The idea is this; clans would lose tribute when their members are killed outside of the Arena and not when guards are killed or badges destroyed. The formula would be the victim's level * the victim's clan rank * some constant value. This would allow for clans to be destroyed still but not while no one is around. It does have the problem still that people can just log off. To counter that, I may have to have clans lose tribute on a daily basis as an upkeep cost to make sure they log on to keep their clan alive.

1 Keep the old system 9
2 Use the new system, with upkeep 10
3 Use the new system, without upkeep 7
Votes cast: 26

Comments: Post New Refresh Comments

singko Post Reply
So, if the lowest rank kills the highest rank of another clan the damage delt will be less. Taking away the advantage of having all low rank members. If damage delt was decided by the rank of the person who died, then everyone would want their members to be low rank, nah what i mean?!?!

Demi Post Reply
This may be slightly oblique to the tribute discussion,

but here may be the only forum for clan talk atm. While the tribute and badge issues are quite a thing, it seems to me that some of the clan razing can be deterred by the following: Allow ONLY rival clan members the ability to attack another clan. ONLY the Warlord may make an act of war against another clan (by an authorized command). ONLY members of the attacking clan can take part in the attack.

It may be a bit of work, but add 'no entry' flags to all chars unless they are a member of the attacking clan.
Make the clanholds and grounds 'no summon' in all cases.

Consider that 'clan wars' should be just that - between clans - and not rogues. This will better help build a
rich history of lore and tradition. And obviously, this wil dampen the destruction of clans for no reason at all,
and allow the clans to grow into something that adds value to the game.

      Drey Post Reply
      1) Restricting attacks to clan-only prevents players with a beef against a clan from attacking it for revenge. This is why any time I've tried to make this change, it's been removed.

2) If all it takes is for a warlord to declare war and there are no penalties besides, clans will always be at war.

            Demi Post Reply
            (1) My thinking is that the one who founded a clan had a vision and went thru considerable investment and
task(albiet MUD work :) to make the clan. It seems to me that anyone with a beef should found a clan to
attack it's neighbor. The illusion here is that (as in history) no one or two people attacked anything at all.
At least a clan attacking another lends some sense of structure and gives the impression that a clan has
some stature and mass.

(2) I Never said no penalties, and the more the better, lol, but let the Warlord assume rightful responsibility
for making a war decision.

singko Post Reply
I think its a good idea to at least take the tribute loss off of badges, or just make clans easier to keep up, giving every clan hold an UBER mob that walks around looking for intruders. This mob would be a constant as in never looses strength from rev loss. To at least make the final blow to a clan, or the only blow to a clan a more difficult one. I dont like the upkeep idea. I dont like the pk rev loss idea, but i am still voting against the old way, just because id like to see some change for the better,and because i am tired of the current system.

      Drey Post Reply
      Upkeep is necessary to keep a clan from surviving simply because everyone sits at safe all day long.

Removing mob tribute loss is necessary to prevent cowardly middle-of-the-night clan destruction.

Removing badge tribute loss is necessary to prevent cowardly we-bought-a-billion-badges clan destruction.

Resistance is futile.

Demi Post Reply
Referencing: .... clans would lose tribute when their members are killed outside of the Arena....Does this new system consider that all those who are in a clan are not necessarily the same strength/skill level. What will (if at all) dissuade the "toughests" of the usurping force from
repeated pkills of the same clan members incessantly? Not whining, but if the 'less than super" clan members are "grazed upon" mercilessly, how long will that char want to play along. If you look at this a step further, that weaker clan member might offer his/her self up for slaying, in a deal of some sort, with the attacking force. Another point may be that, rather than fellow clanners defending a "less than super" clan member, that lesser member may be simply cast off - although loyal in all regards. True, life is tough, but this IS a game with (hopefully) other than a
pure PK setting, ala four rooms of walls and sand floors for gladiator-fighting - and little more.

The offered system seems (on the surface) to be headed in the right direction, but hopefully more effort will be made towards the "total playing experience", not just a "slay land" for the handful of the "super strong".

      Drey Post Reply
      There's no real way to determine PK worth of a foe. Even the PK Rating system is basically meaningless junk. Tribute loss would likely be based on rank of victim, with some changes to what ranks can do to actually make the ranks worth a little more.

Orta Post Reply
Is there a way that you can tag a badge that has been taken from someone's corpse... that way the only badge's that can do damage to a clan are the ones that were taken in battle, not purchased and horded until a pissed off person wants to use all of the badges to take down their former clan... You could also punish the people that do that, cause it's just weak gameplay.

      Drey Post Reply
      Might be able to.

carla Post Reply
It really doesn't matter what is done, a twink, is a twink, is a twink. If someone wants to take out a clan they are going to find a way to do so. From the inside, from the outside, if you want clan destruction to stop then code it that a clan cannot be destoyed at all until all the clan halls are full. What the heck is the point of destroying a clan if there are others avaiable to open. PK mud or no. It's just STUPID.

      Drey Post Reply
      It's been considered to modify the system so even when a clan is at 0 its not destroyed -- it just has no control over a clan hold.

Maulok Post Reply
I like the new system plus upkeep, but I'm thinking that it may be a good idea to make higher clan ranks more desireable to have/give, as well. With the equation (victim's level * clan rank * constant) for loss of revenue, the clans may get around higher losses of revenue by keeping all members as initiates. It may be a good idea remove certain privileges from lower-ranking members, or have some way that higher-ranking members would have more worth to the clan, to coax warlords to occasionally promote members. Just an idea.

      Drey Post Reply
      I'm thinking of something revolving around who has access to badges at the least and maybe as drastic as who can actually altar in the clan . . .

Thri Post Reply
Heres one problem. Lets say Upkeep is 5mill gold a day. So Joe, the warlord, goldruns 5 mill a day (about an hours worth) just to keep his clan up. But the moment someone attacks, he logs out, thus escapes clan loss. All he has to do is goldrun for that upkeep price each day (or keep several days worth in reserve) and log in, and pay the upkeep costs and his clan is safe from desctruction.

In theory this is a good idea, but people can just log of the moment theyre under attack and just wait till the attackers are gone. Even regardless of the upkeep. You can always gold run when people aren't around. To prevent abuse (i can think of several people who have clans, or have had clans recently that would do this just out of reflex) SOME sort of damage has to be dealt while theyre not there, otherwise the warlord can just chicken-shit around the whole time.

One idea to combat this, is have other ways to damage the clan. Not just revenue. Heres my idea..

Clan Controled Areas. Ok, a clan, can gain control of say.. Ofcol, and impose a tax on the mobs there. Each update for this, taxes are collected, these taxes goto the revenue. (this could also allow for higher upkeeps) However, Joe-bob, Knight of a enemy clan, goes into Ofcol and kills everyone. Well, seeing how these poor souls of ofcol have to keep their pockets filled, the Taxes to the clan lessen, or can even become non-existant.

Oh, and if you have the clans cant be hurt when no ones on thing (as people have talked about for well over a year now) Might as well go all the way, and make the doors un-openable/locked so you can't loot the pits when theyre not there either.


      Drey Post Reply
      Controlling an area for tax revenue is right out. I see no reason to gives clans a way to get even MORE money. The logging out bit is better and could be offset by things like an automatic fine if you log out while someone is in your clanhold. The entire clan system relies on people not being twinks anyhow.

            Thri Post Reply
            Ok, how about remove the Tribute command in addition to it. Thus, clans would have to advance and take over territory to survive and gain power.

                  Drey Post Reply
                  "UD Risk" doesn't interest me personally.