Howdy, Stranger!
Categories
- 3.7K All Categories
- 3K The Midnight Age
- 757 Announce posts
- 125 Newbies
- 6 Class Guides
- 804 Harpy's Head Tavern
- 57 Echo Canyon
- 310 Self-Affirmations
- 163 Town Crier
- 135 The Exchange
- 167 Sparring Grounds
- Combat Guides
- 30 Combat Logs
- 188 Idea Box
- 9 Classleads
- 578 Roleplay Logs
- 107 Aetolia Development
- 5 The Void
- 744 Miscellaneous
- 9 Announcements
- 417 OOC Chat
- 217 Tech Talk
- 47 Scripts
Looking for more active discussion? Join our Discord at https://discord.gg/x2s7fY6
PROPOSED IDEA: NPC-Ran City-State: Esterport
Have a fifth City in the game with the political structure dictated by NPC's.
Laws devised as a Neutral Merchantry City/State
No protection within boundaries but a way for those who dont desire to participate in a tether, to work alongside bolstering Esterport as an up and coming City.
Develop Research for a Pylon for Esterport, allowing openings in trade between Esterport and Delve...pushing a furthering of the Free City and the merchants goals.
A Communications channel for rogue players to help Citymates within the City and plan events. No Tethering but also no Ylem bonuses such as Manipulation.
Ylem works, collection of Mists, purchasing wares, and gold tithe for ylem collection top three ranks for members of the City.
I think there are -alot- of people who are kinda over the tether system and being forced to either be Enorian or Bloodloch, the other two cities Spinesreach and Duiran Council are somewhat forced within the idealism of the others in the means of conflict despite perhaps organizational difference this is not going to change, and we -have- to deal with these other Cities and that will never change, and cant change.
There is no reason to have treaties or political grounding as its always just a status quo.
Consideration for a Fifth Player run city could also work...
Might shake things up a bit.
I know there are plenty of players who dont really fit the mold of Undeath or Light, and right now the RP in between isnt strong enough to not really change away from that.
I dont know the tether system is just boring and I havent seen any reason other than us being told "Well this is just how it is"
Laws devised as a Neutral Merchantry City/State
No protection within boundaries but a way for those who dont desire to participate in a tether, to work alongside bolstering Esterport as an up and coming City.
Develop Research for a Pylon for Esterport, allowing openings in trade between Esterport and Delve...pushing a furthering of the Free City and the merchants goals.
A Communications channel for rogue players to help Citymates within the City and plan events. No Tethering but also no Ylem bonuses such as Manipulation.
Ylem works, collection of Mists, purchasing wares, and gold tithe for ylem collection top three ranks for members of the City.
I think there are -alot- of people who are kinda over the tether system and being forced to either be Enorian or Bloodloch, the other two cities Spinesreach and Duiran Council are somewhat forced within the idealism of the others in the means of conflict despite perhaps organizational difference this is not going to change, and we -have- to deal with these other Cities and that will never change, and cant change.
There is no reason to have treaties or political grounding as its always just a status quo.
Consideration for a Fifth Player run city could also work...
Might shake things up a bit.
I know there are plenty of players who dont really fit the mold of Undeath or Light, and right now the RP in between isnt strong enough to not really change away from that.
I dont know the tether system is just boring and I havent seen any reason other than us being told "Well this is just how it is"
1
Comments
Next, if you start putting shadow and spirit classes onto the same side, say hello massive combat imbalance in teamfights and small skirmishes. That means they'd have to rebalance classes for ONE city that could very well screw over the individual users, because it's happened before.
There was a 5th player run city once upon a time. One way or another, they flopped to one side as a survival tactic. Aside from the fact that the dwindling number of players in this game would be spread out even thinner with the addition of another city, that in and of itself would cause conflict imbalances. The resulting scenario is going to be 2v2v1, 3v2, 1v4 and it's going to result in a massive whinefest one way or another when it comes to conflict, because someone is going to get the short end of the stick.
You're also being far too polarizing. There IS an in between of Light and Undeath. It's called Duiran and Spinesreach. Duiran doesn't really care what you do, just don't touch their trees. Spinesreach doesn't seems to care what you do, just don't touch their spires. Bloodloch is undeath or gtfo, and Enorian are the light worshippers. Also, cities CAN change and HAVE changed.
Lastly, the tether system got put into place because players wanted more conflict. You might see it as boring, but without it the conflict scene would be a huge clusterpluck that nobody would even want to touch on.
Basically, what you're asking for has previously existed and it didn't work for various reasons, but these are just a few to name off the top of my head. So that's why things are the way they are right now. But what do I know, we're moving to Albedos about 5 years in the making with new cities, factions, and a whole bunch of other exciting ball ticklers. At least, it's happening trademark soon.
If you made a fifth player run city or even a fifth city in general, it would skew the game way too much. Simply being is that if this city was completely neutral, there would be absolutely no reason to fight at all. People who don't enjoy conflict would just flock to this neutral city and just play there. The four founded cities would crumble and be eradicated into history because 3 people can't keep up with all of the requirements to run a city. Additionally, at this point, there would be no reason to run a city at all.
This would cause conflict to become completely erased. There would no point in having Orrery anymore, no point in lessers/majors, and no point in pretty much any continued conflict system that we currently have. Even the gods would have no reason to squabble with each other because they'd all be represented in this neutral city to appease everyone, which removes even more conflict, especially for the admins (though I'm sure this would ease up a lot of their time as well if they're not having to RP bickering with each other).
However, it would not really cause any imbalance in team combat that there isn't already. As it stands, there's no real rules that says a Templar can't fight with a Praenomen, or a Zealot can't fight with a Teradrim. It would make this city superbly overpowered though with the ability of having every class at its disposal with 0 repercussions, because the founding cities wouldn't be able to force them to drop the class... especially if everyone rallies to protect the rogue person. People already whinge about the numbers game, this would be no different. However, Esterport wouldn't need to fight for any reason because they're neutral and they wouldn't care what happened so long as Lanu Du isn't trying to destroy the world.
That said, Bloodloch is not all about undeath (though that is our primary focus still) as Bloodloch now accepts living members. Though we're still not sold on Yeleni joining the ranks.
Before I move onto the discussion I would like to state that tether system itself limits the conflict. It places artificial sides, yes there will be occasional conflicts among lumped-up cities but they will be small/medium scale dramas. What I would like is to break the tethers totally and put city RP on the fore instead of Shadow vs Spirit. For example, Spinesreach is full of living beings, why not Bloodloch try to dominate them, enslave them and teach them their undead superiority? Instead Bloodloch bends its laws to allow living to become citizens. Sure that is a sound decision, but still then Bloodloch can set its sights on Spinesreach regardless of they give citizenry to undead or not. Try to subjugate it to its will in one way or another. It is easy to RP "We are dominators!" and chest-thump; let us see you dominate and prove that might makes right? The other three cities should be nothing compared to the glory of Bloodloch. Bloodloch will not because when the tether related conflicts come, they have to fight together. So why truly bother? In the long run tethers will always stiffen the maneuver area the cities could have without them. The cities sharing same gods also make some ties stronger, so the possibility of ally conflict is reduced dramatically.
Now the small back and forths in the past, can be considered as conflict examples, sure. But the mechanical tether implication will not encourage people to break ties with their allies in the end. So what is actually needed is to put forward points of interest which will turn allies into rivals or enemies, serious objectives not subgame conflicts when it is done they will go on their merry ways. Set them against each other, fan the flames.
Let us return to idea of @Runas that kind of thing has been accomplished very well with a Nationality mechanic in MKO back in time. Every city had Nationality i.e you could not be a citizen of Krondor but could still be national of the Kingdom of the Isles and capture certain points of interest on the map. The Free City of Natal was the Esterport counterpart of the game and it had a nationality too. Also only FCN nationality could be hired as mercenaries, in city-initiated sieges, otherwise like a city Nationality they could still capture/liberate townes. For example, Port Natal being a part of Free Cities, was a conflict zone. That would give a motivation for a FCN national to strike back whether it is Krondor, Elvandar or Sar-Sargoth tried to dominate the place. Of course Nationality mechanic would not fit to Aetolia since cities are not part of a greater whole mostly.
Of course, rogues/non-fitting should never be on the same footing with cities and in no IRE game even in MKO (which provided a good accomodation to roguery) they were not in equal footing. But it is a point of interest for a certain subset of players, they can be more inclined to purchase things if their preferred roles can be enabled in a sense. It is great to encourage organizational RP, but then it is great to RP as a vagabond, wandering skald, freeblade, mercenary or even an evil necromancer living at a distant tower plotting the next movement.
So any idea which expands the roles upon the game and provides new avenues of conflict/RP would be a worthy idea and should be considered seriously.
Edit: Also doomsayers will always exist, but time and again I have seen that neutrality does not have to be nice or conflict-less. Perhaps I should rather say roguery (i.e not belonging/fitting to cities) does not equate to pacifist neutrality, you still have your own storylines. That is my perception and experience though.
@Runas Ashtan did this. Ashtan was destroyed because this was a really really bad idea in practice. To use Achaea, Cyrene and Hashan are "neutral" and they... sit there. They're pretty useless in the grand scheme of things. With a playerbase this small, it's really not feasible.
That said, adding a fifth city into the mix which will allow everyone to flock there and raise a banner of neutrality so that we no longer have to fight each other, will kill the game. Sure, it might have worked in MKO, but Aetolia is not MKO. MKO didn't even make it 10 years, I believe they only made it 6 years. So let's not blunder the success (or failure as it was) with that of Aetolia.
Does neutrality mean that no conflict will arise? No. It just means that its further decreased. Why bother paying attention to some half baked city of 3 vampires who proudly beat their chest about being superior when you can be like 'Eh. We've a city of 30 people, all of whom agree in neutrality. You can't do shit. Go back to your holes peons.' and boom, just like that. All conflict is over. Why bother trying to fight against undeath, or light, or go against the woods, or anything else? As a city, you have to bring people together, tie them together. A neutral city would essentially allow everyone to work together, in one big happy family.
Additionally, this "neutral" city would then proceed to wreck shop on every little event that came its way. The leadership would decide on something that doesn't really advance the world or hinder the world either because they'd rather keep things neutral. This also kills conflict. The only conflict you would have at this point is who will be your leaders.
Also, like Trager said, there's no such thing as neutrality. Eventually, this city would be forced to pick a side. Good or evil. Shadow or spirit. Light or dark.
...I know a neutral city wont happen, it doesnt fit in this game...
(Sub-thought) RIP MKO, theres a reason you didn't work
Maybe more quests in Esterport though. If I would have realized Kalak would have supported this idea as strongly as he did I wouldn't have even mentioned it.
Next thing you know im buying tiki torches...
Its a downward spiral from here
And the artifact along its mechanical comforts, has RP reasons behind it which you possibly do not care. Maybe you do, maybe one day you can surprise me with your ability to differentiate between character and player. That remains to be seen.
@Runas The main reason it did not work was financially, not that it had botched mechanics or such or lack of player interest to support the game. It was not an IRE-brand IP so it was presenting constant costs annually. At the end of the day this is a business.
Also that is true if I offered this idea, I dread to think. I mean when I offered just a title change ability for clans, we were speaking about end of Aetolia...so an idea of this magnitude would turn into people discussing IRE going out of business, I suppose.
Spireans might not care that you are friends with Lighters, but I can assure you that most Enorianites will not approve that you befriend Spireans or Lochians, and same probably goes for Duiranites. They will dub you Darkie, because you befriend the Undead and their allies. So, even if YOU consider yourself neutral, many in the game will not, resulting in you not really being neutral. If you refuse to pick a side, the game will pick one for you and it will most likely be Shadow.
That said... I do believe an NPC "5th city" would be beneficial to the game if it served more as a launch pad for campaigns and story arcs for the admin to use instead of acting as another city for players to join. While the Dre... I can't for the life of me remember their names but the dragon people that dominate Albedos - while they serve as great antagonists, I'm not aware of any ways for the players to strike back. The other NPC towns, villages, and cities that decorate the game are for the most part static. It would be interesting then if there was a mechanic introduced that allowed players to interact with them on a more fluid level. It would also be good to have a centralized hub of NPCs that players could negotiate, attack, and defend themselves from on occasionally to shake up the status quo.
But we'll hit it in the townhall, neutrality specifically.
(no one)
The Council of Five: Qayyam, Holgraid, Tirriki, Rhav, and Veran
Lord-Provost of the Ecclesiarch: Wahelei
Seneschal of the Guard: Horvatz
Prelate of the Helm: Kull
Nestled on the far north-western coast of southern Albedos, the Port City of
Delve is the last bastion of hope for the populace of those not yet
enslaved by the Dreikathi. Its very location provides a sphere of
natural protection, and effectively has been cut off from the rest of
the continent. Bordered on three sides by typhoon-prone
waters, the city is guarded by sea as well as protected via land by the
expanse of the Dramedo Crags to the east.
With the Dreikathi having razed all other cities and settlements not under their iron fist, the port
of Delve quickly grew into a melting pot of all the various races of Albedos. The city itself is a
sprawling assortment of various districts
ranging from the massive docklands to the expansive military yards. Delve is a bustling city that
despite the threat of the Dreikathi, is full of life.
Those counted as enemies of the Dreikathi are welcomed as allies within
the walls of Delve, as long as they abide by the laws of the city. Delve
is also home to the only known access point between both the continent
of Sapience and that of Albedos outside of attempting to brave the
violent waters that separate them.
lol WHAT DO YOU MEANT IT COULD BE COOL
Cause we have to make NPC cities great again. Nobody takes care of cities better than Pmurt. Pmurt knows all the cities, has friends in all of them.
Though people put too much meaning into the word "neutrality" and take it granted that neutral will mean they will be utterly harmless and within their own world. On the contrary you can still be harmful, influential and assertive while you are neutral. Of course, your actions may benefit one side or the other depending on how the story of your character unfolds. But that does not mean you pledged for those sides.
There is allure to not be in any of the organizations. And a game is as strong as it can accomodate many varying roles. It is always nice to encourage organizational participation. But when it comes to RP vs organizational advantages, I would not be moved.
From business perspective, allowing a pylon within Esterport would be great which would give non-aligned players to participate in ylem stuff too. That translates to them caring about Refining skillset and whatever ylem-entails (artifacts, antiquated goggles, antiquated gauntlets etc.) Maybe even allowing them to choose only one tree from the various trees for their efforts would be cool. But let me not get ahead of myself.
In the end, established people who control the player-run resources will always look at neutrality/rogueness/non-aligning suspiciously. It is an unpredictable element after all.