Genesis Roleplay

[Mangost]

So basically, after having played on genesis 1 a decent amount I had an idea for a server: basically a roleplay/pvpve server where 5 tribes each get one of the 5 biomes, and then they have to use the resources in their biome to build up and trade with others, there would probably be rules against stealing or even just tping to other biomes (maybe just for like the first week or so, after that you gotta defend)

basically im just wondering: would anyone play on a server like this? spawning and stuff would probably be changed to make the biomes a little more balanced, such as biomes that have many resources should be bottlenecked more, certain tames should be moved to different biomes so people are more encouraged to trade if they want everything, and war could be declared but maybe with rules such as: (in similar ways to civ 6)
formal war, declare it a few days in advance then fight until surrender
surprise war, declare and attack at any time however there would be some limit to how much damage you could do, or some other penalty.
stuff like that, maybe if another tribe builds an outpost in your territory you can have like a territory war where you just attack that outpost?

just looking for opinions

[Yggdrassil]

Its a nice idea but on a public server you will struggle to enforce this. If you had a whole bunch of friends willing then it would be a nice idea but this is ark, trust nobody

[Pipinghot]

11 hours ago, Mangost said:

basically im just wondering: would anyone play on a server like this?

I think they might in PvE, but you would have to do a lot of work to recruit people who would play fair & square all the time. It's a great concept, but it would only work if you find people who specifically want to play a game with those rules. You could not, for example, create a public server and then just post those rules when people join. They would have to be recruited in advance and know exactly what sort of server rules they're agreeing to before they join it.

The catch is, would you be willing to spend the time mediating between the different biomes/tribes and investigating accusations of cheating your server rules, because it's inevitable that there will be accusations even if no one ever cheats.

11 hours ago, Mangost said:

and war could be declared but maybe with rules such as: (in similar ways to civ 6)
formal war, declare it a few days in advance then fight until surrender
surprise war, declare and attack at any time however there would be some limit to how much damage you could do, or some other penalty.
stuff like that, maybe if another tribe builds an outpost in your territory you can have like a territory war where you just attack that outpost?

When you consider that warfare in ARK is destructive, it would take a lot of time and oversight to make sure that people follow your rules of warfare. Trying to figure out a way to calculate "how much damage you could do" and make sure that people stop when they've done that much is basically impossible unless you find a way to program a system that automatically enforces it, and then you have to make sure that system doesn't have any bugs.

The moment you have more than one person involved you will have more than one interpretation of what is legitimate and what is cheating. People who are winning wars will resent having to stop and people who are losing will want it to stop sooner, so they would each constantly argue about whether the attackers have gone too far or have not gone far enough, and would constantly be asking for the other side to be penalized.

It's not that people are dishonest, this is just human nature. People are much better at understanding when other people have screwed them over than understanding when they've screwed someone else over. Look at how much people complain about officials and penalties in their favorite sport? "That ref stinks, he should have penalized them" vs. "that ref stinks, he shouldn't have penalized our player". It takes constant supervision and enforcement in every game, ever. Having wars with agreed upon rules is impossible unless there is an external referee who's willing to make both sides mad at them by enforcing the rules even if people don't like it.

11 hours ago, Mangost said:

just looking for opinions

It's a cool concept, but people are always looking for ways to get the edge when they're competing with each other. It would take a lot of work to maintain a system that allows for warfare without people quitting your server.

[Mangost]

yeah i think it would be invite only for one thing and idk how to enforce the rest, i just wanted to throw the idea out there