Totems: Friends, Enemies and Allies

[Dubanka]

I state earlier that I would like to see tribes gain the ability to influence their tribal area by ranking their totems. I like this because it gives motivation for tribal members to do 'stuff' on a regular basis to support, or expand, their tribe.

To go along with this, I would like to see the totem menu expanded to include non-tribe member status and permission. It would appear that the code for this is already mostly there...as inter tribe permissions can be set based upon tribal rank. Would it be a huge step to extend these permissions to non-tribal members?

/tally [tribe] designates [tribe] as an ally
/friend [individual] designates individual as a friend of the tribe.

the 'diplomacy' tab would look much like the tribe management section, you could extend permissions to varying degrees for friends and alllied tribes. Access storage? sure. Harvest resouces? sure. Terraform? No way. etc. etc.

of course you'd also have
/tenemy which would designate an enemy tribe. this would currently be kinda pointless, since we don't have npc guards or anything...but ideally at some point we would (tamed wolves?) and this would allow us to kos hostiles.

On my personal wishlist, would be in the ally menu, the ability to allow an ally to build on your land...and then a subset of what they'd be permitted to build. WHy? because then i could contract out for someone to build my walls WTB Craft guild to fortify VD homestead. Food, protection and shelter guaranteed! In the same manner, a pve tribe could hire a merc tribe for protection.

anyway. thoughts.

[MrDDT]

I would like to see some type of in game cost/sink for allowing tribes to be allies. Thus people wouldnt just allies with everyone in the world.

Good system and idea though.

[Dubanka]

good point. i'm not sure how that would work tho. actually i'm not sure that i care. if someone allies up with the whole world, that's actually pretty risky, from a diplomatic standpoint...ally with me, and then i start launching raids into your neighbors backyard...kinda bad diplomatically. I guess i'm of the mind that the hand holders are going to hold hands whether or not there is a mechanic in game for them to do it...i'd just assume have the mechanic in game so all hand holding is on the up and up

[MrDDT]

good point. i'm not sure how that would work tho. actually i'm not sure that i care. if someone allies up with the whole world, that's actually pretty risky, from a diplomatic standpoint...ally with me, and then i start launching raids into your neighbors backyard...kinda bad diplomatically. I guess i'm of the mind that the hand holders are going to hold hands whether or not there is a mechanic in game for them to do it...i'd just assume have the mechanic in game so all hand holding is on the up and up

Well it was would also with the "We are allies for today, and not tomorrow" issue. Where people pop in and out of allies. Making some type of "Tribute" to become an ally using some type of resource that will be removed from the game. Also could allow some of this "tribute" to goto the leader tribe of the ally, or some to both tribes. Part of the agreement.
This would make it so there is just more than 1 reason to do all this stuff.

I hate systems like in Darkfall where people are able to jump in and out of being an ally. Or fake game ways that force you "3 days before you can join a tribe". Why not make it based on resources instead?

[Dubanka]

perhaps its the subordinate guild that is paying tribute to the alliance leader. one time fee? weekly cost? both? based on number of members of subordinate tribe? Personally i generally detest alliance systems in general...but it's good for gameplay...if only for forum warrioring, '...If you're gonna nutcup why don't you ally up already and make it official!...'

[Book]

I state earlier

On my personal wishlist, would be in the ally menu, the ability to allow an ally to build on your land...and then a subset of what they'd be permitted to build. WHy? because then i could contract out for someone to build my walls WTB Craft guild to fortify VD homestead. Food, protection and shelter guaranteed! In the same manner, a pve tribe could hire a merc tribe for protection.

Over here :

http://www.xsyon.com/forum/showthrea...hiring-workers

[MrDDT]

perhaps its the subordinate guild that is paying tribute to the alliance leader. one time fee? weekly cost? both? based on number of members of subordinate tribe? Personally i generally detest alliance systems in general...but it's good for gameplay...if only for forum warrioring, '...If you're gonna nutcup why don't you ally up already and make it official!...'

Yep just like that, but also make allies have a reason to allies. Like you said, shared resources and other bonuses but make sure its balanced too, not to promote it too much.

[KeithStone]

I would like to see some type of in game cost/sink for allowing tribes to be allies. Thus people wouldnt just allies with everyone in the world.

Good system and idea though.

I don't like this at all- there's already going to be limitations on who you can ally with. For example, a good tribe would not be able to ally an evil tribe and vice versa. You can't jump back and forth between being good and evil without first disbanding your tribe so that will keep people from flip flopping allies or trying to ally the entire server for a day.

[orious13]

Good tribes are also not supposed to be able to kill/attack other good or neutrals (I think?) without severe penalties.

In a sense, everyone who is good is an ally already and everyone who is evil is...well a toss of the dice.

[Dubanka]

allignment shoudl get tossed out the window when it comes to this subject...you could have 2 good alligned tribes that hate each other.

while they don't kill each other in an rpk sense, the fact that they are of the same allignment should not preclude them from engaging in a fight for territory...otherwise would leave the system open to grief. EXAMPLE:
I hate tribe A. They are a 'Good' Alligned tribe.
I make tribe B as a good alligned tribe.
I cut down all of the timer surrounding tribe A and haul it back to my tribe. because i can.
I scavenge all the junk, and pave what i couldnt, around tribe A. because i can.
I can and there is nothing you can do without compromising your good status. HAHA.
I also make a point of capturing every rare resource that tribe A wants. further hampering them.
Tribe A should be pretty pissed at me and my folks.
Tribe A should be able to try to send me a message without it compromising their allignment.

and everyone should be able to ally with a neutral tribe...that's the whole point of them being neither good nor evil. A good tribe shouldnt be able to ally with an evil tribe...but really, whats the point. If i'm evil, and you're good, and you're fgighting one of my enemies, I May decide to come crash the party on your behalf. So really the whole discussion of who can ally with who doesnt matter, because player behavior will truump code every single time.