MMORPG SotA Column: Concerns Worthy of Note

And when a new guild comes into town and takes control over Beran's Reach because they're bigger than [BEAR] and have more people to outvote you... then what?

 

I like that idea too. If the risk of going to court makes both people that sign a contract nervous, that's probably a fair motivator to solve the problem without ligation.

 

That would be the point - an i imagine that it would only work for POT ... it would give a guild a real tool ... however / group of friends behaving in a not so nice matter could game the system

 

I like it.. It could also be a part of the process of making a lot available to a player in a Player Owned Town so that this is automatic when the lot is unlocked by the owner for the player.

 

I think it both owner and tenant agreed to the consequences of the trial the jury should be able to do this.

Of course, you have all kinds of issues with biased juries and stacking them, but that's an issue for another thread.

 

I don't think it would ever work like that Duke Violation. I think the owner of the town would never (and should never) change. I think it would be a way to arbitrate disputes based on previous agreements.

 

Jury of your peers - unless to make it fair it is a jury of impartial wanderers such as myself

 

I kind of like the idea of having the justice (jury) system wrapped up into this too. It would be like an extra "choice" that both parties could agree to if they both felt strongly that they were in the right. Maybe if you agreed to let it goto a jury it would have less impact on your reputation? I can see that working.

 

Btw, Archeage has a trial by jury....it looks really cool

 

Yup.. Not without it's drawbacks that is for certain..

EDIT: Sorry not drawbacks... I meant to say problems, or issues.. poor choice of words.

 

it also may decrease angst amongst the player base ... and maybe make guild relations play out a little smoother - we have all heard of guild drama / also less not forget that some landlords may be charging non game ....

 

it plays out in the chats - as the jury is in session - people say some funny things ... but the issue of guilt is not in question they have a list of all crimes you have committed

in beta I reported someone for taking someones crops

 

we have the official answer for future funding - crowdfunding + sells (founder q/a)

 

If it's a feature it can be abused and the abuse of the system would be always causing the mayors wishes to not go forward... it would be 100% possible for a vote system to be cheated. I've seen vote to kick systems abused in every game that I've found them in and this is just the exact reverse of that which would appeal to the same type of griefing players. In my opinion, this system should not be added.

 

I may not understand what system we're talking about then. I didn't read about a system that changed who owned the town. Maybe I skipped over that post. I have a number of people on ignore so sometimes that happens.

I would not advocate any system that took ownership of a town away from the person that paid for it (either in-game or out of game). I read back through all the posts on this and I still can't find any suggestion that a town owner would lose the town they owned.

I think what we're talking about is a town owner having some limitations on who they can kick out and why in an effort to avoid situations where a single player gets pushed around by large guilds or mean or unreasonable town owners.

 

Well, it is not as good as it could be. For jumps in mazes I would prefer Mirror's Edge-like first person view. Still it is much better than no first person view at all.

 

man o man. No thanks.

I want to play a game, not a real life simulator.

Contracts?
Loss of actual RW paid for in-game virtual property?
Justice systems because someone accuses someone of something? And not "omg he killed so and so" literally "I paid money to rent and the guy is a jerk?".... da wut?

If all those things are required, then this is less a game, and more virtual life.

I want to play Ultima, not simulate the crap problems of the real world with watered down mechanics and thematic, medieval asset content.

That is just what?

 

No one has been talking about that. You can take that off your concern list.

 

Uh, yes they did hommie:

https://shroudoftheavatar.com/forum...erns-worthy-of-note.14552/page-13#post-241745

 

Sorry, Joviex. I still don't see it.

When I read "Loss of actual RW paid for in-game virtual property?" I'm thinking you mean that you paid for something and now someone has taken it from you.

I don't think that's what those guys were talking about. I think they were saying that you paid for a Citizen level pledge and put your lot in a Player Tower and then the Town Owner said "nope, I'm kicking you out". You still own everything you paid for you would just have to go to another town to place it.

I'm not in favor of that without some form of record keeping (contracts) but it's not like anyone suggested a system that would vote on taking your RW stuff and then you'd just lose out.