Suggestion - Borderless world - for the benefit of equality of trade routes and positioning/posture

nerdhunt

This may seem weird or controversial or genius to you, but I propose as the map is filled and finished with nodes, we make it so as you cross the very left or top border of the map, you will be making your passage through the very right or bottom border of the map (think pac-man,) this will ensure that all nodes will have some-what equivalent trade routes and not be excluded from other nodes.

I was looking at the map and thinking about the economy node having the worst trade routes of all, and the only solution I could see is connecting the borders of the map. This would also solve the problem of center nodes being much more viable due to the fact that they are able to access the whole map much easier over the entire server, as there is no fast travel; seamless world is needed to balance the positional relevance of the nodes.

This will effectively make every node the middle node.

Jassim Salam

Steven once addressed this topic and said that he'll be sticking on to the "flat earth" system where you won't be able to go around.

The main reason is because, if the devs are planning to make a new landmass with new content as the part of the expansion, it would disrupt the existing trade routes and spoil the existing gameplay experience.

Kilion

The reason why a wrap around map has been rejected by Steven in the past is because it would do exactly what you said: make trading routes more equal. But if they are... why would anyone go to conflict (PvP) over the better routes?

Inequality drives conflict and conflict is an intended part of the game.

ThevoicestHeVoIcEs

Dear God sir, are you suggesting that the world is.....ROUND?!?! Heresy!

ThevoicestHeVoIcEs

Kilion wrote: »

The reason why a wrap around map has been rejected by Steven in the past is because it would do exactly what you said: make trading routes more equal. But if they are... why would anyone go to conflict (PvP) over the better routes?

Inequality drives conflict and conflict is an intended part of the game.

I agree, we have a lot of evidence that a round world results in no conflict over trade routes

Vhaeyne

I feel like a round world is cooler from a tech and immersion prospective, but I can't ignore how much better the game is going to be when the lack of balance create conflict.

Conflict is content, Content is king.