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.
|Doc 07.14.2015 14:55|
I want faction PvP to be popular and lots of people to be highly engaged with it.
Which is why I argue against people trying to lump problematic core game issues designed by Goblin Works on the actions of one player group, and recommend people address these issues directly to Goblin Works rather than trying to create server wide meta-rules in an attempt to play inside a pretend-context within a game that actually functions much differently in reality.
|Bringslite 07.14.2015 15:20|
You are very much on the wrong track if you think that I am posting about this to solely benefit myself, Ozem's, or the Free Highlanders. If that wasn't part of your angle, please skip that part of my reply.
It certainly doesn't happen near me every hour or even every day.
Actual feuds, like since feuds came out? Only internal (alliance level) to move towers.
Fighting for towers or being randomly attacked? A fairly respectable amount, since almost the start of EE.
I know a good deal about precautions. I even take some when I have reason to believe that risk is higher than normal. We try to teach every new person to be on their toes at all times AND remind each other (old vets) to also.
Will the Thornguards defend the people in town during a declared war? However you slice it, those Guards will attack "recognized" war decced players.
There are a few things here that I acknowledge:
1. If your company is being feuded, it is best that you know about it and take precautions.
2. It should be possible to get into a town and kill a player, BUT it should be very difficult. It is easy, accomplishes very little, and serves no real purpose. It doesn't drive many players to move to different settlements. A few (very few) here or there. Most that feel it is not fun just move on to another game.
It is possible to do these types of warfare. I imagine it is a bit fun for some that do it. Is everything that we could do, good for growing the player population?
Is it getting anything more done than a 5% hit on someone's gear and a short chance at their husk? Is that worth the chance of driving new players away?
If the new player is driven away because he got killed "outside", I could say, "Yeah, this is a tough game. That can happen to you a lot. I hope you can find some game that you like"
If the new player is driven away because he got killed "inside" a settlement, I could say, "yeah, that happens a lot. If that level of PVP is a deal breaker, I suggest that you try EVE or DFUW. There are places in those games that are free of PVP for when you want to chill out and craft, etc…"
^^Those two are not mutually inclusive. New players know that this is a PVP game. Many can accept getting ganked "outside". A significant portion of those don't like the idea of being ganked easily "inside".
When it happens, it is purely a player driven action. That means that players decide to do it. They can always decide to not do it. There is not really much to gain from it, but there is much to lose.
Virtute et Armis
|Baron Malthius 07.14.2015 15:25|
Two thoughts I have about all the PvP discussion:
1) An actual in game win/lose mechanic for wars. The problem now is that with the current mechanics there is no in game way to do any real damage to any side that is at war. There is nothing that will force a settlement to have to surrender in order to get some time to rebuild and thus there is nothing really at stake. The only thing we lose is gear durability really. The only real consequence is having to wait until the gear can be replaced before running back onto the field and the whole cycle just repeats itself ad nauseum.
Ultimately, unless the goal is to simply make the opponents players quit the game en masse (which would be a horrible thing to have happen, especially with the population being this small), there really is nothing for either side to lose. While I relish in a good PvP fight (even if the odds are completely against me), there needs to be something on the line. When something is actually on the line and there is a far higher risk to waging war in game, then perhaps that would also have the effect of having at least one side be more willing to come to the negotiating table depending on how the war is going. The only way you'll see this happen though is again, in game losses that can do actual harm.
Until then, when someone says they want to play to win, or try to emerge victorious in any given war, what would that even look like? I can't see what would define "winning" in regards to this conflict or any future one for that matter. To me, it almost seems like there's no direction for any given conflict to go in once it reaches a certain point. That's a huge problem for a game advertising itself as an Open PvP sandbox where player driven conflict is at the center of it.
2) In terms of PvP and conflict, in my opinion, the best thing that could happen at this point would be another conflict between other settlements outside of EoX and EBA. Having at least one more conflict that is completely separate from this current one with EoX and EBA will give us something else to talk about and spice things up around here. Hopefully, that conflict would have grown out of some in game reason rather than out of game one, and thus the banter between the belligerents would be very different in nature as well. In short, it would feel more like an actual PvP sandbox where conflicts can grow organically within the game, and that to me seems more like how the devs intended this PvP sandbox to play out. Of course, until there is a need for others to do so and have something truly valuable on the line, I'm not sure if there is any other way to change the current status quo, which is quite a shame really.
|Smitty 07.14.2015 15:39|
Wasn’t trying to be antagonistic with you on the subject, I was mainly interested if you guys had feuds up there and was seeing if these things happen to you guys a lot. Good to hear you at least mention it as good habits to get into for your folks. With a little thought most of those things are non issues. I have been in feuds for 3-4 weeks now. haven't been caught logging in at all. the only time i was attacked in town i wasn't even a target of a feud, just surrounded by 10 people and alpha striked while semi afk ( lesson learned..)
I get the feeling feuds and wars will be different, they need to be different so they have different feels and different cost.
I imagine the guards we are getting for holdings and outpost ( which from what i gather are not as tough as throne guards and are realint on the + of the structure ) will also be used in times of war.. that way the +’s on the buildings matter more and the nicer the buildings the better the guards ( just like the outpost/holdings).. but that is just a guess.
that is what I am hoping for, you have war declared on you and the Thorne guards change to the Guards like we will see in for holdings. Hope it is like this because last I heard if you kill a thornegaurd they may remember and attack you forever..
If my guess is correct the current thorn guards watching feuds is right in line with them being protectors of law, and not city guards. just my thoughts though..
|Doc 07.14.2015 15:42|
2) In terms of PvP and conflict, in my opinion, the best thing that could happen at this point would be another conflict between other settlements outside of EoX and EBA.
I actually recommended that to the settlements up north months ago. To help with recruitment and make that area of the map seem more interesting to new people, heck even old people.
I'm not sure if there is any other way to change the current status quo, which is quite a shame really.
I'm not sure there is either. It would be helpful if people addressed gameplay concerns like Bringslite has directly to Goblin Works, but I doubt some will because I think they fear what the response will be. As if it will confirm their fear that the game isn't going to end up how they imagined it in their head after years of vague blog posts.
I feel like there is a segment of this game's population which wants to believe this game is something different than what Goblin Works is making, and they're trying to push that off as long as they can or something, either with meta-rules or whatever.
The reality as I see it is EoX has been far more compliant (to GW's rules) and conciliatory in regards to PvP frustrations then just about any other competitive PvP gaming crew I've ever seen in any MMO I've played. And yet they get lumped with sometimes veiled, sometimes overt accusations of killing the game.
Honestly, those people should be complaining to Goblin Works as to why the game isn't what they imagined it would be, and ask them hard and direct questions if it actually is going to end up being what they interpreted from a year of blog posts. It would save a lot of forum typing, and probably give people a chance to determine if this is actually the place they want to spend their free time.
|Rynnik 07.14.2015 15:44|
@ Bringlite - we are definitely straying here but I strongly suspect our 'ideal states' for PFO aren't that far apart.
I mean in the perfect Rynnik version of PFO settlements could allocate much of their capacity to defense. Use half your small slots and you now have walls that need siege equipment to breach (except for rogues of course who if not spotted for the amount of time it takes to scale them can get over or of course level 15+ miners who given 6 hours can dig a tunnel under them passable 1 person at a time). And of course the keep is truly a holding where you can log in and out as your archers could pin cushion anyone coming near from almost invulnerable safety so even new players could hold off a crew of vets that hadn't softened up the target enough. You need that player force because you can't trust the guards. I mean the ones you have personally paid for are going to fight for you every time but the hell knights you allowed to set up an office may be a liability depending on if they side with the attackers more and the merchant guards aren't reliable at all and an opposing senechal may have bribed them to look the other way already.
Daydreaming is fun.
Baron MalthiusWho are you going to attack then?
Not a member, representative, or supporter of Brighthaven Alliance.
|Baron Malthius 07.14.2015 15:55|
DocI'm not sure if there is any other way to change the current status quo, which is quite a shame really.
Yeah, I can definitely see that. I think at this point with all this settlement infrastructure and potential for settlement warfare down the road we need a more solid understanding of the direction PvP is going.
Well, perhaps we can bring this all up at tomorrow night's dev side chat? I'm not sure if I will be able to attend personally but I am sure if someone just straight up asks this directly it would be good to at least hear a solid answer on what kind of PvP is intended. From what I'm reading this isn't the first thread where this confusion seems to have come up.
|Doc 07.14.2015 15:58|
From what I'm reading this isn't the first thread where this confusion seems to have come up.
It's been an ongoing issue since the first day of Early Enrollment in January.
|Baron Malthius 07.14.2015 16:08|
DocFrom what I'm reading this isn't the first thread where this confusion seems to have come up.
Well, I think this would be a good time to have more clarification on this now, people need to know what to expect going down the road so they can prepare themselves. Not only that but I think this would cut down on a lot of the arguments over what the devs may have intended all along.
|Gryphyx 07.14.2015 16:11|
This sounds incredibly awesome. Rynnik, when you are not insulting people, and actually adding the the coversation, your ideas are incredible. I humbly request you do more idea sharing and less insulting.