• 500 Players on Java
  • us.mineplex.com
  • 3079 Players Online
  • 2579 Players on Bedrock
  • us.mineplex.com
!
Attention Internet Explorer Users
To have the best user experience on our site please consider upgrading to Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox

Truce command for clans!!!!

Discussion in 'Game Alterations' started by nadav1112, Jan 27, 2020.

?

Like this?

  1. Yes!

    11 vote(s)
    50.0%
  2. No,meow!

    11 vote(s)
    50.0%
Multiple votes are allowed.
  1. So I have idea call truce command you can truce peoples but not see them on map they can’t hurt each other but they still be the same on map so or same color the name
     
    Posted Jan 27, 2020
  2. I feel like truces should be officially added into the game, but should have no perks other than a color change. You can hurt truces, they don't show up on the map, and there'd be no truce chat. Truced clans would just be a different color so you'd know not to attack them. I don't see why there would be a limit on truces, as clans would always make more truces without the command if there was one.
     
    Posted Jan 27, 2020
  3. I’m not sure how I feel about this. While realistically there wouldn’t be many problems with implementing this command, I feel like at the end of the day it wouldn’t be used much and is rather useless. I get that it could be helpful to create a truce with another player to protect yourself, but that person is always capable of violating that and hurting not you, but your clan. If truces are between players and not clans, people who have a truce with a member of a clan would be able to go against the truce and directly hurt the clan or other members in it in some way shape or form.

    I think maybe truces between clans would be cool instead. That way, it’s beneficial to all members of a clan and one player can’t go against a truce with someone and hurt their clan rather than them.

    How do you think this command would work? You didn’t really give much detail there. Personally, I think /truce request (clan name) would suffice. Like a party or friend request it would show a message in chat saying “(clan) has request to truce with you. Do you accept?” After this message there are both a green “Accept” button and a red “Decline” button.

    I think you’ve got a decent idea here. With a little more detail I think it wouldn’t be to bad but as it is now I’m going to leave it as a +0. Thanks for the suggestion!
     
    Posted Jan 27, 2020
  4. Ok /staff request name you can infinity truces they can see on map but can’t hurt each other
     
    OP OP
    OP OP Posted Jan 27, 2020
    saltyfishhy likes this.
  5. I feel like giving the truces any special abilities other than color will get denied.
    Doing /c truce clanname will send a truce request identical to that of an ally request. (Only admin+ will be able to use it) and it will only change the color to (pink possibly) some unused color. Showing truces on the map might be cool, but may be too much.
     
    Posted Jan 27, 2020
  6. I recommend you join the Clans Discord. They have talked about it a couple of time, and there have been polls about it. You can also see more of the clans community vote on your idea
     
    Posted Jan 27, 2020
    Fallen™ likes this.
  7. Hey!
    This is a interesting idea, although it gives less perks then being allied, but it still allows for many more clans to work together then I personally think should. This removes much of the functionality from alliances. I also don't see this affecting the game too much as it can be easily violated with un trucing them the same way you can un ally. I would have to give a -1 from me as alliances already exist.
     
    Posted Jan 29, 2020
  8. Personally, I don't agree with this idea because if you want truces to be between clans everybody may not agree with having a truce. If this were to exist I think that every member of the clan would have to agree and there should be a way to back out of the truce if you change your mind.
     
    Posted Jan 29, 2020
  9. A pink color is the same as the neg/pos on a clan color so I would recommend making it blue but I think this idea’s a good one, and should be considered
     
    Posted Jan 29, 2020
  10. This makes literally no sense. As of now ally requests don't require all members to agree, one admin can ally a clan and then everyone else can't hurt them at all. Truces would be much less lenient, if one member disagreed so strongly with a truce that they'd go against it they could still attack and kill truced clans.
    It doesn't really remove any of the functionality of alliances (at least my version) as only the color of the clan would change. As of now clans still truce, however this can be confusing in fights as they might not know who to not kill. All the /truce command would do is change the color, you'd still have to worry about accidentally hitting your truce. While it wouldn't effect the game too much it would be a big QOL change and would make the game less confusing for all.
    The fact that you can un-truce a clan makes no difference, you can easily disband a clan or kick a member but does that make creating clans useless?
     
    Posted Jan 29, 2020
  11. A /truce command is absolutely pointless. It does nothing a player can't already do.

    Your first point demonstrates exactly why this command would be useless. If one member disagreed so strongly then what is the entire point of trucing? Sure, you may be able to label your friends but if the purpose is to be coordinated, why would you potentially allow them to backstab. Labeling them as a truce generalizes the entire clan and as you pointed out, it will be very easy to betray them. You can't kill allies for that reason because your clan leadership wants to maintain a competitive relationship with other clans that - for the most time - ensures mutual achievement. Labeling players as truces diminishes the value of mutual achievement and can instead open a pathway for exploitation. It is better to just identify who is and who isn't your friend by player tag (or by remembering who your friends are? This should be intuitive...) instead of generalizing anyone that may disregard your friendship with another player in the same clan.

    Secondly, this does diminish the value of alliances. Alliances are supposed to bring together multiple clans to "dominate" other clans or alliances. The problem is the more alliances a clan has the more overwhelming it can be for other clans with less alliances - meaning the smaller clans or alliances stand no chance. For this reason, there is an alliance cap for clans.

    As you pointed out, other clans sometimes truce other clans that aren't considered alliances. However, if you label those players as truces what incentive is there for not simply merging clans? If two clans are already strong enough friends and don't plan to attack each other why should they not merge or have other "truces" merge? If you label every neighbor, enemy, or friend as a truce from time to time you are devaluing the need for an alliance because there should already be mutual trust between the two clans. Furthermore, betraying that trust is just like being enemies anyways. There is no gain other than creating a needless limbo of uncertainty for differentiating between friends and enemies.

    By encouraging players to truce, which this addition would, clans servers would become smaller and smaller rather than larger. For every season I have played clans any clan I swarm complains about fighting a 20 v 6. If the fight was an 8 v 6, it is definitely a bit more balanced. Trucing groups more and more clans together means that they should all work towards a common goal. This means that instead of making the world wider and more welcoming for newer and less experienced players, it becomes smaller because there are less and less overall objectives for individual clans to pursue. Most players come to clans for a combination of competition and bargaining, not simply the bargaining. That would be better off for a survival server.

    Ultimately, I believe adding a /truce command will have little effect other than wasting developer time for more important features. It's absolutely pointless and will only create more clan v. clan issues. Clans would be less coordinated, the value of their alliances would diminish, and it would encourage entire groupings of players instead of a diverse mixture of large, powerful clans and small, farmer clans. If the whole purpose was to dominate anyways, then multiple clans would just merge instead of dealing with the possibility of betrayal.
     
    Posted Jan 29, 2020
    Fallen™ and Chromuh like this.
  12. Why ally when you can have almost the same effect from just trucing? Now you might disagree say that it isn't the same effect, but I disagree due to the fact that you can easily un ally and kill them if you wouldn't that clan as an ally anymore. Or you can simply not hit them if you would like the same effect as a permanent alliance. I'm not saying this feature is necessarily bad, just saying it would substantially affect the alliances, especially if there is no maximum cap to how many truces one clan can have.

    You misunderstood me because I related trucing to allies, and I was saying trucing is useless because you can un ally and kill with alliances. The fact that whether or not you can hit a truce or not barely matters, due to you being able to un truce with them at any moment.
     
    Posted Jan 30, 2020
    Fallen™ and KyloRen1010 like this.
  13. I mean you can un truce them at any moment yeah, but you can also un ally and kill an ally at any moment, or you can currently just kill a truced player right now with no warning, and with my idea you'd still be able to do that. The only thing this would do is allow for a player to know what other clans your clan has agreed to truce. The same issues of easy betrayal and accidental killing would still apply.
    Allowing for official trucing wouldn't really change anything. Allying a clan allows for you to talk to them, see where they are, not hit them, and know where there base is. Saying that adding a truce command would make this useless implies that the greatest benefit gained from an alliance is the fact that there name changes color.
     
    Posted Jan 30, 2020
  14. This is the exact reason why it isn't needed. to put it simply, in my opinion it isn't needed enough to add no perks, and if it got perks it would basically be an alliance. A simple solution for this is to inform the members of your clan that you are truced. What I said in those messages I was specifically pointing out that if they got more perks then just the name color change.
     
    Posted Jan 30, 2020
    Psta and KyloRen1010 like this.
  15. I don't think this is necessary since we already can ally with other clans. This truce perk gives one of the main benefits to an ally and I think that would be unnecessary. Although, I would agree if the truce command would only change the clans name just to make it simple and easier for other clan mates.
     
    Posted Jan 30, 2020
  16. The thing is there's a limited amount of allies a clan can have, but people truce with other clans all the time. Many times while playing clans people will ask "Hey are we truced?" before being slaughtered by the clan they were uncertain about. Adding an offical truce command that only changes the color of someone name will still keep alliances useful, but would eliminate confusion between the enemy and friends. At one point a few seasons ago I heard someone in a ranger tower say "I can't see nametags from up here. yellow name = death."
     
    Posted Jan 31, 2020
  17. This is exactly my point. Most of the time - at least for how my clan plays - we truce with individuals inside of other clans and only keep alliances with entire clans. If there are already truce issues between clans, why add another layer of issues by providing evidence that they may be truce with some members but not the rest of the clan? For me, it would be easily exploitable for members of my clan or other clans to do a /truce and then kill players who think they want to actually be safe from attacking one another.

    Plus, this just adds to the diminishing server issue that clans has always had. If clans keep on making more and more truces then there really is no competition for newer players. Inherently, if you are going to do a /truce why would you attack them? This would make it more identifiable, yes, but allies do the exact same thing and allying also prevents damage. If this were added, it would encourage players to just form huge factions of multiple clans that would demolish smaller clans because of their sheer numbers.

    By keeping truces a player-to-player interaction, players will firstly have to rely on their memory to remember who their friends are within other clans. They - hopefully - won't have to worry about being betrayed by a friend. Secondly, by keeping larger truces a clan-to-clan interaction, clans won't be encouraged to truce with every other clan and some level of competitive integrity will be kept.

    Then there is the point I think everyone has hammered home, this has no purpose because it is already something everyone does - as you said. I don't exactly see why you would be confused about who your friends are and who isn't. If someone can't render a name tag, a change in color would be useless.

    There are too many possible negatives for the server and only one positive for players that may not remember who and who isn't on their /f list. That one positive is still outweighed by many negatives for individual players.
     
    Posted Jan 31, 2020
    Chromuh likes this.
  18. It would be cool to have a /truce command as long as the other clan doesn't have to accept and it would only change the color for players in that clan. Sometimes my clan likes to truce people without my knowledge and I end up trying to kill them before knowing we are actually truced. However, this would probably be a waste of developer time, considering there are more important things for it to be used for. /truce isn't really a necessity for clans and a big downside is the possible increase of teamed players, making it harder for smaller clans to play if multiple power clans truce. I also believe you should still have the ability to hit a truced player if this rules comes about, so it is not the same as the /ally command, only without the limit. It also adds more risk to the game as you need to be careful who you are trucing. This also prevents the clans from using abilities to support each other, such as using life bonds and healing shot as they may become to powerful in huge teamed groups. Again, my opinion for this is for it to just be a way to just know who you are truced to.
     
    Posted Feb 2, 2020

Share This Page