After reviewing the most recent Fall 2021 Alpha feature video, I’m proposing a change that I believe will encourage a better sandbox for our pails and buckets.

Fractured has advertised itself as a relatively hardcore, intricate sandbox MMO experience; a game for guilds, communities, and solo players alike.

Given the prevailing MMO gaming attitude, however, it’s important for Dynamight to systemically encourage niche playstyles… lest Fractured become yet another clone of Albion Online.

Though economies thankfully remain local, the augmented marketplace in the upcoming Fall 2021 Alpha test allows users to view the wares of other cities (the developers are rightly committed to requiring players to travel to these cities to complete transactions).

I’ve long advocated for steps to be taken that promote niche communities and groups and allow them to prosper, distinguishing Fractured from other generic MMOs. To that end, I suggest the following to Prometheus and Dynamight:

• Create a system mechanic that allows regional Governors to charter merchant guilds/companies

• Multiple regional Governors could choose to recognize the chartered merchant guilds/company, thus establishing a commercial relationship between those cities

• The chartered merchant guilds/companies would be able to display their wares between/among the cities that recognize their charter, creating a linked market

I believe this system would create unique, complex, and rewarding gameplay loops in the form of relationships between multiple parties: the merchant guild/company, the Governors and citizens of their patron cities, and consumers:

• Commercial-minded players who want to be merchants now have systems in place that actively encourage and reward their niche playstyle

• Governors would be encouraged to seek out or sponsor such groups for the benefit of their local economy

• Consumers who only see the exchange of wares as a means to an end would no longer have to dedicate as much personal time to trade and transactions

• Those who don’t want to interface with merchant guilds/companies could still use the local marketplace to buy and sell wares locally… without the benefit of the linked market view or the infrastructure provided by the merchant guild

• Merchant guilds/companies, not the player, must then execute transactions between buyers and sellers, even in other cities (thus assuming the risk of transporting goods and funds in an open PvP environment)

• Regions could generate revenue by taxing the activities of these guilds, to the benefit of city maintenance and upgrades

• Governors and merchant guilds/companies would be incentivized to have a healthy, reliable relationship; otherwise a Governor could revoke a charter or the merchant guild/company could close shop, depriving that city of linked market view… until the Governor replaces the merchant guild/company

I just thought of this today so I admit to not having all the details perfectly ironed out. However, I believe the concept is worth considering and debating.

Some additional concerns/questions I present to the community include the following:

• Should the merchant guild/company have to purchase the wares from the seller and then become the seller themselves?

• Should the seller keep the wares but pay the merchant guild/company a flat fee to list the wares and make them viewable among the linked market?

• Should the seller/buyer hire the chartered company to execute the transportation and transaction of wares and funds?

• Some sort of mini-skill or tech tree to merchant guilds/companies to better facilitate and incentivize their actions?

• In order to avoid monopolies by merchant guilds/companies, I propose imposing artificial caps on the number of charters a merchant guild/company may accept
  In order to incentivize niche playstyles, merchant guild/companies should be their own organizational type, subject to unique rules (e.g. a merchant guild/company should be unable to directly siege a city).

Let’s discuss!

@Xzoviac said in Opinion on Monsters after the alpha:

@Jetah said in Opinion on Monsters after the alpha:

@Xzoviac

the point of animals is crafting materials which is the point of most of the NPCs.

in my mind the whole point of the survival and crafting system is for pvp. Having recently started Black Desert Online, I'm starting to see the similarities between Fractured and BDO. If you've played BDO then think of it with a static camera and 3 planets.

beastmen are gonna get bored fast if the only point in killing monsters is for pvping later ....
BDO , monsters drop loot , killing monsters lets you learn about them, the more you kill said monster eventually you learn how much hp it has and hit it harder , you can pickup quests and get knowledge the more you kill certain monsters and earn reputation with certain NPC's In BDO there is even a beastery saying your Rank for killing said monster

Good ideas!

In a game like this, the PVE really needs to be dynamic to be fun. Bosses should be difficult and require teams, they should threaten NPC (and perhaps player) polities, and the PVE landscape should shift based on the players succeeding or failing versus certain groups. The devs shouldn't be afraid to allow enemy NPCs to build towns and cities and have people destroy them for coinage and rare resources perhaps.

Bestiary is also a fantastic idea. Monsters should also be dynamic and rewarding. If a dragon burns down an NPC town and your team kills it, maybe you can be recognized by a local NPC faction with a one of a kind title or other rewards.

The ideas are really limitless if you forgo the traditional splattering of animals in the wild for a mixture of that and more dynamic options.

As mentioned in the first part, which can be found in @Alexian 's Alliance thread, I will be breaking my compendium of suggestions into different groupings of talking points. Last time we looked at Guilds and Alliances. This time we will change gears a bit and look at Logistics and Economies in Sandboxes and how I feel they should play out in Fractured. Please note that I'm not an expert in economics and as such I will be attacking this topic from a more... perhaps ideal lens. Feel free to contradict me, but I ask that the discussion be lively and productive.

(As usual, you can find the whole document here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1qrD2MwlirFeuFF3U88XVUcvPa3yVbbslkbImYow0XJk/edit?usp=sharing)

Logistics in a Sandbox MMO

What is logistics in a sandbox?

This is another area of a sandbox that is far more unique than most games. While most themeparks require logistics in the form of raid prep, pvp practice, and gearing, the sandbox goes a step further by requiring the movement of items and gear and the creation of said gear usually being a part played by the player.

The movement of these items are often done via tedious, though rewarding, activities such as hauling them across the world, or by organizing them within storage areas akin to warehouses. Some games choose to make this process less tedious by allowing fast travel, carry limits that are absurdly high, or by linking auction houses so that you can obtain the same resources without the opportunity cost of moving them. I think these are the wrong way to go about logistics in a sandbox.

What should logistics look like in Fractured:

Logistics in Fractured needs to exploit the large mass of land provided in game. Since the worlds are so big, consideration should be taken when having to move goods across it. Whether it be through hiring third party groups who specialize in caravans, or through moving your own goods across the world, it should take time, effort, and be open to exploitation by people who are looking to disrupt your logistical flow.

Logistics, therefore, should be a niche that someone with acuity for organization should be able to fill while having a fulfilling time playing the game running these networks, much like fighting appeals to some people and governing to others.

• Trade caravans should be necessary for the movement of mass amounts of resources across the continents/planets. They should be able to be intra-guild or hopefully niches will exist for people to carry out these caravans and be paid for doing so, taking the place of auction houses by actually BEING in game, rather than magicked away.

• When passing through friendly territory, perhaps there should be some way to hire NPC guards (as well as players), who will be paid upon completion of a contract automatically (similar to quests in other games and beacons in something like Star Citizen).

• Moving resources to attack another power should also thusly be difficult. If you need to siege a town, you should either have to carry the tools to do so, or scavenge them from the area.

• Trade should NOT be conducive to fast travel, with the exception of moving between planets.

Why?

The point of having almost everything exist in the game and be exploited by groups in the game is to allow for complex interactions to take place between players who want to fill niches other than the ones provided by standard games. Someone should want to be a caravaneer and should be encouraged to set up contracts and quests. People who want to protect these guys should want to go along and escort in order to receive a bit of money through, hopefully, little effort. Ultimately what this does is encourages different niches for players of different abilities to fill. Not everyone wants to play the no-nonsense warrior out to kill every foe. Some people might want to be tradesmen, merchants, or mail carriers. This would help them live their dreams and could also spawn guilds that aren’t focused on being land-owning empires so much as merchant republics, artisan guilds, or even mercenaries for hire.

Logistics should be difficult and should be thought out and properly organized by the people wishing to take advantage of the game mechanics. It doesn’t have to be 1:1 real life, but there should be an incentive for people to play these roles too.

Part 5: The Economy in a Sandbox

What does the economy of a sandbox mmo look like?

The hallmark of sandbox games are their dynamic economies. Items and gold go into the economy mostly via the player and they also leave the economy via the player through taxes, item degradation and destruction, and costs associated with utilizing NPC features of the game. The difference between a sandbox and a themepark in regards to economy usually stems from the removal of items from the game, thereby hopefully limiting inflation. Themeparks usually utilize higher commodity fees and taxes to stem inflation, but over time it still usually happens as quests give higher rewards and there are fewer penalties for making certain mistakes (WoW being a good example of inflation).

What should the economy look like in Fractured?

I won't depart from most hardcore sandbox games in this regard as there is no perfect solution and often these things must be adjust over time.

I personally think the economy of Fractured should consist of money coming in via various tasks (or by giving dynamic value to goods that can then be bartered in lieu of coinage) as normal. As more money enters the economy, there will need to be outlets that make money leave the economy.

On top of this, I agree with most hardcore games that markets should spring up around the player as much as possible, so banks, markets, and player markets should all be local to the area they are in.

• Purchases can contain small fees that delete a small percentage of currency from the game per transaction. These should be done via player stores AND npc stores, however trading and the like would be exempt as normal.

• Auction houses should be player ran as much as possible and tied to local towns only. This gives incentive for there to be a niche that can be filled and these players must also carry and move stock and inventory.
  If that isn't feasible, then local auction houses should be built and paid for by the town with an upkeep that deletes money from the economy.

• Towns should have job boards that can be posted on that hold money in escrow until tasks are accepted and (within a time limit) completed at which time the person who completes it will be paid.

• Job boards should also allow people to post buy orders for quantities of resources and goods and keep these separated from the auction house (see quests).

• Items should have a chance to be permanently lost on death or after too many repairs.

• Item degradation should slowly deteriorate a weapon's maximum durability over time (with horizontal gear, this shouldn't be too awful). This will also play into crafting later.

Why?

Economies in games are one of the signs of the health of the game itself and this is doubly so regarding hardcore sandboxes where the economy of the game stems directly from player input and output, far more so than themeparks, where npc content often adds more to the economy outside of cash flow and resources they can be obtained elsewhere.

It is a precarious balance that always has to be maintained. When new items enter the game, when new cash flows are introduced, something has to become a cash sink or item sink so that inflation isn't out of hand.

There’s probably a lot more that I could say on economy, but I am no expert here for sure.

Now that is has been a few days, let's take a look at a prominent feature of Fractured: towns and cities.

As usual the link to the full document can be found here:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1qrD2MwlirFeuFF3U88XVUcvPa3yVbbslkbImYow0XJk/edit?usp=drivesdk

Towns and Cities in a Sandbox

What should towns and cities look like in a Sandbox?

Player owned houses, towns and cities have been a fascination for video game players for a very long time. I still remember when I first rented my own house in Tibia and the excitement of having a room in a guild hall. Many different games have offered differing views on what a town or city should look like and many of them have done a pretty good job of making them viable, even if they fail in the customization department or are forced to be instanced. Ideally in a sandbox you would have non-instanced houses, towns, and cities that have a purpose that reflects the goal of your game and encourages players to use them to that end.

What should towns and cities look like in Fractured?

I think Fractured has a very robust housing/city system that incorporates both NPCs and player owned sections.

• Towns and cities should be able to employ people to do jobs with wages that are held in escrow from the treasury until cancellation or completion of the job.

• Guilds and guild towns should be able to delegate nearly every aspect of responsibility to encourage guilds to utilize complex bureaucracies and teamwork to fulfill logistical needs

• Guilds and towns should be allowed to host mercenary guilds, merchant guilds, Etc. so long as they pay rent for the plots they are using. This should count for the population.

• Towns and cities should have laws that are determined by the local guild, government, or people depending on what is being used. These laws can just be a large checklist of options that determine what is and isn't a crime in that sphere of influence.

• Republic cities and towns should not just vote for Governor (who can do all of the things in the town), but also for individual magistrates that make up some of the major power options of the town (city planning, building, laws, etc.). This could be at the discretion of the town.

Why?

Towns and cities are going to be one of the main features in Fractured. The consequences of having cities and towns with in-depth mechanics, then, are obvious. It should be a system that promotes personalities that enjoy bureaucracy or otherwise delegating tasks while also allowing for pretty much anyone who is interested to get a taste of what it will be like.

It has been a couple of weeks, but today we are discussing the options for entertainment and fluff activities in the game. These activities may not provide large end game benefits for some people but are means by which people can enjoy themselves outside of the daily grind, even if they are a grind as well.

As usual, the entire document can be found at:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1qrD2MwlirFeuFF3U88XVUcvPa3yVbbslkbImYow0XJk/edit?usp=drivesdk

---

Entertainment/Fluff in a Sandbox

What does Entertainment mean in a Sandbox?

Often times, people assume that sandbox MMOs, especially the hardcore ones, are for one of two people: A) The loud PVPers and B) The roleplayers. While these groups certainly are a part of this community, there is obviously much more involved behind the scenes. To accompany the presence of people who are want to get bored, there should always be activities that are outside of warfare and work inside of these games in order to allow for people to have a little bit of fun with their guild mates, fellow hermits, or just to blow off some steam. Many games do this in various ways, and I would say that their only flaws are that they are put into the game and then forgotten about. If you want people to enjoy your content and to utilize the tools that you provide in game, you need to encourage them to do so, especially in a sandbox.

What should entertainment look like in Fractured?

• Entertainment doesn’t have to be the highest priority because you have around a month after a game launches where people will be entranced and diligently working on whatever they want to achieve their goals in the most efficient way possible. Also since this is a game that adds some light survival mechanics and a touch of realism, we should really have fun with the entertainment possibilities.

• Since the world is so big, there should be player built and maintained Inns and taverns at certain points in the roads. Perhaps they pay a fee to the local lord for protection, but they also provide beds, campfires, and are in constant need of food at wholesale prices to sell to the weary travellers. Using an Inn in your travels should provide better and more rest than sleeping outside on the ground with just a campfire.

• There should be hunting contests held by the NPC towns, where a specific area of the map is marked off and contestants will hunt special spawning deer, rabbits, etc. in the area. The winner receives a sizeable allotment of currency and some crafting materials.

• I like the idea of having mini-games in the game, such as dice or cards or what have you, but I’m not sure how to get more than a handful of people to actually do those things for fun in their downtime, as these things tend to be abandoned fairly quickly by some people. Perhaps tournaments, etc.

• NPC sponsored duel tournaments; Massive, multi-event tournaments hosted by either NPCs or the devs themselves where people are allowed to enter one or more competition. Participants of each competition (perhaps armed, hand-hand, magic, etc) would receive healthy cash sums or special titles. Make it where the NPC set a buy order for food, gear, and goods so that people have to work together to see the event play out (while also eliminating some items from the economy in the process).

Why?

Is it really necessary to have these things in the game? Perhaps not, but they do increase the longevity of the game, especially for those people who come into the game not wanting to pvp or fight monsters every single day. However, I think any sort of event, so long as it is backed by the devs and encourages the players to participate, would work here. My examples are just things that I personally like and would like to see how they would translate into a sandbox MMO.

As the King and ruler of Meridian, I approve this message.

I'm going to have to agree with Alexian and Gothix on all of this so far. At the very least we should start as open and free as possible and without game-enforced alliances and such.

Friendly fire and collision can and SHOULD be played around with and tested for viability. We can leave Arb out of it, fine.

Alliances can and should be difficult to maintain and not be artifically enforced in the game outside of a few features in the UI to allow for diplomacy.

If none of this works, it can then be shifted fairly easily, especially friendly fire.

@Farlander said in What challenges should guild alliances face?:

I never said that griefing was going to be completely eliminated. I've played online games long enough to know that jerks are going to find a way to be jerks. If I see ways to prevent griefing I'm going to voice my opinions. I've not demanded that the game be my way or no way. I've asked that two game mechanics not be implemented. I've expressed my reasons why. And yes I was told by Gothix on several occasions to go ahead and quit Fractured to play solo games. He's been rude as hell in alot of his posts. He's that typical pvper that wants everything his way and will attack anyone that disagrees with him.

As someone who was traditionally called "carebear" in the past, I truly get how you feel about griefing. It is a pain in the buttocks and causes stress to those who aren't traditionally in the same boat in terms of attitude. No one will argue with that, and we are open to debate over what can help prevent it. We tend to just disagree with the assessment that we should START with everything disabled. If we START at the more hardcore end of the aisle, at the very least we can work backwards into a happy medium, especially considering there are 3 different planets with presumably 3 majorly different rule sets in play for different styles of players.

If friendly fire is turned on it will in fact affect all planets unless it is turned on in certain situations and places. Unless I have missed that point in the many posts then I apologize. The only solution I have seen is to allow sneaking past people. That in it's very nature means death in alot of situations. Speed is important escaping an attack.

I don't think it has explicitly been said, but I do think it would be simple to allow for varying degrees of friendly fire. The sneaking comment was in regards to unit collision, I believe, though to be fair if 20 people surround you in a wilderness, you should most likely be dead no matter what (assuming no magic in play)

As for the 3 planets, I think variations of the rules can be used. No FF at all on ARB, for example. Perhaps a combo on Synd. FFA Everyone ded on Tart. Assuming each planet has its own coding, I'm sure something like friendly fire in that regard could be nothing more than a slider set at different points for each planet.

So to clarify when do you see friendly fire being turned on? Where? If it is on all the time then someone could very easily go around towns spamming their AOE to kill everyone. The fact you say friendly fire means they are not going to flag as criminal. Unless you are saying it will flag as an aggressive action. If so AOE attacks will be as useless as they are in Pathfinder Kingmaker. If they don't flag as aggressive then we have a problem because that now enables people to kill in the no pvp zones.

Actual implementation of friendly fire can and should be debated. Will there be safe towns, safe harbors, all out brawls? I've seen them done every way from Tibia to MO. We assume friendly fire has the possibility of being in the game in some form (or at least had some plans to be last year), but the real argument comes from whether or not allies will be invincible towards each other here. In this case, we suggested having a war declaration feature that placed guilds in a permanent aggressive mode towards one another while the war declaration length lasted, removing consequences from murdering each other. We could debate how that would work and what would be involved and I'd be happy to hash it out.

As for collision mechanics it is an easy way to box players in. Normally when a creature is aggroed on a target they will not switch targets. So someone seeing you are low health just comes up and boxes you in. Happens all the time in games like UO. Again this is something that can happen in the nonpvp zone. I've not at one time talked about changing the pvp zones. I could care less what they do with the pvp planet.

We can make creatures not have collision detection, I'm sure. It used to happen in Tibia too. I'm not too particular on the PVE, as I think other things like difficult mechanics, or AI that group up and attack and siege, would be more interesting than collision against a wolf butt. Again, variations could be used for each planet if necessary. This one is probably more of an ON/OFF switch than a slider, though.

@Jetah said in What challenges should guild alliances face?:

@Roccandil

with how elements react with other elements, i dont see how full FF would work.

if we're fighting something in water and i use an electric spell then you're taking damage as well as the mob/player. if i'm near melee range while you're swinging then i'm taking melee damage while attack the mob/player.

i dont see full FF working.

I think some extensions of protections can be made. People were floating ideas of party immunity and/or guild immunity (as long as these are capped). This would still allow for reasonable exceptions while forcing a larger emphasis on deployment strategy/resource usage.

Perhaps it should be experimented with just to see what happens, but I don't think this is contrary to at least what I was suggesting previously.

A Compendium of Suggestions Part 1

By: Bardikens

Guys, over the past two weeks I have been working on a list of suggestions of things that I'd like to see in Fractured or in sandbox MMOs in general. This is basically a compendium of sorts that contains suggestions and ideas for some (not all) aspects of the game. The first couple of sections are about guilds and alliances, so I've decided to post them here so as to not double post in the forums. Each post will be divided by similar topic groupings and will have a link to the Google Doc with the entire document. This is only meant for discussion.

(https://docs.google.com/document/d/1qrD2MwlirFeuFF3U88XVUcvPa3yVbbslkbImYow0XJk/edit?usp=sharing)

(We are skipping the introduction piece which can be read in the full doc.)

Guilds in Sandbox MMO

What makes a guild?

Traditionally, a guild consists of groups of people banding together to do activities that would be challenging or impossible alone. They haven’t always been given status in games, but almost all games nowadays have methods to discern guild-mates from regular players, as we as game mechanics or UIs tied to being within a guild itself. In essence, these groups come to form the political groups of the game, the various polities that vie for control of some resource, race to be the top on the server, or exist solely for community benefit.

What should a guild look like in Fractured?

I think guilds in Fractured can follow the main curve of games in this respect. Guilds should be represented in the UI and should definitely come with benefits that outpace and incentivise the solo player to take part.

I would personally like to see:

• Members lists - Common in games to show who exists and who is online in your guild.

• Membership logs - Who joins and leaves within a certain period of time (24-48h is fine).

• Ranks/titles that, even if they are for flavor only, can be fully customized.

• If there is a centralized monetary fund of some sort (a la the guild UI in Albion), then dedicated auditing logs as well.

• Perhaps a system that allows guilds to choose what type of guild they are, allowing for special rules or bonuses (trade guild, nation, etc.)

Why?

I think guilds in the hardcore sandbox MMO are the lynch-pin to success and what set hardcore sandboxes awayfrom other sandbox games and even from themeparks. Guilds in sandboxes are in the unique position to alter the political landscape of the game, so much so that developers often have to make changes to baseline game design in order to shift the game towards or away from ends that guilds have forced their hands on. One problem unique to guilds in all video games is having to keep up with each individual member and what they can do in your guild.

If you have a guild with 50 members, 10 ranks, and each rank can do different things or are expected to do different things and, say, 2 towns, or even 1 town with many different buildings, that is a lot of micromanaging for the guild leader or the governor. While keeping it difficult to manage multiple towns or polities should be the goal, there should also be some way, while maintaining overall logistical difficulty, to take stock of what is going on in a particular guild or town. Most games do this, and I see no reason to change. The more customization in ranks, titles, and their powers the better in a sandbox adhering to some realism without selling the farm.

Alliances in a Sandbox MMO

What is an Alliance in a sandbox?

Sandboxes, like with guilds, are in a unique position to make politics a viable form of gameplay and empires a viable, yet difficult, goal. An alliance in a sandbox is basically two or more guilds who decide to band together, whilest remaining individual political powers, and sign non-aggression pacts, trade clauses and usually military alliances that see the pooling of resources for the greater good. Unlike in a themepark, the sharing of resources in a sandbox is paramount to the success of an alliance, as well as the furthering of a fledgling empire. This can cause some political drama and issues and in some cases, outright betrayal.

What should an Alliance look like in Fractured?

I think alliances in Fractured should be a prominent, but difficult to maintain force. There should be alliances, and they should have some representation in the UI. However, I think that it must stop in the UI. Other than perhaps noting who is in your alliance as you see them, there really shouldn’t be any in game benefit to having an alliance member standing right next to you.

What I would like to see:

• Treaties of different value: Non-aggression pacts, trade contracts, defensive alliances, military alliances, and Military Access pacts, client-states and vassals(similar to the Total-War games). These should be noted in the UI, but are non-binding in game, i.e. the players aren’t FORCED to adhere to these rules, opening up the floor for political intrigue and scrutiny towards who is allowed to be in an alliance.

• The ability to carry Alliance banners alongside guild banners on towns and in battle providing some small morale boost to nearby members.

• The ability for individual members of alliances to betray their alliance at any time, necessitating good communication, subterfuge, and trust between all members.

• The ability for vassals and client-states to be taxed by their vassal liege.

• Alliance members who ARE NOT vassals of a guild are on equal political standing.

• Alliance members SHOULD NOT be immune to friendly fire.

Why?

Alliances are political powers in sandbox games. Too often, though, they are not real alliances, but a vassal-liege relationship where one guild forms an empire of smaller guilds who pay tribute. This is usually enforced in game via immunity to friendly fire, allowing larger guilds and alliances to paste massive hordes together that, while choreographed, usually end with the bigger army crushing the smaller one.

In reality, alliance members are usually politically equal in terms unless some other deal has been made. In this sense, there shouldn’t be a “LEADER” of an alliance de jure, but obviously there will be de facto. What they agree upon is what decides their position in the alliance and those terms can change on a whim if either side is uncomfortable or find themselves facing greener pastures.

With regards to friendly fire, I think it is okay to leave guild members immune if necessary, but do not extend that protection to alliance members. This will force alliance members to strategize about how they will participate in a battle, and hopefully force alliance leaders to strategize and react in ways that are different than the typical “dog-piling” we see with modern zergs.

Ultimately, an alliance should be rewarding as long as the powers are playing their part. It should not, however, be automatically rewarding without great care taken by the heads of each of the guilds involved and should be the vehicle that drives the political intrigue that so many games lack.

We are still alive, friends and compatriots! As more information about the beta drops, feel free to stop by and check out our mission and goal within the world of Fractured.

@spoletta said in Markets and Merchant Guilds - A Reimagining of the Current System:

I'm a huge fan of Spice and Wolf novels, so I obviously love the idea of Merchant guilds in Fractured as a second power parallel to nations, but until we know in which scenario they are going to deployed, we can't understand if they are a good idea or not for the health of the game. That's where my concern lies.

I absolutely love those books. It's also what basically convinced me that trading and merchanting in games needs more depth and gameplay initially.

@spoletta said in Markets and Merchant Guilds - A Reimagining of the Current System:

I can see the merit in something like this, but I have the following concern.

It is too soon to talk about this.

This is really just taking what they announced and reimagining it in a way that puts more gameplay in the hands of the players.

We'll, of course, have to see how everything plays out, but my idea in Fractured is that there needs to be rewarding gameplay loops for different types of people and organizations.

@GamerSeuss said in Markets and Merchant Guilds - A Reimagining of the Current System:

@Bardikens Although your suggestion is interesting, it goes against the concepts the Devs have stated for the game.

They want a player driven economy, where individuals need to spend the time going from place to place to get their goods. The one allowance is the fact that merchant minded players can physically buy goods in one city, physically transport them to another city, then fulfill orders/list goods in the new city, and thus create trade routes.

This is fully possible in my system. In fact, this just expands upon what is already in the game and allows there to be fully codified gameplay for people that dont WANT to pvp or PVE and want to spend their time trading.

In no other way do they want to have a linked marketplace. Shoot, the Global Wallet might even end up going away once they put the current mode into practice, or the ability to search other markets might go away. Finally, the Global Wallet might get changed somehow to restrict it to only Merchant transaction funds being deposited by the Marketplace, but Deposits go into the bank's Gold fund, not the Global Wallet, and the Gold Fund remains local, so you can't as someone said in another thread, 'Search for something on the Marketplace, get the price and quantity, deposit enough gold to cover that exactly, run to the new city, and then purchase" thus keeping the Gold itself safe during the travel aspect of commerce.

I am fully against the global wallet AND fully against marketplaces that can be searched globally. The system I created is a compromise of the two systems already in play. I am a proponent of the most realistic, simulator-based hardcore gameplay you can imagine (I would want crafting to be full fledged mini games that take lots of time, for example.)

What my system does is take what is in the game already and puts in the hands of the player rather than just allowing for a global search by default.

They DO NOT want to turn all the merchanting over to merchant guilds and guild charters, they want individual players to do the work whenever possible. The marketplace is more for selling off your excess locally, and encouraging trade, not for making it easy to get those things that are rare in one area, because someone else joins up with a Merchant Guild to deal in them.

Again, my vision doesn't really go against this. What we NEED in Fractured are ways for people to live out second lives in game. If they never want to go out and PVP and want to spend their entire life crafting, they should be able to sit around hammering out steel and have just as much fun as someone grinding monsters.

The only way in my eyes to do this is to codify gameplay that will encourage these niches to exist. They DO NOT functionally exist in any other game (excepting perhaps Star Citizen which is a second life simulator) with any true depth.

What I am proposing in no way takes the individual responsibility from the game - just gives more options to those who are playing. You could dump off your wares on the merchant guild for a pittance knowing that you have guaranteed money, or you could run it to another town yourself and make full profit but assuming all of the risk.

You can even still put your stuff on the local marketplace. Those would be truly local as in previous tests. Previously a lot of the "trade" in the game was between polities (aka guilds set up for conquering and owning land) buying and selling to one another to fund their war chests or PVX requirements. This system adds an extra wrinkle with more opportunity for non-polities to have something to do in the game by adding guilds that aren't focused on death and destruction specifically.

The "rare" in one area bit will largely be a farse once larger guilds dominate the land and send their 200 hive-members to bully others out of their local resources anyways. The Devs said no one would walk halfway across the map to get resources not in their area but we see how that worked out last test.

--

No, this would incentivize Guild play, and deincentivize solo play...there are already a ton of advantages to guilding up, and the Devs have said they want to make the game equally encouraging to solo'ists, yet even if you allowed a guild of one to join a commercial charter, what town is going to allow a solo guild to join their charter if they have limited charter space? The solo'ist gets annexed out again.

Just to respond to this point, I believe the merchant guild would be limited in charters. The idea would be to have a network of linked cities with different merchant guilds so that one or two could not have a truly "global" marketplace.

Also, we should be encouraging guild play as much as possible in an MMO. The solo opportunities are still there in my system, but guilds who work together for a common goal should easily be able to crush a single soloist with regards to time and efficiency.

That's how it always works in MMOs and what differentiates MMOs from single player games. This does not prevent you from becoming the most powerful trade baron in the lands - it just adds the ability for people who want to play as a merchanting guild to do so and be rewarded for it.

We may fundamentally disagree on solo/guild play in MMOs.

After reviewing the most recent Fall 2021 Alpha feature video, I’m proposing a change that I believe will encourage a better sandbox for our pails and buckets.

Fractured has advertised itself as a relatively hardcore, intricate sandbox MMO experience; a game for guilds, communities, and solo players alike.

Given the prevailing MMO gaming attitude, however, it’s important for Dynamight to systemically encourage niche playstyles… lest Fractured become yet another clone of Albion Online.

Though economies thankfully remain local, the augmented marketplace in the upcoming Fall 2021 Alpha test allows users to view the wares of other cities (the developers are rightly committed to requiring players to travel to these cities to complete transactions).

I’ve long advocated for steps to be taken that promote niche communities and groups and allow them to prosper, distinguishing Fractured from other generic MMOs. To that end, I suggest the following to Prometheus and Dynamight:

• Create a system mechanic that allows regional Governors to charter merchant guilds/companies

• Multiple regional Governors could choose to recognize the chartered merchant guilds/company, thus establishing a commercial relationship between those cities

• The chartered merchant guilds/companies would be able to display their wares between/among the cities that recognize their charter, creating a linked market

I believe this system would create unique, complex, and rewarding gameplay loops in the form of relationships between multiple parties: the merchant guild/company, the Governors and citizens of their patron cities, and consumers:

• Commercial-minded players who want to be merchants now have systems in place that actively encourage and reward their niche playstyle

• Governors would be encouraged to seek out or sponsor such groups for the benefit of their local economy

• Consumers who only see the exchange of wares as a means to an end would no longer have to dedicate as much personal time to trade and transactions

• Those who don’t want to interface with merchant guilds/companies could still use the local marketplace to buy and sell wares locally… without the benefit of the linked market view or the infrastructure provided by the merchant guild

• Merchant guilds/companies, not the player, must then execute transactions between buyers and sellers, even in other cities (thus assuming the risk of transporting goods and funds in an open PvP environment)

• Regions could generate revenue by taxing the activities of these guilds, to the benefit of city maintenance and upgrades

• Governors and merchant guilds/companies would be incentivized to have a healthy, reliable relationship; otherwise a Governor could revoke a charter or the merchant guild/company could close shop, depriving that city of linked market view… until the Governor replaces the merchant guild/company

I just thought of this today so I admit to not having all the details perfectly ironed out. However, I believe the concept is worth considering and debating.

Some additional concerns/questions I present to the community include the following:

• Should the merchant guild/company have to purchase the wares from the seller and then become the seller themselves?

• Should the seller keep the wares but pay the merchant guild/company a flat fee to list the wares and make them viewable among the linked market?

• Should the seller/buyer hire the chartered company to execute the transportation and transaction of wares and funds?

• Some sort of mini-skill or tech tree to merchant guilds/companies to better facilitate and incentivize their actions?

• In order to avoid monopolies by merchant guilds/companies, I propose imposing artificial caps on the number of charters a merchant guild/company may accept
  In order to incentivize niche playstyles, merchant guild/companies should be their own organizational type, subject to unique rules (e.g. a merchant guild/company should be unable to directly siege a city).

Let’s discuss!

@spoletta said in Meridian's Spring 2021 Alpha test feedback - OPEN DISCUSSION ENCOURAGED!:

I used a lot harbors this test. They are my biggest money sink so far.

There definitely need to be money sinks to help with inflation, so I have no issue with that aspect of it.

They are really good for group content, when you organize to go to some very distant place to explore an area or hunt a legend. Most of the players of this game have a work and many times a family, If you have to travel 30 minutes to go there, then some activities become outright impossible. I feel that the current implementation of those is fine.

I feel like harbors, while you are correct in their time-saving convenience, may make long distance travel a little too trivial. If anything, I'd rather there be more diverse and exciting content in the every part of the world where you wouldn't feel the need to travel from one side of the continent to the other, except for specific reasons (exploration, siege, trade, special boss monsters, etc.) and in those specific cases, harbors as they are implemented would seem to trivialize it a bit.

Some things should take a long time to do. Travel should be inconvenient sometimes and play a role in how you decide to spend your time in game.

I would like to note here that if harbors were ever connected to systems such as actual boats, having to sail yourself, or some other means of "speeding up travel" but it not being instant, I wouldn't mind as much. It would be best if those events also allowed for counter play so that people could intervene/stop an army from getting to the nearest harbor, have pirates, etc..

They are quite costly, you use them only for important events.

As for cost, I think they are only costly if you are doing things that don't return gold, you die, or the prices adjust with inflation. Other than that, I can see with the current prices, that harbors could be utilized for pretty much everything after more money flows into the game. Since most crafted items are light (i.e. can fit in your inventory) I could see their prices adjusting to fit into harbor travel in order to guarantee delivery or something similar.

Although, the thought of "Meridian Prime: Guaranteed 1 day delivery" does make me chuckle.

One final note: we didn't have food issues in the start of the test, because there was the possibility to gather wild wheat (and there was also the starting town wheat exploit). After that was removed, gathering food has become much harder.

We were just pointing that out as something to keep an eye on in the future. Outside of a few ranks to get off the ground, food scarcity needs to be pretty much instantly an issue. It still may be, but I think it is worth noting nonetheless.

Wholly agree with @Alexian and @GamerSeuss on this one.

These things should feel impactful in game and should be decisions that are considered carefully.

There is some issues with a corner piece snapping into place on the south side of Zenith. We could get it to snap, but then it would not let us actually place the item.

It may be too close to the edge of the "city" zone because that is also a primary area where we get the "you must be inside of the city" bug as well.

Temporary work around is to walk out and back in the city, but it doesn't fix it permanently.