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
PvP: payment for kills
Arya_Yeshe
Member
Trust me bro, this is not a lot, the thread may seem a little long but it's because I put a lot of love in this!
Nodes should establish a comprehensive policy concerning the compensation for eliminating adversaries, with payments applicable to various categories, the PvPers will spend a lot of gold and materials repairing their own gear and they will invest a great deal of time in this, precious time they could be farming gold elsewhere. Therefore AoC needs a way of creating policies for PvP:
Payments:
Reward Ratio:
Availability:
Targets:
Region, focus where people should be killed:
Given the inherent gear damage in AoC upon death, the criteria for payment should be based on the required gold and resources. The reward rate should range from 0% to 200%. For instance, if the target's gear incurs 5000 gold in damages and the contract stipulates a 20% rate, the killers (split evenly among attackers and their healers/boosters) should receive 1000 gold. Additionally, material payments should be considered. If fixing the gear demands 5 iron ingots and there is a provision for material payments, the killer should be entitled to 1 iron ingot as payment.
Mayors should formulate policies regarding gold and material payments, determine the corresponding rates, specify target categories, and set availability parameters and where people should be hunt their targets. Multiple policies can be enacted, especially in nodes or guilds engaged in frequent conflicts with ample resources at their disposal.
In situations where a mayor anticipates the imminent destruction of their node by an exceptionally aggressive enemy node and possesses sufficient gold reserves, a policy can be established to incentivize the hunting these enemies, offering a 200% gold rate. This approach encourages the creation of player mercenary armies, particularly in nodes with a strong mercantile focus should rely gold for muscle.
In instances where a node lacks gold but has a lot lumber in stock, material payments should be rolled for hunting individuals or ships and caravans from enemy or from anyone in a specific region.
This framework also aims to support the war efforts faced by PvPers in AoC, acknowledging the associated costs of frequent deaths. Additionally, it provides mayors with a tool to ilustrate to the community where to set their priorities aligned with the needs of the node at any given time.
Example of policy A, this is a policy a mayor should make to cause problems for another region:
Example of policy B, this should reward citizens for fighting off attackers within the node:
Example of policy C, this should reward citizens for dealing with constant piracy at The Fortunic Sea:
This type of reward is really important for supporting the node's fleets, they will lose ships while defending their coasts, they will need to generate the node SRP (Ship Replacement Program). The rewards should be split evenly among attackers and the people boosting and healing them, if the payment generates an odd number for example 1 wood, then just give to the person who gave the last blow.
Nodes should establish a comprehensive policy concerning the compensation for eliminating adversaries, with payments applicable to various categories, the PvPers will spend a lot of gold and materials repairing their own gear and they will invest a great deal of time in this, precious time they could be farming gold elsewhere. Therefore AoC needs a way of creating policies for PvP:
Payments:
- Gold: how gold much will be allocated
- Materials
Reward Ratio:
- From 0% to 200%, but the availalibity will cap the ratio (check Availability)
Availability:
- Citizens (up to 200%)
- All individuals within the node hierarchy (up to 200%)
- Public (encompassing neutrals up to 100% rate)
- Fully public (even adversaries should be paid, rate capped at 50%, let them backstab each other for payment and sometimes the enemy of your enemy is your enemy, it's a win win)
Targets:
- Corrupted
- War targets
- Guilds
- Nodes
- Node hierarchy
- Caravans
- Ships
- Kill and destroy anyone in a dermined region (except your people: citizens, node guilds, vassals, etc)
Region, focus where people should be killed:
- Within the node
- Within the node hierarchy
- Region (land or seas, pick which seas)
- Enemy node
- Enemy node hierarchy
- Anywhere
Given the inherent gear damage in AoC upon death, the criteria for payment should be based on the required gold and resources. The reward rate should range from 0% to 200%. For instance, if the target's gear incurs 5000 gold in damages and the contract stipulates a 20% rate, the killers (split evenly among attackers and their healers/boosters) should receive 1000 gold. Additionally, material payments should be considered. If fixing the gear demands 5 iron ingots and there is a provision for material payments, the killer should be entitled to 1 iron ingot as payment.
Mayors should formulate policies regarding gold and material payments, determine the corresponding rates, specify target categories, and set availability parameters and where people should be hunt their targets. Multiple policies can be enacted, especially in nodes or guilds engaged in frequent conflicts with ample resources at their disposal.
In situations where a mayor anticipates the imminent destruction of their node by an exceptionally aggressive enemy node and possesses sufficient gold reserves, a policy can be established to incentivize the hunting these enemies, offering a 200% gold rate. This approach encourages the creation of player mercenary armies, particularly in nodes with a strong mercantile focus should rely gold for muscle.
In instances where a node lacks gold but has a lot lumber in stock, material payments should be rolled for hunting individuals or ships and caravans from enemy or from anyone in a specific region.
This framework also aims to support the war efforts faced by PvPers in AoC, acknowledging the associated costs of frequent deaths. Additionally, it provides mayors with a tool to ilustrate to the community where to set their priorities aligned with the needs of the node at any given time.
Example of policy A, this is a policy a mayor should make to cause problems for another region:
- Gold
- Ratio: 20%
- Public
- Caravans
- Riverlands
Example of policy B, this should reward citizens for fighting off attackers within the node:
- Gold
- Ratio: 200%
- Citizens
- War targets
- Within the node
Example of policy C, this should reward citizens for dealing with constant piracy at The Fortunic Sea:
- Hard Wood
- Ratio: 50%
- Citizens
- Ships
- The Fortunic Sea
This type of reward is really important for supporting the node's fleets, they will lose ships while defending their coasts, they will need to generate the node SRP (Ship Replacement Program). The rewards should be split evenly among attackers and the people boosting and healing them, if the payment generates an odd number for example 1 wood, then just give to the person who gave the last blow.
PvE means: A handful of coins and a bag of boredom.
0
Comments
Attack the enemy node and kill all, lots of gatheres will die to this:
Naval blockade campaing against The Umbral Sea, make three policies:
The material payment ratio is determined by the construction cost of the ship; for instance, if it requires 500 lumber, a 10% reward is granted based on the production cost.
customisable contracts for payments to either guilds or players with not only gold but resources.
Yes, this would oil the war machine with node gold in a plausible way and create player oriented content. This would allow AoC be a true mercenary game, not just letting people RP as mercenaries.
In AoC people would be able to run guilds like Golden Company from Game of Thrones etc
It's essentially how mercenary works regardless of official payment methods. Could also make enemies by not paying out too.
No
No, its not "so..."... you can't see the rainbow on the sky? Can't see the gold nugets on a mountain of gold?
A system like this is a lot more that , it also allows people ranking up in warscore, allows evaluating who are the best mercenary guilds, who are the best nodes to work with, a system like this will unfold many possibilities
This creates cycles of wars, creates SRP, this can keep naval fleets running, can keep blockades going, can keep people on the battlefield instead of forcing them into farm gold just to be able to repair their gear
could this system be used to launder gold for gold sellers?
Inplausible
Any gold seller would have to fight as purple and take all the risks upon him, die many times, spend a lot of gold and materials to repair his gear. Their war targets won't peacefully die, and because the mayors are temporary and they can control the ratio, he can simply put he ratio at 10-15% and no gold seller would go after this
A gold farmer will run PvE as green and play safe in peaceful areas
My main question is - where does the gold/material reward come from?
My guess is if it's node related probably personal certificate creation and trade in at an npc/interface within a building tied to their storage/warehouse if conditions are met. Could be a messy system for several reasons. Could just have players do their own trades though.
The major part of it is a way to increase a player or guilds "warscore" or what ever contribution to a rating system.
It's all about metrics and ladder scores... lol
Guilds could exploit the situation if the guild has the mayor.
This system could just encourage people to only help if they're getting paid/rewarded to do it. Then you get into the mess of people not wanting to help each other because if it affects their "warscore" in a negative way they wont bother with it. The social dynamic of the game could devolve into selfish behaviours. If it's an implemented system then the design around the game will be mercenary focused and pay for hires to many.
player 1 "hey can you help with the siege?"
player 2 " what's in it for me? "
I understand creating incentives for player participation but this could completely change the tone of the game for the wrong reasons.
that too!
exactly! plus if the deal goes south... it's a great excuse for a guild war!
Some of that suggestion seems to be already covered by Enemy of the State.
I doubt many PvE Guilds will pay for PvP Guilds. I guess we'll see.
The concern I have, if you will, is that the OP specifically talked about a nodes gold reserves.
This makes me think the payment for it is expected to come from node taxes.
The thing to keep in mind with a system like this is that players will simply get friends in these rival nodes, so that each of them gets a reward for killing their friend (both nodes having this policy in place), and then just swap kills to make profit. If the gold reward is more than the cost of repairs, it is a system that will be abused more than it will be used as intended by the OP.
True, @Song_Warden was suggesting something similar earlier about guilds and friends with mayors. It's definitely got some flaws for abuse potential. The whole political side of the economy can be corrupted quite easy with opt-in events, merc work and rewards.
Love the savage Line in your Signature. You're not wrong ... ... ... >;-]