THE LONG OVERDUE POLITICAL OVERHAUL • CCNet

THE LONG OVERDUE POLITICAL OVERHAUL Back

MrTurtleGamer about 1 year ago

I think most people who read suggestions are aware of the Antarchists treaty, so I won't explain too much, but we've been fighting to try to bring back regional politics and diminish the power of the multi-continent mega alliances that have dominated the server for 2+ years now. The treaty is slowly garnering more and more of an audience and a few nations signed it, but most nations don't like the idea of the treaty. However, a majority of the server does agree that the current political landscape is quite boring, and I made a poll about this in the 100+ member discord server. After about 2 days, the results are 38-16 with a majority of the players voting that they are bored of the endless mega alliance wars. That's over 70% of the server that's not happy with the current politics, which is quite a large majority. Even if you take out the members who signed the treaty that voted, which wouldn't make any sense as they are also players in the community, it's still 26-16. People who were against the treaty, but also against the mega alliances asked for gameplay changes instead, so here it is

My idea is to cut the world into different regions. https://prnt.sc/FZm1YGMX_2RO - here is a map of proposed regions. THIS IS JUST A DEMO OF WHAT IT COULD LOOK LIKE, NOT AN ACTUAL VERSION. Making the official map would require way more planning and would probably have to be cut up based on population. Also, some people might have noticed that I left out Antarctica on the map, and that's because I don't want to be bias cuz my nation is there

So what are the point of these regions? Basically a nation can only siege towns in a region they have a non peaceful town in. Here's an example, Thracia has 2 non peaceful town in the north African, and European regions (ik they don't have one in Europe, this is just an example) this means they can only siege towns in those regions, and that also means they can't fight in ally sieges that aren't in those regions. However, once a month a nation can choose one ally siege anywhere on the map that they want to fight in. This means foreign allies are still important, and there will still be large sieges with many nations, but nations have to pick and choose which they want to fight for. This not only encourages large nations to build more non peaceful towns, but it does limit the towns they can fight in which would lead to more regional fighting

None of this would include naval and pvp siege regions or restrict the allies that nations can have. This means you can still fight with allies that are far away at siege regions or random wilderness fights, but it does stop the whole world from showing up to every siege which is definitely needed if we want more regional politics

A lot of the details in this suggestion can be changed, and I have more ideas, but I just want to get the idea out there. If 70% of the server player base is against almost the exact same politics that have existed for 2 years, then why don't we change it? If you are against this suggestion, then give your own suggestions. I'm not doing these suggestions to make my nation any stronger. I'm doing these suggestions to make the server more fun :

Comments

NotWeirdGuy about 1 year ago

Well Turtle, I have a lot to lose from this suggestion. I vowed revenge against Thracia and vowed to destroy their nation whole for destroying Britain. But I still upvoted this suggestion because fundamentally, I'm tired of the mega alliances and even if there are better ways to go about accomplishing your goals, I am in concord with the overall principle.

makonitis20 (ign) about 1 year ago

your idea is stupid and let me explain to you why, first things first, cultist, for example, is a really strong nation and there are no nations around it that someone would siege, and from ur suggestion, we can't help our allies in a siege that makes the game super boring bc rn I grind, build wtv 4 days a week at the weekend I can relax and enjoy pvp at sieges which make the game super fun, and rn of ur suggestion, if staff would put it in I wouldn't be able to have fun in sieges bc no one would siege cultist and we can't help allys which means players will quit. The second thing is to make a nonpeaceful town for other regons cultist, for example, would need a bigger reach from a nonpeacfull town so it would be possible to make one in Africa or Europe, so staff would need to expand possible reach from one nonpeaceful town to another which would be really stupid although I agree with that it shouldn't be mega alliance so better idea would be just new command of making alliance and having 3-4 nation limit that can be in an alliance, bc ur idea of the map is stupid but the idea of buffing mega alliances is good

Fake4 about 1 year ago

I agree with most of what you said Turtle, but the region thing would not work, there are nations that have a full "region" for themselves, making them impossible to siege, since making a full fort on another location that is most likely really far away from your main towns would be really hard to defend, I think if the regions would be bigger and only counted for allies, for example, a region per continent, and, you can only ally people in that region, but, you can still make sieges on another region, that would make, region wars, where a region would be against other regions, idk, still seems like its not the best of Ideas, but Its the first thing I came up with.

x_Erebus about 1 year ago

hey guys i dont like this server but want to keep playing on it so instead of finding a different server I'm going to try to change a fundamental mechanic of the server

Microwaved1 about 1 year ago

For a logistical basis this idea is a bit of a nightmare, it would result in entirely regional conflicts which in some areas may result in a lot less sieges. The key reason that may happen is because once a nation gets strong enough to take over a whole region literally no one can siege them, it creates this massive regional power that has total dominance in one area. Unless you have players optimistic enough to continuously revolt a lot of the players not wishing to be under the regional uni-nation would either leave to a different region (screwing up your idea for it to be population based) or leave the server.
Your idea of stopping the major mega alliances and mixing things up a bit is honorable and understandable, but this is how things play out. Creating a solution against it will probably lead to a lot less fun for some rather than creating fun for others. Idk how valid your poll was nor do I know which server it was made in but if they're supporting this I want to hear this sentiment from them (them being those who voted with you) because I've only heard it from the EPF folks such as yourself.