Suggested changes to Menhir function

I hate the function. Sucks to be a small kingdom and suddenly see a large group of people setting up a treasury nearby and getting it full with players by the menhir.

I propose the following:

- Make it so only new players with low prestige can use menhir (friendly for new players)

- Instead of spawing randomly you have the option to join the server as a group and are spawn close to each other (friendly for older players)

The last point can also be made so you pick to start near a WW that you select as we often see kingdoms speed-settle and then kingdom players are menhir to their borders.

Drastic game change. But what if you could only expand into a space that is touching your personal pre-existing borders? Where every 5th village could be up to 7 spaces away from an existing instead of touching directly. This fixes menhirs and kingdom size imo.

- Now if you menhir, you can't shove too many people into a kingdom at the start because it then limits expansion of all players later on.

- More kings have to exist to support the fewer players in a kingdom area, due to their need to expand in the future.

- The idea of chiefing becomes harder if you tries to solely isolate around a WW. It encourages kingdoms to toward each other

Quote from Jak

Not sure where to post this & probably going to get grief for suggesting it (maybe I'm just having a blond moment) ... But here goes anyway

Following on from not allowing zero prestige players to be Kings

I also think sitter functions should be disabled for zero prestige players too

Having the "sitter" function enabled makes it much to easy for people to make Multi accounts & then run them mainly as a sitter, just logging in occasionally if there are actions needed by the account holder, with very little risk.

The downside is "new players" wouldn't have sitter access, but is that really a negative?

It would encourage more to ask questions & be more interactive, rather than just have someone sit them & do it for them.

In the early game it's all a learning curve, but if player is going to survive they need to learn how not to just be a farm. This game demands quite a bit of activity & a lot now think logging in once or twice a day for 10 minutes is enough (they rely on sitters too much)

Display More

Sitter checks.

Whenever I am in the leadership of a kingdom I want to have the option to do sitter checks.

What you can do as an alternative to removing sitter option, is that sitters are removed after the account owner hasn't been on in the last 2 days instead of only after... 3 weeks?

Quote from Pinkguy#NL

Sitter checks.

Whenever I am in the leadership of a kingdom I want to have the option to do sitter checks.

Yes good point

Ok so what if zero prestige acc's were made "view only" for sitters in that you couldn't build/send anything, you could just check & advise?

Quote from Jak

Yes good point

Ok so what if zero prestige acc's were made "view only" for sitters in that you couldn't build/send anything, you could just check & advise?

View only is in my opinion a good idea regardless of prestige.

well yes, but lets not kill it's function all together, everyone does need a sitter from time to time

Our thought process here is just to stop sitter function being abused by MA's

When a genuine player starts an account (zero prestige) they should be really active & eager to click & learn everything they can (so sitter shouldn't be needed to build the account for them)

If a player can't find time to be active when they first start up an account, then it's questionable if this is the right game for them anyway?

Quote from Jak

well yes, but lets not kill it's function all together, everyone does need a sitter from time to time

Our thought process here is just to stop sitter function being abused by MA's

When a genuine player starts an account (zero prestige) they should be really active & eager to click & learn everything they can (so sitter shouldn't be needed to build the account for them)

If a player can't find time to be active when they first start up an account, then it's questionable if this is the right game for them anyway?

For sure. That is what I meant, view only as an OPTION, not as a replacement for normal sitters.

Quote from Unknown

What do you call your "personal pre-existing borders"?

How would this exactly work?

If a player has a single village at (100,100), they can only settle or conquer a new village x spaces away, where x is a distance of their border. If they have n villages, then a village can be settled or conquered up to x spaces away from any one of their n villages. I'm pitching a static x but you could in theory make it variable based on population, distance, or "influence".

x could be 1 or relatively small, which would drastically change dynamics of kingdoms and things. Imagine if a person could only expand to something touching their border. Then kingdom influence becomes more interesting to fill. Menhir can't be abused. Because if a kingdom has 10 open village spots at the beginning, if they cram 10 players in, they will not have room to expand.

There are a lot of mechanics that can be considered and changed here. Part of it is up to the developers creativity. But these mechanic changes flip the usage of menhir.

Quote from Unknown

Just thinking about someone going into hospital and not been able to use mobile or computer at all... what then?

What are the options?

Someone going to the hospital for a longer period of time and not being able to use mobile or pc probably has other things he should focus on

Quote from leo#EN(19)

If a player has a single village at (100,100), they can only settle or conquer a new village x spaces away, where x is a distance of their border. If they have n villages, then a village can be settled or conquered up to x spaces away from any one of their n villages. I'm pitching a static x but you could in theory make it variable based on population, distance, or "influence".

x could be 1 or relatively small, which would drastically change dynamics of kingdoms and things. Imagine if a person could only expand to something touching their border. Then kingdom influence becomes more interesting to fill. Menhir can't be abused. Because if a kingdom has 10 open village spots at the beginning, if they cram 10 players in, they will not have room to expand.

There are a lot of mechanics that can be considered and changed here. Part of it is up to the developers creativity. But these mechanic changes flip the usage of menhir.

I like the idea but there is few problems. It would become a game of lottery to see who gets closest to cropper(s). But I'm really pro limit kingdom sizes, I just don't think this is the right way. Maybe just hardcap member count to 20 or something like that. Would mean there is more "politics" involved in a server and the shit show that is called would not happen again.

Quote from th0mm#NL

Giving back res piles is fine imo. The problem at this moment is that people are menhiring 15-20 times a server with a way too big army for that day to kill little kingdoms.

- Limit menhir to a server day

- Limit menhir to a account age(in days)

- Limit the amounts a acc can menhir.

- Remove all troops when menhiring

These 4 are imo the most viable options and won't be too big to implement (i hope lol), while not changing the main intention of menhir.

That intention was if i'm correct to be able to get friends together closer, if menhir really is used this way then you dont need to menhir multiple times.

Display More

It will be 1 year in 13 days

Quote from leo#EN(19)

Drastic game change. But what if you could only expand into a space that is touching your personal pre-existing borders? Where every 5th village could be up to 7 spaces away from an existing instead of touching directly. This fixes menhirs and kingdom size imo.

- Now if you menhir, you can't shove too many people into a kingdom at the start because it then limits expansion of all players later on.

- More kings have to exist to support the fewer players in a kingdom area, due to their need to expand in the future.

- The idea of chiefing becomes harder if you tries to solely isolate around a WW. It encourages kingdoms to toward each other

This was a suggestion I made back in 2017, is this what you're thinking too leo#EN(19)

"maybe do not allow Kings or Dukes to settle further than the next treasury outside their borders (so 5 fields max away from the kingdom borders) that way a King/Duke would not be able to just put a treasury over an existing "Friendly" Kingdom's treasury to absorb their treasures in any area that wasn't near their current kingdom"

Quote from Unknown

Thank you for clarifying leo#EN(19) it makes it more understandable.

About the rest of ideas, even if they are older than even me in the International domain, it would be interesting to see what everyone thinks about them.

I think all the ideas have been more or less commented on in this thread. Now just implement one of them please.