Jump to content

Territory Units, Ark tokens and the effect of both on a soloplayer


SkyIsGreen

Recommended Posts

I just read the territory devblog post and I had a few ideas and addressed my own concerns.


 


You can find the post here


 


I think solo-players will drive the economy for cheap items/weaponry whilst the larger groups would go for the more advanced, more expensive and effective stuff and both economies are needed to drive the prices of each respective market but I don't think they've really been included thus far into the development or future of the game. So my attempt at fixing this comes in the form of TU and Ark token adjustments. 


 


I think the idea of Ark tokens is a fantastic idea for nurturing small/new cities or securing ties with neighboring organisations, because especially at the beginning of a city, one of these bad boys is not only a pillar of safety for the city's inhabitants, it encourgaes solo-players to branch away and explore and even possibly join an established city's organisation. It also signifies alliances as (the way I'd like to see it being implemented) a solo-player can't just simply "get one" and would take the combined effort of organisations to acquire one.


 


With that said, I think a good way of implementing such a device would be to either have it as a rare resource. Or having access to an ark token blueprint and the resources to construct it be rare. (I personally prefer the latter and it makes more sense although doesn't really fit with the current lore)


 


If the Ark token was to be implemented in this way then the territory unit I think would to be a fairly easily acquirable device, I think this gives solo-players the OPTION to claim their own stuff, but indirectly imposes penalties for doing so (a solo-player doing this wouldn't be able to defend all of the land he claimed, so it kind of nudges them to form alliances with other players, because lets face it, this game is going to be dominated by large groups and PVP, the only way to survive early game will be to form alliances)


 


So yeah, those were my thoughts, let me know what you guys think!


 


Hopefully we can come up with a solid way of implementation for the ark token as I think it'll alleviate a lot of the concern connected with big organisations steam-rolling small ones.


 


THANKS FOR READING.  :D  


 


 


 


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi SkyIsGreen, and welcome to the forums :)

 

You need to be very careful with invulnerable territories.  A very important aspect of the game is territory control.  It's virtually impossible to close all the loopholes that will allow for gaming of the invulnerability aspect in order to gain an advantage in the territory control aspect.  This is why NQ have not yet confirmed arkification.  They need to be sure they get it right.

 

The reason they are considering it at all is to ensure that there is always space for new players and certain player achetypes, such as builders, to have a secure area to play their part.  I think the concern is that the game will reach a point where the initial ASA will be overpopulated and essentially run out of room.  So they need a system to expand that initial area.  Arkification using tokens is one solution, arkification by uncovering alien ruins is another.

 

I think solo-players will drive the economy for cheap items/weaponry whilst the larger groups would go for the more advanced, more expensive and effective stuff and both economies are needed to drive the prices of each respective market but I don't think they've really been included thus far into the development or future of the game. So my attempt at fixing this comes in the form of TU and Ark token adjustments. 

 

I'm not sure that this is true.  You can have rich solo players.  Plus I imagine there will be a whole range of commodities on the market to suit all needs.  Supply and demand should be the ruling factor as in any free market system.  Even so, from your quote I'm not sure what you think needs fixing or how it ties in to invulnerable territories.

 

I think the idea of Ark tokens is a fantastic idea for nurturing small/new cities or securing ties with neighboring organisations, because especially at the beginning of a city, one of these bad boys is not only a pillar of safety for the city's inhabitants, it encourgaes solo-players to branch away and explore and even possibly join an established city's organisation. It also signifies alliances as (the way I'd like to see it being implemented) a solo-player can't just simply "get one" and would take the combined effort of organisations to acquire one.

 
With that said, I think a good way of implementing such a device would be to either have it as a rare resource. Or having access to an ark token blueprint and the resources to construct it be rare. (I personally prefer the latter and it makes more sense although doesn't really fit with the current lore)

 

My guess is that they suggest a token because it is far easier for them to control how many of them are in the game at any one time.  They need to limit the number of safe areas.  I could be wrong of course, that's just my guess.

 

If the Ark token was to be implemented in this way then the territory unit I think would to be a fairly easily acquirable device, I think this gives solo-players the OPTION to claim their own stuff, but indirectly imposes penalties for doing so (a solo-player doing this wouldn't be able to defend all of the land he claimed, so it kind of nudges them to form alliances with other players

 

Claiming territories is not a gameplay aspect that has solo players in mind.  It is something for organisations of players working together to achieve some goal, establish a secure area of operations, put their name on the map, attract more members.  As someone who has played similar games solo, I don't understand why a solo player would even want to claim territories.  What would you do with a patch of land that you have claimed that you couldn't do if you hadn't claimed it?

 

lets face it, this game is going to be dominated by large groups and PVP, the only way to survive early game will be to form alliances)

 

Perhaps.  But I'm hoping for enough variety and potential for innovation, skill and strategic genius for all sizes of organisation and play styles to be relevant and have an impact on the story.  And I think this is the vision that NQ have.

 

If arkification by token is included in the game, my take is that it needs to be completely removed from the territory claiming system.  Arkified territories should be freeports that anyone can use, and there should be a minimum distance between arkified territories and claimed territories.

 

Shameful self quote coming up:

 

 

Has the team considered completely disconnecting arkification from territorial ownership?

 

Any player may arkify a territory if they meet the following criteria:

 

a) the player uses up an arkification token

B) the territory is not claimed, i.e. there is no TU;

c) none of the territories within x radius are claimed;

d) none of the territories within y radius are arkified / Arkship Safe Zones;

e) there at most only z other arkified territories on the planet.

 

Once arkified a hex is permanently arkified and claiming territories within the radius specified in B) is no longer possible.  The arkified hex is a freeport.  Any player can travel to it, through it, live in it, use it in any way they see fit.

 

Arkification of claimed territories has many problems associated with it such as throwing risk/reward out of balance, encouraging turtling, diminishing "job" opportunities for combat oriented players (on both the offensive and defensive sides of the coin), forcing centralisation of non-combat oriented players - which in turn feeds back into the previous points, allowing permanent claiming of the most valuable territories, and many more.  Perhaps having arkified territories as isolated freeports side steps these issues while still protecting creative, non-combat oriented and solo players.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...