Sign in to follow this  
Battlepaw

PMKs on Freedom how would they work? Could they even work at all?

Recommended Posts

Was looking through the topic where everyone is complaining about the PvE rules. Well, got me thinking... what if Freedom had PMKs?     This would let players control territory.    This means if you are not in the PMK you wouldn't be able to put deeds down within the PMK territory.    


 


So how would it work?  Could it work?   


 


How would towers be exchanged?   For tower exchange, PvP tower caps, within that tower's influence during cap?   Or some other mechanics?   


 


Should KOS apply to tower guards?    


 


How about kingship/voting?     Or PMK types, such as democracy, theorcarcy (ruled by priests) Autocracy (by a few elite) Or Dictatorship?    Hell perhaps even a Parliamentary system, with village leaders, a citizens's council and a King/Queen.  


 


Personally having votes, to put people on KoS would be interesting, and putting deeds on KoS, etc should be a part of that but only with the vote majoiry of alliances, etc.     Hell it would be interesting to get servers to pool all their alliances into a server-sized PMK in the case of smaller servers at least, and ones the size of Xanadu may have larger servers.   


 


So.. what would you want to see in a PvE PMK?    


 


A PvE PMK would have to be very different than a PvP one on a fundamental level, as you would want an environment that would let players-self regulate, but not any type of system that would let a PMK have a massive negative effect on a server.   


 


The real question is... should players be given the power to regulate territory at all?  


Edited by Battlepaw
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We do have the right to regulate as much land as we want with deeds.


 


I for sure would not want to play a game where groups of players would control the wild/undeeded land on my server so if it was that kind of a thing i would want it on a new server or i would quit.  


 


We already have groups controlling the pvp servers i don't want that here on PvE.


  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't the idea of having and taking territory a fundamentally PvP feature...?


 


What could work however, would be a way to remove the free 5 tile perimeter in order to let alliance deeds touch yours and form a 'seamless' large deed, with each segment controlled by different people/ground.


Edited by Outlaw
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We do have the right to regulate as much land as we want with deeds.

 

I for sure would not want to play a game where groups of players would control the wild/undeeded land on my server so if it was that kind of a thing i would want it on a new server or i would quit.  

 

We already have groups controlling the pvp servers i don't want that here on PvE.

 

The whole point is to join that group, and participate in it.   That is why, there could be different PMK types, or perhaps only one type, with a balanced voting system.    Basicy we already have Alliances "taking" territory with perimeter, so we in effect alread have arguments and complaints over territory. So it's already a PvE issue.  The question is, should we make it formalized?    

 

Why not try it out on one server first?   Have all the servers vote if they want to try it out, and the ones that pass the vote can participate in it.    That way, you could play on a server in PvE with a PMK kingdom that controls the land, or you could play on a server that dosent.     Or you could just not let PMKs be about territory at all, or have very limited control over it.     Simply about identity, having your own tabbards, flags, etc.   

Edited by Battlepaw

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont care how to implement it, JUST DO IT


 


I want pmks on freedom :D


Edited by Thorakkanath

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Land control of any kind besides deeds won't really work in my eyes because you can't 'dethrone' people by raiding,capping towers, etc. all the stuff that comes with countering them owning land


  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Land control of any kind besides deeds won't really work in my eyes because you can't 'dethrone' people by raiding,capping towers, etc. all the stuff that comes with countering them owning land

 

Hmm, the idea I was going for was that they get "Dethroned" if they misbehave, meaning if they piss off enough players that it puts it to a server vote to remove them, or incur GM intervention.     Basicly, to let people regulate territory as long as they use that mechanic without being bastards about it.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We have sort of PMK's on Freedom already - alliances. Giving them total control over large territories is not too good idea (IMO) as this could lead to various unpleasant situations. On PvE servers you wouldn't be able to solve them with force like on PvP servers.

On the other hand, I would LOVE to see more ways to customize alliances like possibility to buy access to customized flags, banners, wagons etc.

  • Like 13

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If i can have a solo pmk then okay but otherwise..no thanks


 


Contrary to popular belief there are solo players here that do not want to interact in groups and are content to play solo everyday. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We have sort of PMK's on Freedom already - alliances. Giving them total control over large territories is not too good idea (IMO) as this could lead to various unpleasant situations. On PvE servers you wouldn't be able to solve them with force like on PvP servers.

On the other hand, I would LOVE to see more ways to customize alliances like possibility to buy access to customized flags, banners, wagons etc.

 

Yep, alliance or even town customization would be awesome.  On Chaos, I've always wished we could have our own custom town banners to carry into battle, or put on tabbards that let people know we are from certain villages in some way.     

 

If PMKs were all about that, would be interesting, though alliances already do have control over vast territory in some cases.    But, as most people do complain about, KoS is mostly ineffective.     Tower guards, and not letting people build within alliances or PMKs could help consolidate things more.    

 

 

If i can have a solo pmk then okay but otherwise..no thanks

 

Contrary to popular belief there are solo players here that do not want to interact in groups and are content to play solo everyday. 

 

Why the heck would you want a solo PMK?  Simply for banners/flags, or titles, etc?    Heck just suggest that instead lol.   I don't see the point of including the word "Kingdom" if there is only yourself.   

Edited by Battlepaw

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why the heck would you want a solo PMK?  Simply for banners/flags, or titles, etc?    Heck just suggest that instead lol.   I don't see the point of including the word "Kingdom" if there is only yourself.   

Well if all the land was controlled by PMKs on a server and i wanted a deed how would that work? I would have to join a pmk to set the deed i guess and that is the trouble i am talking about not everyone would want that.

 

I have three deeds on Independance now so if pmks were allowed then how would that work if there was a pmk that set up in the area? Would i be forced to obey the new pmks rules since my deeds were made into their territory?  Would my deeds just not be part of their lands? Is it only the pmk deed and perimeter tiles that are part of their land or it claims "wild" land too with just towers?  

 

I guess it comes down to how the undeeded land is handled in the pmk. If pmk was just what you deeded and the perimeter then okay but just to own land with guard towers and stuff then no. 

Edited by Kegan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't believe PMK's would be able to work at all because of the land control aspect - land control is a PvP fundamental and without the ability to force people out you would end up with a large problem. That is the only reason I do not see PMKs as a viable thing on the PvE servers.


 


However as Warlander said I would be all for more customization to alliances. Alliance leader pays a sum of money, we'll say 1g, and that bumps them up just a bit and allows them to customize there own banners, flags, etc. now whether they do it for trade purposes, just RP purposes, well thats to be decided by them. Is it do-able? Absolutely. Is it something I would say Rolf would put any sort of thought into? Not at all because their are far more things that need to be addressed first before such a huge thing could be implemented. This being implemented would be much larger then PMKs being implemented in my opinion.


 


Edit: Reading back just a bit, if the land is not out right owned and it is not blocking players from placing deeds, then that is no problem. Deed blocking would be a major problem however if you deeded in that kingdom's area then you should be subject to that kingdom. Tower capping would be an interesting dynamic added however in terms of land grabbing and add more community play to the game. Hmm. Backing up a bit I will re-think this because it could be viable I guess.


Edited by glauc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You'd get PMK's spamming towers across the majority of the map and bam, that entire area is closed to everyone but those in the PMK because tower capping and bashing wouldn't be possible. I also don't think capping is a thing that should be added to PvE bcause it's a PvP feature and there are players on Freedom that don't want to have to raise their skills to be able to cap towers when all they want is to be left quietly alone. What about the hermits?

Expanding the abilities of alliances a bit would be nice, but there's only so much that could be added before you're bringing in features that require PvP to function and not just bring a PvE server to a grinding halt.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having the aesthetics of a pmk available would be nice; however, aye I agree the territory control would allow for too much land to be locked up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe just allow each large alliance (maybe.... 10+ villages?), or 50+ people (who cares about alts I guess) to have their own tabard and banners, but that's about it. Would need to be a template for it as well I imagine.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As much as i am sure most players would want custom banners..etc we have to think about all the time that would take away from the art guys making them all the time. I just don't think it is a viable option really for PvE also they are taking away wood textures and stuff to save space or whatever so just think about all the new files we would have to have for every new pmk that was ever formed.


 


I just dont see it being a good idea really. 


Edited by Kegan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

pvp on freedom is like saying ''cancer is a good thing'' 


 


Freedom is all about having fun and making money if you are not getting enough pvp then come to elevation. Buy a account and become a credit card warrior today! 


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 




As much as i am sure most players would want custom banners..etc we have to think about all the time that would take away from the art guys making them all the time. I just don't think it is a viable option really for PvE also they are taking away wood textures and stuff to save space or whatever so just think about all the new files we would have to have for every new pmk that was ever formed.


 


I just dont see it being a good idea really. 



 



 


Since when are they "takeing away wood textures to save space?"    Personally I'd rather have a larger client download if it meant I had a more immersive experience (meaning textures for everything).  Besides that whole excuse makes zero sense, you download the files once per update, not all the time.    Saying they would somehow take up more space in the database would also make zero sense, considering how it's built.    Considering how it would take up space in your local FPS lag, would also make no sense.  If they don't want to spend the time vetting submissions, they should just come out and say so.    


 


The "Art guys" don't make any of the PMK banners, the players do, and I think the players shouldn't just be limited to PMKs when they want something of their own to display.  Towns, and alliances should both have their own ways to display things.    


Edited by Battlepaw

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since when are they "takeing away wood textures to save space?"    Personally I'd rather have a larger client download if it meant I had a more immersive experience (meaning textures for everything).  

Well lets see bsb, fsb, boats and weapon racks and i am sure there will be more to come unless the complaining that was done put a stop to it. Now as to if it was to save space or help performance i have no idea but either way it is the same i guess.  

 

The staff might not draw up the flags etc but they do have to put them in the game and make sure they work not to mention the time in dealing with each group sending pms or emails or however they do it.

 

I am not against it but i just don't think it is important is all but as long as this PMK idea does not have guard towers controlling open deedable land then i don't care. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

seems nobody its talking about the biggest problem i see if they allow pmks in freedom everybody will end up joining up one and new players wil be all alone in their own chats


  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

seems nobody its talking about the biggest problem i see if they allow pmks in freedom everybody will end up joining up one and new players wil be all alone in their own chats

 

Been wondering when someone would bring this up.   Would be interesting if they replaced the freedom chat with "Cluster" chat.   The whole segredation of Chaos from Freedom really makes no sense.   People playing on Chaos can still talk in freedom and vice-versa anyways.    The current chat system itself does need a major overhaul.   Currently you can't talk in alliances in cross-server chat situations.   And if your off server you can't talk to your PMKs.    (Yes I know IRC and Voice Coms are for that, but humor me)  

Edited by Battlepaw

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pve pmks won't work because of t.erritory like others have pointed out. Also you can't really rely on people self regulating in terms of 'dethroning' without actual pvp elements.

Customizable tabards and stuff for villages/alliances is a nice idea however with the current way of adding pmk graphics it would be impossible to manage. Even if the system was changed the number of new textures for things would probably be the source of other problems. Instead maybe add a few preset features (like in character customization) for the coat of arms of village/alliance and replace the freedom coat of arms with it.

Edited by Twinsen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We have the alliances already, the great innovation that can be done was to let the alliances have some control over territory. For instance, let the alliance have settings for buffers / perimeters around each deed. The larger the alliance is, the more tiles around each deed it would be allowed to set restrictions on. 


This would be the perfect mechanism for keeping perceived griefers at bay, as long as set griefers are not within your own alliance. If you had an alliance with 20 member deeds, there would be an additional 20 tiles around your deed where only alliance members could dig dirt or cut down trees.


 


I am not worried that everyone would join just one alliance at all.  But I would like to see a mechanism whereby alliances would have to be clustered together in order to get the territorial control benefits. For instance, the territorial control zone should not be allowed to overlap with a non-alliance deed. Touching the perimeter of a non-alliance deed would mean that this was the maximum size of the buffer zone, and it could be no larger for any deed in your alliance. This would have the nice effect that an allliance would not accept a new member from the other side of the server, because that would mess up the alliance control benefits. 


 


At least on Xanadu there is plenty of space, so that territory control would not mean that solo players and new players would not be pushed out of the server by the controlling alliances. 


Edited by Cista

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My 2 cents.


 


A straight copy of PMK's for PvE wont work.


 


What you need is a separate but 'equivalent' system.


 


This is just a very quick and unspecific idea, so I wont put it in the suggestions sub-forum for now.


 


Guilds


 


On the outset, Guilds look very similar to PMK's.


 


To found a Guild:


You need to use a Guild Treaty Form, purchased from a trader for 1 Gold, with at least 25 players standing still inside your local.


The one to use the Guild Treaty Form is elected as the first Guild Master, the PMK equivalent of a king.


 


Having a Guild grants all members a unique chat window similar to an alliance or village window.


Guild members can make submissions to the art team for their own Guild tabards and flags. (It could also be made up from preset graphics or something if too many textures is a problem I suppose)


 


Guild Membership


 


Membership should be completely separate from Village/Alliance membership.


It shouldn't effect or change permissions in any way so that hermits and other people worried about theft/griefing don't need to worry.


Membership should be on a per-person basis, so that one village/alliance can theoretically have people from many different Guilds in it.


Because Guilds are not really tied to a physical location, there is no need to move across a map to be a part of them, and you can choose any Guild you wish even it's just because you think their tabard is pretty.


 


Guild Control


 


Unlike PMK's which focus on territorial control, Guilds should focus on economic control. (Territorial control could turn into a very bad form of greifing on PvE IMO)


The 'influence' of a Guild should be able to spread through the use of merchant and trader NPC's. (Though not the same sort of influence as Towers, more like influence over the markets)


One person's merchants and traders will benefit the Guild, but will still only be controllable by the player that placed them (To prevent theft/greifing etc from potentially nasty Guild Mates)


 


Guild Contributions


 


Contributing to a Guild should be no different from the way that many economically focused people are already playing the game.


E.G. crafting goods and selling them, trading goods etc.


This should hopefully mean that anyone can contribute, whether they are a Hermit working alone or a Newbie just getting started.


The Guild which performs better than other Guilds in terms of sales or market influence should receive greater benefits for doing so.


 


Guild Benefits


 


Guild benefits should take an economic form.


Perhaps a more successful Guild has its traders receive a greater share of the silver distributed by the king each month.


Perhaps Mayor Guild members get slightly reduced deed costs.


 


Guild Elections


 


It should be possible to challenge a Guild Master for control of a Guild.


But that could have any number of suggestions to how that works so I'm not gonna bother :P


 


Conclusions


 


I would hope that system provides a bit more challenge and life to the PvE playstyle.


With people battling to make certain markets more popular, and 'fighting' for economic control.


That said, the benefits/detriments of the system shouldn't be so severe that you are punished for not taking part or because one Guild dominates the server etc.


 


Maybe there's also some kind of economic or creativity based HOTA equivalent for PvE to compete over? (A more formal and automated form of the treasure hunts?)


  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this