Jump to content

[9.0] [Your View] Freebuild


Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, NotEvilAtAll said:

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.


The primary method for political shakeups on the server is war, rebellion, and diplomacy, not in the ability of charters to grab land. Nations, as a general rule, want to grant land as it is the primary currency in which they deal, allowing them to foster ties with communities that are different from themselves. You need only look at Urguan to see this in action as they've created a system of vassalage where they grant nominal independence in exchange for military or other services, this is/was the case with Sedan, the Ferrymen, and Blackvale. This was used to great effect in the last major war as either side saw swings in the balance of power due to the actions of these groups which ultimately left Oren fragmented. The regions at the center of this may be OOC constructs, but they facilitate an entirely RP exchange and relationship that the server would struggle to otherwise have.

Nation status is itself an OOC mechanic ideally representing more permanent communities of the server from which better foundations for RP can be built. Nations themselves are both RP and player constructs created from the various communities that populate the server and are reinforced via roleplay. Any group is free to operate in the manner of a nation at any time just don't expect to be immediately endorsed with nation status. If these pseudo-nations wish to land themselves then they should either work with an existing nation through diplomacy or take land from another through war. A majority of our nations rise and fall in a manner similar to this and often times it is the primary RP generator on the server and sparks creative interest.  

You can run through a hundred other LoTC systems and pick out what components of them are OOC. The point that I make with regards to charters is that it is a system better done in RP by players and nations than staff. 
 

Edited by Fishy
a
Link to post
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Fishy said:

The primary method for political shakeups on the server is war, rebellion, and diplomacy, not in the ability of charters to grab land. Nations, as a general rule, want to grant land as it is the primary currency in which they deal, allowing them to foster ties with communities that are different from themselves. You need only look at Urguan to see this in action as they've created a system of vassalage where they grant nominal independence in exchange for military or other services, this is/was the case with Sedan, the Ferrymen, and Blackvale. This was used to great effect in the last major war as either side saw swings in the balance of power due to the actions of these groups which ultimately left Oren fragmented. The regions at the center of this may be OOC constructs, but they facilitate an entirely RP exchange and relationship that the server would struggle to otherwise have.

On Almaris it's mostly been charters doing that, with war/diplomacy/rebellion only ever forming new nations when it forces people out of their land to have them make a charter instead. Currently on Almaris the number of successful rebellions/diplomatic plays to gain independence from an overlord nation is zero and the only new nations popping up have been on charters or formed out of couping an old nation and re-branding it with a different name. This was also the case on Arcas with the only newly independent nation forming out of an old overlord, Haense, already having held nation status for many years regardless.

 

New nations just aren't made out of the lands of old nations these days, certainly not under the current rulesets. You have to go to unsettled lands to make a new nation on modern LOTC. Thus, all else staying the same, only allowing communities to set up as nation vassals ensures that said nations stay the same from map to map. This isn't Axios anymore with big rebellions to carve new nations out of Oren (even in Axios many new nations were made on charters too).

 

I shall now also highlight another problem with only allowing people to settle in existing nations; such a policy is terrible if true conquest is to be allowed. On my time on LOTC I've found that very restrictive rules on settling new locations goes hand in hand with very restrictive rules on conquering old locations. If your nation getting conquered gives you no easy methods to start up something new again someplace else, you tend to be more in favor of conquest rules that saves your nation from ever getting conquered in the first place. This is a trap that Almaris fell into for its first few months, with very restrictive war rules and much too restrictive charter policy, the polar opposite of Atlas which saw new settlements get easily set up in freebuild and old settlements/nations regularly conquered in map-wide coalition wars.

 

26 minutes ago, Fishy said:

Nation status is itself an OOC mechanic ideally representing more permanent communities of the server from which better foundations for RP can be built. Nations themselves are both RP and player constructs created from the various communities that populate the server and are reinforced via roleplay. Any group is free to operate in the manner of a nation at any time just don't expect to be immediately endorsed with nation status. If these pseudo-nations wish to land themselves then they should either work with an existing nation through diplomacy or take land from another through war. A majority of our nations rise and fall in a manner similar to this and often times it is the primary RP generator on the server and sparks creative interest.  

Correct, nation status is an OOC mechanic, and correct, nations themselves are RP entities. What exactly is the point to the OOC mechanic built in to justify the RP entity? Is the RP entity of a self-declared nation not enough alone to justify it's roleplay and continued existance? The non-staff supported groups, the psuedo-nations and vassals and settlements and whatever are also RP entities much in the same way that a nation is, often with a great degree of longevity and history themselves, and whose likewise rise and fall is as much an RP generator as whatever goes on with nations.

 

Nations are not special. They just happen to have at one point had enough activity on a spreadsheet for staff to give them an OOC nation status and the ability to buy multiple tiles, settle many vassals, and other such things unique to the status of being a staff-declared nation. Yes, dynamics surrounding vassalage to staff-declared nations has lead to RP on the server, yet I fail to see how roleplay is hurt by doing away with the special status declared by staff or even just maintaining things as they currently are (as opposed to your opinion that the staff-declared OOC nation status ought to be entrenched ever further with a complete monopoly on all land). These vassal groups and pseudo-nations can still call themselves vassals in RP without the staff being there to declare such, and all such dynamics related to vassalage would likewise still exist with the added benefits of more land-settling options for those communities that wish to engage in them.

 

Of course, if the pseudo-monopoly on land that nations currently have is lessened or removed entirely, it hurts the power of existing nations. That doesn't hurt roleplay though. If nations don't have as much OOC power over people, that doesn't hurt anyone's RP. If a nation relies solely on its nation status and associated benefits over non-nation groups to stay afloat then I do wonder why such a nation need exist at all. Nations can just go back to being RP-declared and RP-enforced groups and nothing more, and I'd be a happy camper.

 

37 minutes ago, Fishy said:

You can run through a hundred other LoTC systems and pick out what components of them are OOC. The point that I make with regards to charters is that it is a system better done in RP by players and nations than staff. 

RP exists outside of nations and it is very dumb to say that giving nations a 100% monopoly on all land settling is the only RP-friendly choice for the server. Deciding not to be a nation vassal is a choice that characters can make in RP that would not be supported on the server with your proposed changes. As I have pointed out many times now, nations themselves are far from free of OOC, their psuedo-monopoly on easy land currently is an OOC privilege and not because they necessarily do the RP to hold onto all of this land, and oftentimes the way vassals are settled in nations is OOC anyways, or made more OOC with pastes or other such methods that make the vassals pop out of thin air after some discord decisions were made (likely involving staff too, hah).

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've always been under the mindset that free-build should be permitted within limits on unclaimed tiles, as well as the ability of other groups to easily go and kick down the proverbial sandcastle. It makes sense that unclaimed tiles bordering nations should be able to be colonized by said nations, or by external groups - With that; However, I would think there would need to be short-notice raze rules for a free-build area. You want to go build your ugly castle outside of a nation's borders or on the fringes of the map? Sure - But don't be upset when someone else comes and burns the ugly fort down.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As one of the main mods that had to go and check the last rp  , and landscars of atlases freebuild no. Rip past build team and LIST of warps for them to destroy every week.
 

BUT also the small free builds for taverns and what not along the main roads were usually very nice.
 

Small spaces , not large 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Freebuild is a nightmare to manage and rarely produces any rp

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been around for almost every map, save for Aegis and Atlas. And if there's one irrefutable truth about them that I've observed, it's that FREEBUILD DOES NOT WORK.

 

I have always staunchly believed that roleplay is best promoted through establishing larger nation-states and limiting the number of smaller settlements on the map to the "real deal" groups who can actually make them work. Realistically speaking, the more people who congregate together, the more roleplay there will be and the higher its quality will be.


Unlimited freebuild would be a terrible mistake. Noobs aren't helped by offering freebuild to them, they're actually harmed. Very rarely is there decent RP out in the freebuild areas. Newer players are more reluctant to seek out mentors in established nations or settlements if they think they can go it alone. Worse yet, it dilutes building quality and weakens the ongoing narrative of the server.

 

As for veteran players, if they can join an existing nation or get a settlement application affirmed, they'll almost always go for it. Very rarely, if ever, will they try to build something in a freebuild zone because of the lack of raid protections and the high likelihood of a decent quality build being torn down, griefed, or taken over by someone else.

If anything, I think the answer is to condense further. Removing inactive settlements and nations to bolster existing ones will make way for newer, potentially more successful ideas that the player base will come up with. Enforce nation and settlement activity standards far more stringently. If you can't make 3%, you lose a tile. Keep it up and you lose nation status. If you can't make 1%, you lose your settlement. For groups that don't fit within any, liberalize lair applications to allow for greater RP diversity in the world.

 

Or better yet, establish a high monetary upkeep requirement and remove activity checks all together. They're honestly an antiquated relic of Arcas's failed land management system. Doing so would reduce the stress on player bases and still keep tabs on what settlements are still successful or not.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 6/6/2022 at 5:09 PM, NotEvilAtAll said:

Freebuild is about the process. It is about settlements starting up without a mastermind organizing it all and prime regions attracting settlement naturally over time. You cannot have a perfect settlement spot be in freebuild without a Belvitz-like settlement popping up there, such is the nature of freebuild. Freebuild escapes the meta-OOC Civ 6 game of tile and nation management, discord messaging, etc and just lets you change and impact the world around you much easier. That is why people advocate for it. Games with fully fleshed out and designed pre-built worlds will always look better than pure sandbox games, yet people still play and enjoy sandbox games all the time. Freebuild is a sandbox, and that is why there are people who like it.

 

This. I couldn't have argued this better. I miss more than anything when LoTC had an organically built, lived-in fantasy world. You could walk in any direction and find a somewhere that another player breathed fictional life into. Chance upon something bizarre or beautiful, have a random roleplay encounter that opens up an entire different storyline for your character. Explore the work of hundreds of players' collective creative vision, all of its beauty and ugliness, and make your own mark on it.

 

I'm game for any system that allows that kind of freedom, be that freebuild or claimable regions or something else, but the one thing that is antithetical to player freedom is making people beg nation leaders or fill out paperwork just to build.

 

If I wanted to roam through eerily uninhabited, picturesque fantasyscapes and obsess over lore obscura I would just boot up Elden Ring. And I cannot tell you how full the niche is for light-rp amusement park style fantasy mmorpgs because there are too many of them to count. What we had on LoTC is special; a totally open roleplay sandbox with decades of player-written lore and a community of thousands of players. It drives me insane that we waste that potential solely for the purpose of gatekeeping, but I've been in RP communities long enough to know that this is an issue that we have to deal with.

 

I do not get why the vistas that you glance at while running from one cardboard activity hub to the next need to look perfect and why someone would chimp out over a dirt hut in minecraft. I don't get why johnny noobert can't be an emperor. We would be having so much more fun now if we didn't waste each other's time obsessing over fictional status. Other players' creativity does not diminish your own. Whatever system we use to distribute land in the next map, we need to learn as a community to live and let live.

 

9 hours ago, Fishy said:


The primary method for political shakeups on the server is war, rebellion, and diplomacy, not in the ability of charters to grab land.
 

 

Been there. Seen it. Sat through midnight discord calls and navigated edater "diplomacy" and I can say with perfect clarity that none of this exists; wars, rebellion and diplomacy are all handled out of character, where roleplay has almost nothing to do with the outcome. "Political shakeups" are so divorced from the game that they're virtually inexplicable in character. Try explaining any of the past 100 years of Orenian history without fabricating events that never actually happened in the game.

 

It's an OOC story of people catching lightning in a bottle and failing to understand what made their brief but genuinely exciting moments of roleplay so special. Forcing people to conform to the Discord political order killed Oren, like it killed other nations before and after it. 

 

But the bright side is you can still do all of these high court intrigues on a freebuild map. But you have to be open to competition and dynamic roleplay, which minecraft noblemen and politicos are so horrified of that they will make up abstract arguments against people building in minecraft. 

 

There will be nations, wars, rebellions, and diplomacy in freebuild, but the average player will have agency in them - and the ability to build something new if they find the status quo boring or inhospitable. And people will be less able to govern from the safety and comfort of their own private server.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I suggest a persona time requirement, perhaps 40 hours (in line with what is required to join a warclaim). By doing this, new players do not run off to freebuild immediately, cities will suffer less of an activity burn, and build quality will (presumably) increase. Then, there will also be no excuses to say "but i didnt know the rules!!?!1" in regards to freebuild bc you just played 40 hours.

 

Also, road to 500 kekw MORE TIME PLAYED = METRICS lets go team!!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just let players who have a reason to build, build.

 

Not every single person should have to make an application and have a community backing them to just build something. Let those who have RP reasoning, build. If someone's playing a hermit, let them build a hermit tent or something.

 

This constant obsession with rules, regulations and just constant gimping of the community is absurd. Stop doing it or you won't have a community sooner or later.

 

Give people limited freebuild, just have them apply for a "license"/area and have them give a decent reason. Give them help or make sure they know how to build to a standard quality. There's no shame in just having rules/regulations be guidelines, they're not rigid and you're not suppose to use them as concrete to trap players in.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I want freebuild, my most fun time on this server was spent in freebuild in JustAnotherLW's settlement, away from the regulation of staff, away from the OOC politics. Simple ooga booga roleplay in my lighthouse.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe you could have unlimited freebuild, but you still need to use resource nodes
like you could clear out trees and hills and everything, but you won't get any resources from it, except maybe dirt and apples from trees n stuff
that way you can still build whatever you want, but most people will build stuff around select areas cause its not worth the effort to go in the middle of nowhere

might make it easier to moderate too but, who knows

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 6/6/2022 at 10:22 PM, Operator_Bugman said:

I do like the idea of a tent plugin, as of right now there is no way for nomadic people to rp properly as you can't build just anywhere on the map.

this, freebuild would be ass but I'm 100% for a tent plugin, nomads and people who frequently travel irp need it

Link to post
Share on other sites

Simply NO! Even cities  and villages of grand nations turn abandoned. Littering the map with empty and mostly ugly builds is a no-no.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...