Node Types Are Imbalanced Due to Mayoral Selection Processes

Scientific node can be won by a single big guild.

Divine nodes can be won by the hardcorest player from that same guild, with the help of the guild.

Military nodes can be won by the hardcorest pvpers from that same guild w/o even the help of the guild (depending on the design of the election process).

Economic nodes can be won by that same guild pooling all their money into one person.

In other words, the top guild on the server has the potential of ruling 4 metropoli out of 5, and that's if there's 2 scientific ones, because they could rule all 5 if there's a duplicate of any other type.

All nodes have the potential to be abused by players. And all the other players are the ones deciding if they want to keep living in that node or let it die and let the abusers suffer the consequences.

NiKr wrote: »

Scientific node can be won by a single big guild.

Divine nodes can be won by the hardcorest player from that same guild, with the help of the guild.

Military nodes can be won by the hardcorest pvpers from that same guild w/o even the help of the guild (depending on the design of the election process).

Economic nodes can be won by that same guild pooling all their money into one person.

In other words, the top guild on the server has the potential of ruling 4 metropoli out of 5, and that's if there's 2 scientific ones, because they could rule all 5 if there's a duplicate of any other type.

All nodes have the potential to be abused by players. And all the other players are the ones deciding if they want to keep living in that node or let it die and let the abusers suffer the consequences.

With regard to Military nodes in particular, I feel the OP's concern stands. I agree that a guild can band together to win most mayoral contests, and this itself is a reasonable balancer, but if the top PvP player on the server is proving a poor mayor, no guild can remove them due to the 1v1 nature of the contest.

We were unable to determine the author of the quoted post.

(ref: Mayors > Node elections )

Even if they allow for counter-build and counter-picking to remove the existing mayor, this makes Military node leadership excessively swingy from month to month.

While "might makes right" is a style of society, I believe that including some potential for one's guild to support them in a mayoral arena in some form would increase overall stability, while suiting the theme a bit better. Individual mighty warriors do not make stable leaders of societies. The powerful head of a mercenary guild, however, tends to fare much better.

Do take this all with a grain of salt. I am not a "military node" style person.

SongRune wrote: »

Do take this all with a grain of salt. I am not a "military node" style person.

All it would take to "control" that military node is to invite the literally best pvper around to your guild and promise him some juicy stuff. PvPers usually care about good gear to have even better pvp, so the top guild inviting you to their ranks and promising you stuff just for your mayoral benefits seems like a nice trade to me.

The node wins out because the guild would just tell the pvper what to do as a mayor, while the pvper wins out because he's now in the top guild with great gear.

And there are the military style solutions I wasn't the type to find. I retract my 'complaint' as it pertains to military nodes.