Almanach Expansion + Capturing/Controlling Regions

W1ck3dWolf

Game of Thrones is all about who is in power, and how the next can replace the current. This is the fundamental basis of the entire series. Giving players the ability to capture, retain, and hold lands will be a huge draw to our community and attract more players. I propose we create a system similar to the one seen in the popular mobile game, Game of Thrones: Conquest. In Conquest, players are able to gather their forces and march on "Seats of Power" or castles/holds in different regions. Players should have to take the lands, unless elected into power by birthright (which is still a work in progress). NPC's can man the holds to begin with, and any unoccupied holds will be run by NPCs. Siege events can be held for players wishing to take part in sieges and battles. A battleground will be set up, terrain modified for war and players will have time to prepare and arrive to participate in the ensuing battle. Once either side has been eliminated, the keep/hold/castle will be awarded to the last standing. If the defender holds off the siege, the original title holder will retain their title. If the attacker wins, the leader of the siege will assume the title of the hold. Leaders are to be decided on before arranging for siege events, which we can do easily on the forums through War and Siege Applications.

Controlling a hold/keep/castle is very simple. The player that rules the land will be given economic bonuses, in the form of IGM for "taxes". They will appoint their own Master or War, Coin, Measter, Whispers and any other titles they wish to award. They will have control over all crimes committed in their respective lands, and will have the duty of serving punishments to criminals. Overall, Lords/Ladies will be the most powerful individuals in each of the regions. NPC's will participate in siege events when an attacked is attacking an unclaimed castle/keep/hold.

King's Landing will be the one exception to the Siege events. Sieges on King's Landing will be an organized event where any number of people can participate in defending or attacking. Multiple armies will converge and fight it out. These events will only take place once every so often as to limit an increased demand for KL sieges. Moreover, there will be a "cooldown" period between sieges of 1-3 weeks. This will allow for people to adjust and to enjoy their claims before another siege is available.

Players can sit on a seat of power as long as they wish, until forcibly removed by invasion, rebellion, or resignation.

Capturing and controlling regions will be an extremely important part of WesterosCraft. I am going to post a mock Siege Event in this thread to show what I envision it looking like on the forums.

Thanks for reading, and as always please leave comments and feedback . I would really like to be involved in the MMO process and would like everyones opinions so I can better understand what everyone is expecting out of WesterosCraft.
 
I think the cooldown should be on the shorter end, to emphasise the fragility of power.

Large scale battles between armies would most likely not be at the strongholds of houses. E.g. the Battle of the Bells and the Trident were major deciding battles in Robert's Rebellion yet did not take place at the strongholds of either house, instead where the forces were at the time or where they felt there was a favourable battleground. It was at the Trident that the Targaryen's lost their power. The Sack of Kingslanding was the result. Siege would be the end result of a campaign.

How would these sieges be carried out, should there be some influence of food and resources? What would the effects of siege towers and artillery be? Preset destruction of the walls, by rams, trebutchets etc that are loaded in response to them firing? Here are some points/ideas:

-maximum length of siege is determined by the stores of food of the defenders
-as it is a siege rather than a storming, will probably need npc defenders or something to continue if the owner is offline because of needing to sleep.
-If food takes a different use. Only rest can regenerate health, food provides a buff and starvation a debuff. So the better fed the defenders are, the better they can defend
-Of course there needs to be some testing of the mechanics. Are the fortifications enough of a force multiplier, or do hp/damage levels need to be adjusted.
 

W1ck3dWolf

These are some interesting questions and ideas you pose here! I agree - most major battles do occur in large open areas. I think it would be best if we left the battle aspect up to the players. We could organize major battles, but that forces people to act if they are unprepared. I don’t think we could go wrong either way. Overall a very interesting point I didn’t think about.

As for the sieges, I would like to respectfully rebute with a couple examples of major battles taking places at a hold. Battle of the Bastards, Siege of Pyke, Siege of Storms End to name a few. I think it would be beneficial for us to organize these to keep the balance fair and give players major events to take part of! Perhaps there can be rewards for the victors in the form of items, exp, skill points, or money?

As far as length of the grace period goes, I think you may be right. My concern is with large holds such as Winterfell or the Twins, players will want to siege it every other day, creating a hard situation since we will have to alter the map to siege conditions each time there is a siege - as players can’t build/destroy as of right now. Perhaps we give the larger holds such as the aforementioned a grace period of 1-2 weeks, and the smaller keeps such as Cleganes Keep or Crasters Keep a day cooldown?

I like the idea of siege engines and bonuses in terms of food and supplies. Siege towers could be placed throughout the siege already at the walls, but the attackers start far from the towers and must run to them. There can be holes in the walls, siege ladders, etc. already in place for the battle. Food is an interesting challenge because it takes us back to the build/destroy issue. Livestock is easy to breed and slaughter and will provide adequate amounts of food if we alter the drop ratios. But crops will be the most significant and important in terms of a siege because of their abundance and ease to grow. The issue is, as I mentioned, the players cannot break/place so we would need another way of producing the food for the keeps... Perhaps the lords buy it in bulk and it is kept as a stat for the hold virtually? If we allow players to harvest the massive fields in WesterosCraft, maybe we can make it so that all crops auto replant and yield more?

Food depletion can certainly be an added status effect to the defenders, or attackers! I envision it causing slowness and maybe a slight reduction in health for either side? But a surplus of food ensures that everyone is fully healed and unaffected. I think overall adding a status effect element to the game would benefit greatly on many fronts. The sieges and battles would obviously be affected, but so would the area you are in (the North is cold, Dorne is hot), the weather, sleep, etc.

I would love to work more with you on the MMO aspects of the game!
 
Realistically, one could not harvest fields during a siege unless the besieging forces were not great enough to prevent exit from the stronghold.

Perhaps sieges could be based on stats until a sortie or a raid is declared. These times are agreed upon by the two parties so that there can be an even battle or contest between the two parties. Thus, there can still be a long drawn out siege and a storming.

essentially, once a siege has been declared and the forces encamped before the walls, if large enough to fully block all exits, a system would engage where the inhabitants would have a limited amount of time before they all starve. This would be set by the amount of food they had stored beforehand (which is further determined by the power of the house and trade). Then the attackers and defenders can work out a time when they can do battle. This might have to be organised/judged by a moderator so an attacker can not just refuse to attack and deny any offers of the defender to lead a sortie out of the gates. Or there could be a system of offers, where denying too many allows the attack to take place without the commander
 

W1ck3dWolf

Yeah thats what I was getting at. The organized event is held when two parties agree on a siege and it is approved by server staff. I think your idea of having a set amount of time to engage is a great idea!
 
However, my point is that sieges are prolonged events, not happening within the space of an hour. So what you are talking about would be storms/storming of strongholds rather than a siege as such
 

W1ck3dWolf

Gotcha I understand what you are saying now. That would be an interesting way of doing things, we would just need to workout conditions of a siege. That way neither side can just idle through until the fighting begins. Maybe having active player time during the siege will count as keeping the siege going? Or maybe we can have mini-quests at the attacker and defender spots that when completed, move the siege forward? Just a few things to think about... Defender quests would be tasks such as gathering wood for defenses, or stockpiling food in the storehouses? Attacker quests would be tasks such as gathering items for siege equipment, hunting for food for the attackers, etc. I’m sure there’s all kinds of interesting tasks we could come up with if we went that route, but as I’m sitting here at work at 6:50 AM, this is all I’m able to brainstorm right now lol
 
  • Like
Reactions: AerioOndos