Jump to content

[9.0] [Your View] Freebuild


squakhawk
 Share

Recommended Posts

just make it 10x easier to build. or maybe make an island where you can build freely

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, un-w said:

I will say that one of my biggest concerns with freebuild is how it tends to be treated by new players. A player who joins the server was advertised that LOTC is a server where they can build their own empire, become a king, queen, whatever, but when they actually attempt to do such via freebuild, they come to realize how astronomically difficult this is. Even for some veteran players, creating (let alone maintaining) a long-term community is extremely difficult. 

You get new players who are under the impression they can get all of this with freebuild, which is sadly not the case. It might be something noobs want, but isn't something that they need. Freebuild doesn't keep noobs, roleplay does. 

also inb4 the "if you don't like freebuild you're a braindead moron" comments

I don't think this is an administrative problem as much as it is a there are few consistently online players remaining on LotC who are not already part of a clique problem.

 

Freebuild doesn't work when you don't have actively participating players. Little settlements don't work when you don't have actively participating players. I think staff should be more flexible and offer up slots of land freely to players (that means no taxes to the GMs like you're playing a dead korean MMORPG) for sure, but I don't know if a server-wide discussion on freebuild should be the administration's top priority rn.

 

Something something carts and horses. LotC culture is rotten and it's not because of people like me even though I'm hella toxic. Gotta look inside yourself and revivify the interest to fill the rooms you have before you start investing in building more shit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Lojo613 said:

-snip-

 

Summed it up as best as could be. 

 

@SquakHawk

My harping on intuitive & effortless design has gotten worn and tired at this point, but I think it's worth bringing up again in this conversation. @Lojo613 and @Srihit the solutions on the nail - grant players maximal freedom and use plugins to deal with the fallout as much as feasibly possible.

 

Every step we remove from the roleplaying process is another foot into the bureaucratic, out-of-character meat grinder. The reason we hold organic, free-build projects like the Fringe or the Whispering Crossroads in high regard (or any regard at all) is because of the free spirit of roleplay they embodied and thrived within. Nobody remembers build quality. Everyone remembers the experience.

 

I think it's important to question the paradigm used to make decisions in map design. I believe that instead of trying to perfect a system that players can exist within, it is more important to design a system that relies and thrives upon player-led interaction. In praxis, this would look something akin to a map without pre-builds or even roads. Players would be encouraged to stake their claim, and Story Team members would lurk in the dangerous corners of a still unexplored map.

 

Without the creation of a perfect "present" of a map ready for players to consume, players will actively be thrown into the mix to shape the landscape and story of the map. Staff resources would be directed to designing a map in size, story, and geography that would facilitate the most roleplay and engage the player with their environment. This is in essence a completely different approach, but I think it merits some discussion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, NotEvilAtAll said:

Hello there. We here admins of LOTC have heard your pleas and thus 9.0 will be a massive void with no ground to stand on.

 

Landscapes will finally be removed from LOTC

unknown.png

 

I am satisfied. My work here is done. Back to the void I go.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Freebuild completely slaughters player retention, and is also terrible for RP. Far better to have some sort of system where people can claim small wilderness areas to build their own huts; it provides RP, and due to the (hopefully scarce) amount of land that will be created by the smaller map, communities will form of their own accord, because everyone will be somewhat close.

 

Also makes it easier for players to run events.

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, MayRndz said:

Here's the compromise that I've heard interest in: Nations allow tiles on their area to be free build for a group of players that requests it. It doesn't drag away from nation activity and retention because it's still on their tile, as well as is then on the nations to allow free build and retain an air of semi-professionalism when it comes to builds. I remember Atlas and if you weren't in a specific nation you'd be in the middle of nowhere with your unofficial own one-person nation I would prefer to stay away from that.

Why further entrench nations and encourage people against their own independent community and such, there's already too much reliance on pleading for gibs from nations if you want to make anything

Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Borin said:

James, Monkeypoacher and Adam have hit the nail on the head.

Maybe not 'freebuild', but at least making it a lot easier to get an independent plot of land, lowering the amount of land nations start with at the start of maps, making tiles SUBSTANTIALLY smaller, like, a dozen chunks big and placed to go along natural borders (forests, mountains, hills, rivers), and implementing LC, and/or Arcas style resource pits is a good step in the right direction... direction of what, you may ask? To combat the ooc idea of 'nations' and 'nation leaders' that's being made worse via plugins, rules, et cetera.

Hot take, like ******* hell, I hate freebuild, but please staff.

 

I should be able to modreq to get a region in the wild made and if I show its not a dumpster fire of a build like a farm or cabin, I should be ALLOWED to do it, and then if a nation takes over that tile, I can deal with it IRPLY

Link to post
Share on other sites

Simply implement shit and unimplement shit:

1. get to the point where you can get land and have a group independent of nations and without having to go through lair and settlement application processes - for example, a tavern by the road, a local chapel or monastery, a fort or a village at somewhere they can attract players (strategic spot near a bridge, crossroads, etc), anything. A gremlin cave for the spookplayers, whatever. Or make things for events, etc

 

2. make tiles a lot smaller and make them fit the landscape. reduce the size of nations at the start so other groups have opportunities to form and take good bits of land, rather than having entire huge areas of the map already locked down

 

3. LC. Resource pits like Arcas. Whatever is necessary to allow nice builds to be made. Keep the shit with nodes for herbs and rare metals and shit. Not wood or cobble. Smh.

 

4. Pull back from the weird obsession with putting the OOC concept of nations, settlements, nation leaders, PROs and ROs into RP and entrenching it further with plugins and rules. This will contribute to encouraging RP, new cultures and independent settlements, free of reliance upon getting gibs from the local OOC leader of (insert nation here).
It's also just generally an issue that needs to be addressed later, aside from impact on this topic

 

- Complaints about 'waaa abandoned settlements! waaa!' are useless. This happens whether people are more free to build stuff outside of a nation or not. See: Sutica/Savoy, Urguan, etc

 

- Just read what taketheshot, james, monkeypoacher, adam, satinkira have said.

 

-----------------------------------other crap------------------------------------

 

Remove or limit AH substantially

Keep doing the changes you've been making recently, been good.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Fishy said:

No thank, I do not want or need freebuild. 

Charter systems should be done away with as well. The only method one should use to acquire land is through RP with Nations. 

And how does a nation get land, through ooc hand holding from the admins. How does a thing become a nation if they can not aquire land and who decides who gets land next map?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lmaoing at people that have only played in heavily perm-restricted maps talking about how bad freebuild is

Link to post
Share on other sites

Free build has a lot more downsizes as a lot of people have already hashed on. It's been experimented with in the past and has proved time and time again to hurt the server way more than what it offered. No freebuild pls q.q

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ReveredOwl said:

And how does a nation get land, through ooc hand holding from the admins. How does a thing become a nation if they can not aquire land and who decides who gets land next map?


Nations will acquire land regardless of the system implemented by the admins, whether it is through arbitration or freebuild. Atlas is more than proof of that despite its freebuild system, with settlements like Belvitz ultimately being arbitrated by Renatus.
Nations are not OOC staff-constructs, rather they are player-constructs endorsed by the staff. Most often they are created either through player groups petitioning staff, see Fenn, or by de facto operating as a nation, such as Haense or Ves. My argument is that if a group cannot acquire land using RP or simply recognition from any of the multitude of nations in existence, then they should not receive land. Negotiate a treaty, sign a contract, vassalize, outright purchase it from players, any of these methods is itself an RP interaction that integrates a would-be group into the wider community, staff meddling should ultimately be just to enact these deals with regions. Charter systems as they've existed are solely an OOC method of land distribution, requiring no interaction or grounding in the world to be done, which in my view is their greatest point of failure. 
As for who should receive land in a new map, the answer is usually self-evident, take what exists at the end of the last map and prune what was seriously deficient or reduce their footprint to just a settlement or enclave.

Link to post
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Fishy said:


Nations will acquire land regardless of the system implemented by the admins, whether it is through arbitration or freebuild. Atlas is more than proof of that despite its freebuild system, with settlements like Belvitz ultimately being arbitrated by Renatus.
Nations are not OOC staff-constructs, rather they are player-constructs endorsed by the staff. Most often they are created either through player groups petitioning staff, see Fenn, or by de facto operating as a nation, such as Haense or Ves. My argument is that if a group cannot acquire land using RP or simply recognition from any of the multitude of nations in existence, then they should not receive land. Negotiate a treaty, sign a contract, vassalize, outright purchase it from players, any of these methods is itself an RP interaction that integrates a would-be group into the wider community, staff meddling should ultimately be just to enact these deals with regions. Charter systems as they've existed are solely an OOC method of land distribution, requiring no interaction or grounding in the world to be done, which in my view is their greatest point of failure. 
As for who should receive land in a new map, the answer is usually self-evident, take what exists at the end of the last map and prune what was seriously deficient or reduce their footprint to just a settlement or enclave.

1624065577554.jpg

Why would we remove the primary method for political shakeups on the server? Nations, as a general rule, don't give out their land for free to form independent nations elsewhere unless they are completely imploding like Oren was in Axios. This sounds like an ideal way to guarantee that, unless one of the nations that's been going strong on LOTC for years and years suddenly implodes into a bajillion pieces, the nation roster will remain unchanged from the start to the end of the map. Historically a significant portion of new nations have popped up in freebuild or as charters somewhere so without anything like that the server just doesn't have as much changing on it.

 

All land management systems are OOC on LOTC. The only IRP way of doing land management is to make all construction work done with emotes and modreqs because that's closest to how construction works IRL. Region systems are an OOC system and not an accurate representation of RP b/c foreigners could realistically do the same construction/destruction stuff as residents (in the real world, a land owner has to physically stop you from building/destroying stuff instead of using non-existent region protections to stop you). Freebuild is an OOC system and not an accurate representation of all the construction work needed to make that log cabin. Pastes are an OOC convenience b/c settlements don't just pop out of nowhere realistically. LC is an OOC convenience for similar reasons. Every land system on the server is an OOC convenience by nature.

 

Nations and nation status too are OOC conveniences LMAO. If you have to petition staff to get some extra good-boy benefits congratulations you have an OOC system b/c staff don't exist IRP. Nations don't have grounding in the land they own either and maintain absolute OOC monopolies on land they don't ever patrol with military forces and sometimes barely even settle with any citizens. Emote chopping down trees and hauling them over to make a log cabin as much as you want, if /rg info says the tile is owned by a nation and the PRO says "no", you can't do diddly squat even if nobody ever shows up to stop you IRP.

 

As for the OOC conveniences on how to dole out land on LOTC, I much prefer systems that let the map change over time and give regular ol' players like me a better chance to do stuff. You're free to think whatever you like but keep in mind that nations and regioned systems of land management are just as OOC as the alternatives.

Link to post
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, NotEvilAtAll said:

Snip

 

 

A-BLOODY-MEN, AAAAAAMEN

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...