make the "raid" mechanic straight forward and simple to implement but gated by resources and capped by a certain amount.

It thus becomes a balancing act, full of actual human intrigue, making alliances and weighing risk/reward/effort.