Think of non waring tribe as Swiss. Perhaps could institute the 1st banking system so that no one would actually want to attack to ensure their ill gotten gains are not revealed.
Think of non waring tribe as Swiss. Perhaps could institute the 1st banking system so that no one would actually want to attack to ensure their ill gotten gains are not revealed.
It's not lost on me. If you don't want to be a warring tribe, I'd suggest not planting down next to a warring one....Even the tutorial suggests that you take your time when choosing a home...This game isn't the Sims :/
Another example of why this wont work is "Merc" tribes could set up a non-warring tribe and then take a contract to just grief this crap out of a warring tribe and guess what, the "warring" tribe wouldn't be able to do jack squat about it. Being able to declare as a non-warring will be a disaster for this game, plane and simple.
What I meant to say is that any gathering of scarce resources outside the tribal area of a "non-warring" tribe, is an act of war itself.
Imagine if you will a scarce resource (oil). If a tribe went over to an "open" area and just started harvesting that oil, until it was all gone, and they did it through force by protecting the gatherers and killing other folks gatherers (yes its open pvp), wouldn't that be an act of war?
Won't work either. Who would go after the "Evil" based ones? Just other "Evil"? That wouldn't be very good design. Plus is goes back to the same problem....Tribe selects "Good". Becomes invulnerable to attacks...pillages resources everywhere with no fear. Not a good balance model at all. It also still allows merc tribes to be formed and completely grief anyone with no fear of repercussion. A merc corp could just constantly kill/gank everyone with no fear of attack on their home city while their contractor sieges...sorry, but that doesn't work and would create completely dumb play conditions.
Xsyon said that being warring tribe won't be a switch but will likely be based on tribal actions, so what you mentioned may be an example of something which pushes a tribe toward becoming a warring one.
@Hellaciouss: a good tribe can't pillage resources everywhere. The additionaly claimed resource lands will be up for contest, and won't be safe zones. A good tribe is only safe from attacks in their own tribe zone, not everywhere, and if they start to grief others they will lose the 'good' status soon and their land will lose its safe status as well.
Well actually you will ind a lot of 'Good' PvP tribes out there looking for a fight. I would guess that they would BOTH enjoy the fight as they BOTH want the PvP.
Except for the fact that outside their tribal lands they can be attacked of course so not invulnerable at all.
How? If they are good they cannot attack 1st. If they are outside their village they are open to attack. Only difference here is that a non warring tribe is safe in their village but loses out of expansion of land through conquest.
Again how are they going to constantly kill/gank it they are unable to attack 1st? In fact it more detrimental to non warring gtribes as they could be gathering resources without the ability to defend what they have gathered.
I'm going on the assumption that by "Open" you mean open to pvp. Then yes, I can see where you're coming from. You would be encroaching on someone else's land, basically invading it. But, if I'm reading your example right, you're also implying the non-warring person killed some people on the open-pvp land. What if the non-warring person just walked into someone's land and picked some grass? Yes, they're encroaching but they didn't harm anyone.
This game may not be the sims, but it is a sandbox...which means everyone is free to choose how they like to play with their sand. I may not like to build my castle with a round bucket like you, after all.
Your scenario could be pretty easy to circumvent. For example, if your tribe's members attack (swing first, etc) then maybe your tribe switches to open combat. Or possibly if you attack someone's land then your land becomes open for attack. Or possibly, as someone else suggested, it could be based on alignment. Good/Neutral could choose to stay out of the fight where as Evil aligned have no choice. Just some quick thoughts....
Nothing personal but most of your posts is telling what YOU want to happen and how YOU think things should be done.Your welcome to your opion but as someone else said point of a sandbox is to allow for all sorts of game play styles.Say there is a tribe of builders/rpers who wanna play the game with no conflict or avoiding it as much as possible you feel its totally okay for a war tribe to come in and destroy there land day after day after day down to the totem if they wanted.How long do you think the other tribe would keep playin? There will be pvp and plenty of war tribes no one is trying to say there shouldn''t be but I sure don't agree with allowing a bunch of griefers torment the hell out of players who do not wanna play that way.
What's stopping an Alt from joining a non-warring tribe and attacking his own "warring tribe" so the non-warring tribe is now at war with the warring one? People WILL do this. If it CAN be done, it WILL be done. You shouldn't underestimate the willingness of griefers to do something like this. YOUR scenario is pretty easy to circumvent.
It is very stupid to give any structure invulnerability to being destroyed. It will not work. All you're trying to do is try and give some false sense of security of being safe and then when it turns out it can be gotten around they leave disappointed. Better off to just tell people "If you want to live peacefully....go find a piece of land away from warring tribes and live peacefully". People who don't want to fight can always hire protection instead of just making them completely invulnerable. It. Won't. Work. It will bring more harm then good.