Walpurgisnacht

Does anyone still have the picture? The link is no longer working.

The game is buy to play right? The person would have to buy the game more than once?

I share all my paid MMO accounts with brother since we live together. It's against the terms of service of course, but who's telling? Besides, I would argue that it is not against the spirit of the terms of service, which is to prevent people from losing their stuff and crying to CS.

Are you talking about gear score or criminal record?

I love the idea of player-run tribunals. I know that there are concerns of it ending up getting political but for me, that is what makes it so exciting. Just look at the International Criminal Court for war crimes. It's a great idea and every country agrees, right? Wrong. For example, Palestine wants to join but is being threatened by the U.S. (non-member) and its close allies to protect Israel (non-member) because people who get in trouble with the ICC cannot enter ICC states (most of the world) without being detained by government officials. This kind of thing would be so awesome in an MMO. These are the kind of ideas that wouldn't be possible in big budget MMOs after the WoW boom. I think you guys should give it a shot and if it doesn't work out, there is always the old way of doing things. Edit: I just realised this scenario could be applied to Eternal Kingdoms or marketplaces.

Book of the Guilty from Dark Souls. Basically, when another player invades your world and kills you, you are given the option to indict them (after you're dead). Indicting them adds them to the Book of the Guilty which is used by a policing type faction (that players join) who invade the worlds of people on this list. I guess it's kind of like a twist on a bounty system but I think it is a neat idea (especially the book part and the self-policing part).

I am also very happy with how the mount mechanics work. It's an excellent base as it is and allows for a lot of the ideas posters here (and myself) have suggested to be added in updates, if they aren't in already.

I don't know if this has been mentioned, but I think the reason why zergs are such a problem in other MMOs is because they support zergs by design. In WoW and Guild Wars 2, there is a cap on how many enemies you can hurt with AoEs. For example, as a mage or elementalist, I can cast Blizzard on a massive zerg of 80 people and only 5 of them will take damage, and I think the damage is actually divided by 5 too (tooltip says 100 dmg, each person takes 20 dmg). This makes it so that there is no reason NOT to be in a zerg. I think zergs have their place but there should be risk involved. The simple solution: Remove the AoE cap so that aggregating in a small area becomes dangerous. Other anti-zerg abilities can be added (like freezing an entire zerg for 1 minute). I haven't played Dark Age of Camelot but I believe it had mechanics similar to this. An alternative solution: FFXIV has a 24 vs 24 vs 24 mode called Frontlines. I have never seen a zerg in this mode because it is extremely structured. Each team of 24 is split into 3 parties of 8 with 2 healers + 2 tanks + 4 dps. Parties generally stick together and focus on a single objective for the whole match. Players stick to their roles because they have no choice (i.e. healers dmg is garbage). I don't think this idea would work for this game but it is an interesting approach.

It looks like Crowfall is in good hands.

I couldn't agree more and I would love to be a Ned Stark. Every player doesn't need to have their own kingdom and castle. It can be just as fun to be Ned Stark and be loyal to someone or be like Tyrion Lannister and enjoy the perks of being close to power.

I guess the campaigns are it then. I was kind of hoping for something more in the Eternal Kingdoms. I've read what Todd said happened in Shadowbane and I understand the concern there but I think it is something that needs to be overcome. I actually really like the campaign idea but I was hoping for there to be a political meta game outside of it. Something like "guild 1 is feeling threatened by guild 2 so guild 1 starts stockpiling on resources by going into FFA campaigns" or "guild 1 puts sanctions on guild 2 so their allied guilds can't trade with them (unless its a drop trade, if they want to be sneaky)". I don't know. I was hoping for stuff like in Game of Thrones I guess. I don't know how expecting thrones and war in a throne war simulator makes me a t-r-o-l-l but okay (t-r-o-l-l without dashes turns into player for some reason).

Game of Thrones IS that good and I think this MMO has the best chance to be like it. I just want to make sure that they are keeping the label "Throne War Simulator" in mind as they develop because right now, I haven't seen much evidence of that.

Where are the thrones and the wars? So far, I have only seen self-contained campaigns and a trophy room called the Eternal Kingdom (this might be an exaggeration ). I want to see more stuff like the fealty system and player relations. I've read through the FAQ and everything about this game (and I am very hyped!) but I can't figure out why it is called a Throne War Simulator.

I haven't read the books and have only seen the show (all caught up) but am I the only one who finds his turn around strange? In episode 1, he does a cartoonishly evil thing and says "The things I do for love!" and later on fights dirty against Ned and is just a hooligan for so long. He was just an irredeemable unpleasant person but I....sort of like him now. It's hard to forget what he's done in the past and I feel like I am being manipulated by the author for liking him. Does anyone know if this jarring change in character is restricted to the show or is it in the books as well?

Excellent OP that summarises my issues with this game and provides a solution that I never thought of. I really hope ACE incorporates something like this. People need some sort of meaningful permanence to anchor themselves to.