skigglez
You’re right that neither option brings in new players — but they do affect the experience of the ones already here. That’s why the kind of filler you introduce matters.
The issue with extra player kingdoms isn’t just transparency — it’s perception and quality of interaction. When one person controls multiple kingdoms, it feels like filler because:
- It doesn’t add new personalities, diplomacy, or decision-making.
- It creates artificial reach — one player projecting power over more land, more races, more map presence.
- It can muddy the social dynamics, especially when players are clearly coordinating their own kingdoms against others.
You say it’s transparent, but in practice? You still have the same voices behind more flags. That doesn’t feel like a bigger world — it feels like the same one in a costume.
NPCs are artificial filler — I never said otherwise. But the difference is purpose:
- NPCs can be designed as challenges, not placeholders.
- They can be gated, scaled, reset, and rotated to create progression or seasonal variety.
- Nobody expects diplomacy or retaliation from an NPC, so there’s no disappointment or confusion.
More importantly, NPCs don’t pretend to be meaningful social entities — they’re content. Second accounts blur that line, and that’s the problem.
As for "more kingdoms = more interaction": that depends on what kind of interaction. Clicking attack on a second kingdom you created isn’t depth — it’s more surface area. That’s not the same as real engagement.
I get where you’re coming from — people do have a kneejerk reaction to “extra accounts.” But the pushback isn’t about being emotional or unfair. It’s about wanting a world where interactions feel real, unpredictable, and social. That’s hard to get when half the kingdoms are just controlled opposition.
Another major issue: abuse potential.
Even with restrictions, giving each player a second kingdom opens the door to coordinated abuse — like suiciding the extra kingdom’s army into a target just to soften them up for an ally to walk in and take the castle.
You don’t need to attack your own alt to exploit that — you just need to weaponize it against others. The second kingdom becomes a disposable hammer that trades efficiently because it doesn’t matter if it lives. That’s not meaningful interaction — it’s tactical padding.
And once that kind of behavior starts, it’s hard to stop. Suddenly the meta becomes less about diplomacy and more about who can manage two kingdoms the best, while pretending one isn’t just feeding the other.
At that point, we’re not increasing player interaction — we’re just increasing ways to exploit game mechanics with extra hands.
