Node citizenship supersedes everything, including guild and family.

This isn't news or anything, but I just came across the video where they talk about it, and I wanted to hear from all y'all what you think. Especially about one specific point: raid/party.

First the quote from Steven:

There's node citizenship. There's guild. There's alliance. There's party. There's raid. There's family. All of these types of affiliations have a hierarchy. The highest of which is your node affiliation: So your citizenship is your greatest superseding relationship, which means if you were a part of a guild and the guild has multiple nodes in which its members are citizens of, if there was a war between two of those nodes, the members of those nodes would be first and foremost citizens who defend that node, even against their own guild members.

That's totally fine and cool I think. It places the nodes first and as the central feature of the game. I am actually even cool with it if it means guild members are still hostile to each other in a party/raid situation, if it is even possible for them to join each other in one. It makes nodewars a big deal and forces people to take sides

In Alpha 1, enemy combatants and corrupted players could join your party/raid and become green, which meant the party/raid affiliation superseded everything else there, but since nodewars weren't implemented, maybe that is as intended. Maybe the hierarchy is node > party/raid > family > guild for all we know.

There is certainly something to be said for having party/raid supersede everything else, including node affiliation. It makes it easier for people who feel guild or family affiliation is more important to still group up and do shit together even if in a nodewar. But, it also comes at the "cost" of decreasing the importance of choosing the right node to be citizen of, and by extension a slight decrease in the importance of nodes overall.

What do you all think about this?

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

daveywavey

It might be cool to even do away with the Family concept completely, making the affiliations less cluttered and more meaningful.

bloodprophet

Node over guild will only be a concern during a node siege. Not everyone in your guild has to be part of the same node. As stated in the link you posted. Rest of the time it will not matter.

Nerror

bloodprophet wrote: »

Node over guild will only be a concern during a node siege. Not everyone in your guild has to be part of the same node. As stated in the link you posted. Rest of the time it will not matter.

Indeed! Well, not only node siege, also node war. Not the same thing

So you're also ok with it as is?

Noaani

My theory with this for a few years now has been that nearby nodes will generally be friendly with each other - once established. They are the people you group with, trade with and are in guilds with.

Node sieges and wars are more likely to be against nodes from further away - and due to little fast travel, it is unlikely that you will be in a guild that is based that far away.

Sylvanar

Noaani wrote: »

My theory with this for a few years now has been that nearby nodes will generally be friendly with each other - once established. They are the people you group with, trade with and are in guilds with.

Node sieges and wars are more likely to be against nodes from further away - and due to little fast travel, it is unlikely that you will be in a guild that is based that far away.

Neighboring nodes of a higher level node have no reason to be friendly with that node as it will only limit their progression and everything to gain by being hostile. There might be some exceptions to this if say a guild is able to dominate multiple nodes but this definitely wont be the norm.

Far away nodes have little reason to travel far and do a siege on a node whose neighboring nodes are friendly with it, if they are capable of plundering their nearby nodes more easily. Unless they have a sort of server domination or it is a low population server or basically some non-ideal scenario.

Noaani

Sylvanar wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

My theory with this for a few years now has been that nearby nodes will generally be friendly with each other - once established. They are the people you group with, trade with and are in guilds with.

Node sieges and wars are more likely to be against nodes from further away - and due to little fast travel, it is unlikely that you will be in a guild that is based that far away.

Neighboring nodes of a higher level node have no reason to be friendly with that node as it will only limit their progression and everything to gain by being hostile. There might be some exceptions to this if say a guild is able to dominate multiple nodes but this definitely wont be the norm.

Well, if you are a neighboring node of a higher level node, you can't declare a siege against that node as you will be a vassal of it.

So yeah.

Once things get settled down, many people are going to find that they are happy being in a tier 5 economic node that is next to a parent tier 6 scientific node, as an example. Since the node structure of any given server isn't going to be static, everyone in both nodes knows that at some point, that tier 5 node is likely to be a metropolis.

The tier 6 node also probably likes having that high level economic node nearby, as even though it isn't max tier, it still has some things going on that the scientific node simply isn't going to have.

Since most guilds in the area will have players in both nodes, most players will have friends in both nodes, and most economic activity relies on both nodes, there is little incentive for either node to be hostile to the other.

Nodes that are a long way away have very good reasons to attack. There is the economic incentive that increases with time (which is the reason the above tier 5 node knows the tier 6 node won't always be there), and there are the relics on offer.

Then there is the desire to change the content that is nearby.

Since players in those far away nodes have no economic tie to that tier 6 node, and likely have no friends or guildmates there, yet have very good reasons for wanting to conduct a successful siege on it, they are the ones that are likely to attack.

The game isn't all just about progressing your node. There is far more subtilty and nuance to the system than that.

TheUglyStic

After reading through these comments a thought came to mind: I don't think node citizenship will play a significant role until the server has existed for a while. Like @Noaani said, once things settle down, most people will have planted roots so to speak and that's when I think the node affiliation will become important. People will want to fight for that node because it's where they've made there home.

McMackMuck

I suspect Steven was prioritizing player affiliations on organization size alone. I can't see how node citizenship can be a stronger bond than guild. Every game I've played Guild=Family.

I don't see Guild member pitted against Guild member happening often in a decent guild. Guild management should decide the political stance for the entire guild with respect to each node siege and support those disadvantaged by any losses if they can't be warned to leave in advance.

Happymeal2415

I don't necessarily think node is higher than guild based okn what they've said. I think that's a choice the player makes it is not set in stone. Why do you have to fight your guild mates? You can choose to leave the node or guild or not participate in that battle. I don't think there's any set priority list. It's just a choice with consequences either way.

Nerror

Happymeal2415 wrote: »

Why do you have to fight your guild mates? You can choose to leave the node or guild or not participate in that battle.

For sure. But you will be flagged as combatants against those guildies in the other node your node is at war with. Actually fighting them is optional, but you can if you wanted to. The question is really if you can even group/raid with them while the node war is happening.

CROW3

Heh. This will be interesting for those of us who are just going to wander a bit before making any choices about node citizenship. I’d probably join a guild before signing my name to a node.

Happymeal2415

Yeah but you can also leave the node and not be a citizen and problem solved. I don't think there's a priority order kike people think just consequences to the choice.

Dygz

McMackMuck wrote: »

I can't see how node citizenship can be a stronger bond than guild. Every game I've played Guild=Family.

What other games have you played that have a Node system?

Dygz

CROW3 wrote: »

Heh. This will be interesting for those of us who are just going to wander a bit before making any choices about node citizenship. I’d probably join a guild before signing my name to a node.

I want to say I would join a Node before I join a guild, but...
My Dygz character will be in the TheoryForge guild...and the guild will choose a Node.
My Briarthorn character will probably be in a DOP Crew guild... and the guild will choose a Node.
But, my main character will be a Vek Rogue, probably a citizen of a Nikua Scientific Node. That character will probably choose a guild after choosing a social org. Node --> Social Org --> Guild

Dygz

TheUglyStic wrote: »

After reading through these comments a thought came to mind: I don't think node citizenship will play a significant role until the server has existed for a while. Like @Noaani said, once things settle down, most people will have planted roots so to speak and that's when I think the node affiliation will become important. People will want to fight for that node because it's where they've made there home.

I'm expecting my first three characters will be determining preferred Node during Beta 2.
I'm not quite sure "planting roots" is a concept I would be thinking about for Ashes.

Atama

Dygz wrote: »

I'm not quite sure "planting roots" is a concept I would be thinking about for Ashes.

To be fair, the old logo did have roots in it...

Boanergese

Some members of guilds may choose to be in the same node with houses and apartments. As @Noaani mentioned neighboring nodes might make alliances for economic and military benefits. I am not sure if they have described the vassal system. It still wouldn't be hard for a neighboring node to attack another node. Anyone can sign up a siege, so you could have a guild member who isn't in the node just do the declaration against the other node and the guild destroy the node. At rank 2 and rank 3 I could see guilds fight it out for who is going to be rank 3 and who will settle for rank 2. I can see Steven's point that if I have a house in a node, I won't want that house damaged or destroyed or to lose that house so that might create an obligation for me to defend that node out of self-interest or choose to sacrifice that asset.

Noaani

Boanergese wrote: »

I am not sure if they have described the vassal system.

If you are a citizen of a node, you are automatically signed up on the defense side of a siege on your node, and any parent nodes if your node is a vassal.

So, the only way to participate in a siege on your parent node is to drop citizenship.

You are right about lower level nodes fighting it out though.

Boanergese

Noaani wrote: »

Boanergese wrote: »

I am not sure if they have described the vassal system.

If you are a citizen of a node, you are automatically signed up on the defense side of a siege on your node, and any parent nodes if your node is a vassal.

So, the only way to participate in a siege on your parent node is to drop citizenship.

You are right about lower level nodes fighting it out though.

Then in theory, if my entire guild are members of node 1 which is a vassal node of node 2. Node 2 is a higher rank than node 1. My guild has 300 members in it. We show up as part of the army of 500 players defending the node. We sit on our ass while 500 members of our alliance siege node 2. Node 2 is turned into rubble. Now node 1 can progress to a higher level because Node 2 no longer exists. We can then rebuild node 2 with members of our alliance. Doing nothing is also a form of participation.

Atama

Here is some good info on vassal nodes:

https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Vassal_nodes

Boanergese wrote: »

Then in theory, if my entire guild are members of node 1 which is a vassal node of node 2. Node 2 is a higher rank than node 1. My guild has 300 members in it. We show up as part of the army of 500 players defending the node. We sit on our ass while 500 members of our alliance siege node 2. Node 2 is turned into rubble. Now node 1 can progress to a higher level because Node 2 no longer exists. We can then rebuild node 2 with members of our alliance. Doing nothing is also a form of participation.

You better hope that node loses then. Because I wouldn't want to be a citizen of a node that is known to have sat out. There could be some nasty consequences. Higher taxes might be the least of it. You could also have the node declare a war on a neighbor, and then let it be known that citizens of your node are fair game and won't be protected. As a vassal node you're automatically included and anyone from the other node can kill you with impunity.

In addition, you miss out on the rewards of participating. If you choose to defend the other node in the siege, you could receive titles or loot. I'm also not sure if node reputation might be influenced as well. So it might be a dangerous thing to do this.

Child Item