Closed Borders Policy

Hi,

What do you think of the idea of a node ZOI setting a closed door policy, especially say a militaristic node style? The effect of this is that non-citizens and non-allies of the ZOI are "corruption free" targets. That's not to say that you have to grief them, but if they come into your territory, there's no corruption for defending the borders.

The advantages to this is it lets a node aggressively defend its resources.

Maybe you balance it by having drawbacks to the policy, such as decreased trade efficacy. So even though you monopolize the resources, you can't trade it as well as you otherwise would be able to.
Also, if a foreigner dies, they can resurrect outside the borders (to prevent griefing) but they lose their collectibles for the transport.

What do you think?

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

unknownsystemerror

Nope, leave the flagging system as is. The more you keep trying to force people to pvp who have no interest in it, the more you will lose. As Leia tells Moff Tarkin "The more you tighten your grasp, the more systems that will slip through your fingers." Steven threw the "no corruption" kiddies a bone with the international waters, take that and be happy.

Taleof2Cities

No.

If you want to grief players you’ll have to navigate the consequences.

Notice I said “grief” even though you made a nice attempt to steer around the word.

tugowar

Taleof2Cities wrote: »

Notice I said “grief” even though you made a nice attempt to steer around the word.

Incorrect. I addressed griefing in the last paragraph.

tugowar

disregard this post

tautau

A node can declare war on another node which flags citizens of both nodes as combatants to each other. If a node declared war on all the nearby nodes (assuming this is possible) then you would essentially have what the OP desires.

Of course, the mayor of the node declaring all those wars would have to be an idiot, since none of his node or citizen caravans would get through and that node would wither. But there are plenty of idiots in the world so it will likely happen.

Veeshan

tugowar wrote: »

Hi,

What do you think of the idea of a node ZOI setting a closed door policy, especially say a militaristic node style? The effect of this is that non-citizens and non-allies of the ZOI are "corruption free" targets. That's not to say that you have to grief them, but if they come into your territory, there's no corruption for defending the borders.

The advantages to this is it lets a node aggressively defend its resources.

Maybe you balance it by having drawbacks to the policy, such as decreased trade efficacy. So even though you monopolize the resources, you can't trade it as well as you otherwise would be able to.
Also, if a foreigner dies, they can resurrect outside the borders (to prevent griefing) but they lose their collectibles for the transport.

What do you think?

I would honostly like to see this with a slight change.

Closed State policy (Military node only) - Any Non citizen that is Citizen of another node (that is not a Vassel node) gets flagged as corrupted when within the node territory, Citizen of another node part is to stop newer players spawning in a hostile enviroment if there spawn happens to fall in node territory aswell as allowing players to defend there territory.
you can add a negative to it if you like in regards to trading however i think close state policy has inheritate negative effect reduced resources from other nodes coming to your area due to risk of PvP aswell as sales in the node from non citizen so thats fine i think

That being said there should also be a node type with the opposite i think religious node might fit best here they seem to be the more PvE orinated node.
Divine retribution policy - Corruption penalty gets doubled in the zone area of influence to reduce the amount of pvp action in the area.
As a downside it could have a high cost to upkeep money wise or could have citizens drop slightly more than normal on death due to increased risk of pvp

Dygz

I think the closest you get to the OP is Enemy of the State?
And I think there's probably a limit a to how many Nodes you can be at war with at the same time.

Also, sounds like a great way to encourage a Siege.

tugowar

Dygz wrote: »

Also, sounds like a great way to encourage a Siege.

I agree. Juicy drama w/ it. Ups the ante if you have a resource monopoly. It'll lead to a siege.

@Veeshan I like it!

Veeshan

Dygz wrote: »

I think the closest you get to the OP is Enemy of the State?
And I think there's probably a limit a to how many Nodes you can be at war with at the same time.

Also, sounds like a great way to encourage a Siege.

tbh not much point waring nodes that are not your neighbours anyway due to size of the world :P

Veeshan

Also allow for coastal military nodes to be more piratelike on the islands as an added RP element although i think the island nodes should have there own policy in regards to pirates similiar to this where the territory flags people as combatant, Would like to see each node type have its own pirate themed policy for variety but these policies would only be allowed on select coastal node and the island nodes.
- Economic node pirate policy could be increase reward on plundered goods while flagging the area as pvp under it area
- Military node pirate policy could be increase ship enhancements while flagging the area as combatant and what not
- Scientific node policty for pirate could ships building components get a slight buff when crafted or unique crafting bench for shipbuilding that offers more options/specilisation in the crafting
- Religious node could be some sea god u worship that provides a buff that speeds boat moment speed up in the open ocean

The downside to invoking these policies would citizens will never been green flagged so either perma purple or red if you been realy bad on lawful zones

daveywavey

If you want no-holds-barred fully-open no-consequence PvP, then play a different game. They've already specified their goals for the Corruption system. Just cos they've gone back on that for the open seas doesn't mean they'll cave in on-land too.

MaiWaifu

I think this should be implemented just to see who'd be silly enough to pick this perk.

Realistically, if everyone that isn't a citizen is a free target, you're going to run out of players supporting your city. You can't get new players and you can't get existing players to change citizenship to yours since you'll kill them on sight.

Without new people coming in, you're essentially North Korea'ing yourselves. Being isolationist will destroy your own economy.

Dygz

Veeshan wrote: »

tbh not much point waring nodes that are not your neighbours anyway due to size of the world :P

Depends. It's not just the Nodes nearby that can negatively affect the progression of your Node.

tugowar

MaiWaifu wrote: »

I think this should be implemented just to see who'd be silly enough to pick this perk.

Realistically, if everyone that isn't a citizen is a free target, you're going to run out of players supporting your city. You can't get new players and you can't get existing players to change citizenship to yours since you'll kill them on sight.

Without new people coming in, you're essentially North Korea'ing yourselves. Being isolationist will destroy your own economy.

Good practical point. You'd have to have an "embassy" or "border checkpoint" for your papers. The policy idea is breaking down.

MaiWaifu

tugowar wrote: »

Good practical point. You'd have to have an "embassy" or "border checkpoint" for your papers. The policy idea is breaking down.

I think border checkpoints would be a better implementation. Have all non-citizens pay a toll to enter and if they don't it flags them.

This at least gives you a way of getting new citizens in if they decide they want to join.

Dizz1

tugowar wrote: »

Hi,

What do you think of the idea of a node ZOI setting a closed door policy, especially say a militaristic node style? The effect of this is that non-citizens and non-allies of the ZOI are "corruption free" targets. That's not to say that you have to grief them, but if they come into your territory, there's no corruption for defending the borders.

The advantages to this is it lets a node aggressively defend its resources.

Maybe you balance it by having drawbacks to the policy, such as decreased trade efficacy. So even though you monopolize the resources, you can't trade it as well as you otherwise would be able to.
Also, if a foreigner dies, they can resurrect outside the borders (to prevent griefing) but they lose their collectibles for the transport.

What do you think?

I wonder if someone want to become a citizen of that closed door policy node but they keep get killed by the citizens of that node how the node grow citizen numbers? Because the policy potentially drive away players that not very commit to that play style and neighbour nodes can easily take advantages from the cons of this policy.

For example the policy only apply some hot hunting/gathering spots etc as corruption free zone for citizens and show the range on map for all players or maybe simply the main roads are not corruption free zone, so like that open some safe ways for players want to join the node at least.

Otherwise I don't see the close door policy can go any where, I mean players won't play games like we think, players always can find ways to mess up the game design meant to do with or without thinking.

Veeshan

MaiWaifu wrote: »

I think this should be implemented just to see who'd be silly enough to pick this perk.

Realistically, if everyone that isn't a citizen is a free target, you're going to run out of players supporting your city. You can't get new players and you can't get existing players to change citizenship to yours since you'll kill them on sight.

Without new people coming in, you're essentially North Korea'ing yourselves. Being isolationist will destroy your own economy.

but it also means there could be more demand for resources and less supply due to less caravans cming in from outside the node so therefore in theory resource would sell more there so maybe the risk then become worth it to run the gauntlet :P
Tbh though if you wanna run this policy people leading the closed city will diplomacy other people to bring resource in for non aggression pact or what not which has happened in other games similiar to this.

I just want the option tbh to be possible for those who wish, not to mention not all policies are pernament so you can use it temporarily if you feel the need to add a restrictive policy for example ur expecing to get seiged and this can be used to reduce the potential enemy movement/spying capability

Arya_Yeshe

Taleof2Cities wrote: »

No.
If you want to grief players you’ll have to navigate the consequences.

griefing = farming the gold non stop while being totally safe

Sapiverenus

Sounds good. No decrease to trade efficacy. I can see Visas or Gathering Rights being handed out as well. A Civ vs Civ game lol
If PvE Pressure is really strong and with many Biome specific I can see an interesting game shaping up.

On the flip side, Invaders should get no Corruption either. Otherwise game will become too safe.

Child Item