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.

Avenues for Improvement

HowardWdW
Oh…and if you don't like the new title please suggest a better one.
Baron Malthius
Memory
it's the Title that struck me. "The game is failing." if i were a potential player and i saw that on a google result straight from GW's forums, i would likely read nothing else and go give my money to Albion or Crowfall.

Titles like "whither PFO" and some of the others aren't so immediately jarring. If you stuck around to read all 70+ pages of content, maybe, but this one gets you without even reading the post.

I can imagine people finding that thread and upon seeing that there was 70+ pages in the first place would probably wonder how on earth did this thread get so big?

Once they act on that curiosity, well, then they find out why, and it isn't pretty :-P.

People love watching a train wreck.
Edam
Baron Malthius
People love watching a train wreck.

lol indeed.

Though to be trueful from a publicity perspective - the impression given (probably false) is that a large portion of the player population are elated that a settlement with maybe 10% of the server population and producing more like 75% of the out of game player help tools is being forced from the game and the devs are fine with this.

Seriously - it is not a good look. Especially since you can view any of these forums with a direct link without ever logging in. Anything posted here is completely public.

People should think more about how all this looks to outsiders.
Rynnik
Lmao

No one is being forced out of the game though I sure hope there is some settlement shopping in a few people's near future.
Not a member, representative, or supporter of Brighthaven Alliance.
Edam
Rynnik
Lmao

No one is being forced out of the game though I sure hope there is some settlement shopping in a few people's near future.

meh … whether anyone actually is leaving is beside the point.

The general tone on these boards is not a good advertisement for the game. Neither is EVE GD for that matter but people have other means of finding out about EVE.
Midnight
Edam
Baron Malthius
People love watching a train wreck.

lol indeed.

Though to be trueful from a publicity perspective - the impression given (probably false) is that a large portion of the player population are elated that a settlement with maybe 10% of the server population and producing more like 75% of the out of game player help tools is being forced from the game and the devs are fine with this.

Seriously - it is not a good look. Especially since you can view any of these forums with a direct link without ever logging in. Anything posted here is completely public.

People should think more about how all this looks to outsiders.

I think that it probably looks like antagonizing people in a sandbox is a bad idea if you were hoping to be casual AND powerful.

Not sure that's a big newsflash to anyone who has played a sandbox, though.

Creating player tools (that even I use) doesn't make you immune to the consequences of meaningful choices.

It's not like they didn't work at antagonizing EoX really hard and really constantly. And it's not like they wouldn't completely destroy EoX if they could.

And everytime I suggest regime change to their members they respond that they love their leadership.

No one is making them quit. EoX is making them lose. In an adapt or die game (as all sandboxes are), I won't accept the blame if they choose quitting over adaptation.
He who wrestles with us strengthens our nerves and sharpens our skill. Our antagonist is our helper.
-Edmund Burke
Mbando
Howard, I appreciate your comments–I'm going to riff off them, because while I share some of your concerns, I have a different analysis.

1. I don't think the game is necessarily all about grinding. In my mind, "grinds" are breaks devs put in to keep players from consuming content. Essentially, "You can't go from this zone to that zone until you grind XXthousand rats." "You can't go on this boss raid until you grind these boss raids for XX 100 tokens of thingy." Whereas when I get a recipe, harvest a resource, craft jewelry, etc., it is not a grind, because I'm not doing it to get to the next tier of thingy–I'm doing it to gain power and safety for my settlement. It's not always particularly exciting–there is not much pizazz right now to settlement growth. But it's not a grind as I understand it.

2. This raises the point where we disagree but are close: the only that keeps this game from not being utterly a bore is my commitment to the settlement. Your critiques above are all fair critiques, but I can't call the game boring, because I care what happens to my settlement, and my settlement mates. That matters to me–that's (the only) juice in the game.

3. Which raises the problem with PFU. It's well intentioned, but I think it has 2d order effects that hurt the game. We have PFU because the learning curve is ridiculously steep in PFO, and the NPE is completely inadequate–you need human scaffolding to figure out what to do in the game. But that's the problem–nothing in the game is worth doing unless you are committed to a settlement. PFU is by definition something you can't have a stake in. It's no good teaching people how to squeeze, if the only juice is somewhere else.

4. GW has this great insight–make PvP meaningful by moving the stakes for power and success up to the settlement level. It's not about you living and dying–it's about the settlement living and dying. But then you've created this incredible tension by steering new players away from entire point of the game–settlement-level conflict, kingmaking, whatever you want to call it–no wonder people quit after a couple of days. GW has instituted a design feature that is directly in tension with their core design philosophy.

5. Recommend dismantling PFU, and steering new players ASAP into real settlements.
A member of Ozem's Vigil, home to servants of Iomedae and her coming Paladins.
MidknightDiamond
@Mbando

You know why else PFU exists? Because the players on the server allow it to. We do quite a bit of the dirty work in teaching and equipping new players that others don't want to. Now, that's not to say that that's the case with everyone - but there's a LOT of people out there that don't bother recruiting, don't bother interacting with new players at all. There's also people that don't want/don't like teaching new players.

That's our dedication - helping those that would fall between the cracks.

Those that already take a huge interest in new players aren't "hurt" by the influence (seriously, there's threads on this… very very long threads on this and it's an old, tired argument) - For EoX, Grim is an insanely awesome recruiter who snatches up people before we've had a chance to talk to them and when he does grab them from us, it's usually within hours to a couple of days after they've come in. Yeah, ton of influence lost there. And they know how to help brand new chars help out in their pvp wars even if they're only a few days old and in T1 gear, they can still contribute if they want. Aragon seems to be doing pretty well given they're close to Thornkeep as well and I know Leriol takes newer players out too which can only be helpful. I see Memory. Sin, Rufus on there all the time looking for opportunities to draw people in.

And the list could go on and on and on… all of these people are snagging up plenty of people from both unaligned and PFU. Simple as that. And they're doing it far more quickly than the 90 day cap we have.

Hoff's said it before - the people that stay the full 90 days are almost always dead chars from 15 day accounts and when we kick them out, we end up losing influence anyway because it lowers our cap. Sure, we "could" keep them like I'm sure many others might for numbers inflation, but we don't.

This will be the last post and response I make on this subject - I'm not going to address this further except to say if you really hate PFU that much, really want to destroy the newbie help center that much… then do so. Take Hoffman up on his offer.
Aurora Silverstar, Pathfinder University Quartermaster & Explorer
Kiernan Silverstar, Aurora's lazy & good-for-nothing younger brother who just likes to blow things up.

PM MidknightDiamond on Paizo Forum
Jakaal
Midnight
I think that it probably looks like antagonizing people in a sandbox is a bad idea if you were hoping to be casual AND powerful.

Not sure that's a big newsflash to anyone who has played a sandbox, though.

Creating player tools (that even I use) doesn't make you immune to the consequences of meaningful choices.

It's not like they didn't work at antagonizing EoX really hard and really constantly. And it's not like they wouldn't completely destroy EoX if they could.

And everytime I suggest regime change to their members they respond that they love their leadership.

No one is making them quit. EoX is making them lose. In an adapt or die game (as all sandboxes are), I won't accept the blame if they choose quitting over adaptation.

I'm not trying to say EBA (I assume that is whom you are referring to) doesn't deserve some comeuppance for biting off more than they could chew but destroying another community at this point with the population already so low is a pretty serious mistake. Say what you will about their actions, but EoX's actions are in part responsible. Neither community leaving the game is good and actions should be taken to avoid such.
Tyv Blodvaerd of Aragon
Jakaal
I'm not trying to say EBA (I assume that is whom you are referring to) doesn't deserve some comeuppance for biting off more than they could chew but destroying another community at this point with the population already so low is a pretty serious mistake. Say what you will about their actions, but EoX's actions are in part responsible. Neither community leaving the game is good and actions should be taken to avoid such.

I agree with this and I would take it a step further. Since it is expected that a loss of a settlement would be detrimental to server population, that possibility should not be turned on until well after the server population reaches into the thousands, and there are other options than quitting available for those players.

That has always been an issue, especially for some of the more obscure role / alignment choices if and when the game ever evolves to include them.

Example: If there is only one settlement in all of the game that is LG and supports Paladins, and that settlement is destroyed, where will the Paladins go? Are they going to give up on the 2 1/2 years of training to be a lvl 20 Paladin? Are they going to go to another settlement that can allow LG, but ask them to build training facilities just for them?
Aragon (CN) a settlement founded on the principles of the River Freedoms: Say What You Will; Oath Breakers Die; Walk Any Road, Float Any River; Courts are for Kings; Slavery is an Abomination; Have What You Hold.

Settlement Focus: Fighter and Rogue Training
Game Play: Escalations / Refining / Crafting / Defensive PVP
 
You must be logged into an enrolled account to post