Adding a political system

[Dyne]

Jailing people is too far... but suggesting that a ruler can dictate law that states only Lallafel can enter the city and all other races are attacked on sight is perfectly reasonable.

-roll eyes-

Yeah... you really thought this out, Dyne.

That was a joke. Why so serious?

[Dyne]

Who says being "evil" is not "fun"?

[Preypacer]

Like free chocobo travel for everyone, in return you pay a little higher taxes. However, someone can hate paying higher taxes, then take away free chocobos when they win the election.

Wait... "they get chocobos for free.. but just have to pay higher taxes". So in other words... they're still paying for chocobos, just indirectly. Brilliant! Keep 'em coming, Dyne... You're really hitting it outta the park with these well thought-out concepts to support your idea.

You can become a righteous ruler or a very bad one. It's all about role playing. The main purpose of player-run political system is exactly that, role playing. It's something that people could only dream of doing in real life. It would also promote loyalty to your nation and competition with other nations. How you make that happen is up to you, playing nice or playing dirty, it's your choice. In the end, it gets the community involved.

OH... So now it's really all about Role Playing.

Funny, for the past several pages, it's been all about being ruler of a region and all the perks that power brings with it. All the ways you can influence other people's gameplay.

Someone calls out the problems your previous sales-pitch could bring, so - on a dime - it now becomes "all about Role Playing".

It's amazing watching you jump from one foot to the other, morphing and changing the idea from one thing to another based on who you're replying to.

It's also undeniable proof of just how ill-conceived and poorly thought out this pet idea of yours really is.

[Dyne]

Wait... "they get chocobos for free.. but just have to pay higher taxes". So in other words... they're still paying for chocobos, just indirectly. Brilliant! Keep 'em coming, Dyne... You're really hitting it outta the park with these well thought-out concepts to support your idea.




OH... So now it's really all about Role Playing.

Funny, for the past several pages, it's been all about being ruler of a region and all the perks that power brings with it. All the ways you can influence other people's gameplay.

Someone calls out the problems your previous sales-pitch could bring, so - on a dime - it now becomes "all about Role Playing".

It's amazing watching you jump from one foot to the other, morphing and changing the idea from one thing to another based on who you're replying to.

Roleplaying being a good leader or a bad leader is what I'm talking about to make it that much more understandable for you.

[Preypacer]

That was a joke. Why so serious?

Given some of the other examples you gave, I kinda doubt it was a joke.

[Dyne]

Wait... "they get chocobos for free.. but just have to pay higher taxes". So in other words... they're still paying for chocobos, just indirectly. Brilliant! Keep 'em coming, Dyne... You're really hitting it outta the park with these well thought-out concepts to support your idea.




OH... So now it's really all about Role Playing.

Funny, for the past several pages, it's been all about being ruler of a region and all the perks that power brings with it. All the ways you can influence other people's gameplay.

Someone calls out the problems your previous sales-pitch could bring, so - on a dime - it now becomes "all about Role Playing".

It's amazing watching you jump from one foot to the other, morphing and changing the idea from one thing to another based on who you're replying to.

It's also undeniable proof of just how ill-conceived and poorly thought out this pet idea of yours really is.

I am merely throwing out ideas of possibilities of what you can and cannot do as leader. Instead of being a bitch, why don't you come up with ideas on what you will do if you are ruler of Uldah?

[Sephr]

I hope the player being able to control whether people can use the AH or not was a joke, too... They'd pretty much be killed on sight for turning it off.

Generally I'm going to say no, I don't think this kind of thing is a good idea. I think successful private companies should hold some sway over things in the future, though. Also, company forts/housing out in the vast expanses of empty space we have would be awesome.

But that's another thread entirely.

[Preypacer]

Roleplaying being a good leader or a bad leader is what I'm talking about to make it that much more understandable for you.

No, it makes it clear that you have no clear idea of exactly what the system is, what kind of experience it's aimed at or how it would actually fit into the game's setting.

It makes it clear that you are willing to change your perspective, and how you pitch the idea, to suit who ever you happen to be responding to. For one person it's a BLT on Rye, for another it's a Ham Sandwich, for yet another it's a Hot Dog. Reading through all your posts in support of it for the last 7 pages or so, there is no consistency in how you're explaining the system. It changes almost from one post to the next.

It makes it clear that you have put no thought into the system, how it would play out or how players would affect or be affected by it.

It makes it clear that your thought process goes only so far as "I want to be able to rule a city and control stuff" and everything after that is "fluff that someone else can figure out.

Perhaps if you took more time to think the idea through, think of the ramifications, how it would fit into the gameworld, what abuses might be opened up by such a system, how it would affect how people experience the rest of the game... not to mention elements of the game that aren't even in the game yet or things SE has planned that we don't even know about yet... Perhaps if you set out a defined and consistent set of rules, restrictions and benefits that didn't change depending on who you were talking to and what their objection was... perhaps then your pet idea could be taken a bit more seriously and warrant serious discussion.

[Amineri]

Perhaps a more limited form of political system could work. Elections and voting .... well, that hardly works in the real world; it seems unlikely in a gameworld.

The first step to having a political system is creating a resource system ... and not just any resources, but resources needed on a larger-than-individual scale. The Grand Companies are being founded on just that principle. The efficient collection and distribution of resources in order to combat a significant threat. Clearly, Garlemald is technologically superior, and has a superior military. Thus the limited resources of the city-states have to be carefully marshaled to try and combat the threat.

I could see fortifications, siege engines, etc being made available. There are two ways to accomplish this: first, allow guilds (private companies) to create them -- second, have Grand Companies make them. Both options are viable and could co-exist (although likely the more game-effecting effects would have to reserved for the Grand Companies). Players can contribute materials and time to the Grand Companies to create these fortifications and siege engines, but how would they be deployed?

NOW we have a need for a political system. Distribution of scarce resources in service of the city-state. One idea occurs to me: Have two sets of members in a Grand Council (for each city-state). One set of members is drawn from the leadership of the private companies that have demonstrated service to the city-state. Another could be selected from the population in general (perhaps a lottery system, with ability to vote people out, or something similar).

The function of the Grand Council is to vote upon placement of fortifications and siege equipment to resist the Garlemald Empire's military advances. The devs would establish viable alternatives, they would be presented to the Council, discussion would take place, followed by a vote.

The result would then effect players' ability to fight in campaign-style battles against the Empire.

P.S. After I wrote this, it occurred to me that the beast tribes are another possible threat. Same concept could be applied there.

[Dyne]

I hope the player being able to control whether people can use the AH or not was a joke, too... They'd pretty much be killed on sight for turning it off.

Generally I'm going to say no, I don't think this kind of thing is a good idea. I think successful private companies should hold some sway over things in the future, though. Also, company forts/housing out in the vast expanses of empty space we have would be awesome.

But that's another thread entirely.

No, they will not be killed on site for turning off auction house, in fact, you are getting the wrong idea. Think of running an auction house as running a corporation, it needs money to run otherwise it goes bankrupt. As leader, it is your responsibility to try to keep that auction house running by collecting enough in taxes otherwise it closes down for your nation and you will be seen as a bad leader. Misusing taxes can result in not having enough funding to run certain services in the city. So, in general, people need to be careful who they elect as their ruler.