There should be a king or some president to defend the royal lands.
I don’t think that would make sense storywise.
You start out a village with a few settlers who are all allready adults. Meaning they have lived a life togheter and decided to get away from that.
This means that most likely, in another big city there is allready a king active. In my opinion. The most logical leadership in the towns you build on Stonehearth is a council by the highest crafters and veteran fighters.
But in your story situtation there must be a leader or something to leave from kingdom. I know the king in the begining is very wrong but some leader (he/she will approve) and became king in later game. If a leader option is aded this will be so good.
But why? What effect would it have on the game @Sina_Gundogdu?
These suggestions keeps comming up with mayors, kings, gods and so on… But what other than caring for the players ego do it actually change?
A true leader is focused on the people they lead and not on their own ego… even though its usually the other way around with most leaders and therefore leaders dont lead… they enforce…
This has been suggested and destroyed several times by this community so nope not happening.
I am going to continue to shoot these ideas down until someone can actually give a real reason for why a ruler is needed. I rule my town not one of my hearthlings.
I think it would be a wonderful idea, Sad that nobody has made this yet as I have seen it suggested many times. I have even tried to make my own but never got very far, not much time to work on it.
For mine anyways I planned to make a king based largely on buffs for villagers and improving morale, as well as increasing their wealth through trading. either by lowering cost of trade items or even having their own form of work bench (possibly a throne?) where they could produce deals or trades instead of objects. (required items could differ and result in gold)
I think as with real life a ruler of some form could be very helpful. people seem to misunderstand this request, but rulers don’t sit around and do nothing, it could if done right prove very beneficial.
I have to second this, I don’t really see the need of a king, a mayor or a god. for all intent and purpose I, the player, am all 3 of those things with my all seeing eye looking over this tiny region of the world.
Show me a real benefit that this class would provide that couldn’t be done with any other less titled class and then we’ll talk.
See now there are actually effects from this suggestions… Now its just up to those who really want to be a god or king to build a proper case and convince the developers about how this would make the game better than it is now?
Personally i think there should be more than just some buffs, and the trades comes already without a king? So yes we could place a king in the game, and say that trades come because of that… But would that then be true?
@Fornjotr Why don’t you swap with Lars Løkke. You’d be geat.
høhøhø Danes and their politics… Thanks @Simon_Noval i guess
I think that it is not really necessary for a king to be a leader, a unit superior to the knight and the footman, but that can only be promoted through a single object that drops an enemy leader possibly in a very advanced campaign mission, the abilities that Could have this leader would be state buffers for their peers and villagers, a lot of strength and life, but since it is such a strong unit that has to live with luxuries, which would mean giving a use to refined articles, it is my opinion
Thanks for replying guys. And ı want to say king and other leaders are just a title to them. The other mobs have their leaders and they are powerful then others. I am asking"Why the humans have not a leader?". Jose_Abreu is explains the situtation. If there was a promotion to be leader or king is makes game better not bad.
It gives me laughter since recently creating my town I thought to create a castle and inside to create a kind of real room and apart a room with all the refined objects and what I did was put as property that bed to a heartling that was a knigth Level 6 and I separate it from the other parties and I only have it in that construction, then I saw this post and I called my attention because it was something that caused me to try in the town (after fighting Ogo and taking away his banner), Sina_Gundogdu only wants to give our people a leader who supports our villagers but is a unique unit.
There is properbly more threads that fit the subject? But here are some of the ideas the players have come up with:
Is it possible to create roles such as a king, valets, queen of course and peasants for next upgrade?
What purpose would those roles serve @Terr4t0r ?
Also I direct you How about a king? <here This is a discussion about the very same suggestion as well as some points and counter arguments and links to a few other suggestion posts asking the same thing.
Also, welcome to the discourse @Terr4t0r
Of course trade already exists, I was suggesting having a leader of sorts could improve trade giving either more options or better deals. no need to add a class without actually adding anything when it can be improved through it.
well i dont disagree but what would the use be? i guess he could orginize stuff to make carpender/mason work faster but i think that would be about it… if they add multiplayer it would be really cool though
there cant be a leader… thats what you dont understand… both races already have leaders you are building a new settlement in their name… having your own king would make you a traitor and be a cause for war with your own faction… which is obviously not in this game…
it would be like what happened to form America… a former British empire separated from their nation with a war…
In Dwarf Fortress that’s not a problem. The existing King merely chooses your settlement as his new home because of its renknown, wealth and glory. Don’t see why that’s categorically out of the question for Stonehearth.
It could boost morale, frequency of trade and overall happyness for citizens while on the downside sieges become more likely. If the king is killed morale would go down and there would be some long term mali. Only thing I could see becoming difficult is to make sure that players dont 't just lock the king up in a safe hole somewhere deep underground so no enemy can get him. Maybe he would demand access to a park or something.