Node Mayors and wars.

Sarkgp wrote: »

Any player can kill you, penalizing you excessively even if you don't even want to participate in the siege.

Not "any", only the warring node's citizens (and probably their allied). The penalty is also less than if they were PKed. The attackers would also need to find you to kill you, while they'd be flagged against all the citizens of your node, so they might die before even finding you.

Veeshan

NiKr wrote: »

Sarkgp wrote: »

Any player can kill you, penalizing you excessively even if you don't even want to participate in the siege.

Not "any", only the warring node's citizens (and probably their allied). The penalty is also less than if they were PKed. The attackers would also need to find you to kill you, while they'd be flagged against all the citizens of your node, so they might die before even finding you.

and most players that would run into would be around ur node or the attackiong node so you can go a little bit over for a bit and do stuff around the neighbouring node away from attackers node and be left alone pretty much since majority of action will be inbetween the 2 waring nodes.

every citizen has influence on how the node goes aswell u choose mayors and mayors choose war decs or failed to politic the way out of a war dec so find a better mayor next election that can bring peace :P

daveywavey

Sarkgp wrote: »

Veeshan wrote: »

and if there a pacifist they can go on a little adventure to another node for a bit till things blow over :P

The problem is not this.
The problem is that as a PVE player, if you are a citizen of a warring node you are outside of the PK system. Any player can kill you, penalizing you excessively even if you don't even want to participate in the siege.

You need to lose all idea of being a PvE player or a PvP player. In Ashes Of Creation, you'll likely need to do both. Maybe not in equal measures, but it's clearly labelled as a PvX game.

WeGbored

So much this. It's such a shame how rampant pixelism has run in the gaming world. In my day, we didn't hunt letters. We hunted pixels.

Spif

Node war flagging would only affect citizens, not everyone adventuring in the node. If it's bad enough, you can always stop being a citizen (sell your property)

NiKr wrote: »

Sarkgp wrote: »

Would this work like clan war? Would it allow players to kill each other without PK system?

https://forums.ashesofcreation.com/discussion/53205/24-7-pvp-during-guild-node-wars/p1

Sarkgp wrote: »

On the other hand, isn't that too much power for a Mayor? Anyone can enter and declare war on the strongest Node where a big clan lives, making efforts to raise the node useless.

It can also cause the game to be more closed towards PvP, since PVE players can never rest easy that a mayor of their city can declare war and kick these players out of the Karma system.

Yeah, I hope there's a way to remove the mayor from their seat if the majority of the populous disagrees with the war.

or become a citizen of a different node???

Depraved wrote: »

or become a citizen of a different node???

Why should I move to an undesired location just because my mayor is shite? Why shouldn't I have a way to influence that shitty mayor? Isn't this game all about the socialization and all that good stuff? If people literally can't influence the mayor outside of a single monthly event - imo that ain't social at all.

NiKr wrote: »

Depraved wrote: »

or become a citizen of a different node???

Why should I move to an undesired location just because my mayor is shite? Why shouldn't I have a way to influence that shitty mayor? Isn't this game all about the socialization and all that good stuff? If people literally can't influence the mayor outside of a single monthly event - imo that ain't social at all.

Different people like different systems.
Some are religious in rl. I don't understand them but if they go to divine nodes is fine for me.
I'll go to a scientific one. Unless I am rich or the best fighter on the server

Strevi wrote: »

Different people like different systems.
Some are religious in rl. I don't understand them but if they go to divine nodes is fine for me.
I'll go to a scientific one. Unless I am rich or the best fighter on the server

Like I've written in some other threads, I'm 90% sure that all election types will be abusable. I'd prefer if there was a way for the citizens to at least try and do smth about that.

NiKr wrote: »

Strevi wrote: »

Different people like different systems.
Some are religious in rl. I don't understand them but if they go to divine nodes is fine for me.
I'll go to a scientific one. Unless I am rich or the best fighter on the server

Like I've written in some other threads, I'm 90% sure that all election types will be abusable. I'd prefer if there was a way for the citizens to at least try and do smth about that.

The system seems fine for me. Not sure how the election rules in a divine node are but those seem to depend on a single player. So players who are afraid that guilds have too much influence can win the election in such nodes through their own effort only.
Those who want democratic elections, will go to scientific nodes.
The other nodes allow money to influence the result. Which means if the majority wants to be sure a certain candidate wins, they have to donate money to help him win. And so the game has a good currency sink too.

Strevi wrote: »

The system seems fine for me. Not sure how the election rules in a divine node are but those seem to depend on a single player. So players who are afraid that guilds have too much influence can win the election in such nodes through their own effort only.
Those who want democratic elections, will go to scientific nodes.
The other nodes allow money to influence the result. Which means if the majority wants to be sure a certain candidate wins, they have to donate money to help him win. And so the game has a good currency sink too.

Questing could be made easier by a guild and a single character could be accshared among the guild. Obviously that's against the rules, but unless Intrepid pay close attention to that - it won't be found out.

Democratic elections will just need the majority of votes to be abused. That could be done by a guild or through bribery.

Military nodes can be rigged by a guild.

Eco nodes will be bought by guilds, because they'll always have more money than random casuals and they'll always be more willing to pool that money to win an election.

I doubt that there'll be a ton of truly shitty mayors out there, but there'd definitely be fewer of them if they knew that they could be overthrown if they kept making dumb decisions.

NiKr wrote: »

Depraved wrote: »

or become a citizen of a different node???

Why should I move to an undesired location just because my mayor is shite? Why shouldn't I have a way to influence that shitty mayor? Isn't this game all about the socialization and all that good stuff? If people literally can't influence the mayor outside of a single monthly event - imo that ain't social at all.

when you have a shitty guild leader, do you leave the guild and take your people with you, or do you vote to change the guild leader?

shitty majors will most likely only last for 1 month =x

Depraved wrote: »

when you have a shitty guild leader, do you leave the guild and take your people with you, or do you vote to change the guild leader?

Being in a guild doesn't cost me anything (outside of a potential tax). Living in a node not only defines what I farm, where I explore and where I live, but also requires a ton of money to upkeep and then would require even more money to move (because the prices in other nodes would already be way bigger than the one I got when settling the first time).

Those are not the same situations. But even not counting that, yes, I've had situations where I "changed the GL" by just talking to most members of the guild and them agreeing with me that the GL is trash now. We left the guild and immediately made another one with the same members. That's functionally the same thing as changing a mayor due to a majority vote, except it doesn't require you to move places.

NiKr wrote: »

Depraved wrote: »

when you have a shitty guild leader, do you leave the guild and take your people with you, or do you vote to change the guild leader?

Being in a guild doesn't cost me anything (outside of a potential tax). Living in a node not only defines what I farm, where I explore and where I live, but also requires a ton of money to upkeep and then would require even more money to move (because the prices in other nodes would already be way bigger than the one I got when settling the first time).

Those are not the same situations. But even not counting that, yes, I've had situations where I "changed the GL" by just talking to most members of the guild and them agreeing with me that the GL is trash now. We left the guild and immediately made another one with the same members. That's functionally the same thing as changing a mayor due to a majority vote, except it doesn't require you to move places.

well you had to level up the guild again didn't you? so no the same xD

let the node be destroyed and go to another one

Depraved wrote: »

shitty majors will most likely only last for 1 month =x

If they are implanted by enemy nodes, they achieved their objective... I wouldn't call them shitty...

Strevi wrote: »

Depraved wrote: »

shitty majors will most likely only last for 1 month =x

If they are implanted by enemy nodes, they achieved their objective... I wouldn't call them shitty...

so an enemy node makes one person lose citizenship and goes to another node and somehow becomes major. then what can that person do? not develop the node? not build anything? the node can still level up and become a metropolis. maybe your node will less likely be attacked than your enemies because there's potentially less loot.

you can also do the same, or make sure your own dude wins.

Depraved wrote: »

Strevi wrote: »

Depraved wrote: »

shitty majors will most likely only last for 1 month =x

If they are implanted by enemy nodes, they achieved their objective... I wouldn't call them shitty...

so an enemy node makes one person lose citizenship and goes to another node and somehow becomes major. then what can that person do? not develop the node? not build anything? the node can still level up and become a metropolis. maybe your node will less likely be attacked than your enemies because there's potentially less loot.

you can also do the same, or make sure your own dude wins.

If a mayor can do nothing then is useless.
If the mayor can spend resources in a wrong way, create wars instead of seeking alliances with more powerful sides... then his role is important enough.
I would also like to have a full list of node policies to see what the mayor can do.
But I hope he can harm too if citizens are not paying attention.

Depraved wrote: »

well you had to level up the guild again didn't you? so no the same xD

Time investment of rebuilding a guild is nowhere near the same to the investment of changing your location, building up new relationships with the locals, building up the node itself (cause high lvl ones would most likely be at their capacity) and most likely fighting other nodes in the process.

Depraved wrote: »

let the node be destroyed and go to another one

And how many people, do you think, would not just leave the game if days of their time was wasted due to a single person's decisions, while those people could literally do nothing about it?

In forced pvp the victim can fight back. In declared wars or sieges the victims can fight back. But in a shitty mayor situation the victims can only sit on their asses and wait for the inevitable end of their node. How is that good design?

I'm not saying that it should be some super easy way to just topple the mayor or that it should be the same method for all nodes. I'm just saying there should be a way to combat potential abuses of the system or a sudden shift for the worse in mayor's decisions.

Military nodes could have a personal challenge, so anyone thinking they're worthy or strong enough would have the chance to overtake the mayor (which is in line with the "the strongest one rules the node" design).
Scientific nodes would just have a reelection, which could obviously still be abuseable, but at this point it'd be on the initiators of the reelection to maximize their chances of removing the current mayor. They'd at least have a chance to do that, instead of waiting for a month.
Economic node would have a higher bid requirement (the size could be determined by the lvl of the node). This would still allow guilds to hold the power if their original bid for the mayor was ginormous, but it would also allow the citizens to pool the money outside of the node and try to overthrow the guild (would also play into subterfuge quite nicely).
Divine nodes could have a chain of difficult quests the require a ton of citizens to complete and the chain could only be initiated by the runner-up in the previous election cycle.

All of these, except for military, would require the majority of citizens to agree on the reelection. All would be quite difficult to organize perfectly and probably even harder to execute correctly. And as for the military node - the strongest should rule, so, if there's a stronger person in the node than the one who got elected, the mayor should change accordingly.