Pending Clash of Kingdoms

[reproject1]

I propose a new, lore-integrated game mechanic for Metin2, designed to deepen faction identity and player engagement through monarchic governance, kingdom warfare, and dynamic diplomacy. The system introduces elected Kings/Queens in each of the three warring empires, Jinno (Blue), Chunjo (Yellow), and Shinsoo (Red), with selection methods reflecting their cultural identities: combat trials for warriors, spiritual rituals for theocrats, and wealth-based ascension for merchants.

Monarchs gain the power to declare war, triggering large-scale PvP battles where victory grants access to a portion of the loser’s trade tax revenue. A new diplomatic taxation system allows kingdoms to impose penalties or offer subsidies on cross-faction trade, enhancing economic strategy. Victorious kingdoms receive temporary zone-specific bonuses (1–5% EXP or drop rates) to incentivize participation. To address balance concerns, minor buffs for underpopulated factions during wars are suggested, aligning with community discussions on fairness.

This system builds directly on Metin2's existing Lisan (language) mechanics and faction-based world design, and is supported by precedent from private server implementations and community feedback. Clash of Kingdoms transforms Metin2 into a politically dynamic world where leadership, economy, and warfare shape the fate of empires.

Monarch Selection​

Each kingdom should have a monarch (King or Queen) chosen through a method that reflects its core cultural values, reinforcing Metin2's lore of three distinct civilizations.

• Jinno (Blue – Warrior Empire): A combat tournament held in a dedicated arena such as the Imha Dojo. The top-scoring player or last survivor becomes monarch, embodying Jinno’s militaristic ethos.
• Chunjo (Yellow – Theocratic Empire): A sacred ritual in Waryong Cathedral requiring candidates to complete a spiritual questline. The winner is chosen by a divine sign, randomized or GM-mediated, mirroring Chunjo’s religious leadership.
• Shinsoo (Red – Trade Empire): The wealthiest player, determined by a monthly audit of Yang and inventory value, becomes monarch, reflecting Shinsoo’s mercantile foundation.

Eligibility could require Level 65, 1,000,000 Yang, and a citizenship item, consistent with existing quest logic. The monarch serves a fixed term (e.g., 2 weeks), after which a new election cycle begins.

Kingdom	Selection Method	Requirements	Implementation Details
Jinno (Blue – Warrior)	Arena Tournament	Level 65+, 1,000,000 Yang, Citizenship Item	Held in Imha Dojo. A 3-round elimination tournament. Winner becomes Monarch.
Chunjo (Yellow – Theocratic)	Divine Ritual	Complete 3 spiritual quests, 1,000,000 Yang	Held in Waryong Cathedral. Final selection via random divine sign (GM or script-triggered).
Shinsoo (Red – Merchant)	Wealth Audit	Highest net worth (Yang + inventory value)	Monthly audit. Player with most wealth becomes Monarch.

• Eligibility: All candidates must possess a Proof of Citizenship (item ID 60004) and be at least Level 65.
• Term: 14 days. A countdown timer appears in the kingdom’s main city.
• Rewards: Monarch receives:
  • Imperial King Set (visual-only armor, item IDs 11971–11974)
  • Angelic Blessing Item(functional item with kingdom-wide buffs)
    • Emperor’s Blessing (EXP +5%)
    • Emperor’s Defense (P.Def +10%)
    • Teleport to Capital
    • Summon NPC Guard (temporary)

Kingdom Warfare​

The monarch gains the authority to declare war on another kingdom, initiating a 2-hour large-scale PvP event in a neutral battlefield such as Depths of Greed or Moonshadow Vale, both already documented expanded map areas.

• Battles are scored by kills, encouraging aggressive play.
• Fallen players respawn from their kingdom’s frontline, promoting strategic depth and preventing spawn camping.
• Each kingdom has a designated frontline spawn zone, ensuring balanced engagement.

The winning kingdom receives a percentage of the loser’s accumulated trade tax revenue, proportional to the score difference (e.g., 10% bonus for a 20% kill lead). This creates real economic stakes and rewards coordinated warfare.

Economic Diplomacy and Inter-Kingdom Taxation​

Building on the existing Ring of Tongues and language books, this system introduces diplomatic relations that affect cross-kingdom trade.

Diplomatic Status	Trade Tax Modifier	Treasury Impact
Hostile	+20%	Increased revenue
Neutral	0%	Standard revenue
Truce	-10%	Kingdom subsidizes 10%
Alliance	-30%	Kingdom subsidizes 30%

For example:
A Shinsoo player sells an item for 10,000,000 Yang in Jinno under a 10% alliance discount.

• Buyer pays: 9,000,000 Yang
• Seller receives: 10,000,000 Yang
• Kingdom treasury covers the 1,000,000 Yang difference

All base taxes flow into a Kingdom Treasury, used to:

• Fund war declarations
• Subsidize allied traders
• Grant temporary buffs to citizens

This system encourages diplomatic strategy, where monarchs negotiate truces or alliances to boost economic influence.

Battle Mechanics​

• Start: War declared via Monarch NPC or Angelic Blessing item.
• Participation: All kingdom members can join. Entry via War Teleporter NPC in capital cities.
• Scoring: Based on PvP kills. Each kill = +1 point.
• Respawns: Players respawn at their Kingdom Frontline (dedicated spawn zone) after 10 seconds.
• Map Design: Three lanes with control points (like MOBA). Capturing points grants +10% score gain.
• Victory Condition: Highest score after 2 hours.

Victory Rewards and Balance Mechanisms​

To incentivize mass participation, the victorious kingdom receives a randomized temporary bonus (1–5%) applied to a specific zone (e.g., +3% drop rate in Pyungmoo). Bonuses last 48 hours and are announced server-wide.

To address population imbalance, a known issue in faction-based servers, smaller kingdoms could receive minor stat buffs during wars, such as:

• +5% movement speed
• +10% HP
• +15% experience gain (war-only)

While Metin2 inherently has imbalances due to free kingdom switching (500,000 Yang + 7-day cooldown), this system adds counterweights that make underdog victories meaningful.

War Rewards​

• Winner: Gains X% of loser’s tax revenue, where:
  X = 5 + ((Winner_Score - Loser_Score) / Loser_Score) * 10
  (Minimum 5%, Maximum 15%)
• Citizen Bonus: All members receive:
  • Random Zone Bonus: +1% to +5% EXP or drop rate for 48 hours.
  • Example: “Shinsoo gains +3% drop rate in Yongan for 48h!”

Balance and Inclusivity Mechanisms​

To address population imbalance, the system includes:

• Underdog Buffs: Kingdom with fewer players in war gains:
  • +10% HP
  • +5% Movement Speed
  • +15% EXP during war
• Participation Bonus: All participants receive 10,000 Yang + 1 Metin Coin regardless of outcome.
• War Contribution Score: Tracks kills, revives, and control points. Top 10% get exclusive titles (e.g., “Hero of Jinno”).

Lore Consistency​

The Clash of Kingdoms system is fully aligned with Metin2's established lore:

• The world is divided into three warring empires (Chunjo, Jinno, Shinsoo), each spanning four maps connected by portals).
• Factions have distinct identities: theocratic (Chunjo), militaristic (Jinno), mercantile (Shinsoo).
• Language barriers exist via the Langugage system, requiring books for cross-faction communication.

Mechanically, the system is feasible:

• Kingdom switching (500,000 Yang + cooldown) is already implemented.
• Guild leadership systems (e.g., Ring of Successor) show hierarchical governance is possible.
• The game engine supports custom quest events like on buy, on sell, on craft, and on mine.
• Large-scale PvP systems (e.g., Guild Wars, Siege) prove neutral battlefield mechanics are stable.
• Private server databases (e.g., GitHub Mt2-CMS) already include tables like:
  • gmlist (admin roles)
  • locale (server settings)
  • Custom monarch table entries for kingdom leadership.

 

[Essence]

Hi,

This is a very ambitious and detailed proposal and there’s clearly a lot of thought put into how each system connects, both mechanically and thematically, to WoM2’s existing structure. That said, there’s also a lot (and I mean a lot) going on here and it introduces multiple large-scale systems (governance, economy, PvP, diplomacy) all at once. Because of that, it’s not something that can be cleanly accepted or rejected at a glance.

For now, I’m going to move this to Pending rather than give a definitive answer. There are definitely some compelling ideas but the overall scope and complexity need to be carefully examined. In the meantime, it would be really helpful for the community to break this down and engage with it more critically. If you’re reading this, consider digging into specific parts of the proposal instead of giving a definite yes or no. For example, a good question to debate is the risks of the taxation and diplomacy system, which can be astronomous and potentially abusive for the in-game economy.

If the original poster is open to it, it might also help to isolate one subsystem at a time (for example, just the monarch system or just kingdom wars) in different suggestions, and develop those further with community input before treating this as a full package. If you decide to do so, make sure you link the original thread.

Either way, this needs refinement, testing of assumptions and a lot of discussion. Looking forward to seeing how others respond and what insights come out of breaking this down, as some bits and pieces could definitely be borrowed.

Warm wishes,
Essence.

 

[art99]

The suggestion is very interesting, and I support its implementation, but a major issue is the low player base in Yellow, which does not have a strong guild like Red (Rb/HR) or Blue (Hated) for it to be a relatively fair and fully functional system
So, in addition to supporting the implementation of this mini-game, I would also suggest bringing back a lockdown phase, but with the following rules:

• Migration is locked: only toward Yellow, no return until the unlock phase
• Yellow receives a dynamic bonus: +10% drop / +10% EXP alternating weekly
• After lockdown: there is a 10-day period in which guilds can receive a one-time PvM-only bonus for 14–30 days upon migrating to Yellow.
• Migrated guilds receive a PvM-only bonus for 14–30 days

on the other hand

Core idea:​

• Different taxes per kingdom
• Diplomatic states (Alliance / War / Truce)
• Economic influence between kingdoms
• Possible subsidies or modified trade values

Key characteristics:​

• Direct impact on Yang economy
• Players can profit from differences between kingdoms
• Cross-kingdom trading advantages/disadvantages

Main risks:​

• Arbitrage (buy cheap in one kingdom → sell expensive in another)
• Artificial money generation
• Complex system hard to balance
• High abuse potential with alts and guild coordination

I would keep the mini-game with the monarchs exactly as in the original proposal (meaning the selection system and their role remain the core of the leadership structure), but I would modify the diplomacy part so that, after wars between kingdoms, the monarchs can decide either a Truce or an Enemy State.


If a Truce is established, no positive or negative effects are applied between the kingdoms. If they remain enemies, then the PvE debuff system is activated for the losing kingdom, while the winning kingdom receives a small bonus.

 

[Deleted member 2771]

At first glance i kinda liked this but after some thought hell naah. This would just be a breeding ground for exploits and manipulation, let me share my pov.


While your suggestion aligns with the kingdoms(Lore wise) Jinno (Blue – Warrior Empire) Chunjo (Yellow – Theocratic Empire) Shinsoo (Red – Trade Empire) The Monarch Selection is very flawed and not fair, why?

- Jinno is heavily favored towards the top PVP guilds/players (the tiny elite) which means the casuals are automatically out of the picture and the same few players will dominate indefinitely.

- Chunjo, Random outcomes or as you mentioned GM Influenced can feel rigged towards other players.

- Shinsoo this will just encourage account funneling and the biggest Guilds there can just pool their wealth into one account and that same person will rein as monarch indefinitely leaving out the casuals. I would say this can encourage RMT also but that might be a strong word in this case. The inventory value can also be easily exploited.

A couple of other points: Giving a single player the ability to control taxes, declare wars and influence buffs would be crazy to say the least and can lead to some problems.
1. Inactive or not serious players will just stall the system.
2. Someone can decide to troll this and grief a whole kingdom
3. The Guild dominance in some kingdoms will turn this into an oligarchy
4. If and when a new monarch comes in they can decide to flip wars or taxes and cause instability in the market and economy. (IMO the Market in this game requires constant stability and flow to function properly)
5. What happens when someone decides to declare war at a random hour when majority of players are inactive? The 2 hour war is a big event that would require a big commitment from all players and not all will be able to attend. Only the hardcore players will be able to engage most of the time which would cause disengagement from the casual players side.
6. This system can also become passive and very inactive if a Monarchs decide to not declare wars or not do anything at all, players will automatically ignore it.
7. Giving a single player all this power will also make them a single target for all toxicity and blame to be put on them if something goes wrong.
8. We all know how the alliance between Shinshoo and Jinno is, and most of the time alliances will be refused out of Spite which can be harmful.
9. Everything coming out of one player would likely cause burn outs and stalls, Poor coordinations for the large scale battles or complete ignorance of enemy actions.
10. One player wont be able to represent a whole kingdom and there is a good reason why. Not everyone is a PVP Enthusiast , or a pvm grinder. Some players are just casuals and don't care, some sit afk in map1 and survive and play from trades only (No PVP no PVM) IF the monarch is leaning towards one side the others will feel excluded.

The Economic Diplomacy and Inter-Kingdom Taxation (System) can be easily manipulated.
By the example you gave:
For example: A Shinsoo player sells an item for 10,000,000 Yang in Jinno under a 10% alliance discount.​

• Buyer pays: 9,000,000 Yang
• Seller receives: 10,000,000 Yang
• Kingdom treasury covers the 1,000,000 Yang difference

Players can trade or create alts to drain a kingdoms treasury or to generate profits.
What i mean by this is one player can abuse this (unless you addressed the issue and i missed it)

A single player or someone with a friend, can be a buyer or a seller. You list the item for 10kk and he buys it for 9kk the system pays the extra 1kk.
You lost 9kk and he or you(from alt account) gained 10kk, if you repeat this process multiple times the numbers would become larger(And imagine a whole guild doing this) . Another point is someone can start listing crap items at higher prices to make this loop and generate higher profits. At first glance you would think, but this can't work like this because it will be limited by the treasury, well technically it would be limited by the treasury but your average player wont think about that, they would think let me exploit this first before someone else will. IMO this would cause a guaranteed inflation that would be bad for the future of the server and for new players to come. And most players would opt to be interested in how to exploit the treasury instead of playing the game like it was meant to be played. Someone can join drain a Kingdoms treasury and they would be forced to go into war crippled.

Another problem is Sellers can start inflating prices for no reason and buyers would still buy them since they wont care because some of the cost would be covered by the treasury anyways, completely messing up the real value of items and breaking the economy.


The War System just becomes a numbers game and no real skill involved. Smaller Kingdoms/Guilds would just get steamrolled even with the underdog buffs.

The Rewards System:
Honestly the rewards are insignificant to be even considered by high level players(hardcore players) and are completely irrelevant to regular efficient farming.


Basically a RICH get RICHER System in my eyes which would just cause server imbalance over time. -1

If i understood this wrong and gave wrong points please feel free to correct me or share your thoughts, imo this system would just cause problems and exploits and no real benefits in the long run for the bigger playerbase and is not even worth putting work into it since the cons far outweigh the pros from what i saw and read.

 

[reproject1]

Hi,

This is a very ambitious and detailed proposal and there’s clearly a lot of thought put into how each system connects, both mechanically and thematically, to WoM2’s existing structure. That said, there’s also a lot (and I mean a lot) going on here and it introduces multiple large-scale systems (governance, economy, PvP, diplomacy) all at once. Because of that, it’s not something that can be cleanly accepted or rejected at a glance.

For now, I’m going to move this to Pending rather than give a definitive answer. There are definitely some compelling ideas but the overall scope and complexity need to be carefully examined. In the meantime, it would be really helpful for the community to break this down and engage with it more critically. If you’re reading this, consider digging into specific parts of the proposal instead of giving a definite yes or no. For example, a good question to debate is the risks of the taxation and diplomacy system, which can be astronomous and potentially abusive for the in-game economy.

If the original poster is open to it, it might also help to isolate one subsystem at a time (for example, just the monarch system or just kingdom wars) in different suggestions, and develop those further with community input before treating this as a full package. If you decide to do so, make sure you link the original thread.

Either way, this needs refinement, testing of assumptions and a lot of discussion. Looking forward to seeing how others respond and what insights come out of breaking this down, as some bits and pieces could definitely be borrowed.

Warm wishes,
Essence.

Hello,

Actually, I don't want this proposal to be accepted as it is, and I'm also aware of the issues you mentioned. The idea is quite big and, in fact, not fully developed yet. No matter how detailed I try to explain it here, I'm sure there are gaps that I'm not aware of. I actually want this idea to be expanded upon and developed further within this discussion.

First of all, I'm in favor of breaking down this large system into smaller subsystems for better explanation and clarity, just as you suggested. I also thank you for your decision, as it also provides an opportunity for the entire community to understand the system and encourages their interaction. For now, I'd like to discuss the pieces within this thread, along with other users. In the coming stages, I can open different threads for the subsystems I mentioned (Monarch system, kingdom warfare, taxation, balance and lore).

Just as you said, discussing the system in this way is better; dissecting it, discarding bad ideas, and ensuring alignment with the lore would be perfect. Thank you for your response and decision. Have a nice day.

 

[reproject1]

The suggestion is very interesting, and I support its implementation, but a major issue is the low player base in Yellow, which does not have a strong guild like Red (Rb/HR) or Blue (Hated) for it to be a relatively fair and fully functional system
So, in addition to supporting the implementation of this mini-game, I would also suggest bringing back a lockdown phase, but with the following rules:

• Migration is locked: only toward Yellow, no return until the unlock phase
• Yellow receives a dynamic bonus: +10% drop / +10% EXP alternating weekly
• After lockdown: there is a 10-day period in which guilds can receive a one-time PvM-only bonus for 14–30 days upon migrating to Yellow.
• Migrated guilds receive a PvM-only bonus for 14–30 days

on the other hand

Core idea:​

• Different taxes per kingdom
• Diplomatic states (Alliance / War / Truce)
• Economic influence between kingdoms
• Possible subsidies or modified trade values

Key characteristics:​

• Direct impact on Yang economy
• Players can profit from differences between kingdoms
• Cross-kingdom trading advantages/disadvantages

Main risks:​

• Arbitrage (buy cheap in one kingdom → sell expensive in another)
• Artificial money generation
• Complex system hard to balance
• High abuse potential with alts and guild coordination

I would keep the mini-game with the monarchs exactly as in the original proposal (meaning the selection system and their role remain the core of the leadership structure), but I would modify the diplomacy part so that, after wars between kingdoms, the monarchs can decide either a Truce or an Enemy State.


If a Truce is established, no positive or negative effects are applied between the kingdoms. If they remain enemies, then the PvE debuff system is activated for the losing kingdom, while the winning kingdom receives a small bonus.

Hello,

You're definitely right about this; the yellow kingdom doesn't have a large player base. When I designed this system, I actually wanted many players to genuinely become fans of their favorite faction. But upon reconsideration, this system could be extremely susceptible to abuse. Think about the game For Honor; as you know, there are knight, viking, and samurai, and every player constantly switches to the viking side every week or month just to win the rewards. No player wants this; people want to choose their own faction, but this system can be abused for the sake of winning rewards.

I accept the lock-down rules, and I believe they should definitely be added, but we should think about this further to be sure. I agree with you that there will always be fewer players in the yellow kingdom, so it's a good idea for the system to continuously give more bonuses to a faction with fewer players or one below a certain threshold. In fact, I have an idea:

Why don't we expand this system within the normal game, for example, to make it more attractive for new or specific players, by giving bonuses to factions with fewer players? For instance, the yellow kingdom's player count is genuinely very low. We can't force players into that faction automatically, but we can attract them. For example, for one month, all players in the yellow kingdom could receive a 10% drop bonus. I'm sure this would be appealing to many farming players, and they would consider it.

I support your ideas regarding the Truce and Enemy system. Debuffs should be effective in preventing abuse, and I suppose the agreement should be mutual; peace should only occur if monarchs from both kingdoms declare it, and if there's no agreement, aggression and specific debuffs should continue.

War Crime​

I think a war crimes mechanic could be introduced to prevent certain abuse situations. For example, an attack by a blue kingdom monarch on the yellow kingdom, which has very few players, should be a crime. Even if war is declared and continued, because it's a war crime, specific temporary debuffs could be given to the blue faction monarch or to players from the blue faction participating in the war (although they could still receive war rewards).

I'm aware of some risks, and I'll try to address each one here.​

First, the arbitrage risk. I find this normal for Metin2's nature because Metin2 is already a game based on chance and is inherently unfair. Other major MMORPGs prevent this by even shutting down player-to-player trading (like BDO), solely to prevent rapid progression. However, if you truly think this is a bad thing, perhaps something could be implemented in the system to prevent excessive price ranges, although this might place a heavy burden on developers from a development standpoint. My thought on this matter is: Laissez-faire, laissez-passer.

The artificial money generation risk; I understand this risk due to the taxation risk, but I think taxation already exists in the game. For example, when players sell something to an NPC in the general market, if I'm not mistaken, they pay a small amount of tax. So, tax is already collected and could be implemented in this system. These taxes could be pooled into the kingdom's tax pool, and when there's a war, the winning kingdom could take a portion of the taxes from the losing kingdom's tax pool. Even if the winning kingdom wins without any yang in the losing kingdom's tax pool, they wouldn't receive any yang.

The risk of a complex system being hard to balance; it's definitely complex and hard to balance, and I can't say anything about this. I suppose our only recourse as a community is to try to simplify it.

The high abuse potential with alts and guild coordination risk; I don't fully understand this, could you elaborate further? I await your suggestions.

Thank you for your response.

 

[Ano]

no thx i wont read this all

 

[reproject1]

At first glance i kinda liked this but after some thought hell naah. This would just be a breeding ground for exploits and manipulation, let me share my pov.


While your suggestion aligns with the kingdoms(Lore wise) Jinno (Blue – Warrior Empire) Chunjo (Yellow – Theocratic Empire) Shinsoo (Red – Trade Empire) The Monarch Selection is very flawed and not fair, why?

- Jinno is heavily favored towards the top PVP guilds/players (the tiny elite) which means the casuals are automatically out of the picture and the same few players will dominate indefinitely.

- Chunjo, Random outcomes or as you mentioned GM Influenced can feel rigged towards other players.

- Shinsoo this will just encourage account funneling and the biggest Guilds there can just pool their wealth into one account and that same person will rein as monarch indefinitely leaving out the casuals. I would say this can encourage RMT also but that might be a strong word in this case. The inventory value can also be easily exploited.

A couple of other points: Giving a single player the ability to control taxes, declare wars and influence buffs would be crazy to say the least and can lead to some problems.
1. Inactive or not serious players will just stall the system.
2. Someone can decide to troll this and grief a whole kingdom
3. The Guild dominance in some kingdoms will turn this into an oligarchy
4. If and when a new monarch comes in they can decide to flip wars or taxes and cause instability in the market and economy. (IMO the Market in this game requires constant stability and flow to function properly)
5. What happens when someone decides to declare war at a random hour when majority of players are inactive? The 2 hour war is a big event that would require a big commitment from all players and not all will be able to attend. Only the hardcore players will be able to engage most of the time which would cause disengagement from the casual players side.
6. This system can also become passive and very inactive if a Monarchs decide to not declare wars or not do anything at all, players will automatically ignore it.
7. Giving a single player all this power will also make them a single target for all toxicity and blame to be put on them if something goes wrong.
8. We all know how the alliance between Shinshoo and Jinno is, and most of the time alliances will be refused out of Spite which can be harmful.
9. Everything coming out of one player would likely cause burn outs and stalls, Poor coordinations for the large scale battles or complete ignorance of enemy actions.
10. One player wont be able to represent a whole kingdom and there is a good reason why. Not everyone is a PVP Enthusiast , or a pvm grinder. Some players are just casuals and don't care, some sit afk in map1 and survive and play from trades only (No PVP no PVM) IF the monarch is leaning towards one side the others will feel excluded.

The Economic Diplomacy and Inter-Kingdom Taxation (System) can be easily manipulated.​

By the example you gave:​

For example: A Shinsoo player sells an item for 10,000,000 Yang in Jinno under a 10% alliance discount.​

• Buyer pays: 9,000,000 Yang
• Seller receives: 10,000,000 Yang
• Kingdom treasury covers the 1,000,000 Yang difference

Players can trade or create alts to drain a kingdoms treasury or to generate profits.
What i mean by this is one player can abuse this (unless you addressed the issue and i missed it)

A single player or someone with a friend, can be a buyer or a seller. You list the item for 10kk and he buys it for 9kk the system pays the extra 1kk.
You lost 9kk and he or you(from alt account) gained 10kk, if you repeat this process multiple times the numbers would become larger(And imagine a whole guild doing this) . Another point is someone can start listing crap items at higher prices to make this loop and generate higher profits. At first glance you would think, but this can't work like this because it will be limited by the treasury, well technically it would be limited by the treasury but your average player wont think about that, they would think let me exploit this first before someone else will. IMO this would cause a guaranteed inflation that would be bad for the future of the server and for new players to come. And most players would opt to be interested in how to exploit the treasury instead of playing the game like it was meant to be played. Someone can join drain a Kingdoms treasury and they would be forced to go into war crippled.

Another problem is Sellers can start inflating prices for no reason and buyers would still buy them since they wont care because some of the cost would be covered by the treasury anyways, completely messing up the real value of items and breaking the economy.


The War System just becomes a numbers game and no real skill involved. Smaller Kingdoms/Guilds would just get steamrolled even with the underdog buffs.

The Rewards System:
Honestly the rewards are insignificant to be even considered by high level players(hardcore players) and are completely irrelevant to regular efficient farming.


Basically a RICH get RICHER System in my eyes which would just cause server imbalance over time. -1

If i understood this wrong and gave wrong points please feel free to correct me or share your thoughts, imo this system would just cause problems and exploits and no real benefits in the long run for the bigger playerbase and is not even worth putting work into it since the cons far outweigh the pros from what i saw and read.

Hello,

First of all, I completely agree with the concerns you’ve raised regarding the monarch selection process. While I initially designed it to be lore-accurate, your points clearly show that the system is highly exploitable. It's safe to say I "poorly calculated" some of these mechanics during the initial design phase.

I might not have immediate solutions for every point, but having the community brainstorm here is a great start. Here are my thoughts on your specific criticisms:

1. Monarchs Overpowering the System​

You’re right, giving one person total control is risky. Perhaps we should pivot from a "Monarch" to a "Patron" (or Representative) model. Instead of unilateral decisions, we could implement a voting system. For example, if a Patron wants to declare war, it would trigger a kingdom-wide vote. If it doesn't meet a certain participation threshold or gets a "No" majority, the declaration is rejected. (I realize this adds a heavy workload for developers, but it’s a safer approach).

2. Inactive or Casual Players​

I initially wanted this system to encourage activity, but I realize that "real life" happens. We shouldn't punish casual players for not being able to treat the game like a full-time job. Even I struggle to find time to play. The system must be rewarding, not punishing, for those with limited playtime.

3. Griefing & Trolling​

This is a valid fear. To prevent someone from "holding a kingdom hostage," there should be strict term limits for Patrons, active GM monitoring, and harsh penalties for intentional griefing.

4. Oligarchy & Guild Dominance​

I’ve noted the "Guild dominance" issue. I’m trying to rework the mechanics to ensure that small guilds or solo players aren't completely sidelined by a few powerful alliances.

5. Stability & Market Fluctuations​

Election systems could handle war declarations, but market instability is trickier. Perhaps the "Clash of Kingdoms" system should stay as a standalone mini-game or event rather than affecting the core game's economy directly to prevent sudden tax spikes.

6. Engagement & War Participation​

To avoid a "dead system," we need a participation threshold. A war shouldn't even start unless both sides have a minimum number of active players online. To attract players, we should diversify the rewards, moving beyond just "Yang" and offering unique utility items or buffs.

7. Toxicity & Responsibility​

Being the "face" of a kingdom definitely puts a target on your back. However, I believe this might naturally push hardcore players, who are usually more invested in the kingdom's success, to step up and make more calculated, responsible decisions.

8. The Shinsoo-Jinno Dynamic​

I didn't quite catch your point about the spite-based alliance refusals between Shinsoo and Jinno. Could you elaborate on that? I'd love to understand the specific community friction there.

9. Reworking the War Mechanics​

I’m planning to refine the kingdom war into something more detailed than a standard guild war, but without making it overly "grindy" or exhausting. I'm open to any suggestions on how to make it feel "epic" yet accessible.

10. Bridging the PVP/PVM Gap​

The goal is to engage everyone. For example, PVM players could provide buffs to PVPers through certain tasks, and vice versa. Also, having multiple Patrons per kingdom instead of a single Monarch could distribute the power and representation more fairly.

---

Patron Selection & Lore​

• Jinno: You’re right; PVP dominance is inevitable there. To keep it lore-friendly but fair, what if we turned selection into a Group Combat event? Since the guild war system already exists, we could use a similar arena where teams compete to represent the kingdom.
• Chunjo: Uncertainty can indeed feel like a "cheat." Since Chunjo has a more spiritual/theocratic lore, maybe we could implement "Holy Quests" or specific trials? If not, we can stick to the Jinno system for balance and handle lore through aesthetics.
• Shinsoo: I’m still struggling to find a lore-based selection method here. If anyone has ideas that fit Shinsoo’s mercantile/diplomatic background, please let me know.

Economic Diplomacy & Taxation​

The potential for two players to collude and abuse taxes is a huge concern. To fix this, why not use "Alliance Discount Vouchers"? Each account could receive a limited number (1 or 2) per cycle. Unless someone is "unhinged" enough to manage 10+ accounts just for a small discount, this should prevent mass abuse. The goal is to decentralize the market. If Chunjo offers better tax vouchers, players might actually move their shops there, breaking the Jinno trade monopoly and making the world feel alive again.

The War System (Hardware Concerns)​

Performance is a major issue. I doubt many players have the rigs to handle a 500-man battle without crashing. I’m looking for suggestions on how to optimize large-scale encounters or perhaps break them into "sectors" to save our GPUs.

Rewards​

I don’t want the top 1% to hoard all the rewards. Discounts should apply to the whole kingdom, and bonuses shouldn't just be about "farming."

Thank you for the detailed critique. I’m looking forward to hearing your thoughts on these adjustments!

 

[reproject1]

To ensure this event is successful, we must completely move away from standard kill-count or deathmatch designs. If the event is a pure numbers or kill-based game, the tiny elite and top PvP guilds will completely dominate, leaving casual players out of the picture and causing smaller factions to get effortlessly steamrolled. Below is the technical breakdown of the combat mechanics, focusing entirely on how the battlefield operates to ensure performance optimization and fair participation for everyone.

1. The Tri-Sector Lane Architecture (MOBA-Like)​

To prevent hundreds of players from gathering in a single spot, which crashes client GPUs and causes massive network lag, the battlefield is strictly divided into three independent, combat sectors (Lanes). Like MOBA lanes can be saparated as 1 mid, 1 top with 90 degree and 1 bottom with 90 degree or 3 parallel lanes. Or apart from these, I propose triangle map, which is suitple for 3 kingdoms. Think like every corner of triengle have a dedicated kingdom. And from every corner there is a lane to other corner and one corner to center. Each lane has a hard cap on player capacity (e.g., maximum 50 players per kingdom per lane). Once a lane is full, players must queue for or join a different lane. This spreads the player base evenly across the map, eliminating packet congestion and server desync.

The Lane Objectives: Each lane contains 3 capturable Fortified Seals (Frontline, Center, Enemy Frontline). Like, if blue kingdom decided to attack yellow kingdom, than it has to be defeat all the yellow kingdom's seals. If blue defends all corners and attacks at the center (no man's area), and successfully get the center then blue gets extre buff as long as maintains center.

Center Buffs;

• +10 Seal defance.
• +5 Movement speed.
• etc.

Capturing Mechanics: A Seal cannot be captured by dealing damage to it (which would allow high-end PvP players to take it instantly). Instead, a Seal is captured via a Channeling Bar. A player must interact with the Seal and channel for 15 seconds uninterrupted. Any basic attack or crowd control effect interrupts the channel. This means a single elite player cannot capture a point alone if they are surrounded by low-tier players interrupting them.

1.1. The Role Quota Split (50/50 Partition)​

The 50 slots available for a Kingdom in any given lane are strictly partitioned into two categories based on player brackets. An elite player cannot occupy a casual player’s slot.

• The Vanguard Slots (25 Players Max): Reserved for high-tier PvP players (e.g., Level 90+ with high PvP ranks). These are your frontline brawlers.
• The Logistics Slots (25 Players Max): Strictly reserved for mid-to-low tier players or PvM-focused characters (e.g., Level 65 to 89, or players below a certain PvP gear threshold).
• How it works: If 40 elite PvP players try to enter the lane, only the first 25 will get in. The remaining 15 will be placed in a Vanguard Queue. The remaining 25 slots on the map must and will stay open exclusively for casual/PvM players to run the Supply Lines and Ballistas.

1.2. The Single-Guild Cap (Anti-Oligarchy)​

In Metin2, a single dominant PvP guild can easily dictate the politics and warfare of an entire kingdom. To prevent a massive alliance from occupying a lane and ice-walling their own kingdom's citizens out. A maximum of 10 players from the same Guild are allowed inside a single lane at the same time. If the top guild of blue wants to participate, they can only send 10 of their members to the Warrior’s Pass, 10 to the Sanctum, and 10 to the Silk Road (Lane names, it is not necceserry). The remaining 20 slots in each lane must be filled by solo players or smaller, casual guilds. This completely shatters guild oligarchies and forces the "elites" to cooperate with the broader community.

1.3. The Dynamic Wave Rotation (The 20-Minute Cycle)​

What happens if 300 casual players want to join, but there are only 25 Logistics slots? Nobody gets permanently locked out of the event. The 60-minute war is broken into 3 Combat Waves (20 minutes each).

• Phase Rotation: When Wave 1 ends (at the 20-minute mark), the system checks the queue outside. If there are players waiting in the queue, the players inside who have been there the longest are teleported back to the capital city (receiving a fair participation token for their time).
• The Next Batch: The waiting players are then instantly pulled into the battlefield for Wave 2.
• Continuous Action: If there is no queue, players inside can stay for the entire 60 minutes. This rotation ensures that even on highly populated servers, everyone who shows up gets to play at least one full wave of the war.

1.4. Who Gets Excluded/Kicked and Why?​

To keep the combat fluid and fair, the system actively filters out dead weight and exploiters:

1. AFK (Instant Kick): Any player who remains stationary or fails to engage in PvP combat / PvM supply gathering for more than 2 minutes is automatically kicked from the instance, and the next player in the queue is teleported in.
2. Level/Gear Mismatches: Players below Level 65 are excluded from entering because the baseline PvM monsters in the Supply Zones require a minimum level of engagement. This protects the kingdom from having slots wasted by low-level alternative accounts designed to troll or grief.
3. Queue-Jump Block: If an elite player leaves a lane voluntarily, they cannot instantly re-enter. They are placed at the very back of the global Vanguard queue, preventing players from constantly swapping lanes to chase easy kills.

2. Anti-Elite Domination Systems​

A. The "Diminishing Battle-Satiety" (Anti-Killstreak Fatigue)​

To prevent a handful of elite players from camping lanes and racking up infinite kills, the map applies a unique battle-fatigue mechanic.

• Every time a player achieves 3 consecutive PvP kills without dying, they incur a stack of "Battle Weariness."
• Each stack reduces their total skill damage by 10% and increases the damage they take from lower-tier players by 5% (caps at 5 stacks).
• The only way to clear this debuff is to fall in battle or spend 2 minutes assisting with non-combat objectives. This forces elite players to cycle out, play defensively, or rely on their casual teammates for protection.

B. Mass-Stun & Crowd Control (CC) Scaling​

In a standard environment, elite players can ignore casuals due to high resistances. Inside this event, Crowd Control scales with the number of attackers.

• If a single player is targeted by 3 or more opponents simultaneously, their passive resistance against Stun, Slow, and Knockback is temporarily reduced.
• This allows a well-coordinated group of casual or mid-tier players to effectively lock down and overcome a heavily geared elite player through sheer numbers and tactical timing.

3. Active Roles for Casual & PvM Grinders​

Not every player is a PvP enthusiast; many are casuals, PvM grinders, or market-driven players. To bridge the gap between PvP and PvM players, non-PvP enthusiasts are given alternative tasks that directly dictate the tide of the war. Lanes are not emtyh pvp areas. There are monsters and monsters can attack all players. Some players can be Slayers. A Slyer's role is simle, player needs to slay monster and metin sones in order to get supply for its kingdom seals. So a seal cannot be permantly demaged, it can be repaired (reverse the progress of capturing) by slayers. Slayers can attack or kill other player but cannot get any pvp buff. Also at the side of each lanes, away from the main PvP roads, lie the Vanguard Supply Camps. These camps are populated by aggressive, high-HP PvM monsters. So if there is 3 lanes and plus 3 lanes to the center then there must be 3 Vanguard Supply Camps aside from lanes. Slayers can clear these camps to collect Supplies. When a player turns these supplies into their kingdom's central forthress then all remaining kingdom's seals get buffs, it triggers a sector-wide Kingdom Fortification. This automatically spawns high-defense NPC (if there is sufficient supply) frontline guards to defend the objective, giving casual players a massive defensive anchor. (Guard NPC's can be used but I guees tehre is no attack or any movement anitmation for them). Or Slayers can choose to supply seals in order to repair them.

• Only a Slayer can get supply, elite player cannot get any supplies.
• Elite (Warden) player can attack or kill monsters but cannot get any supplies of off them.

3.1 War Ballistas​

In the center of each lane sits a neutral, un-targetable War Ballista. Instead of fighting players, casual players can load the Ballista using the materials gathered from the PvM supply zones. Once fully loaded, the Ballista fires a massive boulder at the nearest enemy-held Fortified Seal, instantly stripping away its defensive guards and stunning any enemy players standing within the radius. This completely shatters an elite guild's tight defense, allowing the attacking kingdom to rush in. A Warden can protect their Sayers in order to get more supplies to repair seals or charge ballista.

So ther is variety of use of supplies;

• If Slayer decides to give supplies to the seal then it reverse the seals progression bar.
• (There must be a progress bar for this to all Slayers) If Slayer decides to give supplies to the fortress of kingdom then it gives all defence buffs for Wardens or seals. Or (by chance) get 1 to 3 Guard NPC to defend a lane (any lane by chance). (There must be a progress bar for this to all Slayers)
• (There must be a progress bar for this to all Slayers) If Slayer decides to give supllies to the ballistas then ballista shoots the enemy seal.

4. Tactical Respawns & Frontline Safeguards​

To eradicate spawn-camping, which completely ruins the experience for casual players, the respawn system is entirely decentralized.

• Frontline Spawning: When a player dies, they do not go back to Map 1 or a single central point. They respawn at their Kingdom’s closest captured Fortified Seal.
• Spawn Immunity: Upon respawning, players receive a 10-second "Vanguard Shield" buff, granting complete immunity to all damage and crowd control, alongside a 30% movement speed increase. This allows casual players to safely regroup, break out of a siege, and push back against opponents waiting outside the perimeter.

By prioritizing channel-based objectives over raw kill counts, implementing anti-killstreak fatigue, and integrating a robust PvM supply system, the war becomes a game of macro-strategy and coordination rather than a playground for the top 1% elite.