An idea to discourage occupation of important positions by innactive players

[pcw27]

It's widely hated for players to attain a high position then become inactive and only log in to keep their position. With no turnover of positions of power the game becomes stagnant.

I thought of a solution.

What if it becomes easier for an infiltrator to wound someone when they've stayed in the same region for a long period of time. It makes sense that the longer you're in one place the easier it is for an infiltrator to observe your guard and look for lapses in security. Furthermore the guards become increasingly bored and likely consider the chance of an attack more and more remote.

This will encourage players to do more if they want to hold a high office. Even if they just move around a little it makes it possible for them to run into rogue hordes or even the front lines of combat. Plus it might just remind them of all the possibilities there are in the game that they're letting go to waste.

[Indirik]

That sounds an awful lot like a punishment for not logging in every turn. I don't think we will be doing this.

[Eirikr]

It's not as bad as I was expecting after I actually read it. (For some reason I read Indirik's comment first... drawn to how short it was.)

Tweak it somewhat and maybe we'd get to something reasonable:

• Make the chance increase weekly or some rather large period of time so it's reasonable to assume that character is basically a vegetable. (Assuming this isn't what you meant already.)
• Reset the counter with any important action: Moving, holding court, building recruitment centers, purchasing food... anything that could reasonably shackle a lord to a region for a while.
• Add in siege protection for when players are stuck defending a city for extended periods of time. Check for a mobile CS number over a certain threshold (3000 CS is pretty safe, most realms would have that and nobody would really be able to resist a city takeover army with that little anyway) and reset the count if it's above that number.

Though, even with those fixes, there are two problems:

• This pretty explicitly goes against the "play at your own speed" ideal that allows any level of activity. We'd first have to cross the hurdle of adding "but you only get out what you put in".
• To accommodate the above rule and avoid forcing people to log in every day, you have to make the impact fairly small or give a wide berth before it kicks in... Both of which mean high amounts of work, minimal impact.

[pcw27]

That sounds an awful lot like a punishment for not logging in every turn. I don't think we will be doing this.

No it's a punishment for logging in every turn just to sit on your titles. There's a reason people lose titles after a certain period of inactivity. Logging in now and then to keep your title but doing nothing isn't playing at your own pace, it's not playing at all.

It's not as bad as I was expecting after I actually read it. (For some reason I read Indirik's comment first... drawn to how short it was.)

Tweak it somewhat and maybe we'd get to something reasonable:

• Make the chance increase weekly or some rather large period of time so it's reasonable to assume that character is basically a vegetable. (Assuming this isn't what you meant already.)
• Reset the counter with any important action: Moving, holding court, building recruitment centers, purchasing food... anything that could reasonably shackle a lord to a region for a while.
• Add in siege protection for when players are stuck defending a city for extended periods of time. Check for a mobile CS number over a certain threshold (3000 CS is pretty safe, most realms would have that and nobody would really be able to resist a city takeover army with that little anyway) and reset the count if it's above that number.

Though, even with those fixes, there are two problems:

• This pretty explicitly goes against the "play at your own speed" ideal that allows any level of activity. We'd first have to cross the hurdle of adding "but you only get out what you put in".
• To accommodate the above rule and avoid forcing people to log in every day, you have to make the impact fairly small or give a wide berth before it kicks in... Both of which mean high amounts of work, minimal impact.

I always intended for it to take a while to make a difference. Maybe it should only take effect if they've been stationary so long that they would have lost titles if they weren't logging in.

The siege system sounds a little complicated. I can't recall the last time any region was besieged for more then a week. Players can compensate by performing police actions during the siege.

[Indirik]

No it's a punishment for logging in every turn just to sit on your titles. There's a reason people lose titles after a certain period of inactivity. Logging in now and then to keep your title but doing nothing isn't playing at your own pace, it's not playing at all.

It's a punishment for anyone who doesn't leave the region on a regular basis. Which includes people who only log in occasionally. Therefore this is a punishment for people who only log in occasionally. Whether you intend it that way or not, that's what you've done.

In addition, you have equated "not moving from one region" with "not generating fun for everyone else". These two things are not necessarily related.

The siege system sounds a little complicated. I can't recall the last time any region was besieged for more then a week. Players can compensate by performing police actions during the siege.

It's way to complex, hard to understand, and bug-prone. No way anything like that will ever get implemented. We want the game to be simpler and easier to understand, not more opaque, complex, and full of hidden penalties.

In fact, this entire idea is never going to get implemented in any form.

[pcw27]

It's a punishment for anyone who doesn't leave the region on a regular basis. Which includes people who only log in occasionally. Therefore this is a punishment for people who only log in occasionally. Whether you intend it that way or not, that's what you've done.

Its a punishment if they log in occasionally and don't do anything. If they log in occasionally and do something they get no penalty.

Actually scrap all of this, why not make determining inactivity based on doing any action what so ever rather then just log ins?

[Indirik]

Its a punishment if they log in occasionally and don't do anything. If they log in occasionally and do something they get no penalty.

So someone who logs in, holds court, then logs out, twice a day, for a year, gets no penalty.

But someone who logs in, sends a dozen letters every turn, but takes no actual *action*, gets penalized, even if the result of his sending letters is an amazingly fun war.

Your proposed is broken at its most basic level.

There is no point in discussing this.

[Eirikr]

So someone who logs in, holds court, then logs out, twice a day, for a year, gets no penalty.

But someone who logs in, sends a dozen letters every turn, but takes no actual *action*, gets penalized, even if the result of his sending letters is an amazingly fun war.

Your proposed is broken at its most basic level.

There is no point in discussing this.

What about setting it to accept letters as well? That's not difficult, is it?

Though, I still agree with the thought that it's too much work for something that would need to be very unobtrusive.

[Indirik]

What about setting it to accept letters as well?

So, as long as you autopause and do anything at all, then it doesn't affect you?

IOW: as long as you don't autopause, you have nothing to worry about. But once you autopause, you're infiltrator-bait?

[pcw27]

So someone who logs in, holds court, then logs out, twice a day, for a year, gets no penalty.

But someone who logs in, sends a dozen letters every turn, but takes no actual *action*, gets penalized, even if the result of his sending letters is an amazingly fun war.

Your proposed is broken at its most basic level.

There is no point in discussing this.

Umm, you keep breaking it by putting words in my mouth. Sending letters counts as doing something doesn't it? Why would you think I meant otherwise?

[Indirik]

Umm, you keep breaking it by putting words in my mouth.

I'm not breaking this proposal. It was fatally flawed from the beginning. I'm simply pointing out the gaping holes.

Sending letters counts as doing something doesn't it? Why would you think I meant otherwise?

You stated "...based on doing any action what so ever...". Since you didn't define what "doing any action" meant, I chose to take it to mean that they actually, you know, *did* something. Sending a letter is not within my definition of actually doing something.

Now that you've defined "doing any action what so ever" as hitting Play for their character and then clicking any link at all, you've defined a completely useless feature. Someone could log in every day, or maybe every other day, and hold a court. Or send a single letter (I'm assuming that a private letter counts, too, so no one at all would ever have to see them, really). Or maybe send gold to their family. Or spend an hour at the academy. And in doing so contribute absolutely nothing to the realm or the game, and be 100% immune to this particular mechanic that is supposed to penalize this exact behavior.

So what's the point of doing all this tracking of activity (which, btw, is protected by the Inalienable Rights) if it clearly and obviously does absolutely nothing at all to target those characters you think need to have surprise back surgery? The only people that will be affected will be those who don't even click the Play link for their characters. (Which, coincidentally, we already have a mechanic to deal with.) Unless, of course, you think there's a significant portion of players who log in, and then go down the character list and click Play > Family > Play > Family > Play > Family...

There is no possible way to make this mechanic work in a manner that:

1) Is simple to define
2) Is easy to explain
3) Is easy to program
4) Is resistant to bugs
5) Actually does what it proposes to do
6) Does anything useful

Look, I tried to be polite and quick in derailing this discussion before it ever got started. I tried several times:

I don't think we will be doing this.

In fact, this entire idea is never going to get implemented in any form.

There is no point in discussing this.

Now I will be blunt:
There was never any chance that this was going to be considered.
There is exactly a 0.00% chance of it ever getting implemented.
This will never, ever be considered for implementation.
This request is a non-starter.
This is an ex-discussion.