Goblin Squad Member
|
@Xeen, I agree - despite Ryan's wishes (whatever they may be) I expect at least one settlement will have its leadership vanish.
I expect that there would have to be a uncontrolled state applied to a settlement at some point after the leadership vanishes, which I call riot, and then someone from inside the settlement or outside will be able to try to take control.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The group always has a leader.
It may not look that way, but there is always someone that either manipulates things, or is the go to guy for answers.
Sure you can have a settlement with zero companies. Good luck to them I guess. It still doesnt take away from the same group running multiple settlements. Using alt characters to get around the alignment restrictions.
Depends upon what it actualy takes to run a successfull settlement. If it takes alot of ACTIVE play (we don't know yet), you may not effectively be able to run more then one settlement no matter how many characters you have.....or you may be hindering yourself because it may be more efficient to focus play time/efforts within one settlement then try to spread them out over multiple settlements. Alot of that is still very nebulous because all the mechanical details of implimentation are still be worked on, let alone play tested and tweaked.
IMO, you seem to be making alot of assumptions based on play experiences in a previous game even though the mechanics for how these things work in PFO may be entirely dissimilar.
Not really, a good leader delegates his authority. These people will have plenty of members, since they can recruit anyone to their group through the meta game.
Look at goons... They control most of 0.0 space in Eve. They do have alot of "allies" or pets if you will, along with alot of renters, but they do control it all. There is one person leading it all as well, but he has many minions.
Pyramid type structure.
Yes but out of game structure is irrelevent to in game structure because you have ZERO way to enforce out of game structure within the game. So if you have to delegate control of your 2nd kingdom to another player because you can't just use an ALT as figured but need someone to ACTIVELY play it...and that other player says "Sorry el Heffe but I've got a better offer...we're in revolt." Mechanicaly there is nothing you can do about it, aside from mustering your armies and hope enough follow you to break down the walls of the other settlement. As far as the game mechanics are concerned settlement number1 and number2 are already entirely independant.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
You could have that problem no matter what. It could happen in a company, single settlement, or single kingdom. All I am discussing is meta game ways to do things that are being blocked in game by design. I know they have their reasons, and they are not bad reasons... I just dont want to see them waste their time or ours for something that will just be ignored anyway.
But you can use an alt to run the other settlement... You can have multiple characters logged in at the same time. Most of the "leadership" requirements mechanically for settlements will just be tedious monotonous things.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Xeen, I agree - despite Ryan's wishes (whatever they may be) I expect at least one settlement will have its leadership vanish.
I expect that there would have to be a uncontrolled state applied to a settlement at some point after the leadership vanishes, which I call riot, and then someone from inside the settlement or outside will be able to try to take control.
Yeah, it will happen. I think he wanted multiple people in leadership slots or something. Like I said though, you can use alts for those spots.
That would be a good way to switch leadership when its necessary. I know in Eve, if your CEO vanishes from game, you can petition for the CEO spot of the corp... I dont remember how long it requires for them to be gone though.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@Xeen, I agree - despite Ryan's wishes (whatever they may be) I expect at least one settlement will have its leadership vanish.
I expect that there would have to be a uncontrolled state applied to a settlement at some point after the leadership vanishes, which I call riot, and then someone from inside the settlement or outside will be able to try to take control.
I suspect there will have to be some mechanism in place for a revolt/riot/coup, etc. The simple example of a settlement that has a dictatorial form of government (single players holds all the keys to authority) and that player gets hit by a bus or rage-quits or has his mother take the computers away ;) . There likely will have to be some mechanism for enough of the members/officers, etc to take over authority for the charter.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
You can have a settlement with ZERO companies.I don't think that's exactly right. I think that there must be one company that has enough Influence to found the settlement: Companies serve as the instrument by which groups of players actually gain control of hexes in Pathfinder Online and enjoy a level of property ownership and management. A company that establishes control of a potential settlement hex by defeating its monstrous denizens can spend influence to found a settlement there.
Previously, it only required 10 Characters to found a Settlement.
A character proposing a settlement must define several aspects of the settlement in its charter...
Once the settlement charter has been created, a minimum of 10 characters must sign it.
Still, it remains that Characters don't have to belong to a Company.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I said active play....not sitting around logged in doing nothing usefull.You could have that problem no matter what. It could happen in a company, single settlement, or single kingdom.
But you can use an alt... You can have multiple characters logged in at the same time.
What kind of active play do you expect will be required? Having played Eve, the only comparable game with this kind of territory structure, and having been a CEO of a corp and the Executor of an alliance... Other then herding cats there wasnt alot mechanically to do. Change roles, grant roles, etc.
Oh, change cats to players... yep running a large group of players is like herding cats.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
You can have a settlement with ZERO companies.I don't think that's exactly right. I think that there must be one company that has enough Influence to found the settlement: Companies serve as the instrument by which groups of players actually gain control of hexes in Pathfinder Online and enjoy a level of property ownership and management. A company that establishes control of a potential settlement hex by defeating its monstrous denizens can spend influence to found a settlement there.Previously, it only required 10 Characters to found a Settlement.
Still, it remains that Characters don't have to belong to a Company.A character proposing a settlement must define several aspects of the settlement in its charter...
Once the settlement charter has been created, a minimum of 10 characters must sign it.
And can all be one player...
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I said active play....not sitting around logged in doing nothing usefull.You could have that problem no matter what. It could happen in a company, single settlement, or single kingdom.
But you can use an alt... You can have multiple characters logged in at the same time.
You can't make it too onerous for regular non-hardcore players to be able to manage a settlement. Therefore if there is one player who just plays PFO 20 hours a day, they'll be able to run multiple settlements with alts. If that's how they find their fun. *shrug*
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I said active play....not sitting around logged in doing nothing usefull.You could have that problem no matter what. It could happen in a company, single settlement, or single kingdom.
But you can use an alt... You can have multiple characters logged in at the same time.
What kind of active play do you expect will be required? Having played Eve, the only comparable game with this kind of territory structure, and having been a CEO of a corp and the Executor of an alliance... Other then herding cats there wasnt alot mechanically to do. Change roles, grant roles, etc.
Oh, change cats to players... yep running a large group of players is like herding cats.
I've been the figurehead of a small mining corp in EVE. I pulled those mechanical switches and such, but I had someone who was a better leader actually organizing things.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
You can't make it too onerous for regular non-hardcore players to be able to manage a settlement. Therefore if there is one player who just plays PFO 20 hours a day, they'll be able to run multiple settlements with alts. If that's how they find their fun. *shrug*I said active play....not sitting around logged in doing nothing usefull.You could have that problem no matter what. It could happen in a company, single settlement, or single kingdom.
But you can use an alt... You can have multiple characters logged in at the same time.
Yep, exactly right, there are people who will do just that... They will make 50 accounts and constantly sell off characters to pay for their game and internet while living in their grandma's basement.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One person in T7V, will be looked to by the others. That person, if he so desires, can grab control of the group... If done right, he could do it subtly and with no one realizing it. Or he could just lead from the group, making suggestions that the others will flock to, and never actually take control.
A leader is present whether you see it blatant or not.
You obviously don't know what you're talking about, but I really can't justify continuing to tell you you're wrong.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I've been the figurehead of a small mining corp in EVE. I pulled those mechanical switches and such, but I had someone who was a better leader actually organizing things.I said active play....not sitting around logged in doing nothing usefull.You could have that problem no matter what. It could happen in a company, single settlement, or single kingdom.
But you can use an alt... You can have multiple characters logged in at the same time.
What kind of active play do you expect will be required? Having played Eve, the only comparable game with this kind of territory structure, and having been a CEO of a corp and the Executor of an alliance... Other then herding cats there wasnt alot mechanically to do. Change roles, grant roles, etc.
Oh, change cats to players... yep running a large group of players is like herding cats.
Yeah, doing that stuff is simple as can be. There isnt much to do really.
Now organizing the people, working diplomacy, that is the time consuming part of running things.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
You obviously don't know what you're talking about, but I really can't justify continuing to tell you you're wrong.One person in T7V, will be looked to by the others. That person, if he so desires, can grab control of the group... If done right, he could do it subtly and with no one realizing it. Or he could just lead from the group, making suggestions that the others will flock to, and never actually take control.
A leader is present whether you see it blatant or not.
So your actually going to sit there and tell me that there isnt one person in your group that is more influential then the others?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
You can't make it too onerous for regular non-hardcore players to be able to manage a settlement. Therefore if there is one player who just plays PFO 20 hours a day, they'll be able to run multiple settlements with alts. If that's how they find their fun. *shrug*I said active play....not sitting around logged in doing nothing usefull.You could have that problem no matter what. It could happen in a company, single settlement, or single kingdom.
But you can use an alt... You can have multiple characters logged in at the same time.
Possible, it really depends upon how many players GW really want it to require to run a settlement....and of course there are side effects any mechnisim put into place.
Just as with any anti-hack/anti-cheat mechanism, you are never going to catch 100 percent of people trying to do it, if they are motivated enough, talented enough and have enough resources to do so.... but that's never the goal, it's to put up enough barriers that MOST people aren't going to be interested in doing it, this diminishing the impact on the game as a whole.
Firstly, I don't know for sure just how much GW cares if a single person runs multiple settlements outside of the kingdom structure. I assume they don't want that to happen, otherwise they would allow for it within the mechanics of the game (though I could be wrong). Secondly, I don't know how many resources if any, they would be willing to expend on making such behavior difficult to achieve or what practical value they may think, if any, there is in doing so. Nor do I know what methods they would consider using if they did, nor what game consequences might result from such.
I'm simply trying to get across the point that just because Developer A can't or won't try to dissuade a certain activity does not mean one should assume that Developer B can't or won't do so.
EvE developed the way it did because CCP made a specific set of choices....it's upto GW whether they want to make similar choices or not. I wouldn't assume what choice they are going to make on any given thing without having them say it explicitly.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The way we set up the stock distribution in my corp, I got about 40% of the stock and the other 3 who actually ran the corp got 15% each. That way if I went nutty the three combined had the power to vote me out. lol However they got the perk of using me as the guy to blame if something unpopular happened. The main reason I was the CEO was I had the skills.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So your actually going to sit there and tell me that there isnt one person in your group that is more influential then the others?You obviously don't know what you're talking about, but I really can't justify continuing to tell you you're wrong.One person in T7V, will be looked to by the others. That person, if he so desires, can grab control of the group... If done right, he could do it subtly and with no one realizing it. Or he could just lead from the group, making suggestions that the others will flock to, and never actually take control.
A leader is present whether you see it blatant or not.
Believe it Xeen. The 7th Veil is committed to rule by council.
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So your actually going to sit there and tell me that there isnt one person in your group that is more influential then the others?You obviously don't know what you're talking about, but I really can't justify continuing to tell you you're wrong.One person in T7V, will be looked to by the others. That person, if he so desires, can grab control of the group... If done right, he could do it subtly and with no one realizing it. Or he could just lead from the group, making suggestions that the others will flock to, and never actually take control.
A leader is present whether you see it blatant or not.
Yes. There is no one person who holds more actual personal authority or actual power than the combined influence of all others.
More importantly, almost all of the influence of the leadership is based on our commitment to the ideals with which we attract our members. Even if the entire leadership group were to act in concert, the outcome of attempting to go against those principles would be that we are left in charge of an empty house.
Some groups are brought together by force of personality; we are brought together by recognition of common principles and goals.
|
CEO, Goblinworks
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A Settlement is not managed by Companies (or at least, it doesn't have to be managed by Companies; "Managed by Companies" is probably a worthwhile voting system). I expect most Settlements will either be Dictatorships or pure Democracies. I suspect Oligarchies will be tried and fail. But I could be totally wrong.
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
I suspect Oligarchies will be tried and fail. But I could be totally wrong.
I intend to do my best to make the very close statement "An Oligarchy will succeed." True.
I do expect that some of the groups that fail will be from each possible -archy, and a possibly some that defy categorization.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
So your actually going to sit there and tell me that there isnt one person in your group that is more influential then the others?I'm telling you it's already been proven that no single Steward of The Seventh Veil is able to impose his or her will against the others' wishes.
That may be, but you really didnt answer my question.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
That may be, but you really didnt answer my question.So your actually going to sit there and tell me that there isnt one person in your group that is more influential then the others?I'm telling you it's already been proven that no single Steward of The Seventh Veil is able to impose his or her will against the others' wishes.
I'm no where near a leadership position in T7V, but from our forum and TS, I can honestly say there is not one person that has more influence than another for our leaders.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Honestly no matter how you look at it a dictatorship is the soundest mechanic any settlement can go with. Elect a leader to put in charge who has all the important permissions. The reason is that if only one person controls the settlement and stays in control you dont run into a situation where I can drop a deep cover spy, get the the head of the class and now i have unrestricted access to everything.
This does put a lot of trust in one person to be sure, and the settlement can be run as a democracy, but its best if only one person had the ability to get into everything.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A Settlement is not managed by Companies (or at least, it doesn't have to be managed by Companies; "Managed by Companies" is probably a worthwhile voting system). I expect most Settlements will either be Dictatorships or pure Democracies. I suspect Oligarchies will be tried and fail. But I could be totally wrong.
I encourage you to include a system where checks and balances can be set up. For example, a Democracy/Republic where member Characters and sponsored Companies vote on most things, but those votes can be vetoed by a super-majority among an Oligarchy, and those vetoes can be overridden by a super-majority of Characters/Companies.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That may be, but you really didnt answer my question.So your actually going to sit there and tell me that there isnt one person in your group that is more influential then the others?I'm telling you it's already been proven that no single Steward of The Seventh Veil is able to impose his or her will against the others' wishes.
Yeah, I wasn't trying to answer your question. I was simply pointing out that you were wrong when you said:
There is always one person in charge, no matter how the game is setup. One charismatic person will be in control...
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
A Settlement is not managed by Companies (or at least, it doesn't have to be managed by Companies; "Managed by Companies" is probably a worthwhile voting system). I expect most Settlements will either be Dictatorships or pure Democracies. I suspect Oligarchies will be tried and fail. But I could be totally wrong.I encourage you to include a system where checks and balances can be set up. For example, a Democracy/Republic where member Characters and sponsored Companies vote on most things, but those votes can be vetoed by a super-majority among an Oligarchy, and those vetoes can be overridden by a super-majority of Characters/Companies.
As complicated as that seems, I could see it being resolved fairly easily on the UI side with some simple drop-down menus. Something like:
1. Highlight your main legislative scheme and select "Add New Check"
2. Pick from the dropdown menu who will be able to veto the main legislative power's proposal. Examples could be the: a specific character, a few specific characters, a company, a population-wide vote.
3. If a vote is needed, select what type of vote.
And then repeat this process for other checks, or checks on checks, etc.
No idea how hard such a system would be to code, though.