Kingdoms

[burgingham]

The IP post was just a first draft to get some input. This thread here is probably not really useful. Jorb promised to make a public post once him and Loftar have more specific ideas on how this is going to be implemented. No idea who felt the need to whistleblow this, it seems quite unnecessary. It is not like they would have put in kingdoms tomorrow without warning anybody.

@The guy complaining there is an IP: It is just a condensed C&I forums to make it easier for the devs to find input. We do not get any secret information (this was the first time and as I said it is only a very rough draft to see if people liked it at all) nor do we control the dev actions in there or get any other advantages. It really mostly is about being easier to read and skim through than an entire forum.

The rest of you folks should better hold off discussing this until there is an official announcement. Most things said here have already been mentioned to the devs by us and are being considered. Jorb was very open minded about this and it really seems he wants to work this out together with the comunity.

[MagicManICT]

3. Exp is totally abuseable, as people have already said.

It's less abuseable than learning points, and I don't think there's an auto XP script. Even if there were, you probably wouldn't be able to leave an alt logged on just ot gain XP, as happens with LP.

At least LP requires consumption of resources. My idea is to make kingdom auth actually CONSUME large amounts of LP, rather than passively rising as you gain LP like village auth, so you have to consume resources to go to "war" (which I don't like as a concept, too hard-coded for me).
Just because you havent seen an XP obstacle course doesn't mean they don't exist.

2. It all seems quite artificial to me :/, restrictions on where I can commit crimes and stuff seems odd in this game.

I think there is a misunderstanding. You can still commit crimes, and you can do it: 1. against your fellow citizens, 2. against independent hermits and villages, and 3. against other kingdoms' citizens. The only difference is that for (3) your kingdom has to be at war against them. There would be no absolute limitation, no peace grid, and no no-pvp zone.

It just seems to be a real break with the open nature of the game. I'd rather that committing crimes on an enemy kingdom claim (or even just anywhere off of your kingdom claim! but to a greater extent on other kingdoms) just drained kingdom authority, to gently discourage people from doing so. At the moment once you have all the skills the only restrictions on your actions are, essentially, "physical" ones, this restriction is a weird imposition of some form of social code onto the hearthlings.
Not to mention it is totally abuseable as Jordancoles and Arvin (and others, probably) have said.

I'm really against hard-coding any restrictions to a particular social system into the game. The new village mechanics are a big improvement to those in previous worlds, for example.

1. If I'm vassalized against my will, how do I rebel? A lot of the mechanics like this don't seem to have been thought about.

I believe and hopefully some dev will correct me if I am wrong but being vassalized (with or without your consent) makes you a subject of that Kingdom, meaning you can commit crimes on the claim. So if you don't like being vassalized you can do something more easily about it than any non-subject of that Kingdom or even help non-subjects against them.

From what the post says it seems like the kingdom's stormtroopers can then just summon you beside your claim whenever they want (although this is, of course, possible to get around by making a suitable vault consisting of a small bricked pclaim surrounded by bricked vclaim and having the vaulted chars not members of the village but living on the pclaim). Can I leave the kingdom whenever I want? I don't want to live as a vassal, how do I force the king to sign the Magna Carta, or destroy the kingdom from within? Do rebelling vassals have a cost associated with them in terms of the authority of the kingdom? I understand its still very early to be worrying about this stuff but I hope that all of these things are thought about long and hard before it is implemented. Some newbs might be happy to have the opportunity to be a vassal but for newbs like me I would hate it if the game forced me to be a slave and didn't let me just leave.

Maybe it seems like I'm very negative about the idea, I actually really really like the general idea of super-village organization tied to scarysiege, I am just a little worried about some of the specifics of the implementation, because one of the things I love about this game is about how open and free it is compared to the real world, for me I get quite a lot of pleasure from the escapism of that.

[burgingham]

A lot of the more extreme stuff like "no crimes at all" "summoning at will, no cost involved" etc are already being reconsidered.

Jorb was talking about a gate system for example where you accept that you cannot commit any criminal acts once you pass them. Sounds like a viable solution to me to make open cities which is the core idea behind the whole kingdom thing.

Pretty sure a safe zone done right (aka no griefers paradise) allows for more freedom not less. You still have your open spaces (kingdoms will be quite limited in size) and you have towns where you can actually enjoy the freedom of socialization. Something that is entirely impossible right now. Cheap ganks at no cost is something Jorb wants to get rid of as it limits freedom for many people even if a small group feels it widens theirs. The social interaction in this game right now consists of auto hearthing and horses at run speed.

[Kaios]

I am just a little worried about some of the specifics of the implementation, because one of the things I love about this game is about how open and free it is compared to the real world, for me I get quite a lot of pleasure from the escapism of that.

That's understandable and I share your concern, believe me I do, but what is the alternative? The underlying statement jorb made regarding this is that in order to have a more social environment, public/open cities and generally improve player interaction the "ability to completely and with certainty prevent crime seems like a necessary prerequisite."

Is he wrong? I don't think he's wrong about that, if you've played this game for any amount of time you know how it goes. We can't have nice things, right?

[_Gunnar]

A lot of the more extreme stuff like "no crimes at all" "summoning at will, no cost involved" etc are already being reconsidered.

Jorb was talking about a gate system for example where you accept that you cannot commit any criminal acts once you pass them. Sounds like a viable solution to me to make open cities which is the core idea behind the whole kingdom thing.

Pretty sure a safe zone done right (aka no griefers paradise) allows for more freedom not less. You still have your open spaces (kingdoms will be quite limited in size) and you have towns where you can actually enjoy the freedom of socialization. Something that is entirely impossible right now. Cheap ganks at no cost is something Jorb wants to get rid of as it limits freedom for many people even if a small group feels it widens theirs. The social interaction in this game right now consists of auto hearthing and horses at run speed.

You're right than any safe zone has to be done right. I would hate for my little free hermitage to be attacked by some kingdom guy and then not be able to do anything about it because he just sits on his kingdom claim. I don't think you're totally right about the social interaction in game right now, btw, but we had this argument before

Well it sounds like there are adjustments I can't see in the inner party, having voiced my concerns with the one post I can actually see I'll leave you to it and hope that I'm not disappointed :p

[burgingham]

This time around I am actually experiencing the social interactions first hand though

[_Gunnar]

This time around I am actually experienceing the social interactions first hand though

Well, you should come live in my area! Then you'll see we aren't all "mindless drones without morals"

[burgingham]

Probably just naive larpers then or sitting beind walls for "interacting".

[_Gunnar]

Probably just naive larpers then or sitting beind walls for "interacting".

Well I'm glad you've made up your mind based on, y'know, evidence.

edit: back on topic so burgingham stops telling me who I am - It has been pointed out to me by one of my villagers that a lot of people would rather that the devs focused on fixing problems with combat, farming, trading, travelling with wagons, etc, before they reinvent the game like this.

[burgingham]

Well apologies for the somewhat short comment on it. Was just a replique on the old quote you always throw at me whenever we talk (a comment I would not make these days. I wouldn't get anygry at anyone anymore, that was probably silly even if their actions were silly too).

What I meant is that ganks of random folks who try to engage in social interaction come with absolutely no cost in this game. Thus people are abusing that fact. If your area is peaceful and neighbours actually meet outside their walls to sit and have a cup of tea then they were just lucky they did not encounter such ganks yet. It is outright dangerous to do such things. Which is why I called your neighbourhood larpers.

I even admire their actions I guess, because I would love for this to become a reality in game. There was no insult in my words even if you took it as such. This is also why I love the kingdom idea so much and it actually fixes some major flaws with current gameplay. In case it didn't become clear: This fixes travelling and trade too. There will be barter stands again with this and safe road zones. It fixes combat as well allowing it to take place at even levels only.