Moving on, let's talk about Minecraft Empires in general. Of course the rules aren't set in stone, but as it stands I sort of don't like a lot of the rules. They seem somewhat tossed together randomly
Definitely. I'm most worried about number, really. So suggestions regarding numbers, ie, costs, gains, starting equipment, etc... are what I'm looking for more than anything else right now.
and the gold doesn't have a constant value that's easily understood.
I'm not sure what you mean. Are you saying that gold is applied too abstractly? That its worth in certain areas doesn't make sense when compared to others, speaking from a purely concrete, plot focused position? Perhaps, but then again, my goal isn't realism, in any sense. My goal, when it comes to gold cost, was to create a balanced gameplay experience.
You pay for moving around, you pay every time you attack, and pay less for defending.
Aye. Gold replaces the turn system used in similarly designed tabletops, so it's used for pretty much any action that directly allows for an advance toward the central goal.
The benefits you gain for having a large clan are sort of major but minor in a very... I'm afraid to say it, but a very unrealistic way.
Of course. Just as a caveman taking a Panzer tank in a straightforward brawl is also unrealistic, however, this is still possible in Civilization for the sake of balance. If the characters were proportional to their real life equivalents no one would do anything but pump all of their funds into tech.
Perhaps as a better example, take Super Smash Brothers Melee. The game is fairly balanced, but the characters are in no way proportional to their cannon. If they were, playing any character outside of Mewtwo would be pointless.
Clans go onto servers and build things. You might have a Clan with a strong presence on a given server, and they would have a huge castle -- with tags and such, of course. It would be best to cultivate a STRONG SENSE OF HONOURABLE COMBAT such that if another Clan decides to raid that castle, they would notify the clan in question well before attacking, to allow for preparation (or at least decide amongst themselves to "attack clan X" 24 hours before doing so, to allow for spying?). The basic goal is to avoid sneakily mass griefing enemy clans in the middle of the night.
That's nice and all, but a single server just can't facilitate nearly as many clans as my map can. A single, popular clan would, right now, easily max out a server. If Minecraft ever gets really popular, a tiny percentage of even a moderately popular clan will max out a server. Something like what you're suggesting just isn't applicable outside of an MMO environment.
Sure, you could jam all the clans into a single server, but it would play out less like real, international relations, and more like the Epcot World Showcase.
Traders; "We have 1000 gold blocks (for example) on your server, and only 100 on this other server"
Clan; "We'll trade you 100 gold blocks on this server for just 20 of them on the other server"
Traders; "Acceptable trade."
Wait, intra-server trade? What?
Even if that is made possible, which I doubt, I do not like the idea at all. Resources within a map should remain as constant as possible in survival mode.
edit However, upon revision, it may be best to not have a notion of each clan getting a "turn" per se -- but more resources would be needed. "movement" and "expansion" should not be one and the same. You should be able to scout out and do things on your own, shouldn't you? Why should you only be able to collect resources when in combat...? It makes things easier to control, but stranger to play.
To keep clans from grinding gold, mostly. If you require clans to enter battle to gain funds, you have a risk/benefit situation, where Minecraft's core gameplay is the deciding factor. If you allow them to gain funds outside of battle you either take away the risk, or you take away the Minecraft.
It would also probably cause clans to be in constant action, which would make this unmaintainable.
"intra-server" would be within the same server.
"internet" is bigger than "intranet".
Just letting you know.
Also, this is how interserver trade would work, and was precisely my suggestion.
Actually, I pretty much think this idea is good, but not at all what Minecraft Clans need for unity. The issues with gold can be figured out (I might think about this a bit); I don't think gold should have a comprehensible value for realism's sake, but rather to simplify the consideration of "what does it mean when I have this much gold and this much land"; the balance of number of members of a clan I just find to be strange and highly limiting in terms of tactics (there is no reason to attack your enemy from any specific direction, and no way to outnumber your enemy except just by having a bigger clan.. and having less land makes no difference to you whatsoever as long as you still have a lot of members and a lot of gold).
Minecraft Space is across all servers...
a single server just can't facilitate nearly as many clans as my map can
Not just ONE server. ALL of them!
Meanwhile your game takes place on a map, using one server that separates itself from any other.
As a result, this game is an entirely external force -- Clan relations only vaguely carry over, and it serves to expand upon their relations a little bit (enemies fight more and as such decide "yes, we are enemies", allies help each other) but it's really very detached from the rest of Minecraft.
It's a board game that uses Minecraft Multiplayer Survival as a tool, not a board game to unify clan relations.
(And if this was never the point in the first place, so be it)
I am concerned that if the only way to gain gold is by participating in battles, gold will be gained in strange ways. A clan who is constantly attacked will be able to collect huge amounts of gold, and this seems wholly artificial. A clan who constantly attacks and never wins but mines tons of gold while launching token attacks will be able to collect lots of gold. Not to say it would happen -- these are just examples of what could possibly happen, exploits or outcomes of the system which seem... bad.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"I want to see forum posts saying "how do i kill dragon" with replies reading "lol"."
---> vede claimed Notch said this (and it is awesome).
Definitely. I'm most worried about number, really. So suggestions regarding numbers, ie, costs, gains, starting equipment, etc... are what I'm looking for more than anything else right now.
I'm not sure what you mean. Are you saying that gold is applied too abstractly? That its worth in certain areas doesn't make sense when compared to others, speaking from a purely concrete, plot focused position? Perhaps, but then again, my goal isn't realism, in any sense. My goal, when it comes to gold cost, was to create a balanced gameplay experience.
Aye. Gold replaces the turn system used in similarly designed tabletops, so it's used for pretty much any action that directly allows for an advance toward the central goal.
Of course. Just as a caveman taking a Panzer tank in a straightforward brawl is also unrealistic, however, this is still possible in Civilization for the sake of balance. If the characters were proportional to their real life equivalents no one would do anything but pump all of their funds into tech.
Perhaps as a better example, take Super Smash Brothers Melee. The game is fairly balanced, but the characters are in no way proportional to their cannon. If they were, playing any character outside of Mewtwo would be pointless.
That's nice and all, but a single server just can't facilitate nearly as many clans as my map can. A single, popular clan would, right now, easily max out a server. If Minecraft ever gets really popular, a tiny percentage of even a moderately popular clan will max out a server. Something like what you're suggesting just isn't applicable outside of an MMO environment.
Sure, you could jam all the clans into a single server, but it would play out less like real, international relations, and more like the Epcot World Showcase.
Wait, intra-server trade? What?
Even if that is made possible, which I doubt, I do not like the idea at all. Resources within a map should remain as constant as possible in survival mode.
To keep clans from grinding gold, mostly. If you require clans to enter battle to gain funds, you have a risk/benefit situation, where Minecraft's core gameplay is the deciding factor. If you allow them to gain funds outside of battle you either take away the risk, or you take away the Minecraft.
It would also probably cause clans to be in constant action, which would make this unmaintainable.
"internet" is bigger than "intranet".
Just letting you know.
Also, this is how interserver trade would work, and was precisely my suggestion.
Actually, I pretty much think this idea is good, but not at all what Minecraft Clans need for unity. The issues with gold can be figured out (I might think about this a bit); I don't think gold should have a comprehensible value for realism's sake, but rather to simplify the consideration of "what does it mean when I have this much gold and this much land"; the balance of number of members of a clan I just find to be strange and highly limiting in terms of tactics (there is no reason to attack your enemy from any specific direction, and no way to outnumber your enemy except just by having a bigger clan.. and having less land makes no difference to you whatsoever as long as you still have a lot of members and a lot of gold).
Minecraft Space is across all servers...
Not just ONE server. ALL of them!
Meanwhile your game takes place on a map, using one server that separates itself from any other.
As a result, this game is an entirely external force -- Clan relations only vaguely carry over, and it serves to expand upon their relations a little bit (enemies fight more and as such decide "yes, we are enemies", allies help each other) but it's really very detached from the rest of Minecraft.
It's a board game that uses Minecraft Multiplayer Survival as a tool, not a board game to unify clan relations.
(And if this was never the point in the first place, so be it)
I am concerned that if the only way to gain gold is by participating in battles, gold will be gained in strange ways. A clan who is constantly attacked will be able to collect huge amounts of gold, and this seems wholly artificial. A clan who constantly attacks and never wins but mines tons of gold while launching token attacks will be able to collect lots of gold. Not to say it would happen -- these are just examples of what could possibly happen, exploits or outcomes of the system which seem... bad.
---> vede claimed Notch said this (and it is awesome).
1
1
1
1
1
1