We have mostly decided on the following update on the village influencing.

Delport and Stewarsville will always revolt at the same time.
Estelbar and Acknor will always revolt at the same time.
Paavik and Shanthmark always revolt at the same time.
Rockholm, Southgard, and Angkrag always revolt at the same time.
Dairuchi will always revolt alone.

The time villages are controlled will be somewhat random but pretty much fixed, and no longer dependent on the type or style of government of a city/commune. Instead, government type and style will effect how occupied villages feel about their host nation. In other words, the village feelings when ruled by a despotic government will turn sour so that when the village revolts, it will be harder for that despotic government to regain that village. Benign goverments will be more favorably received. Also, villages will not like cities or communes whose kill their villages but will like those who perform commodity quests.

We believe this will make village revolts more interesting and competitive in the long run.

But doesn't it sort of make raids on villages completely pointless?

Maybe have a village not like a city or commune who lets them get killed at the same time as not liking the attackers?

I don't know, it just seems like there needs to be something to make raiding a village have an effect both sides.

For killing the villagers, is that based on the individual or the organization as a whole? For example, if Vesar goes and kills all the orcs of Acknor all the time, will it just be harder for HIM to influence, or all of Celest?

Killing villagers will still make villages produce less power and commodities.



All of Celest.

Is there any way that it can show in the city logs when someone kills a villager?

Maybe I'm paranoid but I can see people making alts just to screw over other organizations by going on killing sprees.....

Logs wouldn't help much... you go and kill villagers in organizations that the alt isn't in, makes the organization have more trouble influencing without even knowing it's happening.

Do you really want that? Wouldn't that make for spammy logs?

I should emphasize that killing mobs and doing commodity quests will sway villages only slightly. You probably won't notice much unless it is a constant and intense campaign (which most likely will be noticed by someone). By far, village feelings are swayed by the governing style towards occupied villages.



I think Catarin meant having it logged if an alt killed a villager no matter what organization controlled that village.

Would a long an intense campaign of beneficial quests be able to eventually counteract the negative effects of a dictatorial rule? If not, there's not much point in using this ruling style... unless it's raze and burn, you just get everything out of the village you can and don't even try to influence it when it goes up again.

Yes, but not completely.

Or unless you're Serenwilde, which apparently can outdebate all of us while still sparing the security forces to chase me out of wherever I happen to be while a village is revolting. Even without Narsrim and Munsia.

Burn the Wilde!

It depends on how confident the city/commune is to dominate influencing the village. It won't be THAT hard to influence a village that is hostile to you, though it will be more difficult and take longer. In other words, you don't exactly "raze and burn". In Magnagora's heyday, I doubt they would have lost a village even if it was hostile towards them (although the other cities/communes would have had more of a chance). Think of it as replacing how villages currently act when you try to influence one that opposes another. Sure, its more difficult but it hasn't stopped Serenwilde from controlling both Paavik and Shanthmark.

Yeah, I more meant if a citizen killed a villager. That would probably be spammy on normal logs. I don't suppose we could just have a village log that would be under the ambassador that'd have information like beneficial quests done, negative, killings, etc.

Because we have some dedicated combatants who aren't much of being influencers, and dedicated influencers who aren't combatants?


This change might be ... well, we'll see. Things pro and con were already discussed in the other thread, and we hopefully will have a bit of time before this kicks in and we get experience in it. Apparently we're not s'posed to have much chance at holding influence over competing areas, though, not even if they like us. Guess it might also help if we worked up priorities ahead of time, so decisions of which to go for won't need to be made right then amidst confusion and arguing.

Looks good for everything except that danged Dairuchi with no counterpart. The other villages will have less argh factor than before but when Dairuchi rolls around it'll be just like previous revolts.

Maybe to help prevent alt abuse, what newbie/novices do wouldn't have an effect? Probably not CR1 (though I guess that'd be another option), because there are probably plenty of those around who what they do should matter as they're around long enough to count ... but preventing newbie/novices from affecting things could help, unless people are inclined to stick around long enough to get out of novicehood and/or get up to level 21 ... a bit of time invested rather than a quick create-charater, go-chip-away-at-villagers'-feelings.

Oh, people will probably start driving non-city/commune members out of villages now so they don't do the comm quests. Well, driving them out more.

At least now it'll be harder for those GOD GODAMNED SEREN to control 6+ villages at once.

EDIT: When you say it'll be easier for orgs that regularly do comm quests, and harder for those who regularly kill villagers... will the amount of villagers killed/comm quests done carry over from the past year or so, or be counted only after the update?

Psst... anyone remember that time when Magnagora had every single one? (or close to every one?)

Anyone remember the time Visaeris influenced villages solo?

Things change.

I believe this will stagnate village influencing immensely.

Organizations will pick a village they want out of the two and always go for that one.

Example:
It might always be Serenwilde/Glomdoring competing for Stewartsville and Celest/Magnagora competing for Delport.

(Perhaps at first to prevent confusion, but eventually it will turn into an inescapable cycle.)
Organizations will be doing commodity quests in their own villages only, thus getting the advantage from that. Fighters who kill in enemy nation’s villages will make it harder for their nation to get that village.

This will be boring to players because:
1.You are always battling against the same orgs(Aquamancers Vs. Geomancers) with the same skills.
2.It effectively halves the villages you get to have influencing battles in.
3.Villages will usually be allied to one of two nations instead of one of four.



Ibaesha's player told me she influenced dairuchi once, solo, a long time ago.

Back when Serenwilde and Magnagora had some sort of agreement over the village.

It took her quite a few hours to do so as well.



Think of the children! Won't some one please think of the children!! (aka novices doing comm quests)