Overthrow a vanarch... would it be practical?

GingerKid Profile Options #1

0
0
Neutral
It is a suggestion I want to post to enmasse. Goes something like this....

A vanarch guild sets taxes higher than any other vanarchs
OR
A vanarch guild leader closes stores because they are either a bad vanarch or inactive.

If this happens, the guild's vanarchy status should go from something like
'Secure' to 'At Risk'
Once they are 'At Risk', players who are in that zone may vote their 'opinion' of the vanarch as either GOOD or BAD, and the members of that vanarch guild, obviously, should not be able to do that sort of voting at that time.

A certain number of people during that vanarch's reign vote them as GOOD, then they stay.
A certain number of people during that vanarch's reign vote them as BAD, then their position is vulnerable.

The guild's position has been voted as BAD enough times for them to be vulnerable. One of the people who voted for the guild to be overthrown then must donate money to another vanarch guild to help them overthrow the baddie.
For less than a day, probably around 12 hours, the vanarch who is helping to overthrow is at war with the baddie vanarch guild. If in that 12 hours, the baddie wins, their reign of terror can remain. And so forth.
Let's say we have an inactive vanarch guild and nobody is playing. Nobody dies and nobody gets any kills, then after the 12 hours, the vanarch guild will lose their status as vanarch and the vanarch guild who was at war with the baddie will be able to control that area too.

At first glance, this would mean angry players wouldn't be flying to Lumbertown every few hours they die for crystals or skill training. Second glance this adds some realism to the game. And not only will it do that, it will give vanarch guilds a chance to rule over multiple areas.

I want to know if this is worth suggesting to enmasse. I'm sick of waiting a long while for elections to come in and I want to be able to get bad vanarchs out of the way outright. I'm levelling in Tulufan place right now and we have a vanarch who has quit TERA temporarily or not we don't know, to play Final Fantasy 14 which is terribad.

It was thought up on the spot. Do not hate. It is a rough outline of the idea I am thinking and may need improvement or deeper thinking, however this is what the basic suggestion is. If you agree with this, I can confidently suggest to enmasse about it. Don't hate. Do not hate.
hakumen9000 Profile Options #2

0
0
Neutral
Read the title

Too abusable, NEXT!

Good Example:
Look at the Philippines, they love to impeach high ranking officials every few years since they found it abusable.
Edited by: hakumen9000 11 months ago
ChoppaGurl Profile Options #3

0
0
Neutral
You know vanarch is like a form of monarchy right?

There are good monarchs and then there are bad ones. Besides they only run for a couple of sessions so it can be decided who can be voted in then. In realism sometimes you can't just hit a button and "boot" the bad ones out.

And yea, I was thinking people had lives outside TERA and couldn't stay in the game 24/7 to run it like it's a job. Or they get bored and find something else to play.

Over-throwing a vanarch would leave the system vulnerable all the time. Anarchy!
Edited by: ChoppaGurl 11 months ago
GingerKid Profile Options #4

0
0
Neutral
We expect vanarchs to be active and dedicated players. We won't vote for a vanarch who is not going to be online or is not going to keep ANY stores open at all. My idea is not practical or could use some improvement or better thought; but on the other hand, perhaps the vanarch system is a bad idea altogether, and that development time could've been used for getting BGs in at release or getting some other smart unique feature that isn't a political system such as this.

As I said about your 'abusable' posts, the system should be strict in a way which I haven't gone into much detail about since I thought of this idea on the spot and made it up as I went along. Certain rules for this such as vanarch is setting incredibly high taxes or has all stores closed for an extended period of time compared to the actual time you spend as vanarch of your area.

You don't have to play the game much to sustain your stores or keep taxes low. You can play small every day or every other day or spend one day getting all your points and what not so that you can go play your other game without your reign getting ugly. Leaving abruptly like that is a terribad idea and the vanarch I have has done nothing to make sure people are satisfied before leaving to play FFXIV.

Problem is, if the political system, say, never changes... this will happen again for other areas and it is just very annoying. Two rules I thought of, still abusable?
Edited by: GingerKid 11 months ago
Rhinosauce Profile Options #5

0
0
Neutral
Quite a few Monarchs were not active in their realms/kingdoms; why should it be different in Tera.

No to a voting system. What I would like to see is a way for guilds to fight over the Vanarch position; something that is not GvG, but more like Sieges.
ChoppaGurl Profile Options #6

0
0
Neutral
Rhinosauce on 07/03/2012, 01:14 PM - view
Quite a few Monarchs were not active in their realms/kingdoms; why should it be different in Tera.

No to a voting system. What I would like to see is a way for guilds to fight over the Vanarch position; something that is not GvG, but more like Sieges.


Instead of Overthrowing...why not...assassinate!? Doesn't Vanarch here have it where you can fight for the position besides the voting?

TERA needs physical buildings for vanarch anyway. Something for players to take-over instead of wandering around the waste-lands like their homeless or leeching off the towns as their 'bases'.
Edited by: ChoppaGurl 11 months ago
rocdog Profile Options #7

0
0
Neutral
What about low-pop servers? As it stands, Arachnaea barely filled all provincial positions. I believe Freeholds has 2 vacancies. There are currently only 4 guilds registered for the upcoming elections on Arachnaea.
linofer Profile Options #8

0
0
Neutral
GingerKid on 07/03/2012, 12:34 PM - view
It is a suggestion I want to post to enmasse. Goes something like this....

A vanarch guild sets taxes higher than any other vanarchs
OR
A vanarch guild leader closes stores because they are either a bad vanarch or inactive.

If this happens, the guild's vanarchy status should go from something like
'Secure' to 'At Risk'
Once they are 'At Risk', players who are in that zone may vote their 'opinion' of the vanarch as either GOOD or BAD, and the members of that vanarch guild, obviously, should not be able to do that sort of voting at that time.

A certain number of people during that vanarch's reign vote them as GOOD, then they stay.
A certain number of people during that vanarch's reign vote them as BAD, then their position is vulnerable.

The guild's position has been voted as BAD enough times for them to be vulnerable. One of the people who voted for the guild to be overthrown then must donate money to another vanarch guild to help them overthrow the baddie.
For less than a day, probably around 12 hours, the vanarch who is helping to overthrow is at war with the baddie vanarch guild. If in that 12 hours, the baddie wins, their reign of terror can remain. And so forth.
Let's say we have an inactive vanarch guild and nobody is playing. Nobody dies and nobody gets any kills, then after the 12 hours, the vanarch guild will lose their status as vanarch and the vanarch guild who was at war with the baddie will be able to control that area too.

At first glance, this would mean angry players wouldn't be flying to Lumbertown every few hours they die for crystals or skill training. Second glance this adds some realism to the game. And not only will it do that, it will give vanarch guilds a chance to rule over multiple areas.

I want to know if this is worth suggesting to enmasse. I'm sick of waiting a long while for elections to come in and I want to be able to get bad vanarchs out of the way outright. I'm levelling in Tulufan place right now and we have a vanarch who has quit TERA temporarily or not we don't know, to play Final Fantasy 14 which is terribad.

It was thought up on the spot. Do not hate. It is a rough outline of the idea I am thinking and may need improvement or deeper thinking, however this is what the basic suggestion is. If you agree with this, I can confidently suggest to enmasse about it. Don't hate. Do not hate.


this is why your name is GingerKid ....
GingerKid Profile Options #9

0
0
Neutral
You can't fight a guild which has no members online.
You can't assassinate a guild master who has quit for days straight (will not be online any time of any day for 'this long') to play FFXIV either.

Another thing is how vanarchs will probably not ACTUALLY be in a physical building or palace what have you... they are probably online every weekend grinding that rep every weekend so that they can reach a reputation for nexus which is 'revered' therefore allowing them to get that top end PvP gear or whatever. Still, there's always a day where the vanarch can get some 'points' or what have you in order to keep their reign sustainable and without getting mad players. Not asking for vanarchs to be online all the time. Just enough for them to keep taxes low and keep stores open. Not hard.

I don't like the wait if they do not live up to that expectation. I want pristine crystals and I want them now. I do not want to fly to Lumbertown if I get killed by a BAM. And the problem is how I know the vanarch will not be online during that one reign to open the stores and skill trainers so players have to be able to do something. And having a fight against them to overthrow them outright is impractical. Players currently in the zone should vote for a fight and if there are enough votes to overthrow the vanarch, then YES you can jump in your Ford Focus and do a siege.

"I hate this vanarch"
"Me too"
"WTB guild who can beat up 'this vanarchy: ______"