#What kind of conflict?

1 messages · Page 1 of 1 (latest)

rugged star
#

I'm currently collecting the questions and have to admit that I don't really understand your question.

Are you talking about community / politics-related conflicts, like one player group secretly trying to convince members of another group to switch teams?

Or economic conflicts like a trader not being willing to sell to specific clients?

Or something completely different?

unique merlin
#

Okay

#

Let’s say you and me are negotiating about an issue , it doesn’t go anywhere and we want another way to solve this issue

#

Like for example I want to have your land because you are to close mine and I want to expand, can I like seize your land or something like that? I know that you guys don’t want pvp as the main reason why people will play the game, but how are we, the players going to solve difference without pvp if we can’t come to an agreement?

#

I hope this makes it less vague

rugged star
#

Ahh, I see and I’m afraid we have the problem with, let’s call it “land disputes” not fully fleshed out yet.
We would like to eliminate most problems of this kind before they even occur with proper game design decisions and we have several ideas. It’s unfortunately too early for me to talk about it in detail.

unique merlin
#

Ah okay, can you already say what you mean with ‘proper game design’? Because I don’t really understand

rugged star
#

One theoretical option would be to make it increasingly harder for an individual to occupy more territory once a certain plot size has been reached.
Another option would be to keep the world size in a ratio to player count that makes it impossible for most land to be occupied.
There are other options, but as I said, this is not in a state of refinements to talk about.

topaz laurel
#

Could u elaborate "make it increasingly harder for individual"?

rugged star
#

For clarification, this was an example I made up to illustrate options.

"Increasingly harder" means, the more you have the higher the effort required to get even more

topaz laurel
#

Interesting

#

What i am trying to understand is: lets say I find a really nice land where there is enough trees and other resources, away from any players (theoretically). I will be able to build only house for myself and can use only some meter square? And if i want to build more houses, just for fun or make a hotel, i dunno.. It will be somehow harder for me to achieve it?

#

To occupy more meter square in that particular area because im only one player

slender cradle
#

Also the question of what happens if a new player builds right next to an established player and prevents them from expanding is important

rugged star
# topaz laurel What i am trying to understand is: lets say I find a really nice land where ther...

OK, this is getting out of control.
I did not mean to indicate that we will restrict occupied territory just that it would be one (among many) options for a game design solution to reduce "land disputes" because Jelle asked for clarification and I gave one example.

What you are worried about is the opposite of Jelle's question; - what to do if people argue over the same territory. Your concern would be relevant/a new challenge IF we would opt for restricting land but that is not something I said.

jagged pulsar
#

I am so sorry I asked.

#

This was more or less my question, and "oh no".

rugged star
#

No need to be sorry, it's a good question. I just did not immediately understand what type of conflict we are talking about.