Enemy of the State: The Public Enemy

JamesSunderland

It's a very interesting Title which we currently don't know a lot about yet, other than:

You can become a Enemy of the State by getting Excessive negative reputation on a node or be declared one by a Mayor of a node if you're a foreign citizen of other node.

The only way we currently know to gain negative reputation is "Bad actions taken, such as failing certain quests."

The only currently known penalty for being an Enemy of the State is that it "might result in higher prices (for goods or services sold at that node)"

Quite a limited amount of info as you can see, but i believe this has a lot of potential to become a pretty awesome system that can create interesting interactions.

For example, some things i would like to see in it and believe would make it more interesting:

Enemy of the State title to put the player and the citizens of the node that designated the player as such in a mutual flag against each other(like in the node war system).

Enemy of the State title to be received even if you're nodeless, to not let nodeless players avoid said system while terrorizing nodes.

Players who acquire Excessive Negative reputation on their own nodes to be able to become a Enemy of their own State.

Negative reputation of nodes to be acquired by players Excessively exausting said nodes natural resources.

Negative reputation of nodes to be acquired by players Excessively PKing players of said nodes.

Negative reputation of nodes to be acquired by players Excessively attacking Caravans of players of said nodes.

In this thread, i would like people to discuss what they think about this title/system and what they expect/want from it.

Edit: Extra possibility: What do you think of the idea of the citizens of a node being able to vote their Terrible Mayor that ravages their own node into becoming a Public Enemy?

Ludullu

JamesSunderland wrote: »

Players who acquire Excessive Negative reputation on their own nodes to be able to become a Enemy of their own State.

Yes to all others except for this one. Purely because we lack information on how that negative reputation is acquired. If you can get enough of it through just failing some quests or anything like that - some casual players might suddenly become flagged against everyone around them and just die on the spot

Maybe if there's an appeal system that shows how you became EotS and the mayor can acquit you asap - then I'd be fine with that.

Outside of that, the system definitely seems quite interesting and could lead to a ton of cool player interactions.

I'd imagine there's gonna be some sort of cost for the mayor to declare an EotS, so I'd like if that cost was related to the reputation values. An already shitty player, that's on their way to automatically becoming EotS, would barely cost anything to get declared upon, while a great helper would cost a ton if, for whatever reason, mayor wanted to fuck them over.

Maybe even relate this system to the node happiness system. If mayor EotS's someone with negative rep, it'll increase the happiness of NPCs. And the opposite if reversed.

Azherae

NiKr wrote: »

JamesSunderland wrote: »

Players who acquire Excessive Negative reputation on their own nodes to be able to become a Enemy of their own State.

Yes to all others except for this one. Purely because we lack information on how that negative reputation is acquired. If you can get enough of it through just failing some quests or anything like that - some casual players might suddenly become flagged against everyone around them and just die on the spot

Maybe if there's an appeal system that shows how you became EotS and the mayor can acquit you asap - then I'd be fine with that.

Outside of that, the system definitely seems quite interesting and could lead to a ton of cool player interactions.

I'd imagine there's gonna be some sort of cost for the mayor to declare an EotS, so I'd like if that cost was related to the reputation values. An already shitty player, that's on their way to automatically becoming EotS, would barely cost anything to get declared upon, while a great helper would cost a ton if, for whatever reason, mayor wanted to fuck them over.

Maybe even relate this system to the node happiness system. If mayor EotS's someone with negative rep, it'll increase the happiness of NPCs. And the opposite if reversed.

This. All this.

If you ever want 'PvP and adversarial incentives' design suggestions this is the person to ask.

JamesSunderland

@NiKr Sadly, lack of information is the greatest enemy of our state.
I definitely understand how being allowed to become an enemy of your own state could get uninformed newbies to fall into this trap, but i believe giving in-game detailed information about the system and constantly reminding the player of their bad reputation gains and its consequences can solve it.

On the other hand i'm afraid removing the possibility of becoming an Enemy of your own State, would allow Bad actors to terrorize a node after becoming a citizen of it evading the Enemy of the State system.

Ludullu

JamesSunderland wrote: »

On the other hand i'm afraid removing the possibility of becoming an Enemy of your own State, would allow Bad actor to terrorize a node after becoming a citizen evading the Enemy of the State system.

Yeah, there's a thin line between what should and should not be allowed. The lack of info of all the other systems impacts this as well.

What are the exact effects of overfarming? What if that citizen overfarmed to trigger them on purpose cause they knew how to use them for the benefit of the node?

What if the node just so happened to get a ton of bots as citizens and the negatively reputable person just PKed them all to help out others?

What if some guild decided to buy out all the local resources from the market as some economic warfare ploy and the person in question decided to raid those caravans to bring some stuff back?

All of those could be seen as "bad actions" by the system, while they had good intentions behind them. This is another reason why I'm not sure if a citizen should be able to become EotS. But I'm definitely opened to that being the case if the system is deep enough and well-thought out.

JamesSunderland

NiKr wrote: »

All of those could be seen as "bad actions" by the system, while they had good intentions behind them. This is another reason why I'm not sure if a citizen should be able to become EotS. But I'm definitely opened to that being the case if the system is deep enough and well-thought out.

Those example are definitely where an Mayoral Amnesty would be required as a important tool to properly guide the system where it may lack in context.

Voxtrium

I want to use EOTS to mark high priority targets, I would love to see mayors using EOTS to mark guild leaders who are actively using their guild to secure a siege scroll or monarchs who have abused their power or perhaps just been in power too long. EOTS could make some ones life a living hell and when you use it on the people who lead the guilds or castles or even other mayors.

Imagine trying to farm as the monarch and your EOTS of the nearby node, gotta be with your crew at all times.

Vaknar

It's fun reading through threads that generate ideas, especially threads around systems that we don't know much about! ^_^

Strevi

Depraved

JamesSunderland wrote: »

It's a very interesting Title which we currently don't know a lot about yet, other than:

You can become a Enemy of the State by getting Excessive negative reputation on a node or be declared one by a Mayor of a node if you're a foreign citizen of other node.

The only way we currently know to gain negative reputation is "Bad actions taken, such as failing certain quests."

The only currently known penalty for being an Enemy of the State is that it "might result in higher prices (for goods or services sold at that node)"

Quite a limited amount of info as you can see, but i believe this has a lot of potential to become a pretty awesome system that can create interesting interactions.

For example, some things i would like to see in it and believe would make it more interesting:

Enemy of the State title to put the player and the citizens of the node that designated the player as such in a mutual flag against each other(like in the node war system).

Enemy of the State title to be received even if you're nodeless, to not let nodeless players avoid said system while terrorizing nodes.

Players who acquire Excessive Negative reputation on their own nodes to be able to become a Enemy of their own State.

Negative reputation of nodes to be acquired by players Excessively exausting said nodes natural resources.

Negative reputation of nodes to be acquired by players Excessively PKing players of said nodes.

Negative reputation of nodes to be acquired by players Excessively attacking Caravans of players of said nodes.

In this thread, i would like people to discuss what they think about this title/system and what they expect/want from it.

Edit: Extra possibility: What do you think of the idea of the citizens of a node being able to vote their Terrible Mayor that ravages their own node into becoming a Public Enemy?

why are you anti pvp?

JamesSunderland

Depraved wrote: »

why are you anti pvp?

Uhm... so yeah, what EXACTLY did you found to be anti-pvp in the ideas for the system?
Am i missing something?

Depraved

JamesSunderland wrote: »

Depraved wrote: »

why are you anti pvp?

Uhm... so yeah, what EXACTLY did you found to be anti-pvp in the ideas for the system?
Am i missing something?

ok hold on

JamesSunderland wrote: »

It's a very interesting Title which we currently don't know a lot about yet, other than:

You can become a Enemy of the State by getting Excessive negative reputation on a node or be declared one by a Mayor of a node if you're a foreign citizen of other node.

The only way we currently know to gain negative reputation is "Bad actions taken, such as failing certain quests."

The only currently known penalty for being an Enemy of the State is that it "might result in higher prices (for goods or services sold at that node)"

Quite a limited amount of info as you can see, but i believe this has a lot of potential to become a pretty awesome system that can create interesting interactions.

For example, some things i would like to see in it and believe would make it more interesting:

Enemy of the State title to put the player and the citizens of the node that designated the player as such in a mutual flag against each other(like in the node war system).

Enemy of the State title to be received even if you're nodeless, to not let nodeless players avoid said system while terrorizing nodes.

Players who acquire Excessive Negative reputation on their own nodes to be able to become a Enemy of their own State.

Negative reputation of nodes to be acquired by players Excessively exausting said nodes natural resources.

Negative reputation of nodes to be acquired by players Excessively PKing players of said nodes.

Negative reputation of nodes to be acquired by players Excessively attacking Caravans of players of said nodes.

In this thread, i would like people to discuss what they think about this title/system and what they expect/want from it.

Edit: Extra possibility: What do you think of the idea of the citizens of a node being able to vote their Terrible Mayor that ravages their own node into becoming a Public Enemy?

Enemy of the State title to put the player and the citizens of the node that designated the player as such in a mutual flag against each other(like in the node war system).

literally kicking people out of a node. you will be perma flagged against dozen if not hundreds of people. this isn't more pvp, its less pvp because the eots player will simply leave the area.

Enemy of the State title to be received even if you're nodeless, to not let nodeless players avoid said system while terrorizing nodes.

same as before. let players handle other players who "terrorize" nodes. don't need auto flag. and what do you call terrorizing? pking? there's already penalties for that.

Negative reputation of nodes to be acquired by players Excessively exausting said nodes natural resources.

well this one is pro pvp. let someone farm the area on purpose and kill him when he auto flags.

Negative reputation of nodes to be acquired by players Excessively PKing players of said nodes.

more anti pvp systems. there's already enough penalties for pking, why u wanna add more? u don't want to see anybody red, ever?

Negative reputation of nodes to be acquired by players Excessively attacking Caravans of players of said nodes.[/b]

yeah lets eliminate consensual pvp...

Strevi

Depraved wrote: »

Negative reputation of nodes to be acquired by players Excessively attacking Caravans of players of said nodes.[/b]

yeah lets eliminate consensual pvp...

Yes because somebody asked in a monthly stream, if the game has risk vs reward as a core pillar, then what is the risk on the attacker side

But let's see how this is balanced.

Depraved

Strevi wrote: »

Depraved wrote: »

Negative reputation of nodes to be acquired by players Excessively attacking Caravans of players of said nodes.[/b]

yeah lets eliminate consensual pvp...

Yes because somebody asked in a monthly stream, if the game has risk vs reward as a core pillar, then what is the risk on the attacker side

But let's see how this is balanced.

well, attackers will most likely lose something for losing..aside from time and not obtaining the mats from winning the caravan. maybe they will lose gold, since they will have to pay an npc to "obtain info" on the caravan route and participate in the attack.

so the issue isn't attacking a caravan many times. the issue is not enough risk for the attackers. then lets add an economic loss to the attackers, instead of de-motivating people to attack

Strevi

Also I wouldn't mind tulnars to be by default Enemy of the Server

daveywavey

Strevi wrote: »

Also I wouldn't mind tulnars to be by default Enemy of the Server

JamesSunderland

Depraved wrote: »

ok hold on
literally kicking people out of a node. you will be perma flagged against dozen if not hundreds of people. this isn't more pvp, its less pvp because the eots player will simply leave the area.

You do understand that the EotS simple "leaving the area" doesn't mean they won't find or is found by members of the node out there in the world right?
And you do understand that EotS's that can influence a Mayor of their node can lead into a node war right?

Depraved wrote: »

same as before. let players handle other players who "terrorize" nodes. don't need auto flag. and what do you call terrorizing? pking? there's already penalties for that.

more anti pvp systems. there's already enough penalties for pking, why u wanna add more? u don't want to see anybody red, ever?

yeah lets eliminate consensual pvp...

Those ones it just seems that you are missing the "Excessive" part of the system, that is meant to restrict/limit focused efforts of different individuals completely directed against members of specific nodes separated from node wars or the corruption system and you somehow consider the one related to resource exaustion pro pvp and not the others when being pro or anti pvp isn't even the main point.

Can't you see that the best way to evade the system is to split your bad reputation throught many nodes to not reach excessive levels?
Can you see how skilled individuals will intentionally become public enemies of a node they believe are less organized and weaker overall so they can handle being sneaky with isolated pick-offs?

JamesSunderland

Strevi wrote: »

Also I wouldn't mind tulnars to be by default Enemy of the Server

Now this is the real business and what really matters here.
The correct mindset.