Node Design And Why I Am Seriously Concerned

The current design of the game gives a lot of competitiveness at the start of the game to become a level 6 node as fast as possible. Who wouldn’t want to have access to the best of the best and be able to say they are part of the first level 6 node on their server? Fast forward five to six months after launch… We have our five level 6 nodes ruling over all.

Well you my friend didn’t make it to that level 6 node first, second, third, fourth, or fifth. You got stuck at level 5 and are now a vassal node to that level 6. They have enslaved you to follow their government, alliances, and wars they wish to rage. Ah but that is not the worst part, they tax you as well, because you fall within their zone of extraordinary influence.

As time goes on you grow tired of their tyrannical rule and think your level 5 node could do a better job of ruling over all the other nodes that fall under that node 6’s command. You gather resources, siege supplies, money, and most importantly allies. One of your allies is a level 4 node that resides in your zone of influence. He agrees with your reasoning and also wishes to fight because he has a strong possibility of having his node reach level 5 if you can make your node the next level 6.

The time has finally come to start the quest to be able to siege… Or so you thought.

Due to the current design of the game you can never go against that level 6 node. No matter how much you might not like them, no matter how much you are taxed without proper representation, you and all the other nodes in it’s zone of influence can not siege against them. The only way to do it would be to completely abandon your node, lands, and freehold. You’d have to completely renounce your citizenship.

You join the game with friends and find a node at level 3 with a great community. You all decide down the line you want to expand… Nope you can not. You are stuck at your level 3 node.

Currently besides renouncing your citizenship to fight a node the only other way to have that “master” node that enslaved you destroyed in a siege is to hire or convenience a completely unaffiliated node to attack.

Node sieges are a large draw to many people for this game. Understandably so… It is an awesome mechanic! But let's look at the reasons to attack a node in the current way the game is being designed (ignoring renouncing citizenship, and mercenary nodes).

For a group of people to siege a node they would want its valuables that are potentially dropped on winning, fame/notoriety, destabilize that area of Verra, or the chance to start building up a node in that area. Those first few options make sense and are great ones. But that last one I have listed… To start building again… From the ashes perhaps? Well if they do build from the ashes they are once again stopped from growing once their level 3 nodes runs into that pesky level 4 nearby that was able to level up because of the consequent node destruction they caused.
See every time a node is destroyed another node will come fill in its place. So that cycle of stunted growth is repeated.

“But what is the problem with that Wiplasher? Why does it matter that we can’t attack parent nodes but they can attack their vassal nodes?” Simply put it makes gameplay stagnant and it encourages bad behavior. The higher level node seemingly can bully you into following its agenda. Realistically we will also be seeing less sieges in this design implementation I would hazard to guess as well. Reason being because what I would garner to be the most valuable resource isn’t up for grabs… That being land.

My idea of the design change would make the parent nodes have a good relationship with their vassal nodes or else they risk facing an uprising. Alliances between those nodes will be tighter and symbiotic. This would benefit artisan classes and pvpers alike. More resources would be required because of an increase in sieges and obviously pvpers would love to participate in them more. The difficulty of starting the siege would also be higher however because the cost would most likely go up because of the greater demand for the resources required. I believe many other people want to grow nodes and level them as well.

No one wants to be told oh sorry you're stuck at level 3 unless some other node comes and wipes out your parent node at level 4. Hell I’d wager that the majority of people would want the enemy to win in that situation. Furthermore what is going to keep people at these level 3 nodes if they know there is a small chance of further development of their node while being stuck under rule of another node they do not like? I would think everyone would just try and go to the level 6 node and take full advantage of all its perks.

So what do you say? Do you want to be part of uprisings and rise from the ashes of tyrannical rulers or do you wish to bend the knee?

tl;dr
Vassel nodes are stuck for the most part in possible advancement and should be able to rise up against their parent node if they are not happy.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

CaptnChuck

@Birthday

I don't really agree with your idea.

Levelling up a node to stage 6 takes a TON of time. One person leaving the node shouldn't affect the effort of a few hundred people. That's why I disagree with giving certain citizens "weight".

Birthday

CaptnChuck wrote: »

@Birthday

I don't really agree with your idea.

Levelling up a node to stage 6 takes a TON of time. One person leaving the node shouldn't affect the effort of a few hundred people. That's why I disagree with giving certain citizens "weight".

I am not talking about giving certain citizens weight. I am talking about giving weight to the citizens that contributed the most to the development of the node.
So if someone comes and contributes enough to get it from level 5 to 6 or someone who has been on contributing to the node since level 0. Those citizens should have more weight than others. A lot more.

As it is right now, it doesn't matter if you are the founding father of the node. You are the same trash as someone who came today and signed up for citizenship in the node.

Thats just not right, dont you think?

CaptnChuck

Birthday wrote: »

CaptnChuck wrote: »

@Birthday

I don't really agree with your idea.

Levelling up a node to stage 6 takes a TON of time. One person leaving the node shouldn't affect the effort of a few hundred people. That's why I disagree with giving certain citizens "weight".

I am not talking about giving certain citizens weight. I am talking about giving weight to the citizens that contributed the most to the development of the node.
So if someone comes and contributes enough to get it from level 5 to 6 or someone who has been on contributing to the node since level 0. Those citizens should have more weight than others. A lot more.

As it is right now, it doesn't matter if you are the founding father of the node. You are the same trash as someone who came today and signed up for citizenship in the node.

Thats just not right, dont you think?

Hmm. It is an interesting idea for sure. Maybe you should make a detailed post about it so that you can get others' opinions on it.

But just wondering, how exactly does it solve the problem that OP is talking about?

CaptnChuck wrote: »

Assume that you and your friends are working on a lvl5 node and are on the way to make it lvl6. Just before you do so, another lvl5 node near you, levels to 6 and turns your node into a vassal node. All that effort you put into leveling your node, is now gone. That is what @Wiplasher is concerned about and it is indeed a valid concern imo.

CROW3

CaptnChuck wrote: »

Assume that you and your friends are working on a lvl5 node and are on the way to make it lvl6. Just before you do so, another lvl5 node near you, levels to 6 and turns your node into a vassal node. All that effort you put into leveling your node, is now gone. That is what @Wiplasher is concerned about and it is indeed a valid concern imo.

Thanks, @CaptnChuck. I went back and reread the wiki. In the example above, it sounds like the enslavement of one of the neighboring nodes would have happened at level 3, and wouldn’t have been staved off to level 6.

“Village (stage 3) or higher nodes enslave nearby nodes, converting them into vassal nodes.”

I think as long as the node dynamics are clear and consistent, I don’t think it’s a problem. If you understand how the node system works and two teams put themselves in the position where enslavement is a possible outcome then they accept that risk. If they don’t want to take that risk, there are options to move their resources to develop a non-neighboring node.

Birthday

CaptnChuck wrote: »

Birthday wrote: »

CaptnChuck wrote: »

@Birthday

I don't really agree with your idea.

Levelling up a node to stage 6 takes a TON of time. One person leaving the node shouldn't affect the effort of a few hundred people. That's why I disagree with giving certain citizens "weight".

I am not talking about giving certain citizens weight. I am talking about giving weight to the citizens that contributed the most to the development of the node.
So if someone comes and contributes enough to get it from level 5 to 6 or someone who has been on contributing to the node since level 0. Those citizens should have more weight than others. A lot more.

As it is right now, it doesn't matter if you are the founding father of the node. You are the same trash as someone who came today and signed up for citizenship in the node.

Thats just not right, dont you think?

Hmm. It is an interesting idea for sure. Maybe you should make a detailed post about it so that you can get others' opinions on it.

But just wondering, how exactly does it solve the problem that OP is talking about?

CaptnChuck wrote: »

Assume that you and your friends are working on a lvl5 node and are on the way to make it lvl6. Just before you do so, another lvl5 node near you, levels to 6 and turns your node into a vassal node. All that effort you put into leveling your node, is now gone. That is what @Wiplasher is concerned about and it is indeed a valid concern imo.

OP wants vassals to be able to siege.
My idea allows for more possibilities on how vassal nodes can rebel against the parent node - a carefully planned coup, a siege, a strike to the economy of the parent's node by a citizenship denouncement.
Also gives room for more negotiations. By giving citizens power, which they've earned through helping and leveling the node, you give them bargaining chips, for example:

-Want me to stay in your node instead of leaving and taking all my riches/influence/resources/profession somewhere else? Okay then give me X. Do X for me.

This also gives bargaining chips to the players as well, so if couple of those high influence, high powered in the node band together they can set up a coup, a siege.

It makes the process have more preparation time, more depth, more meaning.
If we just allow vassal nodes to siege the parent node like any other node it'll could cause exploits and redicilous things like:

-Master nodes switching very often because vassal nodes constantly fight among each other. This is going to be just ridiculous. Would look like some kids being constantly unhappy that they aren't the boss. And it would take away from the focus of siege on enemy nodes.

Exploits:

-Vassal nodes can siege the master node and lose on purpose so that the master node goes on cooldown thanks to the unsuccessful siege and now it's real enemies can't siege it.

-Master node loses on purpose from the vassal node. Why? After all the dungeons it unlocked have been grinded by the majority of it's citizens, It loses the siege on purposes so that the dungeons which the new master node will unlock upon reaching max node level can be unlocked to be grinded. This exploit in particular will shorten the game lifespan immensely, due to players being able to go through all the content at a faster rate than what the original idea is.

So just giving vassal nodes the ability to straight up siege the master node is a bad idea. There have to be rules about when it's possible for a vassal node siege. There need to be big repercussions about it. And it's also important that the players are given a number of ways to achieve it, rather than just the usual - go declare siege, so the game gets more depth.

Otherwise these nodes wont have any meaning. Not sure if intrepid has noticed this but if the systems in nodes, between nodes, in government in nodes, in citizenships etc. if those systems don't have good depth then nodes will only become simple tools for blocking/unlocking content or ways to change the surrounding theme parks. Which from what I know they are extremely against - making another theme park mmo.

Child Item