PDA

View Full Version : Occupation?


MrBlack103
09-25-2008, 05:22 PM
Okay, I had this idea for the MMO version:

How about, instead of moving your territory every time it's conquered, you become part of the victor's "Empire"? That way you would have to pay a regular tribute to that player (A certain % of income?) and have some of his soldiers patrolling your base and generally bullying your citizens. He could also absorb your remaining soldiers into his army and start conscripting your citizens.

This would not be the end for you, because your surviving heroes could go into hiding (turning the game into more of an RPG) and form an underground resistance movement, hopefully and eventually liberating your base or evacuating your loyal citizens to settle elsewhere.

This would make it so powerful players have to not only protect their borders, but also keep a sufficient garrison in their occupied towns in order to keep control of the population.

Anyways, hope you like my ideas and I do admit that they are a bit rough, but I do hope something similar could be incorporated into the game.

Esculas the Mighty
09-25-2008, 06:03 PM
Okay, I had this idea for the MMO version:

How about, instead of moving your territory every time it's conquered, you become part of the victor's "Empire"? That way you would have to pay a regular tribute to that player (A certain % of income?) and have some of his soldiers patrolling your base and generally bullying your citizens. He could also absorb your remaining soldiers into his army and start conscripting your citizens.

This would not be the end for you, because your surviving heroes could go into hiding (turning the game into more of an RPG) and form an underground resistance movement, hopefully and eventually liberating your base or evacuating your loyal citizens to settle elsewhere.

This would make it so powerful players have to not only protect their borders, but also keep a sufficient garrison in their occupied towns in order to keep control of the population.

Anyways, hope you like my ideas and I do admit that they are a bit rough, but I do hope something similar could be incorporated into the game.

dude.. we think too much alike

but if the victor just decides to level your city then u have to start over in a different region like norm

fyro11
09-25-2008, 06:16 PM
Wouldn't the 'victor' know of a small band of rebels/terrorists/freedom fighters? He would just hunt them down. For which reason I don't think it would work. Also, most players would just abandon their particular team at that point and start afresh; another reason why it wouldn't work.

Sorry but I can't see it actualising. I think the team would be a lot more strict. Plus, it has to remain an RTS, at most, with RPG elements.

nickson104
09-26-2008, 09:20 AM
Wouldn't the 'victor' know of a small band of rebels/terrorists/freedom fighters? He would just hunt them down. For which reason I don't think it would work. Also, most players would just abandon their particular team at that point and start afresh; another reason why it wouldn't work.

Sorry but I can't see it actualising. I think the team would be a lot more strict. Plus, it has to remain an RTS, at most, with RPG elements.

Spoil sport, all good games have to have a storyline :p
I am all for the idea, you becoming like their vassal or such, yeah the occupier could just raze the town or just parts of it to flush out the defendants or perhaps they will go search and destroy or maybe even espionage? Your idea opens up a wide variety of playstyles, im all for it...

And yeah... Fyro... i wouldnt abandon my forces to restart again, i would fight it out, and perhaps they wont give you that option?

aVeron
09-26-2008, 09:34 AM
Hmm.. Cool idea. But i dont think all of that is possible to make in this game engine.. But it would be damn cool! Could be something like vassal.

Mrdash
09-26-2008, 01:06 PM
Im not much for that idea. Someone ruling over me. Nope Never.

Feweh
09-26-2008, 07:45 PM
That's like... nothing that DoF is.....

Maybe a potential mod idea...

Esculas the Mighty
09-26-2008, 08:14 PM
Im not much for that idea. Someone ruling over me. Nope Never.

i dont mind someone ruling over me if they defeated fair and square but if like 8 people jumped on me and 1 guy wants me to follow his rules ima spit and his face

nickson104
09-27-2008, 05:39 AM
i dont mind someone ruling over me if they defeated fair and square but if like 8 people jumped on me and 1 guy wants me to follow his rules ima spit and his face

Same. To be honest i wouldnt mind someone rule over me at all, vassalage works two ways, yes we pay tribute and answer to them but in return they must also protect us too.

Esculas the Mighty
09-27-2008, 10:41 AM
Same. To be honest i wouldnt mind someone rule over me at all, vassalage works two ways, yes we pay tribute and answer to them but in return they must also protect us too.

true i just want tht person too be strong leader not a wimpy leader whos only taken me over tho to help from nations from afar

id just say no to the tributes rebuild a military and find allies willing to help me back on my feet and bring down the house

Jean=A=Luc
09-27-2008, 11:37 AM
Interesting as it sounds how the hell would an idea like this be realized in gameplay terms? It's just a "fun" random idea without a realistic basis or consideration for what can actually be accomplished within a computer game.

Mrdash
09-27-2008, 03:57 PM
You nailed it.

Puppeteer
09-29-2008, 10:34 AM
Sounds too in-depth. And yes, that is a bad thing.

Joseph Visscher
09-29-2008, 10:44 AM
I could see many people leaving the game right away if your idea was turned into a feature. :)

nickson104
09-29-2008, 11:07 AM
Yeah i guess so :) it would still be fun though :) but as you say it will be hard to implement and not many would like it unless they are mature enough or a hard enough gamer to accept they have been defeated

The Witch King of Angmar
09-29-2008, 01:37 PM
I personally just don't see the point of it. If you destroy or capture someone's territory, it's yours not someone elses. You shouldn't have to pay tribute to that kingdom.

nickson104
09-29-2008, 04:43 PM
I personally just don't see the point of it. If you destroy or capture someone's territory, it's yours not someone elses. You shouldn't have to pay tribute to that kingdom.

You got a little confused there, the conquered kingdom pays tribute not the other way round XD or did i just read what you said wrong? :p

The Witch King of Angmar
09-30-2008, 04:58 AM
Woops, sorry about that. Are you saying this for only one city becuase I don't think that should happen either because if you capture only one out of the whole empire they shouldn't pay tribute.

Esculas the Mighty
09-30-2008, 05:43 AM
Woops, sorry about that. Are you saying this for only one city becuase I don't think that should happen either because if you capture only one out of the whole empire they shouldn't pay tribute.

im more then sure its the capital and of course the 2nd most major city

The Witch King of Angmar
09-30-2008, 04:00 PM
I just meant a city. You need to specify if you mean something else, unless I missed something.

nickson104
10-01-2008, 12:36 PM
I just meant a city. You need to specify if you mean something else, unless I missed something.

lol okay okay... for the purposes of this conversation lets assume it was their capital city then shall we? :p

The Witch King of Angmar
10-01-2008, 01:29 PM
That's fine with me. I agree with you now. But what would happen if the captured city capital's army captured your capital? You'd have to pay tribute to each other. :p

nickson104
10-01-2008, 02:37 PM
That's fine with me. I agree with you now. But what would happen if the captured city capital's army captured your capital? You'd have to pay tribute to each other. :p

Lol but that would be extremely difficult? :p one would have declared independance first, or i would guess they would have a straight swap, freedom for freedom

Esculas the Mighty
10-01-2008, 04:07 PM
Lol but that would be extremely difficult? :p one would have declared independance first, or i would guess they would have a straight swap, freedom for freedom

1 can simply refuse to pay tribute... thats like the local new kingdom who hasn't built walls yet demanding you the regions most powerful empire to pay him 1000k in every resource or face his...wrath

well its not exactly like that but you get the picture no one in the right mind would pay tribute to someone of equal power more like negotiations

MrBlack103
10-01-2008, 06:38 PM
Well, I reckon the tribute would be a set amount - say, 5% of total resource production or something?

Esculas the Mighty
10-01-2008, 08:26 PM
Well, I reckon the tribute would be a set amount - say, 5% of total resource production or something?

thats i good idea and the receiver should be able to choose the amount max being 50%

Puppeteer
10-02-2008, 10:26 AM
How about... no tribute?

nickson104
10-02-2008, 12:09 PM
How about... no tribute?

That would pretty much take the point of cold wars out of the game :( what about the "my armies bigger than your army, give me money or i kill you" aspect of the game that is so amusing :)

Mrdash
10-03-2008, 11:06 AM
That will create too much pushing. If you have played Ogame the noob protections sucks. Once you get to a certain lvl theres no lvl restriction on who attacks you. So lets say lvl 5 your not protectd any more. So a lvl 100 decides to start pounding you. Now your screwed unless he finds someone else. Im ok with tribute ( altho I would rather have the battle) but plz dont start a cold war sorta thing. I so dont like them.

Esculas the Mighty
10-03-2008, 03:43 PM
That will create too much pushing. If you have played Ogame the noob protections sucks. Once you get to a certain lvl theres no lvl restriction on who attacks you. So lets say lvl 5 your not protectd any more. So a lvl 100 decides to start pounding you. Now your screwed unless he finds someone else. Im ok with tribute ( altho I would rather have the battle) but plz dont start a cold war sorta thing. I so dont like them.

???? i dont think u knwo what we mean by a cold war it happens narturally between nations of emense but equal powers

also your city doesn't have a lvl its all skill so u shouldnt be worried

most super powers wil be troubled by other supers not having time ot pounce on noobs

Mrdash
10-03-2008, 09:48 PM
First, I know there won't be levels it was just an example.
And Second, I hope your right...I hope your right....

nickson104
10-04-2008, 04:53 AM
Yeah the newer cities wouldnt be as developed as the larger empires, but they would be the defenders and therefore will be on their own land, they have the bonus of knowing the land well and having their castle there whereas the attackers only have a siege camp. The defenders could use guerilla tactics and even that advantage out.

And yes as Esculas said, they would be too busy with their equals to worry about the rising powers

Esculas the Mighty
10-04-2008, 06:20 AM
???? i dont think u knwo what we mean by a cold war it happens narturally between nations of emense but equal powers

also your city doesn't have a lvl its all skill so u shouldnt be worried

most super powers wil be troubled by other supers not having time ot pounce on noobs

gah i meant to put not having time to pounce on newer cities ...

anyways yea im sure supers would attacks other supers who are being mean to upstarts

i sure would and when i win id say that's what you get lol

nickson104
10-04-2008, 09:06 AM
gah i meant to put not having time to pounce on newer cities ...

anyways yea im sure supers would attacks other supers who are being mean to upstarts

i sure would and when i win id say that's what you get lol

Muhahahahaha :p I would only attack the upstarts in defense or if they are growing at an alarming rate...
However when Im upstating i would start on like one or 2 upstarts then a major power, their borders would be so large they would have trouble defending them all and they will probably be in other battles anyway, i wouldnt want to conquer... just to expand my borders a little

Puppeteer
10-04-2008, 09:33 AM
they have the bonus of knowing the land well
Thanks to a radar this is almost negligible :p

Esculas the Mighty
10-04-2008, 11:03 AM
Muhahahahaha :p I would only attack the upstarts in defense or if they are growing at an alarming rate...
However when Im upstating i would start on like one or 2 upstarts then a major power, their borders would be so large they would have trouble defending them all and they will probably be in other battles anyway, i wouldnt want to conquer... just to expand my borders a little

xD but then that nations may call his allies on you ;)

nickson104
10-04-2008, 01:59 PM
xD but then that nations may call his allies on you ;)

And then i call my allies on you, and then its the ultimate battle of ultimate destiny all over again

kronlc
10-04-2008, 06:08 PM
ALiies cramp my stylz and
they is like nooob when Im attacking them and pun yourmom
and theEy never do ti when Im attackin

Esculas the Mighty
10-05-2008, 12:38 AM
ALiies cramp my stylz and
they is like nooob when Im attacking them and pun yourmom
and theEy never do ti when Im attackin

well if this game was unlimited population yea id be a loner too

but since its not sooner of later your gonna need allies

Mrdash
10-05-2008, 12:13 PM
LOL unlimited pop would be so awsome. The guy your attacking thinks he is so great with his 2k troups. Then sees you marching on his castle with 10k. Mwuahahahaha feel my wrath you evil, unclean, blackgaurd!

The Witch King of Angmar
10-05-2008, 01:00 PM
I'd get like 100 dragons and just dive bomb anything that gets in my way. :p But just imagine how laggy that would be. :(

nickson104
10-05-2008, 02:21 PM
I'd get like 100 dragons and just dive bomb anything that gets in my way. :p But just imagine how laggy that would be. :(

I agree, my computer definitely needs a tuneup, it struggles enough with LOTR nevermind what this will be

Mrdash
10-06-2008, 11:39 AM
I agree, agree.... I doubt this comp will work with it unless they rly tune down those minimum reqs.

nickson104
10-06-2008, 03:40 PM
Enough about specs i think though :p

-off topic no more-

Occupation i think would be a really good feature and it is one that would make this game extremely rare if not unique

Winterwolf00
09-13-2009, 11:47 PM
Why would people quit if there city was occupied? The conqueror should be able to either kill the leadership. (You) Or subjugate you, making you a vassal.

The first option would mean you have to start over anyway so I'd think any rational leader would grin and bear it to to keep what power they can. Instead of having to start all over again.

But idk that's just how I see it.

BTW im new to the forum so HI!

Josh Warner
09-14-2009, 12:35 AM
Why would people quit if there city was occupied? The conqueror should be able to either kill the leadership. (You) Or subjugate you, making you a vassal.

The first option would mean you have to start over anyway so I'd think any rational leader would grin and bear it to to keep what power they can. Instead of having to start all over again.

But idk that's just how I see it.

BTW im new to the forum so HI!

Fun > realism. As one of the people who likely be playing MMORTS the most - this would totally break the game. This suggestion is akin to Permadeath in an MMORPG. This is coming from someone who played ultima online and darkfall, two of the harshest mmorpgs in terms of death consequence, also L2 as a red. You have to understand MMORTS mode is designed to incorporate the things about MMOs people like - part of that is obviously the larger groups of people able to do things together and at the same time in the same 'world' - but the biggest thing quite honestly is the progression of your what's normally a character, or in this case an empire, city, what have you. Most players will be losing every 2-3 battles, if they had to start from scratch each time there would be no persistence.

Joseph Visscher
09-14-2009, 10:26 AM
Fun > realism. As one of the people who likely be playing MMORTS the most - this would totally break the game. This suggestion is akin to Permadeath in an MMORPG. This is coming from someone who played ultima online and darkfall, two of the harshest mmorpgs in terms of death consequence, also L2 as a red. You have to understand MMORTS mode is designed to incorporate the things about MMOs people like - part of that is obviously the larger groups of people able to do things together and at the same time in the same 'world' - but the biggest thing quite honestly is the progression of your what's normally a character, or in this case an empire, city, what have you. Most players will be losing every 2-3 battles, if they had to start from scratch each time there would be no persistence.

Right on buddy; your empire is more like a character that grows in skill, if you die, most mmos wont start you back at a level 1 right? Most just stripe you of all of your weapons and armor. Sort of like Burning strongholds and huge rotting dead armies everywhere, all of which can be repaired, retrained, rebuilt and looted...

wills370
09-14-2009, 01:05 PM
I Think thats true i would hate to be somones female dog :D

and with the ammount of operations it would take to liberate a city. A player with that much power to take you over in the first place would be knocking on your door in no time.

In certain terms i beleive it would detract from the gameplay i wouldent want to be organising a uprising instead of building my empire from anew.

If this gameplay is adapted it would say for the next 2 weeks after a city is conqured there is a chance to begin a uprising. Meaning you would need to keep a uprising at bay with a garrison for that length of time.

Darathor
09-14-2009, 03:31 PM
While working up a rebellion and keeping it secret from the occupier could be fun once in a while, especially against a friend. It would get extremely annoying if it happened every time you lost a battle for your castle and, unless it's already been started on or wouldn't take long at all to design, it would take too long to design. If ever implemented in a patch, it had better be a choice that you choose whether you want to be able to be occupied or not, and you had better be able to change that choice between yes and no.

MrBlack103
09-14-2009, 09:40 PM
What if at the start of the battle, before arrows start flying, you had an option to surrender, save your city from ruin, and become their vassal until you have built up enough to declare independence?

wills370
09-15-2009, 12:53 AM
What if at the start of the battle, before arrows start flying, you had an option to surrender, save your city from ruin, and become their vassal until you have built up enough to declare independence?

No that wouldent work as the attacker would know exactly what your doing. The moment you say surender and become a vassel the enemy would know your either waiting for aid or organising a uprising.

As a result as im sure any other experienced player would. I would raise the city and line the ashes with the corpsps of the enemy. :)

hey pesto no uprising :P

Winterwolf00
09-19-2009, 10:21 PM
How about another alternative. Instead of becoming a vassal what if you could flee if they take the city. Like the horde option in Rome total war barbarian invasion. A percentage of your population flees and tries too eek out a living in the wilderness. Maybe they could settle down somewhere that looks safe and start over, build camps and hunt. Like in the movie Defiance.

sneaky_squirrel
09-20-2009, 09:59 AM
That would probably work and is hopefully included (Epic Retreat).

wills370
09-21-2009, 07:24 AM
How about another alternative. Instead of becoming a vassal what if you could flee if they take the city. Like the horde option in Rome total war barbarian invasion. A percentage of your population flees and tries too eek out a living in the wilderness. Maybe they could settle down somewhere that looks safe and start over, build camps and hunt. Like in the movie Defiance.

Hmm nice idea but i beleive if you did that then it would be hard to ever become a large player once a large player is established around your area. Becouse he would be growing larger but you would have to keep starting over. Widening the gap between you to the point of no victory.

Winterwolf00
09-21-2009, 02:14 PM
Hmm nice idea but i beleive if you did that then it would be hard to ever become a large player once a large player is established around your area. Becouse he would be growing larger but you would have to keep starting over. Widening the gap between you to the point of no victory.

What if you could act as sort of resistance group. Raid their caravans or trade routes and strangle their economy. Use guerilla tactics and make keeping that area too costly for the conqueror.

Darathor
09-21-2009, 04:31 PM
The whole area deal wouldn't happen, an infinite number of people can have their city in the same zone and there would be no crowding(theoretically). Everyone has there own instanced zone for their city.

Josh Warner
09-21-2009, 04:54 PM
The whole area deal wouldn't happen, an infinite number of people can have their city in the same zone and there would be no crowding(theoretically). Everyone has there own instanced zone for their city.

Pretty much this. Given the mechanics of the game and world map specifically this sort of feature just wouldn't have any place.