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.

The Holdings and Outpost Warfare Blog

You don't even have to have characters out scouting anymore.

Ryan Dancey in the blog
Once the Holding is captured, the attacker invests the Influence from the Feud to gain control of the hex. The Feud costs at least 100 Influence, and Holdings cost 100 Influence, so at minimum the attacker will get control of the Holding.

My interpretation of this is that the 100 Influence invested in the feud, which normally you would get 90 back at the end of, instead now returns 0 at the end of the feud. Perhaps rather than saying it "cost" I could say it is "banked" since it is now tied into the holding. But it is no longer available for use in feuding.

Attackers always have the advantage of deciding the target and time and organising their forces beforehand. My experience with the capture mechanics is much more limited then anyone in EBA and EoX, so I'll reserve comment on how well the current described system balances it out.
Good… Bad… I'm the guy with the bow.
..I'm already prepping to deal with a steady stream of naked players "defending"

That was pretty much what I imagined on reading it, assuming the spawn locations are unchanged.
Good… Bad… I'm the guy with the bow.
Brighthaven Leader
Daeglin, I think your terminology threw me off. Also, yes the Attackers have a pretty big advantage, I also don't think the costs are anywhere where they should be.

This is the same thing as the tower mechanics, other than the occasional naked/alt running around, I didn't really see that happening much.
Brighthaven is a Neutral Good settlement focused on defending its citizens and its allies from negative fringe based PvP (Player Killing and Griefing) while striving to become a large and shining beacon for Good. Whether you wish to benefit from this protection or you love PvP and wish to assist in providing this protection, Brighthaven aims to be the home and support center for you!
How does that give an edge to the attacker? If I read it right, all it takes is one defender alive at a time within the capture area to prevent the accumulation of capture points. Thats a pretty good home defense advantage to start with, but having your settlement able to help whether you are defending or attacking seems equivalent to me. Am I missing something?

Re: The cost of feud in Influence. The point of feuding is supposed to be territory control, if you succeed it permanently "costs" you the feud influence. If you fail, you get a partial refund and can try again. Not seeing the problem that you are. Are you concerned it makes it too "easy" to attack someone?

That part of my post might be a knee jerk reaction. When it was first described, I remember that only the defender could have his whole settlement available to defend his hexes. Of course the same when the defender attacks the aggressor's holdings during the same or the next feud. I thought it might be helping those on defense a bit. If you have ever been fighting for towers, it is clear that the pro aggressor (competent) pretty much has an advantage. There are a few exceptions (a cpl times Ozem's has repelled attackers but only incompetent or lesser developed attackers), but generally the aggressor rules.

The purpose of feuds is to allow an avenue for penalty free PVP. It has expanded a bit to include capturing "territory". Success doesn't "cost" anything. As described, it invests the influence into the holding which is pretty much the same as placing a holding. If you abandon the holding or it gets taken, I am assuming that the influence gets returned to your "available".

Why do I think that is probably not good? The aggressor has nothing or very little at risk. The defender has everything at risk and no reward other than keeping his degraded holding.
Virtute et Armis
If a +0 holding is captured then the holding is reduced by 1 and destroyed. The victor ends up with no holding and I'm assuming -10% influence as if a holding were destroyed. Is that correct?
Flynn Pontis
@ Bringslite
"If you have ever been fighting for towers, it is clear that the pro aggressor (competent) pretty much has an advantage."
In regards to towers yes 100 percent agree.
In regards to the new system regarding holdings no…

The only advantage that the Attacker is choosing when and where to engage the enemy (maybe not so much when due to pvp windows). The defender enjoys having a home field advantage (unless the placed holdings willy nilly) and npc guards to help defend the holding. Hell there isn't even really anymore surprise associated with sniping holdings while the defenders scramble around to find the attackers, it is marked on the mini map for you. Also the attacker only has a short time window to capture the holdings as well so if anything I would say that there is an advantage defending with the new game mechanics.
Flynn Pontis
… if anything I would say that there is an advantage defending with the new game mechanics.

About time...
Nihimon murmurs in sheer ecstasy as the magic courses through his veins
Flynn Pontis
Ha, +10 forum xp.
Attacker has an advantage in being able to use AOE attacks more effectively since defenders have to stay in a small area whereas attackers can be spread out and less affected by AOEs. Be nice if there was some sort of small defensive bonus inside the defensive perimeter to help offset to a degree that AOE bonus. After all, the towers had walls around them but didn't seem to do a thing for defense, just to look nice.
Crafting! Gathering! Monster Killing! Exploring! Politicking! That's us in a nutshell! Ranged Attackers, crafters and gatherers come join the Holy Magicks company based out of High Road. Our main motto is "Death Thru Superior Fire Powers!"
You must be logged into an enrolled account to post