Greetings, glorious adventurers! If you're joining in our Alpha One spot testing, please follow the steps here to see all the latest test info on our forums and Discord!
Options
Ideas and proposals (prosperity, causus belli and positions)
Coldsharpshooter
Member
Hello guys! I would like to suggest some ideas that I would like to see in Ashes of Creations, even though I don't know if the core mechanics of the game would work well with my suggestions. I have 3 proposals. The first two of them are based on a grand strategy game called Europa Universalis IV, and the other one is a consequence of the first two.
1) As far as I am concerned, the conflict between nodes will be a core feature in the game, so players will be encouraged to start wars and fight for power and control over nodes and resources.
I really appreciate this idea, but I also think that a strategic peaceful stance should exist as an option for the players/nodes. So, to encourage this stance, an attribute called "prosperity" should exist. Prosperity naturally appears in nodes that are in peace for a while. It provides a boost in aspects as production efficiency, science progress, trade bonus, etc - in other words, it's the opposite of the devastation that is brought with wars.
So, for example, let's suppose that a certain node is in peace for 2 months. Because of the peacetime, production, science progress, and trade start to flourish there. So after the third month of peace, the production of goods in this node has a weekly increase of 0,25%, to the limit of 10%, in total, after 10 months.
Therefore, citizens and the mayor would think twice before joining a war, given that if they lose, not only they would suffer the consequences of losing a war, but also would lose their prosperity bonus.
The reason for this mechanic is that prosperity would encourage neutral (civil) orientated nodes that are focused on diplomacy. So they would make agreements to stay away from wars. Or, at least, do not directly participate in a war, but they could indirectly help with resources, money, technology and weapons.
2) Wars should have an arch in its occurrence. The war should be divided into 4 phases: The cause (causus belli), the preparation, the strict act of war (battles), and the peace agreement (that should seal the peace deal).
For this proposal, I just would like to make suggestions about "the cause".
Nodes would only be allowed to declare war on other nodes if they previously have a causus belli against them. A causus belli is "an act or event that provokes or is used to justify war" (literally, "an occasion of war"). If a node declares war on another one without a causus belli, this node will suffer great penalties, as aggressive expansion and bad reputation penalties. Moreover, because of the unjustified attack, the defensive side would receive a huge bonus against the attackers.
The causus belli could involve player-oriented quests. For example: imagine that node "A" wants to start a war against node "B". Node's A mayor would have a list of plots (quests) to select to create a causus belli against B. This list would include things like "steal an item from the enemy", "forge a false document", "infiltrate bandits and raid its own territory and blame B for doing that", etc.
After choosing an option, the mayor, itself, would look for players that he trust and order them to execute the plot (quest). For example, the mayor would order a group of players to dress like foreign soldiers and attack their own people; so the mayor would blame B for the attack and declare war on them. For the quest to be successfully executed, this would happen daily for 1 week.
However, The mayor of node "B", after being informed about the plan, can also send spies (players from his node) to investigate the attacks and prove his innocence.
The idea behind this mechanic is to create a prelude to war. One node would try to create a causus belli and the other one would try to stop this plan (or let it happen if B is also looking for it). Both actions would be a small scale player-driven conflict, contrary to the actual war, that involves a very large number of players.
In summary: causus belli would create an espionage/sabotage and counter-espionage arm-wrestling between nodes and also would give them time to prepare for wars (negotiating alliances, stocking resources, etc)
3) I would like to see a complex political system for developed nodes. I think that is ok to have a mayor taking care of towns. But as far as nodes grow, the political complexity of them should also increase. For example, a town has its rules decided by a mayor. However, when this node becomes a city or, after that, a metropolis, new civic and military positions should be created with it, as:
a) general: responsible for warfare, the security of caravans, and protection of the node;
b) diplomat: responsible for political agreements, peace negotiation, and management of spies;
c) Priest: Actually, I don't know the lore of the game, but this position should be related to quests that keep creatures and demons far away from the city; and
d) mayor: responsible for tax rates, constructions, and the link between citizens as part of a united community.
These are my proposals. I am not an English native speaker, as you could see. Sorry for any mistakes or eventually unintelligible fragments.
1) As far as I am concerned, the conflict between nodes will be a core feature in the game, so players will be encouraged to start wars and fight for power and control over nodes and resources.
I really appreciate this idea, but I also think that a strategic peaceful stance should exist as an option for the players/nodes. So, to encourage this stance, an attribute called "prosperity" should exist. Prosperity naturally appears in nodes that are in peace for a while. It provides a boost in aspects as production efficiency, science progress, trade bonus, etc - in other words, it's the opposite of the devastation that is brought with wars.
So, for example, let's suppose that a certain node is in peace for 2 months. Because of the peacetime, production, science progress, and trade start to flourish there. So after the third month of peace, the production of goods in this node has a weekly increase of 0,25%, to the limit of 10%, in total, after 10 months.
Therefore, citizens and the mayor would think twice before joining a war, given that if they lose, not only they would suffer the consequences of losing a war, but also would lose their prosperity bonus.
The reason for this mechanic is that prosperity would encourage neutral (civil) orientated nodes that are focused on diplomacy. So they would make agreements to stay away from wars. Or, at least, do not directly participate in a war, but they could indirectly help with resources, money, technology and weapons.
2) Wars should have an arch in its occurrence. The war should be divided into 4 phases: The cause (causus belli), the preparation, the strict act of war (battles), and the peace agreement (that should seal the peace deal).
For this proposal, I just would like to make suggestions about "the cause".
Nodes would only be allowed to declare war on other nodes if they previously have a causus belli against them. A causus belli is "an act or event that provokes or is used to justify war" (literally, "an occasion of war"). If a node declares war on another one without a causus belli, this node will suffer great penalties, as aggressive expansion and bad reputation penalties. Moreover, because of the unjustified attack, the defensive side would receive a huge bonus against the attackers.
The causus belli could involve player-oriented quests. For example: imagine that node "A" wants to start a war against node "B". Node's A mayor would have a list of plots (quests) to select to create a causus belli against B. This list would include things like "steal an item from the enemy", "forge a false document", "infiltrate bandits and raid its own territory and blame B for doing that", etc.
After choosing an option, the mayor, itself, would look for players that he trust and order them to execute the plot (quest). For example, the mayor would order a group of players to dress like foreign soldiers and attack their own people; so the mayor would blame B for the attack and declare war on them. For the quest to be successfully executed, this would happen daily for 1 week.
However, The mayor of node "B", after being informed about the plan, can also send spies (players from his node) to investigate the attacks and prove his innocence.
The idea behind this mechanic is to create a prelude to war. One node would try to create a causus belli and the other one would try to stop this plan (or let it happen if B is also looking for it). Both actions would be a small scale player-driven conflict, contrary to the actual war, that involves a very large number of players.
In summary: causus belli would create an espionage/sabotage and counter-espionage arm-wrestling between nodes and also would give them time to prepare for wars (negotiating alliances, stocking resources, etc)
3) I would like to see a complex political system for developed nodes. I think that is ok to have a mayor taking care of towns. But as far as nodes grow, the political complexity of them should also increase. For example, a town has its rules decided by a mayor. However, when this node becomes a city or, after that, a metropolis, new civic and military positions should be created with it, as:
a) general: responsible for warfare, the security of caravans, and protection of the node;
b) diplomat: responsible for political agreements, peace negotiation, and management of spies;
c) Priest: Actually, I don't know the lore of the game, but this position should be related to quests that keep creatures and demons far away from the city; and
d) mayor: responsible for tax rates, constructions, and the link between citizens as part of a united community.
These are my proposals. I am not an English native speaker, as you could see. Sorry for any mistakes or eventually unintelligible fragments.
1
Comments
2) A little long-winded for a game like this, I think. I imagine that most node wars will simply be "because they're near us". Or maybe someone from one node looked at the other node guy's wife. I dunno.
3) The AoC wiki currently has the following for Node Government:
Node governments are chosen from a node's citizenry when a node reaches stage 3 (Village).
Positions within a node's government are attained through titles that grant special access to NPCs in the node.
Mayor.
Priests, bishops or acolytes in certain temples.
Patron guild leader.
Chief bounty hunter.
Finally, please don't apologise for your English. If I could say in your language even half of what you just wrote, I'd be delighted. The only thing that gave it away was the "0,25%", cos we use a full-stop rather than a comma!
I really enjoy these ideas that add complexity to the game in ways that pull you into the reality of it. You put some great thought into all of them!
I do understand what daveywavey said about it might be too much; however, I think there could be a middle ground. Instead of forcing a precursor to war, adding quest lines/activities that encourage node sabotage would be a very-very fun game mechanic. This would allow the players to craft drama around the war if they chose to or just go clobber each other without any pretense.