Governor's Trade Deal - possible improvements

[CovenantX]

I know many people build their suits around these buffs, but they last a flat 24 hours....

Would it be possible (I know it is) for these buffs to persist indefinitely (until the city runs out of funds, or the deal(s) are changed) OR at least be able to be refreshed, by activating the trade deal at the stone again while you're under the effect of it so it does not wear off in the middle of a fight ?

It's unbelievable the buff needs to wear off before it's able to be reactivated.

Also, there are several different buffs, the governors are able to choose from... would it be at all possible to allow a governor to choose multiple buffs, and allow the citizen of the city choose which of the buffs that are paid for by the city to use ?

Example: Vesper 3 city deals +5 ssi, +5 sdi, +1 fc... a citizen could then choose ONE of the three buffs. for 2m each buff/per week.

 

[MalagAste]

I personally have always maintained that the individual ought to be able to apply whatever buff they like if the Governor funds the trade deal... as well I'd also like it if "using" the trade deal meant you also invest in it say 50k per use. And since they gave us a check box to keep the deal active I honestly don't see why citizens can't get a check to keep the buff active without having to return to the stone everyday or at least allow renewal of the buff anytime after server up. What does it really matter if it's only been 5 or 15 or 25 hours since you last took the buff?

 

[Merlin]

Something I'd like to gripe about related to this is how few options you have. On Atlantic, I feel like there are two towns with SDI, 1 town with FC and almost all the rest have SSI. (please correct me if I am wrong)

According to UO Guide, here are the various options to choose from:

• Society of Clothiers: +1% Resist bump to all resists

• Bardic Collegium: +1 Faster Casting

• Order of Engineers: +3 Dexterity Bonus

• Guild of Healers: 5% Bandage Healing Bonus

• Maritime Guild: +2 Hit Point Regeneration

• Merchant’s Association: +2 Mana Regeneration

• Mining Cooperative: +3 Strength Bonus

• League of Rangers: +3 Intelligence Bonus

• Guild of Assassins: +5% Swing Speed Increase

• Guild of Arcane Arts: +5% Spell Damage Increase

• Warrior’s Guild: +5% Hit Chance Increase

So basically, out of 10 options, we usually only see 3 different ones chosen on Atlantic. I think this is wrong. There has got to be a better way.

Some rambling suggestions/ideas:
There shouldn't be more than two towns that can use the same buff.
OR you should be able to pick one from two different buffs, and no town can have the same combination of two.
Make it some type of purchasable donation where you can change buffs for a donation of X amount of gold and you can't change buffs more than every 7 days.
Make each Governor's buff of choice more prevalent during elections (atleast for me, this is one of main factors I care about when voting)
After elections, have a separate vote in each town to vote on the buff (admittedly, this could end up with same 2-3 buffs we see in all towns, but atleast their would be a democratic chance to change it)

 

[Andrasta]

A Citizen should be able to pick whatever buff they want & the buff should last 1 week for a small gold fee.

 

[Scribbles]

Making reds be able to join a city, or at least give us bucs den so we can balance the playing field in pvp. I also wouldnt mind RPing a bit of murder or thievery with the other governors...

 

[Dot_Warner]

The buff should be chooseable by the citizen. This has been requested since this system was started, and there is no valid argument against it.

The citizen should also be required to donate somehow, even it is just a token amount. The free ride most people have been abusing needs to stop. The token amount could be lowered based on their city loyalty, or better yet, their purchased city title.

 

[Maximus Neximus]

So basically, out of 10 options, we usually only see 3 different ones chosen on Atlantic. I think this is wrong. There has got to be a better way.

Other than SSI, SDI and FC 1, the rest aren't good options. With items available today, hitting caps on regens, resists and HCI is easy. People want one of the three.

 

[MalagAste]

Other than SSI, SDI and FC 1, the rest aren't good options. With items available today, hitting caps on regens, resists and HCI is easy. People want one of the three.

Exactly on GLs Yew I run the FC1 because for a long while folk who actually PAID for the Buff asked for it. So I gave it to them. And I keep it up so long as that is what they say they want and there is gold on the stone.

 

[Merlin]

To gain access to any buff, donation should be required ATLEAST each election cycle. Everyone should have a bit more skin in the game than simply the one time donation.

 

[Archibald]

As a Governor of a less populated shard i have to say this.

The whole system needs to be tweaked, rule sets added, some taken away and then reset.
This whole governor system is supposed to be purely about community building and its RP aspects.

Everything you do in a city, should be based on loyalty rating, and title of an individual toon.
Your title should reflect your participation. It shouldnt be bought.

For example right now you need to be respected to vote and use the trade deal..
Instead of just dropping 4k boards or ingots on the city Trade minister ..you would have to participate in the "City functions" in order to gain in title/rank.

Without these 1 or both of these things, then you shouldnt be able to participate in the system at all.

You should have to put in, and want to put in, "work" to get any of the bennies off the city stones.


1. Firstly, remove raw gold donations off the city herald. No gold donations should be accepted.
(Devs- tweak your gold sink systems and incorporate them into the various systems with more outlets.)
the ONLY ways to increase the city TB to fund those deals are thru player done tasks.
For example:
-Doing trade orders...simple system..gets the job done..its great for what it does.
those who want the rare drops items..will put in the work to get them, and get the higher
karma bonus, and get the higher gold generated for their city TB's.
Those who dont will use the moongates and just grind their way to reach their goal.
( Keep in mind these drops arent meant to be a high dollar resale value..thats not the point.
the point is to participate, grow your toon's city RP rep, or gain in title and rank to be able to use the
City buff.)

Add new outlets...make each city have its own specific TB building outlet.
-Skara Brae has the Huntsmaster challenge located just outside town.
Although anyone can participate in the challenge..make it to where if your loyal to Skara, then
the 5k that each permit costs goes to the increase the TB on the city stone..Those who are loyal elsewhere
who play in the challenge, the gold can just go down the gold sink drain, or tie them all together so no matter which " City Challenge" you participate in, your loyal city gains in TB as well.
When you complete a trade order now..both cities benefit..so extend that way of thinking ..either way..its still a sink.

Example: Minoc..Miners challenge..Pan for the heaviest ore nuggets...
Yew...Heaviest colored log...
Vesper..Heaviest fish or shore fish species..etc

2. Another way to increase TB now..is the buying of the city banners.
They cost 250k and require you to hold a certain loyalty rating, and you can only buy one every 7 days,
and you have to be a certain loyalty rating to place them in your home.
this i would leave alone... i would add something useful to them though..

I would give them 2 modes.
Active and decorative.

Decorative mode is just that..you buy it once hang it on a wall and forget it.

Active mode:

Make them hold 4 charges that grant you when double clicked to have your City buff last 1 week before it expires. When the charges run out you have to run more trade orders to accumulate more points to trade in for the recharge item. .." City Pride in a bottle" ( 1 bottle per charge) when you use it you get a message that says.

" You dampen the banner with City Pride. Your banner will Majestically be displayed for XX amount of days."

If at the end of the max charge time if you neglect to keep recharging it. It will decay, become tattered..and become perma deco..and youll have to go buy another banner to get that advantage again.

3. Another way to increase/decrease TB is to allow a Governor access to the city Herald and turn it into a city vendor.
Make all donations that a city is given, to be given to the Trade minister, in either deeded or raw forms.
( separate herald and trade minister jobs.)
The only thing the Herald can sell are certain items ( resources) that are donated to the city Trade Ministers and only a certain % of those donations can be for reselling to the public.
the prices can bet set by the governor, although price limits and quantities are placed upon the items.
The Governors will not be able to physically touch any donated item to prevent items from being cleaned out.

The rest of the usable items donated goes into the city stockpiles.
Each week a city uses resources, and its stock piles dwindle.
Its the governors job, and its citizens to keep stockpiles up.
If stockpiles are running negative, then the city TB reflects the difference.

4. Integrate the PvP'ers, so their roles have more of a function.

lets face it, the only reason a PvPer even cares about the Governor system is to get the Trade Buff.
and thats it...and our current 3 Buff selection anyone ever picks proves it.
Might as well use that player base, instead of just getting used by it.

Tie in the VvV system, add that city pride in a bottle to the silver trader in fel.
If your loyal to Skara tram because of its buff, then you can only use the fel Skara Silver trader npc.
Fel Skara silver trader points redeemed for all vvv items translate to Tram Skara TB.

- Make sure all Virtue cities can host VvV action..
drop Ocollo, and make Vesper and New Mag city battles.

Put a silver trader,herald,trade minister, guard captain, and city stone in Buc den Fel for the reds.
Any red can use that stone, but upon declaring city loyalty, the Buc stone understands which tram
stone should be displayed ( if thats even possible)

I dont think the system should exclude reds.
Just because your red doesnt mean you are not loyal.

5. As far as letting ppl decide which Buff to use no matter what city they belong too is a mistake.
It should not happen, because what we be the whole point in any of this system.

The PvP'er on the most part would just pick a town wouldnt vote, and do what they gotta do to get their desired Buff and thats it. ( maybe should make it to where you have to vote in order to use it, or reach a certain level of points by doing city functions in between elections.)

Might as well make a +5% SSI, or a FC1 potion, with a 24 hour timer available thru the silver trader.
Why pester the Pvp'er to come to tram at all and click on the stone?

But as a PvP'er if you knew that Governor Archibald was going to keep SSI, and not change it every week.
then you might me more inclined to vote for him if your a Dexxer.
Because if they had to switch towns and do the whole loyalty system for a new town.. OMG forget it
Im gonna vote for Archibald!...

Although it can be argued the person is voting because of the wrong reasons..its still a vote.
and who am i to judge his playstyle.
He will never care why i chose to be a governor, just as i can care less how many ppl he killed or made rage log this week...
He will go where the path of least resistance is.
if SSI suits him..then so be it..Skara he will be.
All im saying is..use that to help fund the TB.




If your a trammie PvM/ RP'er, and you get to pick what trade buff you get regardless of which town your loyal to, then it takes the 1 thing the Governor can do away..Make a decision for the town he/she was just elected to Govern.

In that type of setting, the community votes a buff, or a person runs more bullish and says..i will pick SSI
so deal with it.
You now have a choice to vote for that guy or a more democratic Governor..

Its politics.
Its community
Its a voting system.
Its about integration, coordination and activity

Its not ala carte'




Gamer as a whole need to get off this im too lazy to do anything mindset so i want it now now now.
The OP posted he didnt want to goto the city stone each day to activate the trade Buff..
Are ya kidden me?...literally takes 2 seconds.

 

[GarthGrey]

Agreed, that citizens should be able to select whichever buff they want. With regards to Trader Quests, citizens of a town should be able to do quests for their town ONLY. Garth is a citizen of Vesper. I should be rewarded for accepting and completing quests for my City, you know, the one I'm loyal to ?? Start quest in Vesper, complete quest, return to Vesper..etc etc..and be rewarded better for it, including selecting my own buff.

 

[Spock's Beard]

Gamer as a whole need to get off this im too lazy to do anything mindset so i want it now now now.
The OP posted he didnt want to goto the city stone each day to activate the trade Buff..
Are ya kidden me?...literally takes 2 seconds.

Jesus Christ, is this a joke? Also, your ideas for the city system are a mess that would drive participation lower, not higher.

 

[Old Vet Back Again]

@Archibald, I disagree with 100% of your post. Your alienating the player base into being forced into doing things they simply might not want to do. If I want to use a buff I should not have to run trade deals or other quests in order to do so. Some people enjoy doing those things and good for them, but I sure don't and I am sure there are many others that agree with me.

I agree with the OP, this would greatly benefit the dead shards where these isn't enough governors to maintain the trade deals.

 

[Kirthag]

@Archibald - I tend to agree with some of your stuff, but I cannot totally like your post for the simple reason that gold is, indeed, very necessary for city to function and even in the RP sense of it all - would still be necessary. If you want to get "period" about it - gold (eg. taxes) were required from every vassal of the lordship. This is how the devs made it so within the game.

Personally, I think people need to live within the area of the city they are loyal to.

The donation of logs, ingots, whatever to gain loyalty (in the RP sense) helps to maintain the city. Think, building repairs and fortifications. Personally, I think it should be more resources to _maintain_ city loyalty, but that's just me.

I had a huge post about taxation, city services and more - all codeable and feasible - I'll find it eventually...

 

[MalagAste]

@Archibald - I tend to agree with some of your stuff, but I cannot totally like your post for the simple reason that gold is, indeed, very necessary for city to function and even in the RP sense of it all - would still be necessary. If you want to get "period" about it - gold (eg. taxes) were required from every vassal of the lordship. This is how the devs made it so within the game.

Personally, I think people need to live within the area of the city they are loyal to.

The donation of logs, ingots, whatever to gain loyalty (in the RP sense) helps to maintain the city. Think, building repairs and fortifications. Personally, I think it should be more resources to _maintain_ city loyalty, but that's just me.

I had a huge post about taxation, city services and more - all codeable and feasible - I'll find it eventually...

While I can somewhat agree about people needing to live in the area you forget that some cities just aren't that possible to have folk living near them... I mean honestly who's going to live near Jhelom in a 10x10 or smaller??? Not to many folk these days unless you live on a really heavily populated shard like Atl.... otherwise you'd be hard pressed to see anyone living there. Moonglow has a few spots but that's very few. That makes things rather limited for them. Might be all of 2 people living in Jhelom or near Jhelom... maybe as many as 5 on any shard living on Moonglow. That's if it's not one person having 4 houses there.

While it's a nice concept it's not terribly likely. Now I own my Theatre near the Yew Moongate... but it's not on Willa's account. So does that mean she wouldn't be able to run because City of Yew owns the house? Even though 99% of my characters come and go from the Theatre? No it shouldn't.

Do I think you should be an active participant of the shard.. and actually LIVE on the shard. Yes. Do I think someone should be the Governor on 4 or 5 shards. Well you know if they are willing to be available and participate then YES. But if they are just being the Governor so their Fel champ group can get some buff and they don't show up to the Governors meetings with the King, don't support the shard with some sort of activities or other means then NO. They should be active members of the community and do things for the community... not just the trade deal...

Now there are tons of things Governors could do... besides just a trade deal... but as far as the deal is concerned the Citizen should chose what buff they want. While it's a nice concept that the Governors would chose something many folk want the truth of the matter is any Governor who asks what folk want for the buff they often get one of 3 responses... FC1, SSI or SDI. That's about it. No one cares about most of the rest of the buffs. If they did they would say so.

And I'm going to be totally honest here... No one is going to be loyal to a city that they don't give a rats about just because they offer a certain trade deal they want. Heck 90% of the players probably don't even USE the buffs. 99% of the players will NEVER ask for a Title or anything else the Governor can do. No one purposefully donates to the stones either. The Governors do... The rest of the gold on the stones either comes from trade deals, the sale of the titles, or from fundraising done by the Governors. (Save Britain on GLs and that money came from a promise to the Governor) Maybe it's different on Atlantic but that's the way it is on GLs and this I can say with 100% confidence.

 

[Governor Ma Nerva]

ok where to start..
gold is a important part of the system i agree to this, i drop gold from my pack on what ever towns herald i am visiting.
now as far as multiple buffs available i agree somewhat to this and here is what i think, I think to further participation governors should be able to align with other city's and citizens should be able to choose from any buff within the alliance of towns. hence a town known for crafting can have crafting bonus, but players can choose any buff from the alliances list the governor has aligned them with. First of all this will show governors actually talk to each other to form a alliance. and will give players reasons to stick to there chosen city. as far as declaring a city to vote is a totaly different apple. i hold to the one vote per acct philosphy. i also have no problems with players being able to renew there buff automatic.

 

[Merlin]

And I'm going to be totally honest here... No one is going to be loyal to a city that they don't give a rats about just because they offer a certain trade deal they want. Heck 90% of the players probably don't even USE the buffs. 99% of the players will NEVER ask for a Title or anything else the Governor can do. No one purposefully donates to the stones either. The Governors do... The rest of the gold on the stones either comes from trade deals, the sale of the titles, or from fundraising done by the Governors. (Save Britain on GLs and that money came from a promise to the Governor) Maybe it's different on Atlantic but that's the way it is on GLs and this I can say with 100% confidence.

I'm going to be totally honest here too... about 95% of the people in my guild and TS channel are loyal to various cities BASED SOLELY on the trade deal buff offered. Most don't give a rats about voting, RP, whoever is governor, or other city specific traits. Trade buff is it.

Maybe I'm wrong here and my sample size isn't big enough, but aside from those who care about the RP community and maybe loyalty to certain governors, trade buffs are what drive loyalty to various cities.

@Archibald
Personally, I think people need to live within the area of the city they are loyal to.

Not so sure about this. If this were ever the case, I could see gerrymandering of districts coming up for debate, let alone - what do you do with people in Luna, etc.? I'm curious how it could be coded as well.

Trade buffs are biggest drive of my city loyalty. I shouldn't be perma-bound to Skara or Brit just because my keep is in between those two cities.

Other than SSI, SDI and FC 1, the rest aren't good options. With items available today, hitting caps on regens, resists and HCI is easy. People want one of the three.

I can understand why the top three are where they are, but every template is different and sometimes you get a few of those perfect legendary pieces or jewels you want to use and lose on something else. I'd really like for there to be one city with HCI because I am under cap on a few toons and it would be more handy than the SSI. I'm sure others would have the occasional need to use one of the other buffs offered.

 

[Dot_Warner]

@Kirthag While living "in" the city you are loyal to would be awesome (as long as it wasn't the monstrosity that is New Magincia!), its not feasible 18 years into the game. I'm fortunate enough to actually live in Britain on GL. Three of the other governors on GL also live "in" their cities. We just happened to be incredibly lucky.

@Governor Ma Nerva The nine cities are in an alliance, its called 'Britannia.' Having the crown cities forming backroom pacts or acting with antipathy towards Blackthorn never seems to play well with the EMs. A crafting bonus, in addition to the buffs, would be a good way to get people to actually go to the cities again.

@Merlin You're right, the vast majority of people are loyal to the city that has a buff aligned with their playstyle/specific need, which means certain cities get the majority of citizens. Its sad that more people don't interact with the RP though, if enough people did I'm sure it would cause more things to happen (events, player recognition, etc.)

I'd like to see more random people at the governor's meetings, its kinda silly that we sit there basically talking about our cities to ourselves with very little external community input. Its also silly that we're supposed to do events, people say they want them, but then they don't actually show up/participate. Its disheartening.

 

[Kirthag]

Aye, I agree Dot... really I do. I disagree with your "not feasible" statement though. I just got the castle of my dreams.... on Pac... and yes, I will be running for governorship again now that I will be living in the district I care about.

Insofar as those cities that don't have that much space - Jhelom, New Mag, etc., they have associated areas of the map. I need to go look for the graphic, but it is around here somewhere... most of the boundaries ran along server lines, but there were some subdivisions, giving each city its own territory.

dammit... can't find it! But I did find a server line map and drew up the boundaries as best as I remember them...

 

[MalagAste]

@Kirthag That's all well and good but... Nu'Jelm for instance isn't part of the Kingdom. It has it's own Sultan can't be included in Vesper territory and should really be separate like Buc's.... also NO ONE can live on Nu'Jelm either. Cove is also separate as is New Haven and Serpents Hold. I know Dot made a map similar for GLs that also included the Township of Newcastle and its territory. But honestly trying to force folk to live somewhere would be BAD. Most folk aren't going to move. And for places like Atl finding a place to even put a home is an issue let alone trying to find a home within the boundary of any particular City. And if I were a Citizen of Trinsic I'd be pretty peeved you gave Jhelom my Shrine. Most RPers anyway would have an issue with that. Honor belongs to Trinsic. Just saying.

Honestly I don't care where a person lives... What matters more is where their heart is. My heart has always been in Yew if you ask Willa. However her sister Trilla was raised in Trinsic and her other sister Valeria was raised in Minoc. Willa was actually raised in Britain, which is where she learned all about Politics and such. So really telling someone they have to live in the area to vote or be elected would be insane... Besides that would mean that no one in Malas would be able to do anything at all. Same with Tokuno residents and those who live in Ter Mur. I think you are putting too much into it. Back in the day when we had only one facet to live in maybe this would be an ok idea... but now..... NO. Back years ago when more folk cared about where they lived, who they lived near and such.... yes... but now no.

So long as you live on the shard and you participate on the shard that should suffice.

 

[Spock's Beard]

I think the small group of people who are super invested in this city government business drastically overestimate how much of a crap anyone outside the bubble gives about it, or can ever be compelled to give. I don't know my governor, I didn't vote for them, I've never met them, and I don't really need 5% SSI all THAT badly.

 

[BeaIank]

The idea of having to live in the city region is a pretty impractical and terrible one.
Pretty much all my characters have loyalty to Trinsic and all my houses are in Ter Mur.

If that were to be implemented, then everyone living outside Britain (and even in Fel, I guess) would be unable to take part on this system, as city loyalty is only for the virtue cities, and such things weren't implemented for Fel cities either. And there will be new lands, which may or may not hold housing with this new expansion.
There is no way I would move away from Ter Mur. I love my spots there.

 

[Dot_Warner]

Here is the GL version of a city territory map I did a while back. Cities protect land-based territories, their fair swath of the coastlines (rampant piracy was a factor at the time of the map's creation) and each city is responsible for their associated shrine.

Buccaneer's Den is in unclaimed water, as is Fire Isle. Nujel'm has a relatively small claim due to its unstable nature and poverty-stricken populace.

New Magincia protects New Haven. Serpent's Hold, as a military outpost of Britannia, controls its own territory.

Note: We have two player cities on GL. Newcastle (gray color) SE of Wrong. And Novus Dracona (dark blue color) on Tar Valon.

Some continental areas were left "wild" (unclaimed) for dramatic purposes.

 

[Archibald]

@Archibald - I tend to agree with some of your stuff, but I cannot totally like your post for the simple reason that gold is, indeed, very necessary for city to function and even in the RP sense of it all - would still be necessary. If you want to get "period" about it - gold (eg. taxes) were required from every vassal of the lordship. This is how the devs made it so within the game.

Personally, I think people need to live within the area of the city they are loyal to.

The donation of logs, ingots, whatever to gain loyalty (in the RP sense) helps to maintain the city. Think, building repairs and fortifications. Personally, I think it should be more resources to _maintain_ city loyalty, but that's just me.

I had a huge post about taxation, city services and more - all codeable and feasible - I'll find it eventually...

I agree gold is still needed and still has value in the system.
I'd love to read that tax post, PM me the link or post it here if ya find it?

I just meant that i rather see players earn their titles instead of just buying them.
For example, the Trade order titles..you cant buy them, you have to earn them.
On the same token, you should have to earn your city title..not just pay 50 mil for it.


and im against just dropping gold on the Herald..
Look at what the former Governor did on atlantic brit.
they dropped an insane amount of gold on the stone.
No one in Brit will ever have to participate in that part of the game ever again......thats not right.
Thats the lazy way out.

IMO you should have to participate in the various outlets available, and implement new ones, to improve
a toons title/progression in a town, and to keep stuff like trade buffs alive in ones declared city.
Not just throw millions of gold at the stone and titles.

 

[Kirthag]

I didn't say how the map I posted was used - it was mainly for various RP groups on Napa (back in the day) and also before Tram. When Trammel was implemented, the map was pretty much useless (prolly why I cannot find the original).

I agree that what matters most is peoples' participation. For the longest time I lived in Yew, but yet most of my friends gathered around Minoc and Vesper. I moved down to Trinsic due to RP, but always longed for Yew and had worked that into my RP. Then... moved to New Mag to be closer to friends and guild - and worked it into my RP.

But still longed for the forest of Yew.

 

[MalagAste]

I think the small group of people who are super invested in this city government business drastically overestimate how much of a crap anyone outside the bubble gives about it, or can ever be compelled to give. I don't know my governor, I didn't vote for them, I've never met them, and I don't really need 5% SSI all THAT badly.

As someone who's been the Governor of Yew since day one... I can say that you are 100% correct. Most people who play could care less about the whole thing up until there is an election then suddenly from out of nowhere 100's of folk show up to vote someone off the stone... and then get someone else voted in and then all the sudden this "new" Governor manages to NEVER show up or do anything for the City they are Elected to and this INCLUDES putting on any Trade Deal... Yet this all gets forgotten 6 months later when a new Governor is elected and once again someone "new" seems to get elected out of the blue and then fades away...

Few Governors even bother to show up to the Council if they aren't part of the RP community. I guess RPers are the only ones willing to endure hours of sitting and just TALKING in game about things happening in-game.

But this also goes along with the misconceptions about the Governor System that have been about since day one. Like that they get to actually do something, or that they somehow have any pull with the DEVs or that the meeting with the King is somehow a meeting with the DEVs and they can "fix" something. But as soon as folk finally figured out that there is no "reward" for being a Governor most folk quit trying to do it. Some still think you "get" something. Which is a lie. Sure you have a spiffy temp title proclaiming you as Governor of somewhere but that only lasts as long as you do.... and if you are a foolish Governor and go down the dark path and become disloyal to your city they will remove you from office and take away your title and ability to chose the Trade Deal.

There is no way to know if anyone even uses the trade deal.... no way to know if anyone cares what you do. Took a long time to get a working bulletin board... that no one uses. I've put up a ballot box 2 times and it got 1 vote. The only way I've ever known if anyone cared was to not do the trade deal for a few days and had 2 people ICQ me about it... Since the autorenew thing I haven't heard a peep from anyone.

My main thoughts is that the Governor system while a wonderful concept... honestly I think it's too little too late. 10 years ago or so when the cities were booming with life and folk cared about them... back when at least on GLs there are a booming RP community with towns that had player run governments and groups that could always be seen there... I recall Minoc and the Highland Guard, Yew had the Yew Militia and Yew Town Council... Britain had the Kilted Police and even Moonglow had a booming community... Trinsic at the time I think was ruled by evil... etc... this sort of system would have been WONDERFUL. And the player event co-ordinator would have been so busy they would have needed a dozen of them... But of late most shards struggle just to hold on... communities are clinging to life. Today you are lucky if 2 active people care about any city. I even recall when Malas first came about folk struggled to develop and build player towns there. But most all that is gone now.

 

[Merlin]

Yeah, I think that the territories idea would've been better when the Tram/Fel towns were much more important to the game. There are just too many other options now. People don't necessarily feel as connected to the particular area they live as much as they used to.

Again, I think in this day and age of UO, city buff's are what drive loyalty to a particular city outside of those who RP. It would be awfully annoying if ALL my toons were bound to whatever buff was chosen by Brit or Skara (my keep is right on the border of the map Kirthag posted).

To me, this thread was a question of city buffs and how to make them better - a proposed 'territory system' would make this more limited.

 

[MalagAste]

@Merlin I agree. We don't need more reasons for folk to abandon community and for selfishness. We need more reasons to join communities, groups and guilds... Other than just PvP.

 

[CovenantX]

I have no problem going to the city stone each day, I just don't like sitting around waiting for the trade deal to wear off before I could refresh it's duration especially when pvp is going on, that is all. Allow it to be refreshed before it ends, and it would be fine.

It would be very much appreciated if it could be done, Kyronix, possibilities?

 

[Dot_Warner]

I have no problem going to the city stone each day, I just don't like sitting around waiting for the trade deal to wear off before I could refresh it's duration especially when pvp is going on, that is all. Allow it to be refreshed before it ends, and it would be fine.

It would be very much appreciated if it could be done, Kyronix, possibilities?

You're talking about the actual Trade Deal buff right? You want to be able to refresh it when its convenient for you, instead of waiting for it to wear off while you're doing other things?

This makes sense.

 

[CovenantX]

You're talking about the actual Trade Deal buff right? You want to be able to refresh it when its convenient for you, instead of waiting for it to wear off while you're doing other things?

This makes sense.

That is correct, the buff the governor sets allowing the citizen of the city to use. That's exactly what I'm asking for.

 

[Deraj]

I offer a disagreement with a number of people on the idea that a player should be able to choose the buff. The trade deal is the only gameplay mechanic that a governor has to impact the virtual world in a meaningful way; it provides a useful limitation that fosters a certain level of competition between players. Removing that limitation just waters down the whole system and makes the buff quite arbitrary. That being said, I do agree that there are ways it could be improved to make the buff more useful or accessible, but if you want UO to be an interesting experience, removing limitations that foster the spirit of competition will not help.

 

[Spock's Beard]

I've forgotten to even use mine for like a week or two now.

 

[MalagAste]

I offer a disagreement with a number of people on the idea that a player should be able to choose the buff. The trade deal is the only gameplay mechanic that a governor has to impact the virtual world in a meaningful way; it provides a useful limitation that fosters a certain level of competition between players. Removing that limitation just waters down the whole system and makes the buff quite arbitrary. That being said, I do agree that there are ways it could be improved to make the buff more useful or accessible, but if you want UO to be an interesting experience, removing limitations that foster the spirit of competition will not help.

A competition only means something if there is an outcome... there is no competition in being Governor save the original getting elected and that's mostly just a popularity contest. There is no "win" for being Governor or having more citizens than another town... choosing the trade deal doesn't "win" you anything at all. The act of not having one doesn't lose you anything either. In obscure towns like Jhelom... the only folk likely to be on that stone are the ones who worked to get the banners... Maybe on a very few shards some folk actually live there and care... but I think on most shards no one does.

Honestly other than paying for the buff what is the point of wanting to be the Governor anyway... I mean outside of just for RP reasons?

 

[Dot_Warner]

I offer a disagreement with a number of people on the idea that a player should be able to choose the buff. The trade deal is the only gameplay mechanic that a governor has to impact the virtual world in a meaningful way; it provides a useful limitation that fosters a certain level of competition between players. Removing that limitation just waters down the whole system and makes the buff quite arbitrary. That being said, I do agree that there are ways it could be improved to make the buff more useful or accessible, but if you want UO to be an interesting experience, removing limitations that foster the spirit of competition will not help.

Competition for competition's sake is pointless and in this instance, would be incredibly contrived.

If anything, the City Loyalty/Governor System should be as open and accessible as possible. Trade Deals are far easier to fund now, since the advent of the Trade Orders, and the auto renew feature keeps the deals alive (and not subject to an extremely psychotic timer)

There is no point to cities "competing" for citizens, especially not based on the Trade Deal. Allowing the citizen to choose the Deal they want makes the most sense and would eradicate the absurdity of only 3 deals being available. (Since only 3 ever seem to be requested by the "majority")

 

[Deraj]

...choosing the trade deal doesn't "win" you anything at all.

This statement is the main problem with your argument as well as your understanding of what defines a win in this particular system. A number of various buffs is available to the players, but only one can be selected at a time by a governor. Different players will want different buffs. The competition is whose desired buff gets to be the one that is selected - this is the win scenario. Competing interests will work against each other to reach their goal.

Honestly other than paying for the buff what is the point of wanting to be the Governor anyway... I mean outside of just for RP reasons?

Right now, the two primary functions of a governor is the trade deal, and RP council meetings. But if players can just select any buff they want, you would essentially be taking the governor out of the equation and making them even more pointless. Governors need to be more than just RP titles - they need to have a meaningful impact on gameplay. Taking them out of the trade deal equation makes both the governor and the trade deal completely arbitrary.

 

[Dot_Warner]

This statement is the main problem with your argument as well as your understanding of what defines a win in this particular system. A number of various buffs is available to the players, but only one can be selected at a time by a governor. Different players will want different buffs. The competition is whose desired buff gets to be the one that is selected - this is the win scenario. Competing interests will work against each other to reach their goal.

Right now, the two primary functions of a governor is the trade deal, and RP council meetings. But if players can just select any buff they want, you would essentially be taking the governor out of the equation and making them even more pointless. Governors need to be more than just RP titles - they need to have a meaningful impact on gameplay. Taking them out of the trade deal equation makes both the governor and the trade deal completely arbitrary.[/QUOTE]

The Trade Deals are already rather arbitrary, since they are at the sole discretion of the governors. Sure, a governor can ask their citizens which deal they want...sort of...using a ballot box, but most governors would be lucky to get 10 responses. Also, most governors would rather see all their citizens happy, not just a vocal few.

The governor system is purely an RP system, not a way to exert power or control over other players. While *I* believe it would be nice for governors to have a few more powers within their city boundaries, lording "power" over their citizens isn't the right tact.

The competition is whose desired buff gets to be the one that is selected - this is the win scenario. Competing interests will work against each other to reach their goal.

This line is just incredibly selfish and following this path can only hurt the system.

 

[Deraj]

Competition for competition's sake is pointless and in this instance, would be incredibly contrived.

I'm blown away by this statement. This is an MMO, and more importantly, a sandbox. Competition is the entire point.

There is no point to cities "competing" for citizens, especially not based on the Trade Deal. Allowing the citizen to choose the Deal they want makes the most sense and would eradicate the absurdity of only 3 deals being available. (Since only 3 ever seem to be requested by the "majority")

Cities do not compete for citizens because as it stands now, the system offers no rewards for population numbers. Governors choose deals based on how useful those deals are to themselves, their guilds, or their citizens. If you remove governors from the equation, the trade deals become arbitrary. And if we're getting rid of the governors, why even bother with the treasury? Why even bother making them contingent on being a citizen of anywhere, since I can get any deal in any town anyways? Shouldn't be able to just select a trade deal from my context menu from home as soon as I log in at no cost?

 

[Dot_Warner]

I'm blown away by this statement. This is an MMO, and more importantly, a sandbox. Competition is the entire point.

No, competition is not the point of an MMO, cooperative/social play is. If UO were an FPS, then sure it should be a competition.

Certain people choose to make aspects of UO competitive: bank account balances, rares collection, murder counts, VvV, etc. But nearly every time "competition" has been added to Tram, its failed miserably. (See the emptiness of Despise mini-game as an example.)

Cities do not compete for citizens because as it stands now, the system offers no rewards for population numbers. Governors choose deals based on how useful those deals are to themselves, their guilds, or their citizens. If you remove governors from the equation, the trade deals become arbitrary. And if we're getting rid of the governors, why even bother with the treasury? Why even bother making them contingent on being a citizen of anywhere, since I can get any deal in any town anyways? Shouldn't be able to just select a trade deal from my context menu from home as soon as I log in at no cost?

I'm fairly certain that "having to compete" for citizens would pretty much kill the governor system. I can't think of any governor I know on multiple shards that would be interested in that.

Trade Deals used to be nearly 100% funded by the governors, barring a few notable examples of large donations. It crippled the governor system since we were paying for Deals that other people were taking advantage of without bothering to contribute. Now, we have the Trade Orders which have managed to buoy the system along without bankrupting the governors...yet still most people don't bother to contribute to the stone. They just accept the deal and run off.

Allowing the citizen to choose their own deal would partially curb city hopping. Players could put their characters into the city that they feel an affinity for, or *gasp* fits their RP, instead of into the buff city du semaine that fits a transitory need.

Just because you want to feel like you've "won something" by "influencing" your city governor to select the buff that best suits you, doesn't mean the rest of us are interested in enabling egomania.

 

[Deraj]

The Trade Deals are already rather arbitrary, since they are at the sole discretion of the governors. Sure, a governor can ask their citizens which deal they want...sort of...using a ballot box, but most governors would be lucky to get 10 responses. Also, most governors would rather see all their citizens happy, not just a vocal few.

Arbitrary in what sense? The fact that the governor chooses a deal, and the fact that different players will have competing interests gives trade deals value as a system in a video game. A rational governor does want to see all his citizens happy, but not all of his citizens will, or should, be happy - this is the fuel for future competition.

The governor system is purely an RP system, not a way to exert power or control over other players. While *I* believe it would be nice for governors to have a few more powers within their city boundaries, lording "power" over their citizens isn't the right tact.

The governor system is an RP system, but not purely, as you stated. Trade deals give governors a role in game mechanics - meaning they affect the virtual world through actual gameplay. I don't know what you mean about governors lording their power over players

This line is just incredibly selfish and following this path can only hurt the system.

Have you forgotten that you are playing a video game? Video game systems shouldn't adhere to moral standards - we're not discussing how to distribute city services to real people, we're discussing how a video game system can better facilitate healthy player competition. In a game, some people get to win, and others must lose. If everybody wins, then there is no game. The governor system is far from perfect but it needs to be refined, not gutted.

 

[Dot_Warner]

Arbitrary in what sense? The fact that the governor chooses a deal, and the fact that different players will have competing interests gives trade deals value as a system in a video game. A rational governor does want to see all his citizens happy, but not all of his citizens will, or should, be happy - this is the fuel for future competition.

Competition that is neither required, nor desired, in the governor system. It. Simply. Isn't. Needed. No governor wants that headache.

The governor system is an RP system, but not purely, as you stated. Trade deals give governors a role in game mechanics - meaning they affect the virtual world through actual gameplay. I don't know what you mean about governors lording their power over players

According to the devs and the EMs, the governor system s purely RP-driven. The buffs are small enough that most players don't give a damn about them, so their effect is marginal. Sure, some people might build a suit designed to capitalize on a specific buff, but they could easily compensate with magical fish pies as well then.

Since a governor chooses the deal, and no citizen has any say in it whatsoever, a governor could be an ass and choose one of the more pointless Deals. Now, would many governors act that way, no, but if you inject e-peen-style "competition" where none should exist, then.. well.. I'm sure you've seen the interwebs...

Have you forgotten that you are playing a video game? Video game systems shouldn't adhere to moral standards - we're not discussing how to distribute city services to real people, we're discussing how a video game system can better facilitate healthy player competition. In a game, some people get to win, and others must lose. If everybody wins, then there is no game. The governor system is far from perfect but it needs to be refined, not gutted.

A video game isn't all about competition, its about FUN. And no, a win/lose dynamic doesn't need to permeate every aspect of a game. UO already has plenty geared towards that.

 

[Deraj]

No, competition is not the point of an MMO, cooperative/social play is. If UO were an FPS, then sure it should be a competition.

Certain people choose to make aspects of UO competitive: bank account balances, rares collection, murder counts, VvV, etc. But nearly every time "competition" has been added to Tram, its failed miserably. (See the emptiness of Despise mini-game as an example.)

Is Despise a failure because it's competitive, or because it's just a failed design?

I'm fairly certain that "having to compete" for citizens would pretty much kill the governor system. I can't think of any governor I know on multiple shards that would be interested in that.

Again, towns do not have to compete for citizens. There is no reward for "most citizens".

Trade Deals used to be nearly 100% funded by the governors, barring a few notable examples of large donations. It crippled the governor system since we were paying for Deals that other people were taking advantage of without bothering to contribute. Now, we have the Trade Orders which have managed to buoy the system along without bankrupting the governors...yet still most people don't bother to contribute to the stone. They just accept the deal and run off.

I'm happy that this system was added as another way to fund trade deals, but I don't see what this has to do with anything.

Allowing the citizen to choose their own deal would partially curb city hopping. Players could put their characters into the city that they feel an affinity for, or *gasp* fits their RP, instead of into the buff city du semaine that fits a transitory need.

Or, maybe the town system can be expanded to make players more invested in their towns. Or maybe the players must face a cost for leaving a city. Or maybe a thousand other possible ways to add depth and challenge without making the governors a bizarre, pointless side show.

Just because you want to feel like you've "won something" by "influencing" your city governor to select the buff that best suits you, doesn't mean the rest of us are interested in enabling egomania.

I see we're at the stage of the discussion where we start making assumptions about my character.

Competition that is neither required, nor desired, in the governor system. It. Simply. Isn't. Needed. No governor wants that headache.

Huh? How can you say this? You mean the system where players face off every 6 months for votes in sometimes very tense elections? Competition is the essence of this system, as well as politics in general.

According to the devs and the EMs, the governor system s purely RP-driven. The buffs are small enough that most players don't give a damn about them, so their effect is marginal. Sure, some people might build a suit designed to capitalize on a specific buff, but they could easily compensate with magical fish pies as well then.

Yes, it is meant to facilitate RP, but the trade deal is a gameplay mechanic, no matter how you want to slice it. It is a resource that players do compete over. A lot of players don't care about them, you are right about that, yet there are others that will go above and beyond to get the buff they want. I would like to see more depth added to trade deals to give them more value.

Since a governor chooses the deal, and no citizen has any say in it whatsoever, a governor could be an ass and choose one of the more pointless Deals. Now, would many governors act that way, no, but if you inject e-peen-style "competition" where none should exist, then.. well.. I'm sure you've seen the interwebs...

Yes, that is the beauty of it. These are the kinds of twists and turns that make the game more interesting. And if people are that concerned about a buff and the governor isn't getting it, they can try to oust him in the next election.

A video game isn't all about competition, its about FUN. And no, a win/lose dynamic doesn't need to permeate every aspect of a game. UO already has plenty geared towards that.

Another bizarre statement. Competition is a fun and enjoyable experience. We're talking about the governor system, a political system at which competition is at the heart. It absolutely should put players at competing interests and compel them to find ways to outwit their opponents to secure the desired resources. I love roleplaying, but governors should not be limited to simply RPing with an EM once a month and pretending they influence the virtual world in a meaningful way. I want to see the governor system expanded and refined, not degraded or subtracted from.

 

[Dot_Warner]

Is Despise a failure because it's competitive, or because it's just a failed design?

Ignoring the Pokémon aspect of Despise for the sake of argument, I would say that the reason the dungeon redesign failed here was indeed due to "competition." Since players can detrimentally effect another player's leashed pet while training, the system fails due to griefing...or put another way, PvP competition that the vast majority of players have zero interest in.

Again, towns do not have to compete for citizens. There is no reward for "most citizens".

Nor should they.

Or, maybe the town system can be expanded to make players more invested in their towns. Or maybe the players must face a cost for leaving a city. Or maybe a thousand other possible ways to add depth and challenge without making the governors a bizarre, pointless side show.

Invested in their towns yes, needlessly "competitive" for the sake of it? No.

It'd be nice if governors could request changes that are potentially unique to their town or shard. Sadly, a cookie cutter approach has been chosen to requests/upgrades.

If we want to throw competition into things, it needs to me opt-in, not mandatory. Gov. Kittie of Moonglow (@Lady Kittie) on GL suggested a City Champion tournament...that'd be a great way to have competition, although without some dev time to create a framework to easily facilitate it, it would be a nightmare to efficiently and effectively pull off.

Huh? How can you say this? You mean the system where players face off every 6 months for votes in sometimes very tense elections? Competition is the essence of this system, as well as politics in general.

That's the election, not the day-to-day running of the system. Two weeks of structured competition every six months makes sense to acquire the position. "Competition" over the Trade Deals...notsomuch. Burn out would ensue. Already, some shards have one or more governorless towns because nobody bothered to run.

Yes, it is meant to facilitate RP, but the trade deal is a gameplay mechanic, no matter how you want to slice it. It is a resource that players do compete over. A lot of players don't care about them, you are right about that, yet there are others that will go above and beyond to get the buff they want. I would like to see more depth added to trade deals to give them more value.

More depth I agree on. I'd rather see a "buff" of some kind specific to each city that is unchangeable. i.e Minoc gets a +10 Exceptional chance for smithing, Yew +10 exceptional on bows etc... or the chance at a special property. The + amount could even scale based on city loyalty ranking.

But arbitrary "competition" over what the Deal buff is set to? No thank you. Not enough players care. I think you'd be hard pressed to find many governors who'd be interested in such a "competition" in the first place.

Yes, that is the beauty of it. These are the kinds of twists and turns that make the game more interesting. And if people are that concerned about a buff and the governor isn't getting it, they can try to oust him in the next election.

They could, but since not enough players care about the buffs currently...

Right now, those who are most vocal just want *a buff* active, and the RPers mainly want to see governors running some kind of event with regularity.

Another bizarre statement. Competition is a fun and enjoyable experience. We're talking about the governor system, a political system at which competition is at the heart. It absolutely should put players at competing interests and compel them to find ways to outwit their opponents to secure the desired resources. I love roleplaying, but governors should not be limited to simply RPing with an EM once a month and pretending they influence the virtual world in a meaningful way. I want to see the governor system expanded and refined, not degraded or subtracted from.

Adding choice isn't going to degrade or subtract from the system. Adding in arbitrary "competition" to a part of the system that doesn't need it will disinterest more people than it would gain. Not everyone enjoys "competition" in every aspect of their play, some just want to log in and have fun - not constantly fight for every scrap.

A +5 buff isn't much in the way of influence, nor, honestly, should it be. A governor isn't limited to just RPing with the EMs once a month, that's just the somewhat mandatory interaction. If they really want to influence their city, or their shard, they can create their own plotlines with the PEC's help.

Something should be done to improve the buff is to require those who use it to actually do something to get it, instead of passively awarding what should be a luxury as if it were welfare.

 

[MissEcho]

My view, make it simple:

1. Governor pays 1 mil from town funds per week to 'activate' buffs.
2. All players can choose what buff they want.
3. All buffs cost players a 30k fee (per day) to maintain, fee going to the town they pick the buff in. (nice gold sink)
4. If they are a citizen of the town the buffs fee is 10k per day. (encourages citizenship and contributes to 'their' city)

If it was 'as above' ALL my characters would use a buff every time they went out, some in towns they are citizens of and some in the town I am governor of or for a town where they want to 'support' the current governor. In all likelihood that would amount to a minimum donation of me to the city (cities) of around 3-500k per week, probably MORE just from MY account/s. At the moment I don't use buffs on 95% of my characters and only rarely on the others. I think most people would use a buff if it was a simple matter of going to the stone and getting the one they wanted. Having to check who has what buff 'available' in what town each week is a pain and just another grind.

If it was 'as above' I could factor in the 'buff' when suit building, which would also guarantee the gold gold sink as my 'mages' would have say the sdi buff allowed for, warrior suits the ssi etc.