War, conquest, loot...

Modest
Posts: 10
Joined: Thu May 23, 2013 12:50 pm

War, conquest, loot...

Post by Modest » Thu May 23, 2013 2:39 pm

Hello everybody :)
First of all I would like to greatly congratulate You for making such outstanding game. It is really an extraordinary! Personally I love the fact that You may not control (directly) what people are doing. I just love this kind of mechanic to be in games (other comperable would be private sector in Distant Worlds). Also symbiosis mechanic is very enjoyable. All game is! :) So congratulations on such brilliant ideas.

Now to the point of my suggestion. From time to time people living in their villiges are geting greedy/bored and deciding to go for war with neighbor. And it is all good mechanic. But there is place for improvments (at least in my opinion). All the time when one community goes for war against other it have the same aim in minds - total extermination and destruction of their country. Ant that aim of war is absolutly all right - I am in no way against that. However, what I am suggesting, is there should be more war aims for villiges. And bellow I will try to describe each of my ideas, one by one.

1. Raid villige - insted of destroying completly other community, they will "just" beat it to some % and by doing it they will force it to pay one-time tribute. Such tribute would mean that part, or all of raided villige's resources are being taken away. Raided villige's prosperity is lowered (it is recovering in normal way - by using resources avilable around) and raiding villige's prosperity grow higher (in instant) once it's soldiers return with their loot, by the amount that was raided. If this means that new prosperity is higher that resources avilable might make it normally possible - it will slowly dimnish as it do when You destroy some terrain improvments. Additionally, raiding army could destroy/damage everything on it's way in enemy's territory.

What things it would bring into a game? It could for example make some projects harder or easier to compleate, depending on who was raided, and what kind of loot raiders brought to their villige. It could be also a spark that start more wars - raided villige would be propably recowering quite fast, and that would led it into higher greed. And lastly, it is only logical to expect winners to return with loot from war (especially if greed is a reason behind it).

Raiding would have higher chances to occure when neighbor villige has resources which are not pressent in another villige (so for example, desert villige would more likely raid forest villige for it's food, or swamp for it's technology, and less likely another desert villige for it's wealth). Note - resources are key here, not villige types.

2. Border skirmish - insted of attacking other community, they will try to change how borders lies betwen them. How could it work? One villige is attacking, and sending it's army to the place where their borders are "touching", and attacked villige is sending it's army to defend it's borders. There is a battle, and if attacking is a winner than they get one, or two planks. If not, they stay the same, as before a war.

Of course border skirmish could happen only when two villiges have "toching" border betwen them. Of course this type of war, should be also greed driven. Chances of such war ought to be greater if when title behind border is of big value, especially if it is rich in resources which villige does not have, or have in far lesser amounts than other two.

3 Conquest and occupation - it would work simmilar to how raiding work - one villige is attacking other, beating it to some % and that force them to surrender. However here victory of attacker would not be one-timed loot. Insted both villiges would get modifier (symbiosis?). Conquered one would have it's prosperity reduced by certian % (it could be related to all prosperity, or to a single resource that is uses), and conquering village would get this missing amount of prosperity (resource). So simple example - Forest villige conquered swamp villige, and technology was a reason behind the attack. Swamp villige is using 200 technology, 100 wealth and 50 food - that means it's prosperity is 350. But afther they were conquered they get symbiosis -15% to technology (technology was a cause of war). So now it is using just 170 technology (-15%), while food and wealth remain the same. Forest villige on the other hand do recive missing 30 technology (15% from 200 produced by conquered swamp village). When swamp village technology output is growing, than proportionally forest village technology is also rising (by 15% from swamp village).

Conquest should have possiblility of happening only if one of villiges has really big prosperity advantage over it's neighbor. So it will never happen at the begining, or betwen equall villiges.

Additionally, conquering village would not go on war never with conquered as long as they remain in "conquered - conquering" relations. But conquered village can go for war against conquering village - and that would be an...

4. Independence war - it would be war started be conquered village, against it's conqueror. If won than both villages are loosing theire's symbiosies - so no more tributes. If lost, than tribute is going to be bigger from now on. If it was 15% of technology (my example), than it will become 20%... And so with every lost independence war.

Ok, so those were my ideas about wars betwen hummans' settlements in Reus. Mark, that only Conquest and Independence war are tied to each other. Apart from that, please regard them as a separate ideas. I hope that You will like it. I also hope that I posted it in a right part of forum - "IDEAS and fan work" tells me that I did, but never can be sure for 100%.

Mook881
Posts: 1
Joined: Sun May 12, 2013 3:58 pm

Re: War, conquest, loot...

Post by Mook881 » Thu May 23, 2013 4:29 pm

I love all of these suggestions!

User avatar
Dunam
Posts: 113
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 11:55 pm

Re: War, conquest, loot...

Post by Dunam » Fri May 24, 2013 12:48 am

Modest wrote: Raided village would be propably recowering quite fast, and that would led it into higher greed. And lastly, it is only logical to expect winners to return with loot from war (especially if greed is a reason behind it).
I think you just added an emergent second world war scenario into the beautiful peaceful world of Reus.

It sounds really fun. In a scary way.

The rest of your post too, that's some cool thinking you put into it.

Although I also wonder if these humans aren't hard enough to control already.

Modest
Posts: 10
Joined: Thu May 23, 2013 12:50 pm

Re: War, conquest, loot...

Post by Modest » Fri May 24, 2013 1:48 am

Dunam wrote:Although I also wonder if these humans aren't hard enough to control already.
I am glad that You two like what I suggested :) I hope that others will also like it.

As for difficulty in control... Telling the truth I didn't though of that ^^' But I am sure that if this features would be implemented, they will be tested and balanced. Possible option, to prewent raided villiges to go for war, caused by rapid recowery from lack of any resources would be for example time limit on greed rising afther raid (so for X minutes there is no greed rising). This time limit could be used by player to develop village even more without worrying about greed, which could cause another problem (gameplay wise proplem, not problem in games world). But also, there could be limit which would put a limit for raided villige on how much resources it may gather right afther being raided without worrying about greed. It would be good if such limit would be rather proportional to village prosperity right before it was raided, than strictly numerical (so, for example if villige had 400 prosperity, than it can restore to 75% without worrying about greed). Just two ideas how to make "emergent second world war scenario" a lot more managable ;)

And one more thing :) I did not explained properly this... I do not suggest more wars to be happening in Reus. All those which I am suggesting is like more wariety of them. Just like it is with villigers' project - they are starting ones from time to time - that is sure. But You may never be absolutly sure what kind of project they are starting and what is it's specialization. The same for wars - not more wars, just more varieti of them, with diffrent possible outcomes :) I hope that now it is even more agreeable :)

ollj
Posts: 53
Joined: Fri May 24, 2013 12:38 am

Re: War, conquest, loot...

Post by ollj » Fri May 24, 2013 7:30 pm

1/3/4. pillage tribute and vassalge instead of destroying adds a nice new layer, one of governmenting/political decision making. Problem is that your giants can interact with the descrution part with the 2 punishments wich adds a delicate ballance od destruction to the game but they cant interact with any tribute system. That would need to be adressed. And how to you even want to display or (have) decide(d) any political relation beyond total anihilation? You basically introduce faction leaders that start controlling 1 city as tribal leader but can gain and lose percentage controll over other cities, very similar to a political system. Cities get founded by a son/copy of the leader who starts with the same parameters but they can develope independantly.

2. the game already has wars inditectly triggered by borders changing by one city growing/shrinking suddenly. That often affects the available ressources of the neighboring cities enough to increase their greed into war wich is just like a territorial dispute. This mostly happens over border changes on smaller oceans between 2 big cities. You just have to pay attention to even notice this.

Modest
Posts: 10
Joined: Thu May 23, 2013 12:50 pm

Re: War, conquest, loot...

Post by Modest » Sat May 25, 2013 11:35 am

ollj wrote:2. the game already has wars inditectly triggered by borders changing by one city growing/shrinking suddenly. That often affects the available ressources of the neighboring cities enough to increase their greed into war wich is just like a territorial dispute. This mostly happens over border changes on smaller oceans between 2 big cities. You just have to pay attention to even notice this.
Indeed, the game has wars triggered by borders changing, but in my opinion it is made currently very odd. This is how it is right now:
1. One city takes ground from other, without fighting war.
2. City which taken ground starts to become more greedy (may not, if ground taken was not wealthy, but in example let's consider that ground is very welthy, and both cities are prosperous and more or less equal in power).
3. City which taken ground starts war against one of it's neighbors (let's say that it choosen to start war against city from which it taken ground) because of it's greed.
4. War is fought, and most ofthen, than not attacker looses it, but borders DO NOT change to it's previous shapes.
4a. War is fought and rarely attacker wins and totaly annihilate (btw. anybody remember old, good Total Annihilation?) enemy.

And this is how I am suggesting it to be:
1. One city becomes greedy and decide to take ground from one of it's neighbor.
2. It start a war and sends it's army on a border to capture land.
3. Attacked city send it's army to defend border land.
4. War is fought and THEN depending on it's result attacking city gains land, or not.

I think that diffrences are obvious in what is right now, and what I suggest to be. Major diffrence is that right now, war does not influence at all wheder land is captured, or not (unles one side exterminate other and take it's land as a result of lack of opposision in taking land, but that does not count as border skirmish). Insted it breake out BECAUSE land was captured. In my idea it is opposite - first there is war over land, and only than depending on it's outcome borders are changed, or not. Second diffrence is that right now wars are ending always in destruction if attacked looses - in my suggestion it is not the case. I hope that You can see what I am meaning, and that You understand my reasoning. If not, please tell me what I should explain more :)

Of course I may be missing something. If so - please, correct me by all means.
Problem is that your giants can interact with the descrution part with the 2 punishments wich adds a delicate ballance od destruction to the game but they cant interact with any tribute system.
Thank You for pointink out that. Yes, it is really a problem. And as it stands now, Gigants would be unable to interact "safely" with "non-annihilating" wars, by using those 2 punishing abilities. However, there other ways of destroying cities - Mountain Gigant may start erecting mountains over a city which slowly starts to harm it, and can be stopped at any time. The same goes for Water GIgant - he can start harming cities with it's "Create ocean" ability and stop and any time. It is worth pointing out that those two abilities, when used in order to destroy cities are working really slowly and stoping it when cities' healt bar will reach certian % is not a problem [unles somebody would decide to go with really small % (like 5%), but than You would need a weapon dealing only one point of damage to be totaly precise which is a bit riddiculus]. So even currently there would be a way for Gigants to interact with non-annihilation wars. So one could use Mountain Gigant's earthquake to destroy cities, Swamp Gigant's "Acid Bomb" to kill armies and deal uncontrolable damage to cities, and both - Mountain and Ocean Gigants' landshaping abilities to carefully damage cities that player want to loose non-annihilation war.
And how to you even want to display or (have) decide(d) any political relation beyond total anihilation?
I am not sure if I understand Your question correctly. I do understand it like that - "I can se that two cities are at war with each other, but HOW do I know what kind of war is it?". I am thinking that each marching army could have one flag carrier (currently the all have a leader which is always going in front of them and if army is defeted, he always dies as last one - he would be a perfect flag carrier). And symbol on a flag would tell You what this all is about. As for symbols - they should be expained in tutorial and always avilable to be checked, so player would not be left without acces to information. Additionaly there is in upper left corner "current wars" menu which displays every war which is taking place at current time, and is comparing both sides strengths, and is displaying even war's name. Right next to war's name could be good spot to write "Extermination, Raid, Border Skirmsh, Conquest, Independence".

User avatar
Adriaan
Posts: 739
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2012 5:18 pm

Re: War, conquest, loot...

Post by Adriaan » Sat May 25, 2013 11:46 am

I think those are beautiful ideas (and some match my earlier vision for Reus perfectly!). IF we ever make an expansion for Reus, I'm sure to look better towards the villages, with more dynamic conflicts, character and relations. :)

Modest
Posts: 10
Joined: Thu May 23, 2013 12:50 pm

Re: War, conquest, loot...

Post by Modest » Sat May 25, 2013 11:59 am

Adriaan wrote:I think those are beautiful ideas (and some match my earlier vision for Reus perfectly!). IF we ever make an expansion for Reus, I'm sure to look better towards the villages, with more dynamic conflicts, character and relations. :)
Thank You very much :) I am very glad that You see my suggestions as "beautiful ideas" ;)
I have great hope that You will make expansion for Reus at some point, because it is really great game. God game and logic in the same time :) And, yes - ollj's idea of adding characters as villige's leaders is also very interesting and would fit in perfectly.

User avatar
saikun
Posts: 9
Joined: Mon May 20, 2013 6:20 am
Location: Catalunya, Spain

Re: War, conquest, loot...

Post by saikun » Thu May 30, 2013 10:31 pm

Great ideas, they'd surely bring a lot of juice into the game. I personally think it's not only logic but also necessary. The game needs options to manage villages with high level of greed, to let them expand and prosper driven by that greed, and also ways to protect the giants without having to attack directly.

Blackhammer
Posts: 10
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2013 1:19 pm

Re: War, conquest, loot...

Post by Blackhammer » Fri Jun 14, 2013 6:17 pm

I have some ideas myself, but yours are even better than mine especially 1st and 2nd. It would give players
a new risky strategy - if a player knows he/she is likely to fail a project in a village, then it would be possible to quickly increase greed and make the village get their lacking resources to finish a project from their neighbour. Of course it would be risky, because they might attack the giants and the other village will also incrase in greed considerably.

I think a raid should "steal" 10 - 50 % of the other village's prosperity. 10 % with zero war markers, but each war mark would improve they skill at fighting/raiding and increase the loot slightly. BTW war marks would be granted only for succesful raids/defence against raids but not border skrimishes.

I must say though I don't like the latter two ideas much. Instead of conquest, I'd prefer the possibility of village being
destroyed in a raid if it's beaten by a much stronger opponent. Chances for this should improve with each border skrimish that a village losts, so when enemy's border "touches" their village it should be vulnerable and always be destroyed by a raid (though the attacker gets loot as usual or even a bit extra).
Destroyed village would turn into ruin that would prevent nomads for settling there for some time. I've explained in detail here viewtopic.php?f=11&t=879.

Post Reply