Waging wars and conquering cities

[Dathias]

i really like dexlans idea it is really good wit the generals and stuff but yet it is still controled by many players

[Valrog]

A system like this is aleady done in ShadowBane. Guilds create their own towns complete with shops, hotels, guards, ect... And these towns can engage in wars against one another.

Troops are supplied by trained NPC charcaters and PC.

To train NPC characters, kings have to pay for them and their upkeep through the Kingdoms economy which grows through trade and tribute. As the city becomes more prosperous it begins to grow.

Vital siege engines could be supplied through engineers who have to be trained in woodworking, alchemy, ect... The engines built could include Mangonels, Trebuchets, Rams, Seige towers, and ladders.

But what about costal cities? Ones with open ports. Those could set up intresting types of battles in which the invading army pours into the city via ships and landingcraft and fight on from there. (It looked cool in Lord of The Rings anyways.)

Yet another Idea. Why should a kingdom have only one city? Mabye if a city reached a certain level of wealth, it could pay some huge amount of money to settle and start a new city, or fort. This could allow kingdoms to make discernable borders and such which could set up wars that were more like lenghty campaigns.

[Levski]

on the faq on the planeshift site it says :

I died and lost all my stuff, can I have it back?

 

 After dying your char will travel in the Death Realm, and if you can get out of there you will have your items and money back.

 
heres the link: http://www.planeshift.it/community_faq.html

[Axsyrus]

yup, this is todays update to the CVS:

- On death spawns a player above the npcroom. Temporarly used to simulate death.

so if you die you will be spawned to another place(the npcroom now, will be the deathrealms later).

[Levski]

You have to find the way out of the place you are spawned in when you die right? i hope they dont make it too hard!

[Wormtail_]

Back to the main topic.

So anyway your right, a player only controls the one character. This is also what I have been thinking all along . But a Player can be a General or captin or whatever and Co-ordinate the other players.

How would a player be elected a General, Captain, or whatever? Perhaps having a specific rank in a guild would affect this, but perhaps also your character could have \"merit points.\" Merit points, basically, are points you get for achieving goals, obeying orders, having orders carried out successfully, etc. You could compare who has the most merit, and then these people could be promoted if they wish. Just a basic description of an idea, but what do you think?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

But what about costal cities? Ones with open ports. Those could set up intresting types of battles in which the invading army pours into the city via ships and landingcraft and fight on from there. (It looked cool in Lord of The Rings anyways.)

It would also be interesting to have naval battles and underwater battles, although I believe those would be rare as the land is an underground stalactite. The lower two levels of the stalactite, I believe, are submerged in water at times, so coastal cities may actually be underwater cities. An interesting idea, though, although I doubt that it can be used in terms of actual, large-scale invasions on transport ships.

Yet another Idea. Why should a kingdom have only one city? Mabye if a city reached a certain level of wealth, it could pay some huge amount of money to settle and start a new city, or fort. This could allow kingdoms to make discernable borders and such which could set up wars that were more like lenghty campaigns.

Actually, I think that the game is not going to give the players actual power in the government.

[Valrog]

Yet another Idea. Why should a kingdom have only one city? Mabye if a city reached a certain level of wealth, it could pay some huge amount of money to settle and start a new city, or fort. This could allow kingdoms to make discernable borders and such which could set up wars that were more like lenghty campaigns.

Actually, I think that the game is not going to give the players actual power in the government.

Well it could be done sort of. For example their could be the preset cities that will be in the game,  but perhaps these cities could be \"ruled\" by guilds. The ruling guilds reaps the benifets of city income but if the city is conquered in war, then it\'s \"ownership\" would be passed on to the winning guild. just another thought.

[Wormtail_]

Well it could be done sort of. For example their could be the preset cities that will be in the game, but perhaps these cities could be \"ruled\" by guilds. The ruling guilds reaps the benifets of city income but if the city is conquered in war, then it\'s \"ownership\" would be passed on to the winning guild. just another thought.

Actually, technically, the players would still control the cities. Also, the government described in the \"Settings\" section of the Planeshift website rules the cities and gets the income, not the guilds. Still, individual guilds could be charged with the protection of cities and get paid to do so. Guild members would pretty much patrol the streets, guard the cities, arrest miscreants, etc. Just an idea differing in some aspects from yours. Anyway, what does everybody think of this?

[Zaknafein]

First of all, the beggining players would have to take a city by force. Most players I suspect would make friends to help them conquer the cities. Unless the begginers start with their own,puny, bite-sized \"city\", they would have to take a loooong time to get to the right level in order to conquer a city. Soon, after the skirmish, that player would have to build an army,barracks, a security force, and so on. Then, summoning his/her power as a strategist, that player would start and assualt to a city of their choice. The outcome of the battle is not by luck,but by skill.

[Wormtail_]

First of all, the beggining players would have to take a city by force. Most players I suspect would make friends to help them conquer the cities. Unless the begginers start with their own,puny, bite-sized \"city\", they would have to take a loooong time to get to the right level in order to conquer a city. Soon, after the skirmish, that player would have to build an army,barracks, a security force, and so on. Then, summoning his/her power as a strategist, that player would start and assualt to a city of their choice. The outcome of the battle is not by luck,but by skill.

I doubt that you will be able to conquer cities and actually be able to build things - as said earlier, this is a RPG, not a RTS. Secondly, this pretty much turns the inner stalactite into civil war. I was under the impression that Yliakum was not in anarchy. Also, conquering cities by force is not the most effective way of getting cities - as stated in Sun Tzu\'s Art of War , attacking cities is the worst way of getting them, as \"the supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting.\" A strategist is more skillful if they manage to do that than if they captured a city through force. Anyway, this game is about role-playing, not strategy, so we probably won\'t see much in the way of actually governing cities and commanding armies.

[Monketh]

Hrm...  perhaps a system could work out like this...
-NPC\'s are the \'basic\' low-rank soldiers
-Some invading NPC army lays seige to City A
-City A is a player city
-Numerous small quests are formed automatically for the seige
-The seige is scheduled on the website
-Players may operate seige weapons, experience from them is shared

[Valrog]

either way I\'d like to see some sort of large scale battles like the ones in ShadowBane. Governement or not the prospect of hundreds of soldiers collided head on in the battle field is something that would seem natural to a fantasy, rpg type of genre which is rarely ever potrayed. It would definetly help distinguish Planeshift from other mmorpg.

[Wormtail_]

-NPC\'s are the \'basic\' low-rank soldiers

Perhaps there could be ranks within the ranks of NPCs, such as in RTS games. As in terms of advancements of units, such as in Age of Empires II. The basic unit is a Militia, but you can upgrade it to Men-at-Arms, and then Long Swordsman, Two-Handed Swordsman, and finally Champion, after you advance to the required age and pay the required price. Something like that could be used to determine how powerful NPC soldiers are, such as Spearman, Bowman, Ranger, and Troll.

-Some invading NPC army lays seige to City A
-City A is a player city  

If City A is a player city, I am assuming that there are at least a certain amount of players in the city at the time of the siege. Also, perhaps NPCs can use siege weapons. Could there also, perhaps, be traitors among the people in City A, so that they open the gates to the NPC army?

-Numerous small quests are formed automatically for the seige
-The siege is scheduled on the website
-Players may operate seige weapons, experience from them is shared

As for the siege being scheduled on the website, perhaps that can only happen if a player happens to find that information. I mean, it would be more realistic for someone to know when the enemy attacks if they have spies, not a big message saying \"Hi! I\'m Bob. I\'m going to attack you with a big army of Trolls! Good-bye!\" Surprise attacks would be fun.

As for numerous small quests, I like the idea. If someone wanted to betray their fellow city-mates, then that could be a quest. \"Open the gates at 12:30 AM.\" Or \"Steal enemy plans.\" Things like that.

As for operating siege weapons, as I said before, perhaps invading NPCs can also use them. Also, the ability to \'sabotage machines\' could be implemented.