PDA

View Full Version : Choosing kingdom leaders(kings)...


LiL_NightFall
08-31-2002, 03:54 AM
I don't think that choosing kingdom rulers on a forum is the best way to go. There needs to be some sort of system to choose a leader, or it will suck the way it did on 2k1...

There should be a quest or something to actually become the ruler. Like the way a person becomes leader of a clan. A person who wants to rule could get 10 supporters and the 10 of them would have to complete a quest through the leadership of the possible future ruler.

Or just set up a system where the actual players choose their leader ingame and can revolt or overthrow the leader and replace them.

On 2k1 we had the same boring leaders day in and day out, half the time they weren't even on. The fact that they can't lose the power goes to their heads and they just dictate everything. Kings are not dictators, so having some semi-permenant king is unrealistic and VERY boring.

If you don't like my suggestion that's fine, but please come up with a better system then: "I'll pick the leader for each kingdom". Kingdoms don't develop that way. A king should be able to lose his title in five seconds if he doesn't do what is necessary to keep it, including gaining the respect and loyalty of the people.

MilkyWay0016
08-31-2002, 04:41 AM
Originally posted by LiL_NightFall

Or just set up a system where the actual players choose their leader ingame and can revolt or overthrow the leader and replace them.


We voted on the king, choosing them in game doesn't make any difference than out of game. The system is good as it is, and what are you talking about 2k1 having a stupid system, I agree but the 2k2 one is different so that was totally irrevelant. And if kingdom leaders need to go though some monster 'quest' we'll have all these stupid leaders who like to fight and not RP.

Pith
08-31-2002, 05:01 AM
Originally posted by MilkyWay0016


We voted on the king, choosing them in game doesn't make any difference than out of game. The system is good as it is, and what are you talking about 2k1 having a stupid system, I agree but the 2k2 one is different so that was totally irrevelant. And if kingdom leaders need to go though some monster 'quest' we'll have all these stupid leaders who like to fight and not RP.
voting in game is better bc:
1.more people votes
2.not everyone have a forum account
3.more rp like.like a election

GryffonDurime
08-31-2002, 07:09 AM
Pith, over 100 people voted in each poll on the forum. Have you seen that many people on 2k2 lately at ANY time? Nah.

Pith
08-31-2002, 07:48 AM
Originally posted by GryffonDurime
Pith, over 100 people voted in each poll on the forum. Have you seen that many people on 2k2 lately at ANY time? Nah.
no but having 20 people on graal 2002 doesn't mean that it is the total # of player that plays it.in a 3 day span there are probably 5 times more people(unique ones.that means like 500 different guys) than here and it took about 3 days on the forum to get 100 votes and people were begging people to vote

_0AfTeRsHoCk0_
08-31-2002, 08:09 AM
It's too late to change it now, and besides, if you hate your King in game, you can elect a new one at any time.

marrico
08-31-2002, 08:17 AM
Originally posted by Pith

no but having 20 people on graal 2002 doesn't mean that it is the total # of player that plays it.in a 3 day span there are probably 5 times more people(unique ones.that means like 500 different guys) than here and it took about 3 days on the forum to get 100 votes and people were begging people to vote

Lets review your post....you say there is 20 people on graal2002, then you say in three days there will be 5 times that much (which is 100) but your math skills are far behind everyones elses I'm guessing so you say 500. But you do say it took 3 days to get 100 votes on the forums, if you would have done your math right you would have seen that it is equal voting on the forums or in game.

-Damix

Pith
08-31-2002, 08:32 AM
Originally posted by marrico


Lets review your post....you say there is 20 people on graal2002, then you say in three days there will be 5 times that much (which is 100) but your math skills are far behind everyones elses I'm guessing so you say 500. But you do say it took 3 days to get 100 votes on the forums, if you would have done your math right you would have seen that it is equal voting on the forums or in game.

-Damix
hi.use your head.
1.There are currently 20 people on graal
2.That doesn't mean that they play all day .they could play like a hour and stop and other players will come after they left.thank you .now you can shove that post up your butt

Zurkiba
08-31-2002, 10:59 AM
Originally posted by LiL_NightFall
I don't think that choosing kingdom rulers on a forum is the best way to go. There needs to be some sort of system to choose a leader, or it will suck the way it did on 2k1...

There should be a quest or something to actually become the ruler. Like the way a person becomes leader of a clan. A person who wants to rule could get 10 supporters and the 10 of them would have to complete a quest through the leadership of the possible future ruler.

Or just set up a system where the actual players choose their leader ingame and can revolt or overthrow the leader and replace them.

On 2k1 we had the same boring leaders day in and day out, half the time they weren't even on. The fact that they can't lose the power goes to their heads and they just dictate everything. Kings are not dictators, so having some semi-permenant king is unrealistic and VERY boring.

If you don't like my suggestion that's fine, but please come up with a better system then: "I'll pick the leader for each kingdom". Kingdoms don't develop that way. A king should be able to lose his title in five seconds if he doesn't do what is necessary to keep it, including gaining the respect and loyalty of the people.

On 2k1 you could overthrow the leaders...

For example

I, Zurkiba, overthrew Darkvillian as Zormite Emperor
I, Zurkiba, overthrew that Icehawk dude as Samurai Emperor
A few select group in Dustari kind of overthrew Kamuii.
Ghost Pirate and others took over Dustari and overthrew Kamuii.
Dustari took over Zormite and overthrew Zyoko person.

So the kings had to have the will of the people to reign harshly apon them.




2k2 System...
Just keep it the way it is... if you dont like the leader then pillage their houses as a thief or something.

cloudstrifevii
08-31-2002, 11:05 AM
it's all said and done it will only change for RP matters(king gets killed and is replaced) or the king isnt taking good care of the kingdom

marrico
08-31-2002, 10:04 PM
Originally posted by Pith

hi.use your head.
1.There are currently 20 people on graal
2.That doesn't mean that they play all day .they could play like a hour and stop and other players will come after they left.thank you .now you can shove that post up your butt

Then why didn't you say that? And no I'll pass, I am not fond of things being stuck up my butt, it makes me feel violated.

-Damix

feivel
09-01-2002, 09:45 AM
Do you know what a registered voter is...
I think thats its retarded that people who plan on joining Dustari should be able to choose the king of Samurai or Zormite,
thats stupid, cus most of the people planning on joining Samurai dont even go on the forums... and its stupid its not even realistic that dustarians would choose the king of another kingdom.

You forgot Wing resigned as Samurai emperor,
Dante took place as acting leader,
Dustari forcefully put Wing back on the throne,
I created Jinshin (retainers) and fought off Dustarians as well as Wing's Samurai and then ended up assasinating Wing.
I admit the way Brad assasinated Wing was very very stupid and cheap, but I had a plan that tooks hours to devise and was so complex that it was realistically flawless, but then I logged on and Brad had alreayd put his plan in action.
And I am not going to reveal the details of my plan, cus a magician never reveals his tricks. (not that I intended to use slight-of-hand to overthrow Wing :P)

Zurkiba
09-02-2002, 02:25 AM
Originally posted by feivel
Do you know what a registered voter is...
I think thats its retarded that people who plan on joining Dustari should be able to choose the king of Samurai or Zormite,
thats stupid, cus most of the people planning on joining Samurai dont even go on the forums... and its stupid its not even realistic that dustarians would choose the king of another kingdom.

You forgot Wing resigned as Samurai emperor,
Dante took place as acting leader,
Dustari forcefully put Wing back on the throne,
I created Jinshin (retainers) and fought off Dustarians as well as Wing's Samurai and then ended up assasinating Wing.
I admit the way Brad assasinated Wing was very very stupid and cheap, but I had a plan that tooks hours to devise and was so complex that it was realistically flawless, but then I logged on and Brad had alreayd put his plan in action.
And I am not going to reveal the details of my plan, cus a magician never reveals his tricks. (not that I intended to use slight-of-hand to overthrow Wing :P)
You know what a person is?

If there are -more- people voting... then there are more veiws apon the people who are running. People vote for who they think will do the best job

Brad
09-02-2002, 03:25 AM
I've killed too many kingdom leaders to name.

-Axel-
09-02-2002, 05:43 AM
Originally posted by Brad
I've killed too many kingdom leaders to name. \

And thats why your sexy. ;)

Brad
09-02-2002, 11:41 AM
Originally posted by -Axel-
\

And thats why your sexy. ;)

:cool:

konidias
09-03-2002, 01:46 PM
I think it would be stupid if a majority could vote the king out of the kingdom.

For one, it would at least need to be limited to people that belong to that kingdom. Otherwise, if one kingdom gets good, all the other kingdoms could vote against the king and make that king lose their position.

I would imagine it would be best to have polling every 2-4 weeks or something. It wouldn't make sense to allow people to start voting at any time.

Perhaps a rating system much like the rating system on these forums. Only people in that kingdom can rate the king, and they can only do so after a certain amount of hours or something. Otherwise people would restart their account, join the other kingdom, and give a bad rating. Then if the rating gets below 50% or something, there will be a vote.

This way, there will always be a fairly accurate rating of how a king is doing.

Zurkiba
09-04-2002, 04:10 AM
Originally posted by konidias
I think it would be stupid if a majority could vote the king out of the kingdom.

For one, it would at least need to be limited to people that belong to that kingdom. Otherwise, if one kingdom gets good, all the other kingdoms could vote against the king and make that king lose their position.

I would imagine it would be best to have polling every 2-4 weeks or something. It wouldn't make sense to allow people to start voting at any time.

Perhaps a rating system much like the rating system on these forums. Only people in that kingdom can rate the king, and they can only do so after a certain amount of hours or something. Otherwise people would restart their account, join the other kingdom, and give a bad rating. Then if the rating gets below 50% or something, there will be a vote.

This way, there will always be a fairly accurate rating of how a king is doing.

Most of Graal is to simple minded to notice that you shouldn't vote against a king who has a better kingdom then you :/...

But I dont know.. I still dont like this republic thingy. It's kind of ***... just install a Kingdoms Admin and if the people dont like the king... then a revolt happens.

LilNiglet
09-10-2002, 07:55 PM
Originally posted by Pith

voting in game is better bc:
1.more people votes
2.not everyone have a forum account
3.more rp like.like a election
::snicker::

YOU'RE the king? Well, I didn't vote for you.