Military mayor should be based on monthly PvP score

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!

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Elwendryll

There is a French MMO, called Wakfu, that has politics, each faction has a governor. And there was a faction that used to have the governor be the top 1 on the PvP leaderboard. It's super cool and all, but this was highly abused, many people just got free points by winning against friends or their own second account, this faction was since removed altogether. This game also used to have open world pvp with ranking attached, but they removed it in favor of PvX arenas, making it extra easy to PvE grind your way to the top of the leaderboard. It was even possible to have people carry you to top 1 while being naked and never winning a single fight against an other player.

I like the idea of a champion arena fighting, for multiple reasons.
1) It's a lot easier to balance. Classes aren't balanced around 1v1 PvP. It's a lot simpler to just have this combat mode be its own thing with its own balance. Otherwise some classes (probably support or tank roles) might have a really hard time.
2) On paper it sounds a lot harder to abuse.
3) It values skill more over raw time investment, by having a more level playing field
4) It makes for a good recurrent event to look forward to, with stakes.

I think a good PvP player should be able to come on top consistently by raw skill and knowledge. And I like to have an objective that doesn't rely too much on pure grind, there are already Divine nodes for that, from my understanding. Realistically, I think that not adding extra external power modifiers to the champions will favor actual PvP players, because it will not be as easy to just "outgear" your opponent.

Arya_Yeshe

Noaani wrote: »

There is no reason to inherently assume a mayor will lead a siege defense.

People keep bringing this up, but the thing is that the mayor will have to setup the node, bring the guild leaders together, raise citizens awareness, will have to engage in diplomacy with other nodes, will have to work with the caravans to ensure their success, etc

Specially knowing how to evaluate your node's pvp capacity and evaluating the other node's pvp capacity is a top player skill, because there are not graphs showing performance, no nothing, the mayor will have to run all simulations in his head and evaluate if the node can do this or see what he can do to help it's guilds.

It's the mayor who will put together all that and talk to his citizens, he doesn't have to fight at all.

Elwendryll

Arya_Yeshe wrote: »

People keep bringing this up, but the thing is that the mayor will have to setup the node, bring the guild leaders together, raise citizens awareness, will have to engage in diplomacy with other nodes, will have to work with the caravans to ensure their success, etc

I partially agree with that. The mayor has tools to setup the node, prepare the defenses, establish trades routes etc.. But when it comes to bringing the guild leaders together, raising citizens awareness, or engaging in diplomacy, these are all tasks that you could assume a good mayor would undertake, but that are not actually on the job description. These tasks could all be done by members of a patron guild of the node, or the chief bounty hunter for instance, especially when it comes to actual siege planning and getting people to show up.

Noaani wrote: »

There is no reason to inherently assume a mayor will lead a siege defense.

Arya_Yeshe wrote: »

It's the mayor who will put together all that and talk to his citizens, he doesn't have to fight at all.

I see on the wiki that the mayor possesses exclusive abilities and stats during sieges and events, so you'd probably want them to be online to at least actually take part in it and fight. But no reason to believe they would need to plan anything or "lead", unless the abilities are something like putting pings on the map for the defenders to see or whatever

Anyway, I don't think there will be a clearly defined set of tasks a mayor has to do, people will probably delegate and have their own ways of doing things on a case by case basis, even for things like taxes, logistics etc, you can have someone else do all the work to just tell the mayor what values input and what button to click. Everything you just described would apply to all mayors anyway, including non-military ones, so this has virtually nothing to do with the specificities of the mayor selection process for military nodes.

Spif

Arya_Yeshe wrote: »

At the moment the idea is on: PvP score feeds the gladiator for the arena

Anyway, people will always be like "oh, but then people will just this or just that", it's always "just" no matter what is said

So you want a tournament where grinding more PvP during the month gives you a better Gladiator? That's ok I guess, as long as there's a hard cap for Gladiator improvements that's less than a ridiculous time sink per month. I was assuming that you would work the Gladiator improvements over the course of the character and not have to do it every month. Then once you maxed out your Gladiator you'd just focus on monthly score

There's advantages for either method

insomnia

Arya_Yeshe wrote: »

insomnia wrote: »

Arya_Yeshe wrote: »

@insomnia yes, here is the subject:

Mayors of military nodes are chosen from citizens through last man standing (gladiatorial arena style) combat.[42][45][46]

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.

That's just your opinion, before giging your opinion you FAILED in understanding the military election and then failed in reading this thread. Must suck failing at everything.

People will work on their champion doing quests along the month and yata yata, then the champion will come in a free-for-all event.

Fuck that, just make mayor whoever is the month's real PvPer. The PvP ranking is in the scope already, just use this and trash this bullshipt champion idea.

your pathetic and toxic. Not going to take you serious. You are acting like a child

insomnia

Arya_Yeshe wrote: »

insomnia wrote: »

Arya_Yeshe wrote: »

@insomnia yes, here is the subject:

Mayors of military nodes are chosen from citizens through last man standing (gladiatorial arena style) combat.[42][45][46]

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.

That's just your opinion, before giging your opinion you FAILED in understanding the military election and then failed in reading this thread. Must suck failing at everything.

People will work on their champion doing quests along the month and yata yata, then the champion will come in a free-for-all event.

Fuck that, just make mayor whoever is the month's real PvPer. The PvP ranking is in the scope already, just use this and trash this bullshipt champion idea.

I didn't fail to understand it. I just didn't read it all. That is my fault, i admit that. But i took it from the wiki.

Arya_Yeshe

insomnia wrote: »

I didn't fail to understand it. I just didn't read it all. That is my fault, i admit that. But i took it from the wiki.

I'm sorry, I completely lashed out on you because I realized you didn't read or you were just trying to attack.

So, yo didn't read the wiki and didn't read the posts, it's fine then!

insomnia

Arya_Yeshe wrote: »

insomnia wrote: »

I didn't fail to understand it. I just didn't read it all. That is my fault, i admit that. But i took it from the wiki.

I'm sorry, I completely lashed out on you because I realized you didn't read or you were just trying to attack.

So, yo didn't read the wiki and didn't read the posts, it's fine then!

I didn't read all of it. But i see you are still being toxic. No point in debatingt with you. You aren't mature enough for it

Sybil_Lanel

Arya_Yeshe wrote: »

Neurath wrote: »

I prefer the champion arena which we got added many months back.

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.

I agree I would rather have someone who involves themselves in wars, caravans and sieges. I would also assume that the players who do better than other will be more likely to become Mayor. Considering they would be having more impact than Arena fights I feel like that's only fair. I'm more of a PvE player myself but I don't think arenas should solely be the way you are elected.

kuldar1994

Either 1v1 arena or battleroyale mode is way to go imo- so most skilled player gets mayor instead of the one that has most time to play.

Kesthely

Arya_Yeshe wrote: »

The actual system's proposal sucks, I will list the three problems in the current mayor election in the military node;
Problem #1: Along the month people will do quests and errands to improve their their champions, so these people won't be running their dungeons, fighting the wars, harvesting, etc. These quests are unrelated to other activities in the game

Problem #2: People who will be working in the champion evolution will be doing stuff that doesn't help you in becomming a better mayor, instead you should be preparing yourself against the node's enemies and competitors instead of running errands for this champion that is good for nothing other than in the election day

Problem #3: Players can fix results among themselves and simply ruin all the work you put into your champion over the month. Such schemes belong to the economic node, not to the military node

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.

Your assumng that the quests related to upgrading your gladiator avatar, has nothing to do with pvp, Majoral duties, or node related content. Why is that? It stands to reason that the quests would be related to pvp, node development or mayoral tasks.

I can forsee the quests beeing:
Kill x amount of players
kill x amount of players during a nodesiege
Kill x amount of players in your nodes ZoI
Guard x amount of caravans
Attack x amount of caravans
Participate in castle siege

This way you have to spend most of your time pvping in a way relevant to your node, instead of pvp stat farming, to get your gear upgrades, and in addition show your individual skill and commitment.

the system that you describe isvery similar to the classic wow pvp system. A system where skill in pvp is irrelevant, only your skill in coordinating rank positions, and online time .

Arya_Yeshe

@Kesthely those quests aren't PvX, Intrepid seems to push people into a balance of PvX, do PvE if you want PvP thing

This is why I simply started shooting in all directions. Having PvP quests would be slightly better, but it still suck. Also, if there's dailies it would be extremely disgusting

Quests suck because you would have to stop what you are doing and go do something else. I think tracking PvP activity somehow is way better, farming your PvP score where you can farm your PvP score is better

Not always you will have a node to siege

Terrifying_Truth

oh, I am starting to understand

if PvP actions results in points somehow, then you can fight a couple huge wars along the weeks, your hands would be full and you would farm such points

you wouldn't have to stop your wars

Arya_Yeshe

Terrifying_Truth wrote: »

oh, I am starting to understand

if PvP actions results in points somehow, then you can fight a couple huge wars along the weeks, your hands would be full and you would farm such points

you wouldn't have to stop your wars

Yes, the point is, you wouldn't need to stop what you're doing just to complete these bureaucratic tasks. If your train is already going at full speed, why stop and hop in another train and resume?

Gui10

I feel the end of month 1 time PvP event makes more sense. You can train all month but if you dont win the tourney, you are not a winner!

Plus the monthly PvP can be easily cheesed with friends. (so can the tourney, but much less easier)

Noaani

Arya_Yeshe wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

There is no reason to inherently assume a mayor will lead a siege defense.

People keep bringing this up, but the thing is that the mayor will have to setup the node, bring the guild leaders together, raise citizens awareness, will have to engage in diplomacy with other nodes, will have to work with the caravans to ensure their success, etc.

No, the mayor doesn't need to do any of this.

Since it is unusual for someone good at PvP to also be good at diplomacy (there are exceptions, but they are rare), it is actually best if the mayor DOESN'T do all of these things. They should only do any of these things if they are the best at those specific tasks.

A mayor absolutely could do these things, but there is no reason nor assumption that it has to be them that does them.

Kesthely

Arya_Yeshe wrote: »

@Kesthely those quests aren't PvX, Intrepid seems to push people into a balance of PvX, do PvE if you want PvP thing

This is why I simply started shooting in all directions. Having PvP quests would be slightly better, but it still suck. Also, if there's dailies it would be extremely disgusting

Quests suck because you would have to stop what you are doing and go do something else. I think tracking PvP activity somehow is way better, farming your PvP score where you can farm your PvP score is better

Not always you will have a node to siege

I don't think you understand what PvX means, it does NOT mean forced pvp or pve, it means that the game is designed that both pve and pvp are interwoven. City development (PvE activity) is interwoven with city destruction (PvP activity) It stands to reason that different node types require different activities to progress the node further. Military nodes have bounty system wich will grant it additional xp, that other nodes don't get, economic nodes get auctionhouses that other nodes don't get etc. One node type will favor pve more, the other pvp.

And why would having quests to upgrade your gladiator to have more chance to become a mayor suck? Becoming a mayor is a concious choice, I don't want someone who only pvp's and not interact with the rest of the node to suddenly become the mayor because hes the best pvp er. I want that pvp er that is actively defending the node, that has a vision of wich direction to go to, that wants to progress and win on a node basis. That player is different, it will have to do stuff, that not only benefits him, but the node in general. Node orientated quests, be it pvp or pve, to upgrade your gladiator help with that. Remember, as with all quests, you get to decide to accept a certain one or not.

What you want is a title to show your accomplishments on that month's pvp, what the citizens want is someone that takes the mayor job serious and dedicates his or her time to it.

Solvryn

Arya_Yeshe wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

There is no reason to inherently assume a mayor will lead a siege defense.

People keep bringing this up, but the thing is that the mayor will have to setup the node, bring the guild leaders together, raise citizens awareness, will have to engage in diplomacy with other nodes, will have to work with the caravans to ensure their success, etc

Specially knowing how to evaluate your node's pvp capacity and evaluating the other node's pvp capacity is a top player skill, because there are not graphs showing performance, no nothing, the mayor will have to run all simulations in his head and evaluate if the node can do this or see what he can do to help it's guilds.

It's the mayor who will put together all that and talk to his citizens, he doesn't have to fight at all.

Generals are not city planners, they work with them. That’s why they are all Administrative staff.

Arya_Yeshe

@Kesthely quests suck because you have to pull yourself out of what you are doing and go do something else and grind that.

How do you even know what Iwant or other citizens want, are you some kind of mind reader? Because you are speaking for all players, maybe you can read the minds of all players of the future, I would love have such supernatural power.

The best leaders I had in other games where purely gankers and scammers, all carebear leaders were garbage. People who see the game from a militaristic and violent approach take the stuff seirously, including taking care of the player's structures.

I want that pvp er that is actively defending the node, that has a vision of wich direction to go to, that wants to progress and win on a node basis

But there is no quest in the world that can attest this.
Not only that, there is also a deficit about sitting in the node for the entire month doing quests, this is absolutely a bad idea, I think it's better if candidate travels and see what other nodes are doing.

A travelling PvP spy who saw and lived everything would be much better as mayor than someone who sat at the node and ran quests to help the node.

I am not 100% against quests tough, but when you bring quests to the table, there is a risk of becomming bad real fast.

Enigmatic Sage

Child Item