Greetings, glorious testers!
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest news on Alpha Two.
Check out general Announcements here to see the latest news on Ashes of Creation & Intrepid Studios.
To get the quickest updates regarding Alpha Two, connect your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest news on Alpha Two.
Check out general Announcements here to see the latest news on Ashes of Creation & Intrepid Studios.
To get the quickest updates regarding Alpha Two, connect your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Military mayor should be based on monthly PvP score
Arya_Yeshe
Member
EDIT: currently the idea became using the monthly PvP score to feed the gladiator points, we are speaking about the gladiator that will be used in the arena where the mayor is elected
This is not about running quests and dailies to feed the gladiator, people should roam the world and fight as much as they want along the entire month and with that the gladiator will evolve.
The only way to ensure a military mayor's credibility and earn citizens' trust is by prioritizing a candidate's performance in the PvP Season.
The current method of selecting a mayor through a single free-for-all election is inadequate and insufficient for selecting a suitable candidate. Instead, a military mayor should possess a deep understanding of all aspects of PvP, remain active throughout the month, and have a consistently high PvP Season score.
To achieve this, there should be used a monthly PvP Season score for determining the who is the best candidate, and the title of mayor should be awarded to the candidate with the highest score for that month. This process ensures that the most deserving candidate assumes the role of mayor. So every citizens interested in being mayor in your node, should apply to be a candidate anytime along the month and in the end of the month who has the highest score will win .
The current free-for-all system may be entertaining, but it is not a credible or serious method of selecting a military mayor.
I want to look at my mayor and immediately know that he has the chops for PvP, my first thought should be:
-That's the guy!
This is not about running quests and dailies to feed the gladiator, people should roam the world and fight as much as they want along the entire month and with that the gladiator will evolve.
The only way to ensure a military mayor's credibility and earn citizens' trust is by prioritizing a candidate's performance in the PvP Season.
The current method of selecting a mayor through a single free-for-all election is inadequate and insufficient for selecting a suitable candidate. Instead, a military mayor should possess a deep understanding of all aspects of PvP, remain active throughout the month, and have a consistently high PvP Season score.
To achieve this, there should be used a monthly PvP Season score for determining the who is the best candidate, and the title of mayor should be awarded to the candidate with the highest score for that month. This process ensures that the most deserving candidate assumes the role of mayor. So every citizens interested in being mayor in your node, should apply to be a candidate anytime along the month and in the end of the month who has the highest score will win .
The current free-for-all system may be entertaining, but it is not a credible or serious method of selecting a military mayor.
I want to look at my mayor and immediately know that he has the chops for PvP, my first thought should be:
-That's the guy!
PvE means: A handful of coins and a bag of boredom.
2
Comments
Alpha-1 node election user interface.
Once a node has reached Village stage there will be a one week cooldown period before node elections begin.
This cooldown period allows players to establish citizenship at the village; which may require them to relinquish previous citizenship at another node.
Following the initial cooldown, there will be a one week election process, then from that point on, elections will follow a monthly cadence.
Node sieges may not be declared for 21 days following a node advancing to any stage.
This was previously stated to apply only to nodes advancing to Village (stage 3), not higher stages.
The village stage is a unique stage because that's when the government system comes online and all other stages past village there will have already been a cadence for the election system and it will follow that cadence, but after the initial village stage is completed there will be a one week period where players have an opportunity to establish citizenship at the village that also provides for the cooldown time that is- that would be present on players leaving another node to kind of participate in in this particular node leveling up. But that after that one week period then there will be a one-week election process and then from that point moving forward will be the one month cadence that the node experiences elections on.[36] – Steven Sharif
Node elections occur on a monthly basis.
Election notices will be mailed to the accounts of citizens.
Only citizens of a node may participate in its elections.
Only node citizens may be elected mayor.
Only one citizenship may be declared per account, per server.
A king or queen can also become a mayor.
Node governments and mayors are chosen through different methods according to the node's type.
Divine node governments are chosen from citizens via service oriented quests that prove faith and dedication to the node.
Most of the devotion-oriented tasks are going to be on an individual basis and won't utilize outside support.
Economic node governments are able to be bought and sold by citizens with the most money.
The developers are in favor of a public accounting of campaign funds and contributions for mayoral candidates.
Mayors of military nodes are chosen from citizens through last man standing (gladiatorial arena style) combat.
An idea currently under consideration is to have players build out a champion that they can then fight in the arena, rather then using their regular characters. These champions can be equipped with gear and skills via quests, along with materials and gold to make the champion stronger.
The reason for the champion idea is because the game isn't balanced for 1v1 PvP. Utilizing champions makes arena combat more of a level playing ground.
Arena style combat is instanced but spectators may be possible through an interface.
The winner of the combat can not transfer the mayoralty to another player.
Scientific node governments are elected democratically. Records of who voted for who are not published.
I do like gladiator arenas and free for all, but hear me out, there are many PvP activities where the citizens performance can be tracked among all that people in the ranking.
It just makes sense putting together how the candidate is ranked on every ladder. Who cares if the guy won a free-for-all arena? This can also be manipulated as hell, manipulation could be fun sometimes, but this sucks.
Hands down, the best choice is seeing who has best perfomance overall, this is the guy who should be mayor.
no really. That is your oppinion. I have played on a pvp server in the past. It is never a fair fight.
So, you’re basically rewarding that unemployed twenty-something player still living in their parents’ basement.
How do you fix that problem?
Could you use an MMR score instead?
MMR has its own shortcomings though …
This is not problem at all, because rulers, commanders, generals, leaders in general, should be online!
Hey, who had leaders who were barely online before? I had and this is terrible.
I don't care about the person's background in real life, real life should stay out of the game, in the game we need the that guy who is online a lot and who has his bearings on PvP otherwise the node will be destroyed.
It just makes sense, the guy has to be online and has to know all kinds of PvP.
In the military node, the mayor should be someone battle-hardened, who has fought on all fronts and knows well all PvP systems and regional threats.
This is an example of PvP rankings, split by activity, we could have the average ranking or a weighted average ranking. I am considering this ranking as server ranking, so among thousands of people there's three top PvPers in our node, since our citizens are in the top 10 in all PvP activies
It could be based on all PvP rankings or simply get your three best rankings for each person. Example: Vaknar's best rankings are: 1, 2, 5 then his average ranking would be 2,666666666666667.
Or use the ranking to generate points to improve the Champion, then having a champion is "fine", but there's still a chance of players fixing results among themselves.
If the node's policies included the option to vote on which ranking system should be used in the next election, then a node located on an island where piracy is loved could choose caravans and open world kills (naval) as their preferred ranking. This would allow the pirate mayor to lead in raiding and killing, making for an awesome experience.
Even if the ranking is used for allocating points in a champion and then upgrading the champion for the election day in the arena. This is way, way better than running errands that have nothing to do with the game's actual content just to prepare a champion.
Sounds amazing.
I am not entirely against the champion, I'm just 90% against it, but this is mostly because how the champion is prepared through useless quests that have nothing to do with the game's content.
It's just stupid, if the champion system is kept then the champion should be fed with points comming from the PvP rankings. This is sensible.
Performing quests to feed the champion is the same as cheating, UNLESS THE QUESTS ARE ABOUT MURDERING EVERYBODY ELSE in all sanctioned PvP activites... which leads to feeding the PvP ranking.
Super makes sense having a champion to avoid hard counters and meta in the arena. The idea itself is perfect if you only have the perspective on the election day.
But I am thinking about the grand strategy in the game, makes sense?
I would like my mayor to be someone who scored really high in sieges and caravans, makes sense?
If the champion points are fed by ranking, that is cool, the candidates with the best champions will be players who are battle-hardened.
Or the quests that feed the champion are 100% PvP based, just to make sure that the candidates have what it takes.
This is also another reason why the election itself or the champion evolution should be fed by the PvP rankings, considering multiple rankings among all PvP sanction rankings. If nobody in the node fought a siege, then there's all those other rankings.
Arena day has no relation to the montly PvP perfomance, which is really bad.Sieges and wars are not won by arena experience. No one cares if you are good in the real, that doesn't help the node in the sense of bringing a better mayor.
There's no reason for having a PvP imbecile as mayor in the military node.
kind of agree on the op at this point, having a pvp score can just be the amount of fair pvp you are doing with ques also related to it that people can grind and get point for.
Free for all will not be fair either as a guild all signs up and kills everyone else until they have who they want to win.
As a result, we might expect that Military nodes would end up as the least viable nodes for growth, overall health and success. Which type of nodes might be the most likely to succeed, and why, would be a potentially interesting topic for another thread.
Though I agree with you @tautau, if you're vying for mayor you should have some conscientiousness of the the job before going into the arena.
Just like every other node type there will be some good mayors and some bad mayors ... it's not specific to military nodes.
PvP is has more than just smashing buttons, PvP has tactics, strategy, pvp trickery, ambushing, baiting, he will have connections, he will know adversaries and have a better grasp in group combat. In the military node, this is the meta!
This knowledge is way above knowing how to click a few buttons, building a couple buildings and setting taxes. Also, definitely being online a lot gives the guy enough time to attend to his mayoral activities, being online and being there for your citizens is important.
A military node mayor should know how to set up caravan operations, party compositions, sieges, bounty hunting, etc. It's logical, sensible and has roleplay.
Pvp score should be a part of the champion's power (probably 30-40% overall). The rest of the power should come from daily and weekly bracket pvp, with weighted distribution. And then at the end of the election cycle you get a seeded bracket (size depending on the lvl of the node) that leads into a winner/loser brackets and at the end the top loser (who lost their first fight, but then won all the other fights against other losers) gets a chance to win against the top winner.
This way you get the "they can pvp in the open world", you get "they need to keep pvping in the open world, so that their champ gets more power every day to use in the daily/weekly arena" and you get "they're great at semi-equalized pvp of the arena champions" (which should be the most skill-based pvp gameplay in the game).
The weekly and the election arena fights should be watchable by other people, so that you get entertainment for the people. A lvl6 military node election would be the biggest monthly event on the server, would pull a ton of people to the node, bring money to the traders there, and the mayor would be known as the biggest pvper on the server.
Just doing "your top score = you're the mayor" is not only highly abusable, but also super boring.
Yes, the thread started with pvp score only and now it is a hybrid system, now it is pvp score feeds the gladiator.
I am against PvP dailies for a number of reasons that I won't describe today, I have done countless of those, but weekly or monthly goals are fine! What I don't like about quests is that they are disruptive to your gamming session and they are unnatural, in that day you could desire to go chase some people, but instead you have force yourself in another direction because there's a quest, this is not good.
Honestly, I would let people collect PvP score from all PvP rankings (owpvp, sanctioned, structured, etc) and let the people spend these points in their gladiator. People should be able to use these points in anything they want and the amount of spent points should have a maximum, otherwise people will just mindlessly grind score and burn themselves.
Big public events could be fun if there's gambling, maybe players could run their own gambling den, 100% player run. In EVE Online, it happened one of the greatest wars in gamming history, the war revolved around gambling, it was called Casino Wars, there's news about it.
- you register for it when you log in
- the bracket gets set up at the same time every day during prime time
- you get a visible and hanging notification 20 mins before the fighting begins, so that you can prepare yourself
- you get teleported to the arena for a 5min fight (less if ends quicker)
- if you lose - your daily is finished
- if you win - you keep going
- at most it'd be ~an hour of arena for the strongest players in the node
Yeah, point distribution to allow some builds and metas would be nice. It could even change week to week, so there'd be a flow to the overall meta. Giving the "change your build" token for the participation in the weekly bracket would also make people participate there.I would refrain from dailies like that, this remembers me of GW2 arena dailies, which I ran more than I should. When there's dailies people just force themselves repeatedly day after day. There's also qeue times, there's the days the qeue is running very slowly, there's days you have to logoff, etc.
Also, in arenas if you have dailies, then it always ends in massive amounts of afk players.
Yes, I would let people farm points from all PvP sources in any way they want, in any day they want, along the month. Then they would spend their points in their gladiator build in the election day.
Divine node mayors will be good quest oriented players, or have the backing of many to boost them there.
Economic node mayors will buy their places... yeah... guilds will definitely not pool/redirect their funds to the one they chose.
Military node mayors are good duellists, or allowed to win in a semi-rigged competition.
If good governance was the only factor to take into consideration, all non-scientific types of nodes would be second rate options for any citizen not aligned with the "random" mayor's interests. Getting a bad/incompetent mayor is still possible for the scientific ones, but to properly rig the system they have to win over the citizenry, and can be booted out the next month. In other types, really bothered citizens may have to vote with their feet. So, I guess, the current system for military nodes is as good/bad as any, and complicating or improving it with other tasks tracking wouldn't change much.
But what will determine why people choose one types over another is not be about how the leaders get their positions: it will all be about the sweet sweet bonuses coming with the types. (my thoughts on that in the spoilered part)
From a role playing and world building point of view, they're all great. I'm not sure how the efficiency blander of the player mindset will treat them though, especially in the long run. At first I think we will see all types popping over the servers, but I fear a "best option" will become the meta at some point and most cities will
Like I said, the queue is building up for several hours of primetime, so there'll be no waiting in the end. If you have to log off, that the same as losing a day of getting more pvp score, so nothing special. I also said that weekly/daily arena would be weighted, so missing a few dailies would not impact your power all that much.
Afk players would lose in their first 5min match and that's it. The 5 min is the fight timer, it wouldn't be unlimited time fights, because fuck that. Even at 1k registered people in a single node, if you win all your matches that's only 1h out of your day, where you're free to concede at any point and just leave.
This is way freer than spending an hour running around hoping to find some pvp, but then not being able to escape it if you need to. But it also allows you to do both, which is why I said that you'd get a notification way before the fighting starts, so that you can disengage from your current content and get ready to be TPed out. Your character would disappear, but you'd return to the same place after the arena.
I said many times here that people would just play PvP along the month in any way they want and this would accumulate score. The monthly PvP score is a natural source of score, this would release Intrepid from spending more time and money in repetitive boring quests.
Getting enough score should suffice, let's imagine the gladiator can have up to 500 points, so along the month you could farm that when you feel like it. People could farm 500 points within a few days if they play hard.
Something like this:
- ow kill: 1 point
- bh kills corrupted: 2 points
- caravan wagon kill: 10 points
- sucessful siege: 100 points
- maybe have a couple monthly PvP quests which are worth 50-100 points each.
- etc
Could be rebalanced, Intrepid could even bring special events in which the score is higher.I would let people roam Verra in any way they want and still farm all the points they need, so when election day comes, people would spend these points in their gladiator.