Node Mayors and wars.

We have not received permission from Sarkgp to share the quoted post.

https://forums.ashesofcreation.com/discussion/53205/24-7-pvp-during-guild-node-wars/p1

We have not received permission from Sarkgp to share the quoted post.

Yeah, I hope there's a way to remove the mayor from their seat if the majority of the populous disagrees with the war.

We have not received permission from Kilion to share the quoted post.

Any node can declare a war on any other node. I'm pretty sure that's what OP meant.

We have not received permission from Kilion to share the quoted post.

The size of the guild doesn't matter here. OP was just stating that the ability of any other node to declare war on a node whose citizens comprise the strongest guild could undermine that guild's work towards improving and building up their node. All the whims of a single person.

We have not received permission from Kilion to share the quoted post.

Node siege and node war are different things. Any citizen can cast a siege scroll, but only node government can declare a war.

We have not received permission from daveywavey to share the quoted post.

Except that streamer have most likely put in years of work to garner a viewerbase big enough to not only justify them subbing to a game, but also playing often enough to get that streamer a mayoral position.

This is literally no different from a GL becoming a mayor because his big guild decided to live in the same node.

We have not received permission from Kilion to share the quoted post.

Yes, I should've been clearer with what I meant by "any node vs any node". I was talking about any non-linked node on the server, my bad.

As for reasoning - it can be anything, from just "we want content and we're all out, but we don't want to upset our local politics" to "a guild that's competing with us on a boss asked us for a trade. We help them destroy a node through war and a siege and they'll let us farm the boss uncontested".

We have not received permission from Veeshan to share the quoted post.

This is kinda the problem. And in theory all of those methods are abusable, if they remain on a monthly basis. But if you're a shitty mayor - I'd definitely prefer if people could do at least something about that. Different node types could even have different ways of addressing that, but there should be something.

We have not received permission from Veeshan to share the quoted post.

It's more about the potential abuse of the selection systems by any stronger guild or group of people. And the influence of that abuse on the common population of the node.

I'd imagine that a lot of players would not even participate in voting cause they won't care too much about how the node is controlled, as long as it's not hurting their gameplay. Those who don't care could potentially be bribed with items or money, because they could only benefit from that kind of trade (at least until the node goes to shit). This would compromise a scientific node.

Military node would probably require people to sign up to the mayoral fights. I doubt there'd be a ton of people willing to even become a mayor, so the pool of candidates will already be small. If a guild wanted to have complete control of a military node, they'd just need to register their members and collude in the arena (no matter what type of process the elections will use).

Religious nodes will most likely be controlled by guilds that accshare a single character or just have a super hardcore player among them. There's also a chance that those quests might require help of a guild, which would lead to the strongest guild in the node easily taking the mayoral position through force.

Economic nodes would be bought up by the same strong guilds if they see benefit in it. The amount of people willing to become mayors will be small and the amount of rich players among those who do want to be mayors would be even smaller, while a guild can easily just tell their members to pool money and outbid anyone else.

So all node elections can be abused relatively easily. But my main point is that a casual player just living in the preferred node and enjoying its services would get quite upset about a sudden war or a sudden siege against their node. And moving all their stuff (some of which might've been raided after a failed siege) after several days of dying in pvp (or not playing because of that war) would definitely push away quite a few people.

Now it could be said that this is all just the intended gameplay and that those casual players should just pay attention to the elections and try doing their best to oppose shitty mayors. But I'm not sure how many people would be willing to spend that much time doing all of that but still fail, cause it's impossible to overcome abuse of the system as a single player, and it's reaaaally difficult to rally several hundred people to do the same thing.

In other words, I'm just a bit worried about the consequences of abusability of the system. But I'm also not sure if it can be resolved somehow and I would personally prefer if the system didn't change completely or go away. I just think that this is yet another system that'll make Ashes a niche within a niche within a niche of a game.

We have not received permission from Sarkgp to share the quoted post.

Not "any", only the warring node's citizens (and probably their allied). The penalty is also less than if they were PKed. The attackers would also need to find you to kill you, while they'd be flagged against all the citizens of your node, so they might die before even finding you.

We have not received permission from Depraved to share the quoted post.

Why should I move to an undesired location just because my mayor is shite? Why shouldn't I have a way to influence that shitty mayor? Isn't this game all about the socialization and all that good stuff? If people literally can't influence the mayor outside of a single monthly event - imo that ain't social at all.

We have not received permission from Strevi to share the quoted post.

Like I've written in some other threads, I'm 90% sure that all election types will be abusable. I'd prefer if there was a way for the citizens to at least try and do smth about that.