The Switch - Lessons from another game

[Bear5732]

A large and well organized pvp tribe will have multiple people with 2 accounts (or more)...of course that assuming that we get a game delivered that actually delivers...Second accounts will be used to set up crafting alts. Crafting alts will be set up in quaint little unassuming villages with names like, Springwater Trading Company, Bobs Bed and Breakfast, etc. etc. The mission of these alt towns will be to craft items for the tribes militant branch.

This frees up the military wing of the tribe to act completely without consequence...the logistics that drive their machine can not be shut down, or even hindered, since they are protected.

The system that is on its way to implementation is worse, as the players will not be able to hold these new 'craft tribes' accountable for the actions of their parent tribe.

Please think about the ways we can abuse a system before it gets implemented...if it can be, we will do it...it's in our nature. Unfortunately.

This system is already in place in the game. Neutral tribes craft items that they will either trade or give to Good/Evil tribes in return for protection or other military actions - In fact I am sure there will be many secret wars going where a neutral crafting tribe outfits and resupplies / supports a Good or Evil tribe in a war against an enemy tribe for numerous reasons. While the Pvper tribes with alts are trying to supply themselves, whole alliances of neutral tribes will be formed that can continually provide a constant stream of supplies while their secret allies can constantly war against any tribes.

You better believe there will be huge political actions in this game between tribes - broken alliances, secret ones, backstabbing, stealing, double dealing, spies, treason, its gonna happen - probably already did in beta.

I think this system already in place, is exactly what is needed for a decent balanced pvp game - I seriously doubt it will be of any benefit with so many other tribes / alliances doing it faster and better.

If you want accountability just come back in 9 months when the devs have stated that "there will be no safe zones" - the baby is in the oven

[Dubanka]

If you want accountability just come back in 9 months when the devs have stated that "there will be no safe zones" - the baby is in the oven

Honestly i don't think this will ever occur.
I don't think certain groups in game would allow this to occur.

Even more honestly, i'm not sure that no safe zones is a good idea. Just if you're goign to be 'safe', there should be a trade off for that safety. And, there needs to be a mechanic to incentize tribes to keep their eggs in one basket, and not build a safety net.

[Bear5732]

Honestly i don't think this will ever occur.
I don't think certain groups in game would allow this to occur.

Well you may be right, but lets be honest - safe zones, in one form or the other, are a necessary evil.

Why? Because games are meant to be fun, and it's no fun logging in for the first time ever only to be instantly ganked before you even know to press C to enter combat. (someone was complaining that this happened to them yesterday). Whether you like it or not, this game has a steep learning curve for people who just are unfamiliar with a somewhat realistic common sense game. And whether its a newbie island or a neutral tribe, there has to be something in place to give new players a shot at having fun and learning the game before rage quitting.

Also there has to be something in place that doesn't force a tribe to have a 24-7 defense. Nothing is more frustrating then logging in after a long week at work, to find that the European tribe just spent the last 24 hours demolishing everything your tribe had built over the last 3 months.

So even if they remove the safe zones as they are in place now, there will still have to be some sort of safe zone in place to keep the game fair and fun.

[jumpshot]

I don't see the fascination with Conquering mechanics, anyway.

I love to PvP, but these things are just contests of WHo HAs the Larger Zerg in every game I've played.

No, I don't equate "politics" with PvP. Or Mass Recruiting.

[Salvadore]

I don't see the fascination with Conquering mechanics, anyway.

I love to PvP, but these things are just contests of WHo HAs the Larger Zerg in every game I've played.

No, I don't equate "politics" with PvP. Or Mass Recruiting.

Which games have you played? With conquest mechanics?

The games I was involved with had zergs as well. Any time they abused their size and started flexing their muscles too much, various others would mount up and stop them. It was also very common that an organized tribe could easily beat a zerg with 2:1 or even 3:1 odds. Recruiting everyone you can and inflating as big as you can actually has many negative consequences in itself.