Thoughts on a directed RvR system

[LordSitruc]

I think what we might need is a artificial political structure between the nations set up by the devs, the political situation could even be the same on all servers.  I think this would give focus to both the PVPers and the PVEers. I think with a little bit of story telling and writing on the devs part could lead players to become invested in the conflict.

 

If it would have some kind of war score as well that would be a bonus to push PVPers and PVEers to kill the opposing nations ships whether that be in pvp or pve.

 

I think this would also push more players into a concentrated area so people wouldn't be complaining about having to sail 6 hours and not finding anyone to fight. You could see where the border between your nations are on the map and that will be where most of the conflict is. 

 

Right now we have nations that have 6 different clans going 6 different directions against other nations that have clans going in different directions against other people so your not getting as much conflict as you would if all 6 of those clans were on the same border and the clans from the other nation were there going against them.

 

Thus a directed RvR system would provided a focus for a more centralized area of conflict and a safer environment from griefers, as new players or people that really didn't want to get involved in the conflict could move away from that border when the war started.

 

 

We are all but humble sailors, and I think that the powers that be (which in this time period are 1000s of miles away for most of the powers that are involved) should be telling us who were at war with and who we're not at war with.

 

 

Clan vs Clan and Nation vs Nation player run politics usually work out but Realm vs Realm player run politics I don't think will work out.

 

We can kinda see that already with the weirdness to PvP action, treaties being brokered then the next day a new clan comes into the area and breaks the treaty because they weren't a part of it, lack of personal investment into a war, Wars of annihilation that don't end until the other nation has been reduced to one port and 3/4 of the players of that nation quit.

 

These are just a few examples of what I feel would be fixed with a artificial RvR diplomatic structure. It wouldn't even have to be well written or even be a very good justifications, hell, if you told me those British punks insulted the queen's mother's dog, that would be enough a reason for me to go sink a few of them to show them what for.

 

 

As for the pirates they would need nobody telling them who or what to do, cause after all they are pirates and do what they want.

 

*edited for grammar even though I probably still suck at it*

Edited March 18, 2016 by LordSitruc

[Mrdoomed]

Ive mentioned something like this before but i dont want the devs choosing who we fight but rather an automated score system that keeps track of conflicts between opposing player and factions and once a certain number is reached war breaks out between those two nations.

During war is when you can capture ports and during war the AI fleets will target the warring players and trade ships will no longer supply enemy ports.

Once the amount of conflict slows down , if it does, the numbers count lowers each day untill peace breaks out and ports can no longer be captured.

[GrapeShot]

Yes. We are ship captains, not politicians. National politics should be meta to the game.

Set up tournaments for the clans if they crave a clan wars' type experience.

Edited March 18, 2016 by GrapeShot

[GrapeShot]

[duplicate]

Edited March 18, 2016 by GrapeShot

[maturin]

There are definite pluses to the devs acting as the heads of government in Europe, handing down proclamations on who is at war with whom.

 

Current experience proves that the players are far from adequate as diplomats, and tend to dogpile onto hostile factions rather than maintain a balance of power.

[Mrdoomed]

There are definite pluses to the devs acting as the heads of government in Europe, handing down proclamations on who is at war with whom.

Current experience proves that the players are far from adequate as diplomats, and tend to dogpile onto hostile factions rather than maintain a balance of power.

You cant put the devs in charge because then every little baby is going to say they are purposely manipulating the map against them and that they arnt allowed to win cuz the devs secretly like the other side or whatever.

People here cry over pvp, can you imagine the devs controling who fights them ? Ha.

No an automated system is perfect, fair amd would be easy to implement with just another score counter added to map.

['Sharpe]

Diplomacy is being built into the game, from what admin says. I would much rather have national votes that determine war, peace, and alliances than devs choosing wars. Part of the enjoyment of the game is that your own actions can help swing the balance of international relations. Taking that out of the game would be a HUGE detriment to me enjoying the game, I personally would probably lose interest very quickly.

Once a player driven diplomacy system is introduced, clans won't be able to have different alliances than their nation's alliances, as the friend/foe mechanic would be inbuilt to the game. This will be a huge step forward for naval action when it comes.

[Capt. Rice]

Diplomacy is being built into the game, from what admin says. I would much rather have national votes that determine war, peace, and alliances than devs choosing wars. Part of the enjoyment of the game is that your own actions can help swing the balance of international relations. Taking that out of the game would be a HUGE detriment to me enjoying the game, I personally would probably lose interest very quickly.

Once a player driven diplomacy system is introduced, clans won't be able to have different alliances than their nation's alliances, as the friend/foe mechanic would be inbuilt to the game. This will be a huge step forward for naval action when it comes.

unfortunately this also can be manipulated with big clans if they vote. but inst that what democracy is.

Edited March 18, 2016 by Capt. Rice

[maturin]

You cant put the devs in charge because then every little baby is going to say they are purposely manipulating the map against them and that they arnt allowed to win cuz the devs secretly like the other side or whatever.

People here cry over pvp, can you imagine the devs controling who fights them ? Ha.

No an automated system is perfect, fair amd would be easy to implement with just another score counter added to map.

I have also suggested an automated system. Automatic shuffling of alliances to balance population.

[Mrdoomed]

I have also suggested an automated system. Automatic shuffling of alliances to balance population.

I didnt know there even was alliances right now other than mutal agreement between players lol. How did your proposal work ? It will be very hard to stop try hards from constantly jumping sides when there is zero consequences for swappi ng