Territory control overhaul

[Woody]

Summary (tl;dr)
This suggestions outlines an overhaul of the Territory Control (TC) and housing systems to improve structure, gameplay incentives, and regional identity. It begins by removing all existing TC assets, refunding player investments, and preserving house inventories for future use. Territories will be redesigned with fixed build locations, including 1–2 villages offering limited housing plots with local benefits, 3 fortresses used to determine ownership through siege-based mechanics, and 1 outpost for resource collection, no longer tied to territorial control. Keeps will be transformed into player-managed towns featuring expanded housing, services like banks and brokers, and unique layouts based on regional style. Housing will become plot-based and restricted to designated areas in villages, towns, and NPC cities, with instanced apartments added to major cities. Ownership grants strategic and economic benefits, and houses can be temporarily disabled through sieging without loss of stored loot. Upkeep will be tied to plot ownership, with options for shared access. Territory ownership will depend on controlling the majority of regional fortresses, encouraging coordinated, large-scale conflict and alliance dynamics. Finally, player activity within territories will generate additional resources for owners, incentivizing regional gathering and deeper integration between player actions and economic control.

---

The Problem
As it stands, the implementation of free placed housing, stronghold and miscellaneous TC assets is not working and creates more negative impacts to the "sandbox" environment that is intended with players owning a slice of the game world. This aspect of MO2 is a massive hook for many players however, the negative aspects of the current implement of free-placed TC far outweigh the benefits toward this. Such as:

• Poor Gameplay Incentives - Current system lacks meaningful reward loops for territory and housing control.
• World Clutter & Visual Pollution - The wilderness is overrun by TC assets, degrading the visual quality and immersion of the world.
• Shallow Player-Town Development- Lack of structured growth or meaningful town building.
• Immersion and Lore Breaking - Haphazard housing placements ruin the handcrafted feel of the world.
• Limits Gameplay Potential - Anti-abuse measures (e.g., placement rules, siege limitations) restrict freedom and creativity.
• Fails Sandbox Promise - Instead of enhancing player agency, the system creates chaos without real ownership or purpose.

If StarVault wants MO2 to succeed and enhance the potential we all know this game has, it needs to start over with TC and pivot toward a static-prefab plot system that ties into the wider systems now being implemented. The recent changes with outposts and territory are very good first steps. With all this in mind, I will only outline the fundamentals that I believe need to exist for this system, and try not to be too specific in the design and implementation.

1. Full Removal of Current TC Assets​

• Refund all players' deed investments in gold.
• Secure player's house/stronghold furniture/inventory for future system use.

2. Introduce Static Build Locations Per Territory​

Each territory includes:

• 1-2 Villages:
  • Contains limited, purchasable plots.
  • Provides village specific benefits to the house owners so long as the house is built and not destroyed.
  • Can eventually include palisade walls and additional services such as vendors (but do not allow for bankers or brokers)
    • This incentivises the use of housing to store loot locally in that area
  • Visually a Tindremic village should look different than an MK village and that of a Jungle village etc.
  • This would equal roughly 35-70 villages for players to build in.
• 3 Fortresses:
  • Determine territory ownership.
  • Does not support player housing.
  • Acts as guild garrisons with stables, storage, priest etc.
  • Require siege equipment to break into unlike outposts, however, should also include some kind of final capture and hold condition much like outposts.
  • Visually these could be a medium size fortress with an outer bailey; services located in the outer bailey etc.
• 1 Outpost (mostly unchanged):
  • No longer determines territory ownership.
  • Collects all regional resources/taxes; must be emptied regularly by the owner at the risk of being flipped by an enemy guild.
  • Easily captured by enemies as it is now; which allows looting of all unclaimed resources and taxes.

3. Transform Keeps into “Towns”​

• Keeps shift to become player-managed towns: there is still a keep as a prominent aspect of the town but functionally, they are designed to be large towns for players to live out.
• Can contain bankers and brokers.
• They include a larger number of housing plots (including apartments) over villages, guild rule-setting such as blacklists and guard states etc.
• Towns layouts should differ from one another, and not be simply copy pasted across the world. This makes both the navigating and living out of each town unique but also changes the way battles and sieges will play out from one town/keep to another.
• Visually a Tindremic town should look different than an MK town and that of a Jungle town etc.
• Tie siege protection and capture mechanics to the connected territories of the town. More connected territories, more protection.

4. Revamp Housing System​

• Housing restricted to designated village/town plots. No free placement, blueprint based system per plot.
• Additionally add plots to NPC towns (e.g., Meduli, Tindrem)
• Instanced apartments added to major cities for all players.
• Players can own:
  • One open-world house (village/town)
  • Multiple instanced apartments (located in Major cities and player towns)
• Torching & Sieging: Houses can still be attacked (visual rubble) to temporarily disable benefits and access to stored loot. This does not however, remove the ownership of the plot from the owner.
• Owners must repair their houses with Wood/Stone/Metal to restore functionality.
• Upkeep is paid on the plot, not the built assets in the plot.
• Villages have two types of plots. Plots that can be (re)allocated by the territory owner at any time (1/3 of all plots), and plots that are freehold and permanent unless the owner sells it or fails to upkeep during inactivity etc (2/3 of all plots).
  • Freehold/Permanent plots cost more upkeep
  • Territory owner plots cost less upkeep.
• Owning a house grants benefits:
  • 100% of the regional benefits from that territory + 50% of all benefits of other territories the territory owner controls.
• Allow for limited plot sharing e.g. requires a house and then by placing a bed inside the home, can be assigned to another player which gives them some access to manage the plot. Removing the bed immediately removes access.
• Upkeep paid can only be paid by those who own the house or share the house.
• Loot stored in houses is always safe even when the house is destroyed/disabled.
  • If a player loses their plot due to inactivity/unkeep loss, then their loot is transferred to a village/town storage for them to collect.
  • This plays into SV's intent to avoid houses being targeted for loot purpose and therefore not actually being used or lived out of.
• Certain plots especially in villages, contain farms!
• To encourage houses being used to store items over banks and increase the utility of housing and apartments, reduce bank size by half. Bags can still be used to store more.

5. Enhance Territory Ownership Mechanics​

• Ownership of territories is tied to the guild that controls the majority (2/3) of fortresses.
• Encourages strategic assaults and multi-stage conflict. If a guild wants your territory, the intent will be shown by the fact they need to capture 2/3 fortresses. This helps mitigate against the false declarations.
• Alliances can divide fortress control between each other without flipping control which incentivises timezone based alliances.
• Guilds show clear intent when taking territory, unlike current flip-flop system.

6. Player Actions Fuel Territory Resources at Outpost​

• Territory owners gain the current passive income + an additional % of all player gathering in region.
  • E.g., 1% of all calx mined is stored at outpost. This 1% is not taken from the player though it's 1% on top of the amount mined.
• Encourages players to live and gather within their own or allied regions.

 

[Woody]

added tl;dr to wall of text

 

[Emdash]

agree w/ static, but I also think outside of those areas that you should be allowed to build things that are easy to siege or that even decay, 'camps.' But the meat of TC should def be static so the world isn't shitted.

 

[Woody]

agree w/ static, but I also think outside of those areas that you should be allowed to build things that are easy to siege or that even decay, 'camps.' But the meat of TC should def be static so the world isn't shitted.

I had the same thought, where temporary "camps" feel like something that could go alongside a static system and give some benefit to roaming groups such as temporary storage etc.

 

[pooternackle]

you don't like walking outside of a Mongol-Japanese inspired city and seeing medieval european houses? you don't like coming across massive field of lifeless copy-paste houses scattered haphazardly about as if the backrooms was bleeding into nave?

 

[Woody]

you don't like walking outside of a Mongol-Japanese inspired city and seeing medieval european houses? you don't like coming across massive field of lifeless copy-paste houses scattered haphazardly about as if the backrooms was bleeding into nave?

If I could pin this I would haha