Mayor/citizenship/faction system draft v0.9.2

For general discussion concerning Pangaea

Moderator: Game Masters

User avatar
Tyrion
Posts: 2787
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2011 1:58 am

Re: Mayor/citizenship/faction system draft v0.8

Post by Tyrion »

Does Imperial lose ownership of towns already conquered when system is implemented?
User avatar
Darian Darkmind
Posts: 2568
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2008 3:58 pm

Re: Mayor/citizenship/faction system draft v0.8

Post by Darian Darkmind »

Jyrgen, you're really making a mountain out of a molehill.

Because it requires a house it's not only less abuseable, but fair as well. If Law owns every house in Minoc, then it is only fair they get to choose the mayor and gets the town for themselves in 24 hours without being forced to siege (Although Imperial is given the chance to end the revolution with half the siege-time and thus Law would most likely need to show up). It's not metagaming. If they use their alts to do it, if they vote for a mayor who turns the town to Lord British, then their alts are obviously loyal to Lord British - which most of you are! - so even when it might sound like metagame, it's not. It's not metagaming for a guy loyal to Lord British to buy a house in Minoc. There's NOTHING wrong with that. It's only metagaming if they used a criminal character or otherwise a character loyal to Lord Blackthorne and cast a vote against him. Even then the guy has his right to vote whom he wants. It's not metagaming if Darian buys a house in Vesper and then gives her vote to a friend who is Lord Blackthorne loyalist and an ally to Tekstone and Imperial. Hell, OF COURSE Darian would vote for someone who benefits her and hates Lord British. It's not metagaming if all my alts do the same as long as those alts are against Lord British - which most of them are. The current mayor just have to make sure Darian doesn't make a citizen.

This allows a group of players to "buy" the towns and you make it sound like it's a bad thing. It's not. It's quite the opposite. It's completely idiotic if a town filled with Law houses, Law members and a mayor who is voted by them - who is also their ally and fights against Imperial - is sieged by Imperial and is then all-of-a-sudden Lord Blackthorne's town even when the mayor and the militia is actively warring against them. Should the mayor and the militia suddenly start to fight against their old ally, the Law? That makes absolutely no sense. Without this addition there really is no point to siege any town that has a lot of "enemy" houses in them, because you know the mayor will work against you no matter what. The mayor will cancel the citizenship of everyone buying houses in the town making sure they can never cast a vote. If Imperial takes over a town, none of them will get to vote even if they own or buy a house, because the mayor - who is still ally to Law - exiles them all.This WILL be a real problem once a town is sieged. My addition is a fix to that problem. Yes it's not flawless, but it's better than the draft without it.

It might be enough if the religion who sieges a town has the option to overthrow the old mayor and militia and choose a new one for the first month. . This way the new mayor will accept the Imperials as citizens so they will get to vote in the next election. The new mayor will also exile all Laws. Maybe you are right and it should not be as easy as just choosing allegiance just like that, but I would still prefer the mayor having power to help converting the town to opposing a Lord. Maybe they could have the power to reduce the amount of guards by 50%. Without that many guards the town is easier to siege. That's another way to do it, maybe even a better way.

Anyway, that's my main concern about the whole system. It simply won't work unless we add siege to it.
Ares

Re: Mayor/citizenship/faction system draft v0.8

Post by Ares »

Tyrion wrote:Does Imperial lose ownership of towns already conquered when system is implemented?
Of course not
Demian
Posts: 2071
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 8:34 pm

Re: Mayor/citizenship/faction system draft v0.8

Post by Demian »

Siege system and mayor system should be totally independent from eachother imo.

What I don't like about the draft is non religion players being able to use blessed weapons though. Dealing religious damage while not receiving it is just wrong. Remove that and it seems good to me as it is.
Jyrgen
Posts: 1583
Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2008 10:25 pm
Contact:

Re: Mayor/citizenship/faction system draft v0.8

Post by Jyrgen »

Darian Darkmind wrote:It's not metagaming if all my alts do the same as long as those alts are against Lord British - which most of them are. The current mayor just have to make sure Darian doesn't make a citizen.
tl;dr
Of course, but the problem arises from when the alts start buying houses and voting crap just cause their alt is in some particular religion. And it's so damn impossible to prove the metagaming in that case, cause everyone can just claim "oh, but we were on their side the whole time!" (Has happened in the past by your bunch in Nox, can't remember for sure, when you ("you" as in Nox alts) came to loot Nox corpses.)

But yes, I agree with the last part of your post, that the siege system itself would somewhat fuck up the mayor system. So yes, either the "conqueror elects new mayor" OR some other system would probably be needed. However, conquering a city does actually NOT change the ownership of the houses. So, even when you conquer a city, it's only logical that the old citizens might not approve it.

Also, I guess there should maybe be some kind of limits to removing citizenship, or else we might see people just staying in power for eternity, cause they just remove citizenship from everyone who might oppose them.
User avatar
Glarundis
Posts: 5741
Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2008 2:26 pm
Contact:

Re: Mayor/citizenship/faction system draft v0.8

Post by Glarundis »

don't know if it has been said yet or not, but one good thing would be to deny more than 1 mayor from same account?
User avatar
Dargon
Posts: 1563
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 6:40 pm
Contact:

Re: Mayor/citizenship/faction system draft v0.8

Post by Dargon »

Glarundis wrote:don't know if it has been said yet or not, but one good thing would be to deny more than 1 mayor from same account?
Why?
Philip Azevedo:
na dude, fu*k uni... that shit wont lead you anywhere
pang on the otherhand....
User avatar
Glarundis
Posts: 5741
Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2008 2:26 pm
Contact:

Re: Mayor/citizenship/faction system draft v0.8

Post by Glarundis »

to prevent groups of players having the power?
User avatar
Mike
Posts: 2465
Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2008 7:33 pm
Location: Sweden
Contact:

Re: Mayor/citizenship/faction system draft v0.8

Post by Mike »

Glarundis wrote:to prevent groups of players having the power?
What's the problem with that?
"last i knew it was illegal to hate someone" Richard Mota
User avatar
Johnny Walac
Posts: 4503
Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2008 3:05 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: Mayor/citizenship/faction system draft v0.8

Post by Johnny Walac »

Demian wrote:Siege system and mayor system should be totally independent from eachother imo.

What I don't like about the draft is non religion players being able to use blessed weapons though. Dealing religious damage while not receiving it is just wrong. Remove that and it seems good to me as it is.
Aye. Everything on the draft looks good except that part. Otherwise *Thumbs up*
Monad wrote: 1) Good point. Different merchant perks should be available awell, I sort of forgot about that. Not necessary skill boosts, as Boris said that would nullify Imperial's rite, but something else. Like special items to work with or something similar. Ideas welcome!
• 5-10% More gold when vendor selling (Might create a problem if you can buy cheap and sell for more)
• Can buy tools with alot better durabillity.
Image
Order of Nature - Telborea- The Britannian Trade Union - ICQ: 434212709
PvP Video 1
PvP Video 2
Post Reply