Author Topic: Idea for a comprehensive revision of the faction system.  (Read 1050 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline CtrlAltDe1337

  • Knight
  • ***
  • Renown: 31
  • Infamy: 17
  • cRPG Player
  • Victoria aut mors
    • View Profile
  • Faction: ATS / Northern Empire
  • Game nicks: Kataphraktos, Muffins, CtrlAltDelete, Haleth
Idea for a comprehensive revision of the faction system.
« on: June 29, 2011, 07:17:56 am »
0
I was thinking about improving the faction system, as it strikes me as far too modern and consolidated for a Medieval-themed game.  IMO, the whole concept of factions should be dropped.  That's right, no factions.  At least, in the current meaning of the term.

Instead, introduce a complex vassalage system.  It would work this way.  Introduce five "ranks:" (names subject to change)

knight (owns no property)
duke (owns a village)
baron (owns a castle, or owns a village with a duke for a vassal)
prince (owns a city, or owns a castle with a baron for a vassal)
king (owns a city and has a prince for a vassal)


The way someone starts the equivalent of the factions we have now is to request people to swear fealty to him.  They become his vassal and join his "faction" color, similar to how it worked with factions.  The top guy gets to name his Duchy/Barony/Princedom/Kingdom like you can name factions now.  Depending on the quality of settlements you own, you would automatically go up in rank. (for example, you capture a castle and you automatically go up from a Duchy to a Barony.)

In addition, the duke/baron/prince/king would only be able to control his own settlement.  His vassals control the lands they own but pay a small tax to their lord.  If a vassal conquers a territory, they can opt to either a) keep it for themselves, b) give it to the king, or c) bestow it on a vassal of their own.

This will create a tiered vassalage system like Feudalism was in real life.  For example, in a kingdom, one of the barons might obtain some more land and bestow it on a vassal, independent of the king.*  This vassal pays a small tax to his lord, and so on, down from a king to a duke and knight.

Is your vassal not cooperating?  Too bad, that's part of politics and a relationship-based system of government.  Go raze his castle to the ground and show him whose boss.  Okay that's a little over-the-top, but you get the point.  Civil wars, discord, etc will be able to happen if you don't know your vassals.  It will hurt big clans in some respects, but also provide a lot more internal strife.  The game won't just be faction A attack faction B.  It might be the king of kingdom A attacks kingdom B, but some of kingdom B's dukes break off their allegiance and side with kingdom A.  Or, a full-blown civil war within a single faction.

You should have the option of offering vassalage to defeated enemies (but again, pick wisely).  Vassals could decide to break off from your faction, and they take their lands and armies with them.  The faction leader won't have absolute power to do whatever he pleases.**





*for the sake of gameplay sanity, the king should have to approve the decision, else it will be chaos with too many people entering the kingdom.

**as a caveat, vassals should have the option of giving their liege lords control of their lands.  This should be done for gameplay reasons, since we all don't play 24/7.




For example, some guy (we'll call him Bob) wants to play with his clan buddies together in strategus.  He declares himself a knight and invites his friends (or they request) to become his vassals.  Their rank is knight.  Bob conquers a village, he gets promoted to duke and starts the Duchy of XXXXXXXX.  His knight friend conquers a village also and is promoted to duke.  This promotes Bob to the rank of Baron.  Baron Bob then conquers a castle and gives his first village to one of his knights.  et cetra.  They build up a kingdom, each of his princes and barons have vassals under them, etc.






tl;dr version:

add a Feudal system of government.  Have ranks, with each rank having vassals under him/her.  It will add more depth to the faction system and create intra-faction fighting and more fun (and drama, we all love e-drama).
« Last Edit: June 29, 2011, 07:21:01 am by CtrlAltDe1337 »
Quote from: IRC
<abearirl>crtlaltdel shut up | you are the worst | sperglord | i hate you so much | if i could ban goatee or ban you | i'd ban you
<Wylker|work>man if i was locked in a bunker with einstein, stalin, and CtrlAltDelete and had a gun with only 2 bullets | I'd shoot CtrlAltDelete twice

Offline Diomedes

  • Count
  • *****
  • Renown: 200
  • Infamy: 51
  • cRPG Player
  • Cat
    • View Profile
  • Game nicks: Sootnik_Diomedes
Re: Idea for a comprehensive revision of the faction system.
« Reply #1 on: June 29, 2011, 07:22:40 am »
0
It's a cool idea but seems less fun.  I like my mostly-egalitarian teamspeak and as it is, and would prefer not to have a feudal-era caste system imposed upon it.

tl;dr: I'm not a fan of e-drama.

Offline [ptx]

  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1871
  • Infamy: 422
  • cRPG Player Sir White Rook A Gentleman and a Scholar
  • such OP. so bundle of sticks. wow.
    • View Profile
Re: Idea for a comprehensive revision of the faction system.
« Reply #2 on: June 29, 2011, 10:24:25 am »
0
This seems like just what strategus needs.

tl;dr: I'm a fan of e-drama.

Offline Thomek

  • El Director
  • OKAM Developer
  • ***
  • Renown: 1372
  • Infamy: 481
  • cRPG Player A Gentleman and a Scholar
    • View Profile
    • Ninja Guide Wiki
  • Faction: Ninja_
  • Game nicks: Ninja_Thomek
Re: Idea for a comprehensive revision of the faction system.
« Reply #3 on: June 30, 2011, 02:32:46 am »
0
Every faction decides for itself how it wants to be structured..

maybe make your own clan?
visitors can't see pics , please register or login


That Thomeck-delay-kicking bussiness is like that asshole-retard dude that fucks your sister sometimes.

Offline Bulzur

  • Earl
  • ******
  • Renown: 465
  • Infamy: 102
  • cRPG Player A Gentleman and a Scholar
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Caravan Guild.
  • Game nicks: Guard_Bulzur
Re: Idea for a comprehensive revision of the faction system.
« Reply #4 on: June 30, 2011, 02:37:17 am »
0
Where are the peasants ? And the merchants ? And the guards ?
[14:36] <@chadz> when you login there is a message "your life as horse archer was too depressing for you. you decided to commit suicide. please create a new char"
[19:32] <@chadz> if(dave_ukr_is_in_server) then rain_chance = 98%;

Offline Joseph

  • Knight
  • ***
  • Renown: 26
  • Infamy: 7
  • cRPG Player
  • I am your worst french nightmare.
    • View Profile
Re: Idea for a comprehensive revision of the faction system.
« Reply #5 on: June 30, 2011, 03:52:55 am »
0
I think it'll make the new trade system way more harder  :|
"Dam those peasants bite hard"

Offline CtrlAltDe1337

  • Knight
  • ***
  • Renown: 31
  • Infamy: 17
  • cRPG Player
  • Victoria aut mors
    • View Profile
  • Faction: ATS / Northern Empire
  • Game nicks: Kataphraktos, Muffins, CtrlAltDelete, Haleth
Re: Idea for a comprehensive revision of the faction system.
« Reply #6 on: June 30, 2011, 05:40:55 am »
0
Where are the peasants ? And the merchants ? And the guards ?
Not everyone will be a nobleman of course.  Other people can be attached to the landowners as soldiers, peasants, etc (ie in the faction but not own land).  This would work well with the new strategus changes chadz is doing afaik.

Quote
Every faction decides for itself how it wants to be structured..

maybe make your own clan?
This is about strategus structure not clan structure.
Quote from: IRC
<abearirl>crtlaltdel shut up | you are the worst | sperglord | i hate you so much | if i could ban goatee or ban you | i'd ban you
<Wylker|work>man if i was locked in a bunker with einstein, stalin, and CtrlAltDelete and had a gun with only 2 bullets | I'd shoot CtrlAltDelete twice

Offline Tears of Destiny

  • Naive
  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1847
  • Infamy: 870
  • cRPG Player A Gentleman and a Scholar
  • Quiet drifting through shallow waters. 死のび
    • View Profile
    • NADS
  • Faction: Black Company
  • IRC nick: Tears
Re: Idea for a comprehensive revision of the faction system.
« Reply #7 on: June 30, 2011, 07:39:36 pm »
0
It is an entertaining idea, but I vote no. I don't want to see any Fallen prince nor duke, ever.

The "Lord" system seems to work just fine.

Impossing a specific ranking system would further impede on faction themes for clans.
I'm not normal and I don't pretend so, my approach is pretty much a bomb crescendo.
Death is a fun way to pass the time though, several little bullets moving in staccato.
The terror of my reign will live on in infamy, singing when they die like a dead man's symphony.

Offline CtrlAltDe1337

  • Knight
  • ***
  • Renown: 31
  • Infamy: 17
  • cRPG Player
  • Victoria aut mors
    • View Profile
  • Faction: ATS / Northern Empire
  • Game nicks: Kataphraktos, Muffins, CtrlAltDelete, Haleth
Re: Idea for a comprehensive revision of the faction system.
« Reply #8 on: July 02, 2011, 11:50:27 pm »
0
It is an entertaining idea, but I vote no. I don't want to see any Fallen prince nor duke, ever.

The "Lord" system seems to work just fine.

Impossing a specific ranking system would further impede on faction themes for clans.
We currently don't have a "lord" system, that's the problem.  Its all just ranks.  As for the names, they could be editable.  Either let each leader name his vassals' titles, or have several pre-set groups for different cultures (for example, sultan instead of king).
Quote from: IRC
<abearirl>crtlaltdel shut up | you are the worst | sperglord | i hate you so much | if i could ban goatee or ban you | i'd ban you
<Wylker|work>man if i was locked in a bunker with einstein, stalin, and CtrlAltDelete and had a gun with only 2 bullets | I'd shoot CtrlAltDelete twice

Offline Diomedes

  • Count
  • *****
  • Renown: 200
  • Infamy: 51
  • cRPG Player
  • Cat
    • View Profile
  • Game nicks: Sootnik_Diomedes
Re: Idea for a comprehensive revision of the faction system.
« Reply #9 on: July 03, 2011, 12:00:05 am »
0
It seems like this system already exists for clans that want it; they just create it for themselves.  For those that don't, like the Tsardom with it's vaguely egalitarian structure, there are players deemed "responsible" enough to manage things and "others" who just fight when they want to.  I'm not seeing the need, nor enough of a gameplay perk, to justify the proposed imposition on already functional methods.  I get the value of potential discord, and whatnot, but it seems like it could be a simple system of passwords that needn't be couched in a big quasi-feudal RP structure.

Offline PhantomZero

  • Earl
  • ******
  • Renown: 384
  • Infamy: 53
  • cRPG Player
  • I'm going to need you playing at 6AM on Saturday..
    • View Profile
  • Faction: BIRD CLAN
  • Game nicks: POSTMASTER_PHANTOM0_OF_BIRD
  • IRC nick: PhantomZero
Re: Idea for a comprehensive revision of the faction system.
« Reply #10 on: July 03, 2011, 12:54:45 am »
0
Forcing factions to have particular forms of government is dumb. Like Diomedes says, it is possible already. People who own the fiefs do not have to move the troops/money out of their lands if they don't want to. The only thing they cant do is outright change the faction of the fief.

You still have to worry about people running off with troops, gold, and equipment, as well as revealing information to enemy states. Did you even play in Strategus?
visitors can't see pics , please register or login