Recommended Posts

Kingdom is too huge on Freedom, and we can't have PMKs.

Alliance does some of this, but would not want to do all of it.

As for a PMK, one character would be the head of the group, with a purchasable estate form to found their Barony.

Stand on the (main) character's deed with all other mayors (alt mayors or player mayors) present, minimum number possibly 2 other mayors. Found your barony. Only mayors of settlements on the same server count.

  • Allows baron to see and add to upkeep of any barony-deed from any barony-deed token at the same time.
  • Allows baron to manage permissions of all barony-deeds via the estate form.
  • Allows baron to access and change writ permissions of all writs in the barony via the estate form, including destroy structure.
  • Allows baron to manage vehicle settings of all vehicles owned by players citizen to the barony.
  • Allows only the baron by default, to form alliances.
  • Allows barony chat-tab, in addition to village and alliance chat-tabs.
  • Allows citizens of a barony-settlement to be optionally upgraded to vassal of the barony (mayors are classed as vassals by default). Vassal permissions are barony-wide.
  • Allows vassal role on writs and vehicles.
  • Allows all vassals of the barony to see remaining upkeep of a barony deed at the deed token for that settlement.
  • Allows all vassals of the barony to set the MOTD.
  • Allows vassals to pick-up any planted item on barony lands including perimeter of barony-settlements.
  • Allows perimeter of all barony-settlements to be protected from fence-building by non-citizens.
  • Allows for barony livery; tabards, flags, banners, wagons (and ship sails when Kingdom sails are implimented). Pick an RGB value for your barony when founding. Option to add a superimposed symbol as for shopsigns would be nice. Barony livery would update so that wagons owned by players and barony-tabards worn by the player would show their current barony, and barony-flags and barony-banners would only show barony colours when planted on barony lands. Otherwise livery reflects Kingdom of crafter's origin.

Spawn-towns would be automatic baronies, and take the title of Barony of <servername>. Therefore no fences or unremovable planted items in spawn-town perimeters.


I'm aware some of this may sound overpowered to long-time players, but it is designed to make managing several deeds easier for one player, whilst not excluding the possibility of multiple player vassals, though you'd have to have a lot of faith in your baron's good intentions. I've listed as many things as I think might be relevent, as IF this was ever implemented it would not be exactly as described here anyway, and I want to illustrate the possible scope.

 

Edit: Added topic tags

Edited by Drayka
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

-1

If you want anything that is close to PMK customization then I suggest you head off and start your own Kingdom in Chaos or Epic.

Your idea is to create variety within Freedom where you have no enemies and you don't need variety to customize your own deed on such scale.

A Barony cannot have the same options to change of colours, tabards, flags and so forth as a PMK. That's the basic structure of what PMK & PvP means.

Edited by Easter
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they just add the ability to see remaining upkeep on all deeds in alliance at the individual token, it would be a boon. Might post that separately at a later date.


  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they just add the ability to see remaining upkeep on all deeds in alliance at the individual token, it would be a boon. Might post that separately at a later date.

That is something I agree on!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only PvP can have cookies! Utter, total Nonsense. It's an empty argument totally lacking in anything resembling reason. Denying non-pvpers content doesn't encourage them to PvP... that's idiotic. If they wanted to, they would already be there doing that. All it does is show them how petty some people can be. 


 


Giving more features to non-pvpers doesn't do PvP or the game any harm and only makes it better. 


 


I totally support this idea in concept.


Edited by Othob Rithol
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to agree they would make more money off pve pmk like options then they ever would on any pvp server. The "special" thing about pvp servers should only be the pvp anything else should be available to everyone. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the idea but for me i could take it or leave it..... to me all players that own a deed are Lords, and i call them as such.


None deed owners are Serfs and on Freedom we already have a king so thats good by me....but i still like the idea even if i may not use it.


 


As for what Lord Othob Rithol said above.....i totally agree .....why keep goodies only for the PVP players ? if your a player that loves to just play PVE style adding in stuff that they can only get on a PVP server is not going to make them want to PVP.


 


Well said Lord Othob ....well said indeed ;)


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like it... Baronikhan the Baron of Port Benden... has a ring to it!

+1 to a kingdom sort of system, always wnated a Pirating syndicate on freedom.

Edited by Nomadikhan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did I make any implication that this was only for Freedom servers ?? I can't see that it would unbalance Epic. Freedom may have more use for it, but I'm certainly not saying Epic can't have cookies too.


Edited by Drayka
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

+1

Its a sandbox game. Of course we should be able to have different tabards and flags on Freedom.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I want Player Made Republics with mechanisms added to allow a half dozen random neighbors to participate in a democratic (or rather, republican) control scheme and a group funded perimeter (think like kingdom borders, but it is limited by funding) rather than a current and suggested models bulit around a central (deed or character) authority.


 


One aspect I really like in Drayka's model is a higher-than-alliance-member role that can be assigned to specific individuals that can be given to the more trusted members of the community to expand their privileges. There is very little an alliance member can do on my deed atm primarily because I have no influence over who my neighbors allow into their deeds. But I would, if I could, allow the ones I do trust greater leeway in their permissions.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is an interesting but complicated suggestion covering many different aspects, not all of which need to be lumped together. I'll try to extract the ones that I can make out:


 


1. Alliance-wide roles:


+1(!!!1!!) to form role groups within an alliance for which individual deeds can assign permissions - super-useful!!


 


2. Baron Role / Alliance Head:


I find this really problematic, it's already a problem with people in charge of deeds and alliances going MIA, leaving their members unable to keep the alliance/deeds growing and often having to leave and re-form. Also I don't see many deeds willing to give up their privileges to one Baron.


This really seems to be aimed at the single player having multiple deeds... perhaps this can also be solved via intra-deed role groups?


All in all I'm not sold on this one...


 


3. Feudal Theming, Tabards and so on:


I also think the feudal theme fits more with PvP, but adding this could detract from the PMK cohesion. On the PvE servers I would love to see something that's not so feudally aimed, perhaps allowing deeds or alliances to choose a design from a particular set of parameters? This has been suggested before: choose an emblem (similar to the sign emblems), emblem color and background color (PvP: within a PMK the color scheme would be fixed to that PMK). So without the window-dressing of a barony: +1.


 


Not sure how this idea would fit together with alliances - if a barony would be part of an alliance, or an alliance super-structure?


 


I would find it neat if alliances could be layered (make smaller alliances that can participate in bigger, looser ones): you'd only share normal ally permissions within the closest alliance, but will share alliance role groups (as per point 1) with the whole alliance. The alliance chat tab would always encompass the top level alliance and all its players.


Edited by Marshlander

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

-1

If you want anything that is close to PMK customization then I suggest you head off and start your own Kingdom in Chaos or Epic.

Your idea is to create variety within Freedom where you have no enemies and you don't need variety to customize your own deed on such scale.

A Barony cannot have the same options to change of colours, tabards, flags and so forth as a PMK. That's the basic structure of what PMK & PvP means.

Seriously, that argument is stupid. It just makes you look bad.

 

This system would actually make wurm more interesting, and fun for many people, and god knows wurm needs more fun. And sure enough having some random guy cutting on that because he wants "exclusive" rights to something he shouldn't then that's just peachy.

 

Finally PvP doesn't mean what you think it means. PvP sure as hell doesn't mean costumize your colors, that would be CYC. And if Chaos got it why can't the rest of the cluster have it? Sure Player kingdoms inside Freedom which is a kingdom in itself might be a bit harsh. But seeing as Rolf actually allowed people on Chaos to replace the original Lore kingdoms with their Own PMKs, i'd say allowing people on freedom some sort of leeway isn't that much of a stretch.

 

 

This is an interesting but complicated suggestion covering many different aspects, not all of which need to be lumped together. I'll try to extract the ones that I can make out:

 

1. Alliance-wide roles:

+1(!!!1!!) to form role groups within an alliance for which individual deeds can assign permissions - super-useful!!

 

2. Baron Role / Alliance Head:

I find this really problematic, it's already a problem with people in charge of deeds and alliances going MIA, leaving their members unable to keep the alliance/deeds growing and often having to leave and re-form. Also I don't see many deeds willing to give up their privileges to one Baron.

This really seems to be aimed at the single player having multiple deeds... perhaps this can also be solved via intra-deed role groups?

All in all I'm not sold on this one...

 

3. Feudal Theming, Tabards and so on:

I also think the feudal theme fits more with PvP, but adding this could detract from the PMK cohesion. On the PvE servers I would love to see something that's not so feudally aimed, perhaps allowing deeds or alliances to choose a design from a particular set of parameters? This has been suggested before: choose an emblem (similar to the sign emblems), emblem color and background color (PvP: within a PMK the color scheme would be fixed to that PMK). So without the window-dressing of a barony: +1.

 

Not sure how this idea would fit together with alliances - if a barony would be part of an alliance, or an alliance super-structure?

 

I would find it neat if alliances could be layered (make smaller alliances that can participate in bigger, looser ones): you'd only share normal ally permissions within the closest alliance, but will share alliance role groups (as per point 1) with the whole alliance. The alliance chat tab would always encompass the top level alliance and all its players.

I think that alliance would be above baronies. Like you could have alliances of baronies, and baronies within alliances of deeds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really like this idea for two reasons it would help control areas that need a dock and a main deed would be way easier to manage.


 


And then for the real purpose of it to have a huge alliance kingdom type would make things very interesting indeed.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would find it neat if alliances could be layered (make smaller alliances that can participate in bigger, looser ones): you'd only share normal ally permissions within the closest alliance, but will share alliance role groups (as per point 1) with the whole alliance. The alliance chat tab would always encompass the top level alliance and all its players.

This, I'd like to see.  And the ability to add permissions for a singular person rather than the entire deed they are part of.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so if im in your alliance and we have a disagreement or some kinda of drama happens,and on a heat of the moment you can destroy all my buildings if you want,or change my deed permissions and take everything or even disband my deed.


 


and you dont think that will be a problem?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so if im in your alliance and we have a disagreement or some kinda of drama happens,and on a heat of the moment you can destroy all my buildings if you want,or change my deed permissions and take everything or even disband my deed.

 

and you dont think that will be a problem?

 

I think that alliance would be above baronies. Like you could have alliances of baronies, and baronies within alliances of deeds.

 

I'm aware some of this may sound overpowered to long-time players, but it is designed to make managing several deeds easier for one player, whilst not excluding the possibility of multiple player vassals, though you'd have to have a lot of faith in your baron's good intentions. I've listed as many things as I think might be relevent, as IF this was ever implemented it would not be exactly as described here anyway, and I want to illustrate the possible scope.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just dont give the baron any bonuses.

In my current village we have a puppet mayor with no skills holding most house writs. All the elders have the login details.

Works excellent if you are with people you can trust.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this