Life is Feudal Official Forum

[Archaegeo]

I have zero problems, and have from the start, with an EXISTING realm removing personal claims in their Realm.

My problem has been for a realm to come into existence around me magically and suddenly I have to leave because he is lord of this land by magic stone? hehe

And don't tell players who like the game to go elsewhere if thy don't like it the way you do. There is a lot of room here for more paying customers.

There is nothing wrong and everything right with making a realm either destroy or make join personal claims in the area where they want to FORM the realm. Its 100% feudal.

[Protunia]

Ok then its settled Personal claims should be able to be attacked and give up their 100% protection for the ability to be destroyed and not just taken by token planting.

Great everyones happy now!!!

[Archaegeo]

So long as realm cant take the personal token just by building monument and pressing button, yep.

[Telakh]

Yet they can. And it is absolutely right

[Archaegeo]

67% of the poll respondents disagree with you Tel

[Telakh]

I guess it is because 80% of the players know too little about the game to make a reasonable choice.

[AceTheFlame]

Game development isn't a democracy...The majority vote doesn't mean something should be changed. The majority does not always know what's best for the game. I would argue that most of the time the majority is wrong.

Reason should be what brings change.

Case and point: You have a majority of players wanting to change a system they haven't even tested yet. That doesn't sound like a reasonable bunch. How something seems on paper and how they play out can be two radically different things.

[Sting5]

Ok now it's time for somebody else to join the debate

Archaegeo, please don't forget that Feudal life means peasants farming their pieces of land by renting it from a landlord in exchange of safety and protection from bandits. It should be the same here. And I'm sure the atmosphere would be awesome.

Also bigger player groups, gathered in guilds, should be considered more important than solo owners, any other way is irrational, I agree with Telakh and Protunia.
BUT the problem in current system is that owner of personal claim (peasant) HAS NO WEIGHT IN NEGOTIATION. In current system, when it comes to deciding the fate of peasant - it's just guild leader deciding whether:
- tax peasant's land;
- banish peasant out and confiscating his estate;

And no matter what suggestions the peasant gives, the negotiations will end same way. The owner of the land should also have some power in negotiation. For example I personally would really prefer the third option in list above:
- burn all my private property and leave if negotiations fail;

If the leader of the guild denies all my suggestions of cooperation because he just wants to kick me out and take my property, I have full right to burn all of it and leave looking for other piece of land. This option would at least leave some weight in peasant's side when negotiating. Because the way it is right now - negotiations decide what the peasant will loose, and the guild owner will win.

[Arrakis]

Game development isn't a democracy...The majority vote doesn't mean something should be changed. The majority does not always know what's best for the game

Case and point: You have a majority of players wanting to change a system they haven't even tested yet. That doesn't sound like a reasonable bunch. How something seems on paper and how they play out can be two radically different things.

This

I really do not see the point of this thread. Archaegeo, you realize that as AceTheFlame said it's not a matter of voting to change the game system? You may put forward a suggestion, we all appreciate when people share their ideas, but you cannot force a change, especially when neither you or any other player have tested that particular system yet. You just have seen scrap of what the game has to offer, so why try changing something you haven't even seen or tested yet?

[Slytacular]

I think the game Rust has a good system to balance the difference between living as a hermit and working in a community. The game is completely PVP and nobody is restricted by anyone or anything except by what could kill your character and what your character could do to overcome the environment. Without claims and localized banks, a large community can already become a threat to all people living in a vicinity and the structures surrounding them. My group of above ten people manage to create a giant and very difficult to attack metal fortress stockpiled with top-notch armour and weapons to continue raiding and pillaging. unlike when I play by myself, it is already a big task for me to build a wooden house and stockpile resources.

My point is that hardcore player versus player can already determine territory and existence in an area of a map. Its just that Life is Feudal could make a similar unforgiving system, but offer options to create peace messaging and in-game communities to reduce the solitary existence that a game like Rust focuses on instead. People do not need an alternative option to remove people from an area when they could instead come out to burn your hold and take your resources. Besides, what is the point of player versus player when you dont expect people to be mean and nasty to each other?

EDIT:

I think the developers are already at the point of creating a lot of effort and content to just turn around and recreate the game. By this point it is either you like this game system or not and a thread like this is pointless.

[Seppuku]

It may not be a democracy, but when the VAST majority of your playerbase tell you your system is bad maybe you should listen. Clearly hardly anyone agrees on what exactly the system should be, but they do mostly all agree that the current one is not good enough for them.

I agree with the majority. A magic button that kicks me off of my land breaks any immersion that you could hope to achieve as a peasant, and is a hugely exploitable mechanic. A griefer guild of nakeds could be funneled materials from another clan, and build a monument just for the fun of driving you from your land... How is that in any way a representation of feudal society?

[Arrakis]

I agree with the majority. A magic button that kicks me off of my land breaks any immersion that you could hope to achieve as a peasant, and is a hugely exploitable mechanic. A griefer guild of nakeds could be funneled materials from another clan, and build a monument just for the fun of driving you from your land... How is that in any way a representation of feudal society?

Once again, that's the magic here, hermits will have hard time living, and if some strong guild will come and claim a land, you either make peace with them, pay some fee for being allowed to stay on that land or you will be forced to relocate.

Second thing, I can't really imagine group of people spending countless hours gathering all these materials and build a monument just to get control over one or two, tiny shacks. This is not even worth the effort, and even if people will have urgent need to do that... Well, that's still part of the game. Everything has some + and - , at this point the + is the fact, that your personal claim cannot be attacked, while guild claims during the war are in danger, on the other hand your land can be taken by some guild at any time, and then you either live there on their terms or move away to be "safe". Ripping off that part of game will break the immersion.

[Protunia]

Vast Majority lolz....

When you get 250-500 votes together after the game is released then talk.

Using 36 votes before Closed alpha begins and anyone even tests what the game is like is pure speculation.

[Telakh]

I can see 9 people share their opinion in the thread.

5 consider that voting makes no sence and original system is perfect.
2 people do not realise how will the claim system work at all.
and you two keep saying that it is somehow exploitable yet you can't bring any reasonable facts and do not provide any competitive idea.

Even if it was a democracy, I would not make a bet on such position.

[Kdchan]

The current system.

[Seppuku]

I agree with the majority. A magic button that kicks me off of my land breaks any immersion that you could hope to achieve as a peasant, and is a hugely exploitable mechanic. A griefer guild of nakeds could be funneled materials from another clan, and build a monument just for the fun of driving you from your land... How is that in any way a representation of feudal society?

Once again, that's the magic here, hermits will have hard time living, and if some strong guild will come and claim a land, you either make peace with them, pay some fee for being allowed to stay on that land or you will be forced to relocate.

Second thing, I can't really imagine group of people spending countless hours gathering all these materials and build a monument just to get control over one or two, tiny shacks. This is not even worth the effort, and even if people will have urgent need to do that... Well, that's still part of the game. Everything has some + and - , at this point the + is the fact, that your personal claim cannot be attacked, while guild claims during the war are in danger, on the other hand your land can be taken by some guild at any time, and then you either live there on their terms or move away to be "safe". Ripping off that part of game will break the immersion.

You say a strong guild. I say a guild with nothing but naked players and another guild feeding them materials would be all that's needed to ruin your gameplay. Nothing in this system says that the guild has to be strong, or have any combat skills, armor, or any resources besides what it takes to build a monument. Why should I be at the mercy of an alt guild who is not really a guild at all besides in name that exploits the mechanics of a game to throw me off my land when I am AFK?

Also what is to keep these guilds from offering you a chance to stay on their land if you give htem half of yoru resources, and then after the deal is made they just kick you off anyway and kill you? THERE IS NO INCENTIVE TO PLAY THIS GAME UNLESS YOU ARE IN A CLAN WITH THE CURRENT PUSH BUTTON EVICTION MODE.

_________________________________________________________

Added » 14 Mar 2014, 21:25

I can see 9 people share their opinion in the thread.

5 consider that voting makes no sence and original system is perfect.
2 people do not realise how will the claim system work at all.
and you two keep saying that it is somehow exploitable yet you can't bring any reasonable facts and do not provide any competitive idea.

Even if it was a democracy, I would not make a bet on such position.

So you go from saying it's not a democracy to say "not enough people have voted"...

_________________________________________________________

Added » 14 Mar 2014, 21:27
Basically for 200 dollars I can make my own guild and funnel them resources through my main character. Then I have absolutely no risk when I go around at off peak hours when no one is online and build monuments. You log in the next day with an eviction notice on your door, and I am laughing my way to the bank.


Is there some reason you are PUNISHING people for not joining a guild? Do you want to make sure that NO solo players play this at all? Seems if you only want the groupcentric pvp players in the game then this will be nothing more than a arena deathmatch game

[Archaegeo]

And that's my issue here. There is a lot of money to be made in supporting solo/small group play without weakening group play.

To those who say if you don't want to be in clan don't play, that's silly, its a huge world, there should be room for the dev team to make money off of solo and large guilds.

You don't have to do anything to weaken a guild with this, just support small/solo group play.

Right now, as Sep has said, a guild could have alt-guild that is no skill naked players just building the monument for the sole purpose of kicking the solo/small group off their land (maybe the solo/small group is on a good vein of ore).

The solo/small group cannot stop them because they cant defeat the stone unless they prevent resource 24/7. Its just silly unless the company really doesn't care about solo / small group income, in which case they should say that.

[Seppuku]

And that's my issue here. There is a lot of money to be made in supporting solo/small group play without weakening group play.

To those who say if you don't want to be in clan don't play, that's silly, its a huge world, there should be room for the dev team to make money off of solo and large guilds.

You don't have to do anything to weaken a guild with this, just support small/solo group play.

Right now, as Sep has said, a guild could have alt-guild that is no skill naked players just building the monument for the sole purpose of kicking the solo/small group off their land (maybe the solo/small group is on a good vein of ore).

The solo/small group cannot stop them because they cant defeat the stone unless they prevent resource 24/7. Its just silly unless the company really doesn't care about solo / small group income, in which case they should say that.

I'm not asking they receive any type of extra protection, Just a fighting chance. Just a fair shot at playing the game. How does it hurt gameplay to actually have to physically smash a claim stone rather than just build a magic eviction rock?

[Protunia]

If you want a Fighting chance Make a Kingdom.

End of Story.

[Seppuku]

If you want a Fighting chance Make a Kingdom.

End of Story.

Once again you avoid addressing the real issue here. You are just trolling at this point and not engaging in any constructive discussion.


Translation: SOLO PLAYERS MONEY IS NOT WELCOME IN LIFE IS FEDUAL


You're wrong... end of story.

[Archaegeo]

As I pointed out in another thread, nowhere on the key features page is Guild even mentioned, nor kingdoms.

http://lifeisfeudal.com/Key-features

Life is Feudal is a Realistic, Medieval, Hardcore, Sandbox MMORPG. No more, no less! And our features prove it all.

[Boogeyman]

Do you want a Life is feudal or an Utopia here?personal claims were never safe.You'll be relatively safe within a "good kingdom".And there will be that kind of kingdoms(realms,i know<in medieval time were called kingdoms>) because most of players will want to create big flourishing communities instead of wasting time and resources trolling your small personal property.who wants a safe personal claim wants a fantasy game,not a game with some historic accuracy

[Archaegeo]

Boogeyman,

Right now as designed personal claims are 100% safe from damage except if a guild builds a magical stone.

With that stone they can evict you without even lifting a sword.

Most of us want personal claims to be attackable. So that if a guild wants to form a Realm, they have to defeat the personal claim first, not just build a pretty sculpture.

[Engellus]

Boogeyman,

Right now as designed personal claims are 100% safe from damage except if a guild builds a magical stone.

With that stone they can evict you without even lifting a sword.

Most of us want personal claims to be attackable. So that if a guild wants to form a Realm, they have to defeat the personal claim first, not just build a pretty sculpture.

Subjugate or slaughter. No cheap evictions without notification or warning(much). Don't like the two options? Grab as much of your goods as you can and get out of there as fast as you can.

Do we want more realism or less? Personally, I want as close to a time machine as possible.

[Proximo]

Personal claims are small, more or less your house with a garden and shed. These are safe because you have to actually gather and make everything in the game from scratch. This game is a hardcore pvp game but you do need a certain level of sustainability in a game that takes time to progress.

Realm claims are meant for many people to live on them, To support the forming of towns. This game like few others is designed so that everything has meaning. Everything down from plant fiber, wood, food, iron and everything inbetween.

Land and not just the resources on the land also has a worth in this game. Groups of players whom claim a realm have the ability to tax or reward people with there land. This is a very rare thing in a video game and makes it so much better.

The realm claim is large but it is not huge compared to how much territory is on the map.

Finding a balance between the individual and the organization is a very difficult thing to do and too many games cater to being easy for the individual. Games like these have no longevity and nothing to keep you playing.

A game like LiF that has so much depth is a game worth playing but you still need to find balance.

The alignment system will help against griefers but it will not stop it completely. If players could destroy personal or monument assets then they would. They will do it whenever they can and at any cost in alignment or skill loss. In games like this people will have multiple characters to accomplish different things.

Griefers and hackers will spend money to re-purchase games they have been banned from or to open up new characters.

Even if there just pkers they will destroy and steal everything you have if they can.

I have played many games and the way it is currently planned is a good system.

TL;DR I don't believe in too long didn't read because if your not on a forum to read then that's your problem not mine.