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

The Issue Is Not Campaign Permanence: We Need An Iron Throne


taroskin

Recommended Posts

Pretty much what everyone has been saying since day one to be honest.

The typical response is a mixture of "bluuuurg Undying worlds will last long time" and "bluuuuurg we don't know enough about the EK yet"

Edited by phatcat09

#CrowFallBata


~Sweet Sensations~


puppy punch Count: 28

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well said taroskin, the fact that the gameplay equation is currently missing a piece have been bothering me for quite a while.

Campaign > Resources > Eternal Kingdom > ? > Campaign

 

Yes, this is what irked me too! There really isn't a mechanic that is binding the temporary Campaigns to the Eternal Kingdoms that defines success in a way that competitive guilds or players will respect.

 

Great post taroskin!  This is absolutely what I've been saying ever since EK was revealed to be a lobby.  Very well written.

 

 

Pretty much what everyone has been saying since day one to be honest.

 

The typical response is a mixture of "bluuuurg Undying worlds will last long time" and "bluuuuurg we don't know enough about the EK yet"

 

 

Thanks for that guys. I'm honestly confident that we can work with the team by providing feedback to help them solve issues like this. It really is a big issue, and the only one that is a common point of contention on nearly every forum/community that is talking about this game. It pops up everywhere - and it rings true, unfortunately. So let's brainstorm, give feedback and hope that it's mended. :)

Crazy Talk co-co-co-gl

Guardians of Moonforest fangirl

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the fealty system was tied to it somehow, which is what I think you are suggesting. 

 

That would be the perfect way to handle it.  Success in campaigns means eventually becoming King, which means having some power.  Tax collection, granting land, etc.  The people the King treats well will want to assist him to make sure he keeps winning campaigns.  Everyone else will want to depose him and you will have situations where suddenly enemies are working together to force a loss of power on the king, once they realize he is in their same campaign.  This also creates situations where a Duke gets greedy and wants the throne for himself, creating opportunity and motive for epic backstab plots.

 

It's essentially a ladder system, but way cooler then just a silly scoreboard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the issue here is the use of the MMO Moniquer.

They should drop the words MMO entirely since it incites the wrong image in players minds.

I am guessing the strategy is reel people in with relevant interest and then attempt to keep them here in this new Genre, which will naturally be re-branded later.

Edited by phatcat09

#CrowFallBata


~Sweet Sensations~


puppy punch Count: 28

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just finished the recent interview with Todd and Gordon (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_mfs7iubYH0#t=2173) and unfortunately, our hopes and suggestions for the Eternal Kingdoms don't seem to fit their vision for the game. :(

 

I don't think that's necessarily so. He obviously made the thread about permanence because he's willing to adapt things. The thing is, there has to be a point that the team is willing to listen to and act on feedback. The automated response to feedback asking for change cannot always be "That's not our vision", because that's a sure way to both piss off the community and make a car crash of a game. I'm hopeful they're here and listening, especially because this is such a massive issue for a lot of players, and an issue that blatantly contradicts the core tenents of the game. They are saying this is a PvP focused, competitive, risk/reward, throne war game - but as stated in the OP those things are severely lacking based on the design presented so far.

 

We are not publishers telling them to change the game for X Y Z arbitrary or financial or time reasons. We are their playerbase saying, "yeah, that's OK, and we love the other parts of the game & your vision, but this specific thing? It could be better and here's how" - it would be remiss to ignore such feedback.

Edited by taroskin

Crazy Talk co-co-co-gl

Guardians of Moonforest fangirl

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To appease the crowd wishing for the EK to have a broader meaning, it needs to find that fine line between a permanent campaign, and a reflection of the success of a guild/individual in the decaying campaigns.

 

I support the EK having a broader meaning. I do not support the EK being just another place for hardcore PVP'er's to get their epeen on.

 

If PVP is open in the EK, then the campaigns lose their worth. Any PVP in the EK needs to be controlled, and specific to the struggle for the Iron Throne. (if that is what such a pinnacle of power is named)

 

I see what you are suggesting, I just don't yet see what the EK needs.

So what if 'PVP' in the EK is mostly done by huge armies of NPCs? And you drop into a Battleground-esque system for major battles, which involves player characters on the field at pre-scheduled intervals, with objective-based maps. Get the bomb to the fortress walls kinda thing.

 

Campaign -> Resources -> Eternal Kingdom -> Army (uses resources) -> Throne War -> Army runs out of resources -> Campaign for more resources

Edited by Psyentific

Hardcore gamer & tabletop enthusiast. Enjoys roleplaying, pretending to be stupid, and one-sided fun.

Goodposting 101: How to Keep the Forums Clean

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think that's necessarily so. He obviously made the thread about permanence because he's willing to adapt things. The thing is, there has to be a point that the team is willing to listen to and act on feedback. The automated response to feedback asking for change cannot always be "That's not our vision", because that's a sure way to both piss off the community and make a car crash of a game. I'm hopeful they're here and listening, especially because this is such a massive issue for a lot of players, and an issue that blatantly contradicts the core tenents of the game. They are saying this is a PvP focused, competitive, risk/reward, throne war game - but as stated in the OP those things are severely lacking based on the design presented so far.

 

We are not publishers telling them to change the game for X Y Z arbitrary or financial or time reasons. We are their playerbase saying, "yeah, that's OK, and we love the other parts of the game & your vision, but this specific thing? It could be better and here's how" - it would be remiss to ignore such feedback.

 

I don't know. I hope I am wrong, but I think it was a pretty clear "no". The problem might be that by making the Eternal Kingdoms too important, it would detract from the campaigns, which is the whole main selling point and core mechanic of the game. The best we can get will most likely be a permanent campaign, which is probably why he made a thread on that and not an Eternal Kingdoms discussion directly.

Edited by Mytherceria
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know. I hope I am wrong, but I think it was a pretty clear "no". The problem might be that by making the Eternal Kingdoms too important, it would detract from the campaigns, which is the whole main selling point and core mechanic of the game. The best we can get will most likely be a permanent campaign, which is probably why he made a thread on that and not an Eternal Kingdoms discussion directly.

Yes but the Eteranl Kingdom can only grow from doing the campaign and bring back the building blocks for the kingdom.....that in and of itself makes the campaign impotant.

Edited by thorbeinn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know. I hope I am wrong, but I think it was a pretty clear "no". The problem might be that by making the Eternal Kingdoms too important, it would detract from the campaigns, which is the whole main selling point and core mechanic of the game. The best we can get will most likely be a permanent campaign, which is probably why he made a thread on that and not an Eternal Kingdoms discussion directly.

I suppose we'll  just have to wait and see. :)

Life is not a Destination  -- Enjoy the Journey

Stand back, then, my friend. Stand back, watch and learn.

wxDQ4r3.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know. I hope I am wrong, but I think it was a pretty clear "no". The problem might be that by making the Eternal Kingdoms too important, it would detract from the campaigns, which is the whole main selling point and core mechanic of the game. The best we can get will most likely be a permanent campaign, which is probably why he made a thread on that and not an Eternal Kingdoms discussion directly.

 

Really? I thought this was a Throne War game. I want to war, for a throne.

So far we've got the war, but now we're all looking around and saying "Alright, where's the throne?"

Edited by Psyentific

Hardcore gamer & tabletop enthusiast. Enjoys roleplaying, pretending to be stupid, and one-sided fun.

Goodposting 101: How to Keep the Forums Clean

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My understanding and from some of the posts/information I have seen is that EK will represent success in campaigns. Those who win will be able to bring back more resources to build up their EK faster. You also get  "Trophies" for winning. I definitely want to see a website based leader board in terms of # of campaign wins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know. I hope I am wrong, but I think it was a pretty clear "no". The problem might be that by making the Eternal Kingdoms too important, it would detract from the campaigns, which is the whole main selling point and core mechanic of the game. The best we can get will most likely be a permanent campaign, which is probably why he made a thread on that and not an Eternal Kingdoms discussion directly.

 

I think there's absolutely a way to do it without making it a campaign. For example, it could quite easily just be a fealty system. Or it could be a system based on sieges within the EK, which are time-gated and require Campaign resources, so the campaigns would always take precedence.

 

The idea is for a mechanic that takes your success from the Campaigns and displays it clearly in the Eternal Kingdoms for all to see, with tangible benefits that are coveted. That way the campaigns are always the important parts.

 

 

 

My understanding and from some of the posts/information I have seen is that EK will represent success in campaigns. Those who win will be able to bring back more resources to build up their EK faster. You also get  "Trophies" for winning. I definitely want to see a website based leader board in terms of # of campaign wins.

 

 

 

So for me to find out who's top dog, I have to rummage through a MILLION (maybe more) personal kingdoms to find out who has the Magical Onyx Dragon of Pearly Eyes hanging on their wall? Again, this harkens back to the fact that these things are first off, not very visible, secondly not very meaningful (they are purely cosmetic) and thirdly not coveted. The competitive playerbase will not find motivation, political intrigue, alliance and rival nuances by coveting your diamond ring collection back in your castle.

 

 

Going back to Crowfall's example here:

 

Campaigns are games of Risk. There are multiple games going on at once. Let's say, 5. So the game, Crowfall, isn't one game of risk - it's many.

 

So there are five of these games of Risk, and slowly someone wins each of them. But no one is keeping score of who wins which one. Finally, all 5 Campaigns end. Who won? No one? Everyone? Who knows, because we don't have any way of determining success.

 

Now imagine that there are five games of Risk and a castle in the middle. The person that wins the most games gets to control the castle, allowing them some minor benefits in the next games of Risk. Now we have a way to determine a winner, and we have a means of qualifying a win. The Eternal Kingdom should be that "Castle" in this scenario. But right now it's not a castle, you don't know who is winning and there is no real meaning to the five games of risk going on.

Edited by taroskin

Crazy Talk co-co-co-gl

Guardians of Moonforest fangirl

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My understanding and from some of the posts/information I have seen is that EK will represent success in campaigns. Those who win will be able to bring back more resources to build up their EK faster. You also get  "Trophies" for winning. I definitely want to see a website based leader board in terms of # of campaign wins.

 

But if that's all it is, it's just some meaningless measure of points. You win all the campaigns forever, but all you get is this cool shirt.

I don't want a cool shirt, who cares about a cool shirt? I wanna be Emperor of the Universe!

Edited by Psyentific

Hardcore gamer & tabletop enthusiast. Enjoys roleplaying, pretending to be stupid, and one-sided fun.

Goodposting 101: How to Keep the Forums Clean

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know. I hope I am wrong, but I think it was a pretty clear "no". The problem might be that by making the Eternal Kingdoms too important, it would detract from the campaigns, which is the whole main selling point and core mechanic of the game. The best we can get will most likely be a permanent campaign, which is probably why he made a thread on that and not an Eternal Kingdoms discussion directly.

I think we really, really need to convince these devs otherwise.  My understanding of the current vision just doesn't make sense.  Actually I think the vision sounds like a pretty cool game I could waste some time on.  With a slight tweak; however, it could consume my entire life and be the greatest MMO ever created.

 

Campaign > Resources > Eternal Kingdom > ? > Campaign

 

They really need to fill in that question mark if they want to sell people on their vision as is.  Campaign's have export rules.  Why have export rules if you have limits on taking things into the next campaign?  Like was said, doing campaigns for resources just doesn't make any sense to turn around and do more campaigns for more resources.

Really? I thought this was a Throne War game. I want to war, for a throne.

So far we've got the war, but now we're all looking around and saying "Alright, where's the throne?"

Exactly.  I haven't figured out how this is a "Throne War Simulator" yet. =/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Excellent post OP.  PvP players are competitive and we want ways to measure our successes.  We love stats and statistical analysis. 

 

There a ton of methods that can be utilized.  

TWITCH.TV/PURPLEPOLOPLAYER

TWITTER @PURPLEPOLOPLAYA

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...