COMMUNITY - FORUMS - ANGELICA GENERAL
How were the kings/queen of the server chosen?
+0

I'm trying to gather as much information about the game as I wanted to know how the kings of the NA-West server (Angelica) were chosen? I imagine there would be many willing to be king or queen of such an incredible game but only six were chosen. How was that choice? based on the most expensive nobility packages? Thank you all


1/3/2018 2:27:26 PM #1
+12

They bought their pledge. That's how they were chosen


United we stand. Divided we fall. Friend Code: ABF605 Click my Banner to find out more

1/3/2018 2:27:51 PM #2
+6

Other than the free kingdom on NA E all titles were purchased via Kickstarter or through the store.

No one was picked lottery style they (we) ponied up the capital to allow SBS to build the game and became nobility for our trouble.

Now to get to the next most likely question. All items and titles purchased can and likely wI’ll be lost over the course of the game. Folks who do not wish to take a chance on SBS can wait till launch and earn a title.

1/3/2018 2:44:49 PM #3
+0

I understand the side of the company no doubt! but as a player beats a certain sadness because the capital ($) that favored certain people. But the game allowed for that loss of status and a turnover in the positions, even with a time for it to occur. because to gain in strength by means of battles would be something very difficult to imagine.


1/3/2018 2:53:14 PM #4
+8

Posted By Vuulk at 08:44 AM - Wed Jan 03 2018

I understand the side of the company no doubt! but as a player beats a certain sadness because the capital ($) that favored certain people. But the game allowed for that loss of status and a turnover in the positions, even with a time for it to occur. because to gain in strength by means of battles would be something very difficult to imagine.

The general idea isn’t to show favoritism based on available funding. To design the world there needed to be kings, dukes, counts, mayors, rich merchants, Gentry and so on. Now way way way back prior to this version on the website when the game had little more to show for it than Caspian’s exuberance there was an idea of a static start. This went by the wayside pretty quick as the idea of the players being in charge of the worlds fate kicked in.

So why use a npc to rule a kingdom when a player making laws and backroom deals creates more drama and more opportunity for story telling?

Then naturally the more coveted positions and titles the more it would cost to start there. This allows SBS to build the game world and actually have a product to show when(if) they decide to get a mainstream publisher.

As a side effect of the 10k price tag of a monarchy those who shell out big have a lot to lose. Those folks and their subordinate dukes have been the leaders of the community building and the leading source of drama both good and bad. So while it may seem like those with means sit atop the game world for now they likely would have gotten there anyway since they are the most invested with time and community building anyway.

1/3/2018 3:18:07 PM #5
+0

I managed to understand what you said, for what little I saw are people who really spent a lot of time in the community, are dedicated and game or even launched, certainly would get high positions in the game without the help of money, but what I hope there is a turnover after years of play.


1/3/2018 3:50:00 PM #6
+7

Posted By Vuulk at 09:18 AM - Wed Jan 03 2018

I managed to understand what you said, for what little I saw are people who really spent a lot of time in the community, are dedicated and game or even launched, certainly would get high positions in the game without the help of money, but what I hope there is a turnover after years of play.

years? The general community expectation is the majority of the starting kings, queens, and dukes will be de-throned in the first 6-12 months. (on all servers not just this one)

the expectation is a large % of the counts ands mayors will be replaced thru invasion or coup during that same time frame as well.

The devs have been very clear and the community has taken to heart.

The question isn't IF you will lose your title, the question is how long can you hold on to it before it happens.

1/3/2018 3:54:16 PM #7
+7

Yeah, the running joke so to speak is that the people that bought those titles basically bought the opportunity to be the first to have the experience of losing those titles.

What they do get for their money though is the opportunity to help form the Lore surrounding those Kingdoms, Duchies and Counties. Much of that may persist beyond their own particular rulership.


1/3/2018 5:22:54 PM #8
+9

I understand completeness, I felt better with all this information. It seems like the whole game is going to be sensational, I look forward to all these takes.


1/5/2018 1:45:40 PM #9
+2

Posted By 1mmaculateDeception at 07:54 AM - Wed Jan 03 2018

Yeah, the running joke so to speak is that the people that bought those titles basically bought the opportunity to be the first to have the experience of losing those titles.

What they do get for their money though is the opportunity to help form the Lore surrounding those Kingdoms, Duchies and Counties. Much of that may persist beyond their own particular rulership.

I suppose I always knew but just never fully realized how likely they are to lose their titles and how fast. It's going to be brilliant to hear about when it happens.


1/17/2018 10:34:34 PM #10
+0

I dont know if they will all lose their titles in 6-12 months but some will for sure especially when established gaming groups like Goon Squad who have enough members to fill out an entire kingdom really start getting into the game. SBS have also said that over throwing a king or queen isnt going to be as simple as killing them and taking their stuff. Even if you have the man power to do that making enforceable laws is an actual mechanic that is going to require players to navigate the political hierarchy to utilize. So basically even if you take someone's kingdom doesn't mean you are the ruling king and without the title which you need a casus beli to obtain you cant make laws. With out laws you can effectively enforce anything and your territory be comes a lawless zone and will suffer massive attrition as people have no way to protect what is theirs by any means other than by the sword and not everyone can be a good fighter.


2/4/2018 8:53:49 PM #11
+2

Overthrowing the kingdom is easy, keeping it is the hard part. As Kazz pointed out, if you rule badly (even for the ones that bought their titles at the beginning), people will move away or plot with other powerful forces so that they can be ruled better.


Angelica Server (NA- W) Friend Code: 352AE0

2/5/2018 9:10:18 AM #12
+2

What BakaNeko75 said. I expect that those best at destroying other characters and taking their stuff are not the best at running governments and getting stuff made. Perhaps serfdom will seem an attractive solution for them (assuming a king could order it), but I don't suppose that any PCs will be amenable to that solution.


2/5/2018 9:51:55 PM #13
+0

I actually don't even want to think about the groups that get together just to pillage other people, making themselves bandits. Typically, those groups aren't as well armed, so the government would have to get their forces together to run them off/kill them.


Angelica Server (NA- W) Friend Code: 352AE0

3/5/2018 5:36:26 PM #14
+2

Posted By BakaNeko75 at 1:51 PM - Mon Feb 05 2018

I actually don't even want to think about the groups that get together just to pillage other people, making themselves bandits. Typically, those groups aren't as well armed, so the government would have to get their forces together to run them off/kill them.

The Barons will deal with the bandits quickly. large bandit groups that could possibly take on individual Barons will find themselves found quickly and attacked by multiple Barons. Small Bandit groups will get through the cracks but will never be able to stay in one area and raid over and over. I doubt many leaders will be toppled so soon. Most community leaders have the support of many people. It would take a huge uprising to take down a Duke or a Monarch. Even Counts will not be so easily replaced. Only weak kingdoms will have such rampant Deviance. Ashland and Blackheart on NA-W will be surprisingly stable....until they aren't :)

3/5/2018 5:43:09 PM #15
+2

Posted By TheCoz at 11:36 AM - Mon Mar 05 2018

Posted By BakaNeko75 at 1:51 PM - Mon Feb 05 2018

I actually don't even want to think about the groups that get together just to pillage other people, making themselves bandits. Typically, those groups aren't as well armed, so the government would have to get their forces together to run them off/kill them.

The Barons will deal with the bandits quickly. large bandit groups that could possibly take on individual Barons will find themselves found quickly and attacked by multiple Barons. Small Bandit groups will get through the cracks but will never be able to stay in one area and raid over and over. I doubt many leaders will be toppled so soon. Most community leaders have the support of many people. It would take a huge uprising to take down a Duke or a Monarch. Even Counts will not be so easily replaced. Only weak kingdoms will have such rampant Deviance. Ashland and Blackheart on NA-W will be surprisingly stable....until they aren't :)

Even the largest and most well supported kingdoms currently will be a small minority in their own territory (among mix of npcs and players) at launch... so we shall see, I expect some amount of instability in all kingdoms for at least a little while after launch, we'll have lots of fires to put out in our own kingdoms before we even have to go looking from drama with the other kingdoms around us.


Log in to post