Purposely lose Node sieges

Vazop

I have a concern, since the node levels will unlock quests dungeons etc, is possible that the players of concurrent nodes will purposely lose node sieges and level up another node to unlock new/different content on that area.
I know nodes give other benefits too, but this can be a problem and can make the node sieges obsolete since the players just lose on purpose to ,for example, unlock a new dungeon with the gear they want/need.

phdmonster

It is possible, but i don't think there will be a lack of people wanting to defend the node and their investment in it.

Caeryl

I don’t see an issue with the citizens willingly dropping the node in order to access new content. If the majority wants it to stay, they will fight and they might win.

But more likely the people who want it destroyed would leave far before a siege declaration so they could attack and destroy it, rather than afk’ if as defenders during the siege. There’s way less profit that way.

Amel

i doubt thats going to happend due to the fact that if you lose a node siege and you had your housing there, you lose a part of your gatherables when it gets destroyed

George_Black

good luck getting every citizen to agree to that xD

Nagash

Saboteurs will be hung by their feet off the Node wall and lit on fire for their crimes

Noaani

I absolutely can see it happening.

In fact, I personally think about 25% of all successful metropolis sieges would fit in to this.

With the rewards for a successful siege on a node going up with time, the leadership of a given node (the mayor, other node positions, leaders of patron guilds etc) may decide that they would rather reduce that reward themselves. They may talk to a somewhat friendly node cluster and make a deal that each node cluster organizes a siege on the other, and no one defends (or at least not in any serious capacity).

If this is pre-organized, then the people from the node cluster in question will be able to decide which of the city level nodes they want to bring up to metropolis, and can plan accordingly.

Also, this way, each node cluster and it's population get to reap the rewards of a successful siege.

This seems like a much safer idea than simply leaving it up to actual rivals - and that is before we even take the content change in to account.

All that said, I don't see this as an issue. If people can organize this and make it work, more power to them. It puts both node clusters in a position where they can screw the other over, so leaves the server ripe for potential intregue and such - which is good.

Timeraider

Point us at the deserters! *Grabs pitchfork*

Surgemaster

You can certainly try. -Mercer