Cookies Disclaimer

I agree Our site saves small pieces of text information (cookies) on your device in order to authenticate logins, deliver better content and provide statistical analysis. You can adjust your browser settings to prevent our site from using cookies, but doing so will prevent some aspects of the site from functioning properly.

Pathfinder Online will be ending operations on November 28, 2021. For more details please visit our FAQ.

EE v4.0 TEST SERVER Release Notes

Kradlum Kabal
KarlBob
Bluddwolf
Crowd forging? If there is no screen shot, it didn't happen.
Close enough?

Edit: Here's a direct quote suggesting the Core Six as the right towers to remove. That's not just close; it's the screen shot, as requested.

Obviously, in PFO, 2's company and 5 is a crowd. Crowforging my arse.
Honest Snotbad's Travelling Traders. Purveyors of fine goods since 2015.
Stoneroot Glade - Home of the brave.
Caldeathe Baequiannia
QMan
lfseeney
Will the Missing towers take away from the Materials, at the end of the WOT?
Do you mean DI? I don't know if they've even detailed how much you'd get. I remember them saying something like the difference or gain would be minimal as to not give one group a big advantage over another. Not sure if they even have a concrete idea on that point. Another question I would like to know on that is if the company gets the DI points or if it goes to the settlement. What happens if a company holds a bunch of towers and decides to go to another settlement before WoT is over. Does the 'credit' for DI go to the new settlement or old?
DI is always for settlements. Companies do not use, or earn, DI, they earn and use Influence (based on things like members' achievements). An unattached company gets nothing for owning towers. Any DI earned during the WOT is supposed to be based on the average towers the settlement controls. If I had input, there'd be a break point, with a pre-EE4 average and a post-EE4 average.
To reach me, email d20rpg@gmail.com
Caldeathe Baequiannia
It is a bit frustrating that we have a (semi?) official crowdforging process on Ideascale, where people can do something close to an actual one person, one vote, but to have things done because of a half dozen people posting on the official board (in which a majority of the players don't participate) and each of the half dozen offer a variation that aren't all in accordance.

Crowd forging is not taking a thread on a board as representing what the population wants. It is offering all the players a chance to select from among the most feasible of those suggestions. If they choose not to participate, that's fine. If the devs want to do something because four or five people all thought some form of it would be a good thing, that's fine too, but it is not crowd forging.
To reach me, email d20rpg@gmail.com
QMan
Caldeathe Baequiannia
It is a bit frustrating that we have a (semi?) official crowdforging process on Ideascale, where people can do something close to an actual one person, one vote, but to have things done because of a half dozen people posting on the official board (in which a majority of the players don't participate) and each of the half dozen offer a variation that aren't all in accordance.

Crowd forging is not taking a thread on a board as representing what the population wants. It is offering all the players a chance to select from among the most feasible of those suggestions. If they choose not to participate, that's fine. If the devs want to do something because four or five people all thought some form of it would be a good thing, that's fine too, but it is not crowd forging.

Agreed.

Also, thanks for the company vs. settlement breakdown. I had forgotten about that.
Belthar
Ryan Dancey
War of Towers

  • Changed max number of capture points per tick in War of Towers to 15. So bringing more than 15 people to capture a tower will not help.
  • Changed the number of towers required per level of training in a player settlement to 4.
  • Crowdforged: Removed the towers from the six hexes surrounding each settlement. Those hexes will no longer have PvP windows.

Maybe its a typo and they meant 4 towers per tier ? That would make more sense, since then you can cap your training at 12 towers.
Leader of Dei Lucrii Trading
http://paizo.com/people/Belthar
lfseeney
Small groups are in trouble with the changes.

The Last change hurt them a bit, this may cause some to just give up.
lfseeney
Caldeathe Baequiannia
It is a bit frustrating that we have a (semi?) official crowdforging process on Ideascale, where people can do something close to an actual one person, one vote, but to have things done because of a half dozen people posting on the official board (in which a majority of the players don't participate) and each of the half dozen offer a variation that aren't all in accordance.

Crowd forging is not taking a thread on a board as representing what the population wants. It is offering all the players a chance to select from among the most feasible of those suggestions. If they choose not to participate, that's fine. If the devs want to do something because four or five people all thought some form of it would be a good thing, that's fine too, but it is not crowd forging.
Hear hear!
Vorsk
Guurzak
I'm nearly certain I've seen a dev note that this was going to be changed to base your available training level purely on your home city's tower count, but I can't find the quote now.

They mentioned it here https://goblinworks.com/blog/short-term-roadmap/ under game mechanics high priority section. Training WILL matter based on your aligned settlement in the long run, not where you are doing said training.
markelphoenix
So, I can train at any settlement. My home settlement (the one I belong to through my company) is what is determining my training level. I have yet to experience 'not being able to train' due to not being at my home settlement or a nearby 'high end' settlement. I believe it works as thus, "Tier of training that your Settlement supports = Tier of Training You Can Get Anywhere".
Ryan Dancey
Lee and the designers will be carefully watching to see how these changes affect the game and the distribution of players and activity. We see War of Towers as a continuous work in progress that will need to be constantly adjusted to get the results we desire - which is a lot of consumption of player-crafted stuff through combat losses, and groups having to become well organized and cohesive to take and hold territory (i.e. the core design of the whole game).

We don't think there's a viable long-term strategy for large groups to be all of one thing to the exclusion of other things. "Crafting Settlements" need to have a military force. "PvP Settlements" need to have a logistical supply side. As the game grows we want the PC Settlements to be constantly feeling the need to recruit new members and to segment their activity across a wide variety of in-game activities.

Remember that War of Towers is really a placeholder for "War of Outposts". The Towers have zero intrinsic value but the Outposts will. When the time comes to advance that game system to the next iteration and the Towers go away to be replaced by player-placed persistent structures, and those structures are a part of the economic web, every Settlement will need to be ready to take and hold the territory they'll need to participate in that activity. We don't want that to come as a rude shock to players. We want everyone to be already thinking about and organizing around the principle that territory must be taken and it must be held, regardless of the overall flavor and top-level goals of each Settlement.
 
You must be logged into an enrolled account to post