Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 13

Thread: Empires?

  1. #1

    Empires?

    So I got to thinking today about alliances within Xsyon. I'm sure many of the tribes here plan on forming alliances with other tribes at some point.

    What if one day there were an actual system within the game where tribes could ally together? You could have a system put in place where tribal leaders would be able to set alliances in stone. For instance, one way to to this would be to have a definitive checklist of... how can I explain this... permissions/features to choose from that they would like to share between the tribes. Trade agreements, wartime agreements (in what types of situations they could "legally" demand support), land agreements, things of that nature. Different alliances or "empires" could then officially declare war (still, all within the actual game system, not just by word of mouth)on certain tribes/empires/alliances for whatever reason.

    You guys should add/expand/change this idea. I'd like to see what we can come up with.

  2. #2

    Re: Empires?

    Im 99% sure alliances will be coming along shortly, pretty sure I read Jookie mention it somewhere not long ago, though I doubt it will have the depth you mention here. Im not sure on the point of having a mechanic for trade alliances, but for military alliances, for sure, some mechanical features in the game would be very good to see, particularly with differing options as you describe.

    Land agreements would most definitely be a good addition also, but this subject may demand its own thread, because I would also like to see a tax system in place for the public, non-tribe-members that will reside on your tribes land.
    Kinslayer
    Co-Consul

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    Join Us

  3. #3
    Xsyon Citizen Venciera's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Bay Area, California
    Posts
    79

    Re:Empires?

    The biggest concern I have with the formation of 'empires' is they become unstoppable 'zerg alliances'. They totally over power any smaller tribe, and force them into alliances which means there will be rare, but huge, devastating wars. However a war declaration system may help to reduce the size of zerg armies.

    Still it seems like it might be rather boring if all the action only took place at the boarders of massive alliances. I'm really interested to see lots of tribe on tribe skirmishes. Hopefully a happy medium can be achieved.
    <--- see my avatar? I drew that! yay me


  4. #4

    Re:Empires?

    Venciera wrote:
    The biggest concern I have with the formation of 'empires' is they become unstoppable 'zerg alliances'. They totally over power any smaller tribe, and force them into alliances which means there will be rare, but huge, devastating wars. However a war declaration system may help to reduce the size of zerg armies.

    Still it seems like it might be rather boring if all the action only took place at the boarders of massive alliances. I'm really interested to see lots of tribe on tribe skirmishes. Hopefully a happy medium can be achieved.
    This happens in darkfall.. If your independent you cant compete agenst the big alliances who can steam roll though and take half the servers citys... 30 people cant win agenst a 100 strong alliance..

    Although I like the idea of being allys with other tribes I dont want the game to become alliance based..

  5. #5

    Re:Empires?

    I like what you guys are saying. I do agree in that a happy balance should be found between alliances/empires and tribes that wish to stay by themselves. I'm not gonna go dig up the info from the site, but didn't he mention somewhere that the area we have access to now is only a fraction of whats planned for the future? I think when starting a tribe or even a new character, you would need to be able to graphically see about where each tribe/alliance's sphere of influence (more or less, their borders) was. Maybe have a map that shows an outline (at least a rough one) and tell whether it is controlled by a single tribe or an empire of sorts? Obviously, this would happen far into the game's future when he can afford a much larger team of developers that will be able to continually add enough land as needed to keep people close enough to either play with each other (but not too close) or roam around as free nomads if they so please.

  6. #6
    Xsyon Citizen joexxxz's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    USA/CALIFORNIA
    Posts
    582

    Re:Empires?

    For example:

    Tribe(A) Trade agreement with Tribe(B )
    Start date: 2012/1/1
    End date.: 2012/12/31

    agreement Fails if:
    Tribe(B ) initiates war with Tribe(C), Tribe(D)

  7. #7

    Re:Empires?

    Amadeusz wrote:
    Venciera wrote:
    The biggest concern I have with the formation of 'empires' is they become unstoppable 'zerg alliances'. They totally over power any smaller tribe, and force them into alliances which means there will be rare, but huge, devastating wars. However a war declaration system may help to reduce the size of zerg armies.

    Still it seems like it might be rather boring if all the action only took place at the boarders of massive alliances. I'm really interested to see lots of tribe on tribe skirmishes. Hopefully a happy medium can be achieved.
    This happens in darkfall.. If your independent you cant compete agenst the big alliances who can steam roll though and take half the servers citys... 30 people cant win agenst a 100 strong alliance..

    Although I like the idea of being allys with other tribes I dont want the game to become alliance based..
    That's because Tasos and Claus are clueless and put portals in. Instant travel allows that type of thing to happen, since clans/alliances can quickly get to the other side of the map. It's not real empire-building.

    If the portals were gone, clans/alliances would need to make sure they could populate their holdings and expand from their root outward, instead of just dotting the map.

    They also made the mistake of not allowing all holdings of a clan to be vulnerable at the same time. Only one holding can be sieged at a time. This makes it easier for clans/alliances to play thin since they only need to defend one city/hamlet at a time (barring ghost sieges on an ally with a holding).

    Big alliances are fine as long as they have to work to keep their holdings. Smaller clans can compete for objectives if the map is large enough and there is no instant travel. Population has to be healthy, too.

    Also, if an alliance gets too big, they tend to break down. Boredom, disagreements, and/or the rest of the server wanting to stick it to the man are predictable reasons for that. Hyperion is an example of that situation.

  8. #8

    Re:Empires?

    JCatano wrote:
    Amadeusz wrote:
    Venciera wrote:
    The biggest concern I have with the formation of 'empires' is they become unstoppable 'zerg alliances'. They totally over power any smaller tribe, and force them into alliances which means there will be rare, but huge, devastating wars. However a war declaration system may help to reduce the size of zerg armies.

    Still it seems like it might be rather boring if all the action only took place at the boarders of massive alliances. I'm really interested to see lots of tribe on tribe skirmishes. Hopefully a happy medium can be achieved.
    This happens in darkfall.. If your independent you cant compete agenst the big alliances who can steam roll though and take half the servers citys... 30 people cant win agenst a 100 strong alliance..

    Although I like the idea of being allys with other tribes I dont want the game to become alliance based..
    That's because Tasos and Claus are clueless and put portals in. Instant travel allows that type of thing to happen, since clans/alliances can quickly get to the other side of the map. It's not real empire-building.

    If the portals were gone, clans/alliances would need to make sure they could populate their holdings and expand from their root outward, instead of just dotting the map.

    They also made the mistake of not allowing all holdings of a clan to be vulnerable at the same time. Only one holding can be sieged at a time. This makes it easier for clans/alliances to play thin since they only need to defend one city/hamlet at a time (barring ghost sieges on an ally with a holding).

    Big alliances are fine as long as they have to work to keep their holdings. Smaller clans can compete for objectives if the map is large enough and there is no instant travel. Population has to be healthy, too.

    Also, if an alliance gets too big, they tend to break down. Boredom, disagreements, and/or the rest of the server wanting to stick it to the man are predictable reasons for that. Hyperion is an example of that situation.
    I compmletely agree with this, I was actually about to post just about the same info- you explained it well.

    As long what you mention doesn't happen in this game where tribes can instantly travel from one side of the map to the other and defend mutltiple locations in an instant I doubt we would ever see zerg tribes take over for very long.

    Also, to add one more thing to this- If tribe A is at war with Tribe B and Tribe A allies with Tribe C- anyone on tribe A's war list needs to be added to Tribe C's war list. This is somthing else that will help to limit how large alliances get.

  9. #9
    Xsyon Citizen joexxxz's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    USA/CALIFORNIA
    Posts
    582

    Re:Empires?

    KeithStone wrote:
    ... Also, to add one more thing to this- If tribe A is at war with Tribe B and Tribe A allies with Tribe C- anyone on tribe A's war list needs to be added to Tribe C's war list. This is somthing else that will help to limit how large alliances get.
    I dont agree with u on that one.
    Let say tribe(A) wants to have war with tribe(B,C,D).
    Let say tribe(M) is at peace with tribe(D).
    Tribe(A) wants to ally with tribe(M).
    Tribe(A) allies with tribe(M) only against tribe(B,C).

    Now if tribe(D) is allies with tribe(C)
    then tribe(A) allies with tribe(M) only against tribe(B )

  10. #10

    Re:Empires?

    joexxxz wrote:
    KeithStone wrote:
    ... Also, to add one more thing to this- If tribe A is at war with Tribe B and Tribe A allies with Tribe C- anyone on tribe A's war list needs to be added to Tribe C's war list. This is somthing else that will help to limit how large alliances get.
    I dont agree with u on that one.
    Let say tribe(A) wants to have war with tribe(B,C,D).
    Let say tribe(M) is at peace with tribe(D).
    Tribe(A) wants to ally with tribe(M).
    Tribe(A) allies with tribe(M) only against tribe(B,C).

    Now if tribe(D) is allies with tribe(C)
    then tribe(A) allies with tribe(M) only against tribe(B )
    I think I'm following you, but in my idea if you are at war with my ally, then you shouldn't be able to ally me. - that's what my idea keeps you from doing. It also keeps someone from trying to lie about being at war with another tribe. If you ally an enemy of your allies by mistake, you are going to piss off your allies.

    However, the more in game mechanics there are to control what we do makes it less and less like a sandbox.

    So, if all we are giving is the ability to ally or not ally then that I guess that is fine as well.

    I know how this problem affects darkfall, but I can't exactly apply that to this game yet, since I don't know enough about this game.

    In Darkfall Clan A can be allied to clan D who is allied to clan B. Clan A can war clan B- and then attack clan B. Clan A could be allied to clan F who is also allied to Clan B- and clan D could be allied to clan F. Do you see where this starts to create confusion?

    Clan A has created a war with a clan that is allied to all of clan A's allies, but clan A won't ally clan B - clan A wants to be at war with them.

    What we have to decide is do we put in a game mechanic that stops that from happening or do we make the tribes figure out who is allied with who and hope the tribe they are trying to ally is telling the truth.

Similar Threads

  1. A few questions
    By Baldur in forum Developer Zone Archive
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 05-28-2010, 05:44 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •