Nodes Determined by Wars

ArchivedUser

<strong>General Idea:</strong>
I was just thinking about the ways nodes can determine the environment, and I came up with certain nodes having wars. I don't know, maybe a variation of this was already planned, but I just wanted to share my ideas of how this could work. Basically the wars would have a progress meter, determined by which side is winning in these wars. Players would be able to choose their side, but it would only be for the war, not have a permanent faction or anything.


<strong>These Nodes Compared to Others:</strong>
Players would still be able to interact with these nodes the same way as they normally would, but the war would determine the general environment on which changes are made. Wars wouldn't always be black and white, like good vs evil, sometimes just two sides that disagree about something. I will however use light vs dark magic as an example for the outcome of the wars however.


<strong>Outcome of Wars:</strong>
Basically if the light side won, the environment would be more bright, and vibrant, and offer discounts on light based items and skills. The dark side winning would of course bring an environment that is more dark, and barren, maybe having dead trees and tombstones in the area, and would offer discounts for dark items and skills. The losing side however would make their side's items more expensive, as they would have to risk more, selling them where they are not welcome.

There would also be the possibility if neither side wins for a while, the environment would be neutral, and all items would cost the same, no increase or decrease in price. I thought this would be fair, because no matter what happens in the war, all players would pay the same thing for the same item, and not lose access to an item because their side lost. These would only be certain nodes however, and not all of them, I was just thinking of another way to add variation to nodes.

ArchivedUser

Ohh so not war between guilds, but an "planned" NPC war. Sounds interesting, but it also sounds like something theres probably gonna be :) "Light vs. Dark" is basicly the most classic theme, but as they say in the Q&A what unlocks around a node is determined by what kind of activity there is in the node. Since this activity is determined by the players its probably gonna be hard to do it on a "node level", this sounds more like a global thingy.
Theres probably gonna be a good vs. evil narrative (what they call the global quest, can be read about <a href="https://www.ashesofcreation.com/forums/topic/new-interview-and-qa/">here</a>). But overall good idea, but dare I say very classic? ;)

ArchivedUser

I think this could actually work. It could also be something along the lines of a contested node. Within this node, there could be conflicting NPC factions ( lets say Faction Light and Faction Dark as stated by the OP) and players would have to decide which NPC faction they wish to contribute for / help / do quests for. The node would tally up the points accumulated by players for both faction Light and Dark and decide which one wins and the node would then progress in that faction's path. And to add the pvp element, players who accumulate points for the faction Light would show up as enemies to players who are working for Faction Dark, but only within the zone of influence of this specific node... ;)

ArchivedUser

If you're only flagged as Dark or Light during the node war, how are you going to get the perks after the war is over? With your idea, players should stay in Dark or Light "faction" after war so they could continue getting the perks such as discounts you spoke of.

I think making 2 sides is just limiting the freedom. I would say just put this mechanic on guilds. Let's say attacker guild A took over a node. Everyone in this guild will get the perks of that node. Maybe enviroment will not change in terms of being darker or lighter but after a node is destroyed, it's just a plain field to my understanding and players will build around that node as they want to. Let's say defenders were a PvE focused guild and only planted farms and harvested potatoes on that node. When attackers took over, a PvP guild let's say, will probably go ahead and try to build some defensive castle-like structure. That's a good enough change on nodes for me.

ArchivedUser

[quote quote=1623]If you’re only flagged as Dark or Light during the node war, how are you going to get the perks after the war is over? With your idea, players should stay in Dark or Light “faction” after war so they could continue getting the perks such as discounts you spoke of.

I think making 2 sides is just limiting the freedom. I would say just put this mechanic on guilds. Let’s say attacker guild A took over a node. Everyone in this guild will get the perks of that node. Maybe enviroment will not change in terms of being darker or lighter but after a node is destroyed, it’s just a plain field to my understanding and players will build around that node as they want to. Let’s say defenders were a PvE focused guild and only planted farms and harvested potatoes on that node. When attackers took over, a PvP guild let’s say, will probably go ahead and try to build some defensive castle-like structure. That’s a good enough change on nodes for me.[/quote]

Yeah i'm not too sure it would work well with the initial suggestion, however, perhaps it could simply be that you get the perks that the node offers regardless of your alignment during the War. The perks would have to be a bit different than what the OP initially suggested, but it could just be that both sides get the perks, and the losing side simply didn't get the perks they were fighting for. Still though, I think the OP is onto something here with these contested nodes that would always or almost always be in a state of conflict.

ArchivedUser

I don't think you guys understand completely what I said. You are never flagged for any side, you can choose whichever side you want to fight for at any point. Never would you be locked into a specific side, simply anyone at all could obtain items and/or skills from either side. Just the price and maybe other things like the skybox and ground (that's all I meant by environmental changes) would change based on the current status of the war.

My original suggestion was working under the assumption that once the war ends that's it, it just works like any other node then. I guess I could see this working as a never ending war as well though. If the war is ongoing, there would be a constant fluctuation in the prices and maybe other changes within the node. Aside from the war, these nodes would still be treated like any other node though.

My idea was never to have every war only have two sides, I just thought that would be an easy example, as usually the first war in MMORPGs only has 2 sides. Maybe some nodes have guild wars, maybe some have free for all wars, maybe some just have a bunch of different npc factions, whatever, my suggestion was only to add to what we already have, not take away from it.

ArchivedUser

In might and magic VII for blood and honor you also had npc wars
you had to choose sides(that is if you wanted to progress in the questline at least)
temple of the dark vs temple of the moon,elves vs humans (you could side with either or betray both)
celestial(divine) vs pit (demonic) ,necromancers vs druids,dragons vs dragon slayers(that was actually in might and magic VIII)

It was so that siding with either would change who you are allied with,so while both sides were neutral,one became friendly and the other hostile after you shifted to either sides.
In an multiplayer online game this would mean that players of opposing sides would become natural enemies.
It would make things complex if in one area a player is your friend because of a same chosen side,while they'd be your enemy in the next because they didn't side with the necromancers,for example,but you did.
While I like the idea a lot,it would almost beg for open world pvp.Otherwise you'd have to turn a blind eye every time another player kills an allied npc or friendly player target ,while you fight to protect the side that is under attack.
Which creates awkward situations if pvp is disabled; you are actually natural enemies.
Also grouping could be a problem when 2 opposing sides group up..its like the farmer trying to protect its sheep grouping up with the wolf and now stands by the wolf, looking at the sheep being slaughtered or vice versa;the wolf suddenly protecting the sheep with farmer.I guess they could make reputation loss possible next to reputation gain,but I dont know if that would be all that exciting..on the other side,games have had failproof systems(where players cant mess up) for too long perhaps..

I,however,like the idea of opposing sides very much ,as it gives the player real meaningful ways to shape the world around them,while it also gives players reason to fight for what they believe is right.

ArchivedUser

You could have a node reputation I guess.
The more damage you do in the node the worse your reputation becomes in that node and vice versa.
Until the node is reset to neutral at least.

That would require each node takes on an 'alignment' of sorts that grows stronger as it evolves.
Perhaps adjacent large nodes might be natural friends or enemies depending on this evolving alignment ?
Perhaps direct warfare between adjacent nodes creates a misalignment....and makes it dangerous for stragglers that are misaligned to enter the area safely without being flagged for PvP by default.

But it gets dangerous then....as you move from safe cities to....some cities are safe. It is more realistic and natrual, but many woudl be uncomfortable heading in that direction I think.

I guess you would need a nodal harmony meter between all nodes on a 1:1 basis.
That way every node has its own unique relationship with every other node.

ArchivedUser

Trying to look at it from a pvp player perspective,it might be pretty sweet if any place in the open world can become a pvp battleground if a node turns "unstable"
In a way the game world would be as much of pve players as of pvp players.Which might be a nice change from the usual 80 procent worldmap pve-centered while only like 20 or less pvp.
Its a double edge sword,players who dislike pvp would indeed be uncomfortable with this direction.But on the other hand, these safe/unsafe nodes might make the events in the gameworld
more exciting and natural.A seamless world instead of the usual pve getting most of the playfield dedicated, while pvpers have to do their thing in separate instances.

Maybe there is a solution so that those who dont want to pvp can still go to aid with the quests that require assistance in an external node(but related to the unstable node ofcourse)
So what if they stay behind or log in on an unstable node? would they get the options to board a caravan that takes them to the border with the stable node?
Or if a node is about to become unstable,maybe they'll get like a notification that they'll be flagged in x amount of time,when the node turns unstable.
They might even aid the unstable node with pve-only missions that take place in the external bordering nodes.
That way,any place in the world becomes a potential temporary battleground for pvp.So the pvp players get all the enironments that exist in the world as potential battleground environments.
While players are not actually forced into pvp.
Maybe players that think the unstable nodestage is not worth pvp-fighting for ,could also forfeit from the event if possible somehow.But this would mean they'll only get a smaller reward for their participation that led to the current events.
Finding a way so pve players do not feel forced into pvp and so pvp players can enjoy every part of the game has never been easy...
Actually for me it depends,if it skill-based pvp instead of gear-based I might be pro open world pvp.So I can enjoy pvp but there are games where I dislike it as much as the rest.