Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

huevos

Testers
  • Content Count

    6
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About huevos

  • Rank
    Hatchling

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Washington State, USA
  1. Start on a large map with several rune gates leading outward. Many temples spread out to sacrifice to. Each temple points to a different biome type map. Sacrifice at highest opens the gates into that island permanently during the fall season. Seasons rapidly change on each map and then are destroyed, leaving no way back to start. Repeats until campaign ends at set number of map jumps or at a final map. Maybe some maps only point to certain other biomes, or certain biomes lead to a specific final map. Factions would try to open to maps with certain resources or better terrain for fighting in. e.g., mountainous and mineral rich vs. plains and animal rich vs. forest tree rich vs. almost no resources and treacherous monster inhabited dungeons etc. Factions could be almost anything, either by guild or by god or by alignment or FFA.
  2. instead of a total loss of mats, how about returned them with reduced quality?
  3. I'm not pushing anything. This is a suggestion box, and I was just posting ideas. There's no need to get worked up trying to defend ideas that aren't being attacked. No pushing, no nazis, no misleading vividness. I agree that the devs are smart people, which is why putting forth ideas that are radical to the norm can only help to inspire them in their designs. Having a nice conversation about it only expands thought on the subject, which is my real goal in posting. To just throw some thoughts around. Thanks for the help, at any rate. The best way to keep a topic on top is to have someone just keep replying =)
  4. Based on the ideas of ACE posts in the past, it is my understanding that they want to promote a diverse and rewarding game experience for many paths. Since there's no way to truly balance such game play choices, it comes down to risk vs. reward. The risk of guarding a caravan in your back lines vs front lines determines pay for guard duty and it balances itself. But what about defending a front line castle? The risk is huge. You will be attacked, you will die, you will have gear and vessel degradation. Attackers don't carry sacks of gold to hand you and, unless they believe they will win the engagement, will probably not have great gear for you either. So the reward is going to be much lower than the risk. Just one example. In a months long campaign there are bound to be many lop sided situations and your personal wealth will fluctuate. Some people will come out very rich, others will come out worse than before. In the end, though, the resulting 'winners' are always going to be the most selfish, self serving players. That doesn't promote a very healthy community, it doesn't promote collective goals. Having currencies tied to realms isn't closing off economies... look at real world examples. Every major nation in the world uses it's own currency and has it's own economy and exercises controls, or laws, over it. And they trade with each other. It creates a disconnect between the value of an item between countries, so that it has to be interpreted within that economy to have value. That's where player merchants come into play. It adds emphasis on your local economy, giving it a higher value to promote and engage in. Having everyone use a unified currency in effect creates a single economic bubble, which is less diverse in it's trade potential and player interactions. As for the germans.. of course the allies traded with them before, during, and after ww2.
  5. I'm not so sure that it is counter to the intent... Having a hard time envisioning an economy based on a crafted currency obtained from harvesting when half the population is going to be focusing on pvp combat which doesn't generate money. How is the guild scout making money? The guard on the wall? Everyone just devolves into a farmer... Also having a hard time with the practicalities of global trade in a pvp game. The hardest raids are going to be the dregs to get the best crafting mats where it's every guild for itself. All crafting mats are useful. Why would a guild trade away any of them? Especially to their enemies/competitors? How would a free for all standard economy work during a campaign? when everyone enters naked and it's extremely dependent on the guild to take care of itself to get going, giving all the mats to the best suited crafters in the guild to produce the gear for the warriors to go protect them, and then half the guild is focused on fighting and not making any money while the other half what.. charges for the gear? I also think most guilds would be mostly trading away the junk they don't need, like crafted items that aren't up to the standard they can afford. A common currency is a great way to trade such items, and having a baseline 'gold' coin is great for such instances. But that idea isn't contrary to or exclusive to other currencies. Games like WoW have craploads of currencies, for example. Every MMO I've ever played for any appreciable amount of time always boiled down to how fun the guild experience was, how connected you were to the other players. The throne simulator idea really appeals to me in that regard, so it seems natural to look for ways to innovate on ways to integrate social and game systems to make the bonds stronger.
  6. I haven't seen anything official about money or how that would work, so here's my suggestion on how to implement a currency into the game while keeping with the aesthetics of a throne simulator. Create a non-transferable currency that is entirely contained within each eternal kingdom called honor. It is attached to each EK for each player that is formally a part of the EK. i.e. every king, duke, baron, and vassal but specifically not for visitors or independent merchants. Primarily earned through completion of campaigns, as incentive for staying the course. The king of the EK sets a campaign as the official royal prerogative and the guild follows suit to earn their honors. Possibly secondary goals (or War Goals) earn more, like killing x people, crafting x quality item, arming x people, steal items, etc. Other means of creating it within the EK itself could exist, determined by the king's laws. Primarily depleted through promotion to a higher rank in the guild, buying guild items, or through dishonorable actions. The liege lord would have the ability to remove honor from a vassal as either a penalty to them or in trade for rewards, like who gets the best parcel of land, who gets the best items for the next campaign, etc. By leaving it entirely up to the liege, you would quickly earn a reputation for better or worse on how you treat your vassals. It should also decay over time. The nobility levels in the kingdom would impose other rules to honor, like a max amount, decay rate, earned for yourself vs earned from your vassals earning it. In effect, it would create an organic and localized currency for each realm that scaled to the size of the realm. It would create a system for players to create their own social content, or meta game even, and add flavor to the time you spend inside the eternal kingdoms. You would eliminate money farmers and sellers as there is no way to do so, or point in doing so (albeit not material farmer bots). Other items, like crafting materials, are still their own form of marketable currency that wouldn't be affected by inflation in each kingdom as honor is non transferable. A poorly managed economy will cause it's own problems for a realm, but a wise king will be able to guide his realm to prosperity. The meaning of the currency would differ from realm to realm as well. Consider a thieves guild, where honor is earned by setting the war goal to stealing as many items as possible.
×
×
  • Create New...