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.

Whither Forever War?

Tyv Blodvaerd of Aragon
Nihimon
It must be truly shocking that a group of players who generally avoid PvP games, and who fell in love with the promise of PFO largely because non-consensual PvP was supposed to have consequences for the aggressor, might grow bored when that promise is revealed to be hollow and they find themselves in just another PvP game with no consequences other than the consequences that already exist in every other PvP game.

Have you seriously considered what the game would be like if those consequences had actually been in?

The consequences for pvp outside of feuds still prevent the majority of engaging in pvp. If you are fairly new, you can't train for up to a week. If you are more experienced, you still can't enter a settlement without being attacked by Thorn Guards. This seems to be working as intended.

What you might believe Ryan promised was that he could change the MMO pvp culture. That was never going to happen and some of us had said that as early as January of 2013. You chose to ignore what more experienced players knew and instead bought hook, line and sinker what the less experienced Ryan Dancey had said.

Many of us similarly told him and you that the reputation system would eventually fail versus more experienced characters, because the training times would exceed to rep recovery. That was plain as day to those of us that have experienced similar attempts to curtail player behavior. Ryan's failing was he just didn't understand the math of it.

The attempt to deny access to features already trained for created the undesirable but accurate perception that by tying trained skills to settlements and reputation to training, the mechanics essentially denied access to skills paid for with real money, and potentially due to no fault of the player. This was widely rejected by potential players and was lumped into the monetization scheme of the game.

Ryan further made matters worse by arrogantly believing that Goblin Works determined what MVP was. They don't, never did and never will. That miscalculation led to the insanity or stupidity of not describing the game accurately as being in an alpha or beta stage, and once the subscription began, they reviews were put in motion.

You can continue to blame pvp for the game's failure, but more than half the population have rarely been engaged more than a few times in pvp. A majority of all of the pvp involved your settlement and Golgotha.

The only consequences for pvp that are woefully missing are those for losing in pvp. There is not enough material loss and that has allowed for nearly uninhibited resource gathering for 9 months. Even bulk resources are far in surplus, and I would guess based on our own numbers that the average, semi active settlement has enough bulk resources to last weeks without a single holding.

Almost every system had some fatal flaw in how it works or in producing the results it was supposed to. I believe a near complete restart is needed. If that means looking like your more typical PvP focused MMO, well that would make more money than what they have now.
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
Midnight
Nihimon
It must be truly shocking that a group of players who generally avoid PvP games, and who fell in love with the promise of PFO largely because non-consensual PvP was supposed to have consequences for the aggressor, might grow bored when that promise is revealed to be hollow and they find themselves in just another PvP game with no consequences other than the consequences that already exist in every other PvP game.

Have you seriously considered what the game would be like if those consequences had actually been in?

Define non-consensual. Because almost all of the PvP I've enjoyed during the last 203 days was sanctioned combat PvP.

Anyone who seized a tower and anyone who showed up to defend a tower was consenting to combat PvP. Anyone who drops a holding or outpost and shows up to defend it is consenting to combat PvP. Anyone who attempts to overrun a holding or outpost is consenting to combat PvP. Anyone who remains in a feuded company (while it is so easy to dodge feuds by company hopping) is consenting to combat PvP.

A piece of advice for the future: If the next game you look at is a sandbox game, it too, will rely on the players for content and that content is almost always going to be conflict (PvP). If it is a low budget sandbox, it will be a hundred times more likely to rely on players to create the content.

There's still plenty of time for someone to drop 50 million dollars on a theme park Pathfinder MMO with dev generated content that can attract millions of players to fund even more dev created content.
He who wrestles with us strengthens our nerves and sharpens our skill. Our antagonist is our helper.
-Edmund Burke
Caldeathe Baequiannia
Midnight
Nihimon
It must be truly shocking that a group of players who generally avoid PvP games, and who fell in love with the promise of PFO largely because non-consensual PvP was supposed to have consequences for the aggressor, might grow bored when that promise is revealed to be hollow and they find themselves in just another PvP game with no consequences other than the consequences that already exist in every other PvP game.

Have you seriously considered what the game would be like if those consequences had actually been in?

Define non-consensual. Because almost all of the PvP I've enjoyed during the last 203 days was sanctioned combat PvP.

Anyone who seized a tower and anyone who showed up to defend a tower was consenting to combat PvP. Anyone who drops a holding or outpost and shows up to defend it is consenting to combat PvP. Anyone who attempts to overrun a holding or outpost is consenting to combat PvP. Anyone who remains in a feuded company (while it is so easy to dodge feuds by company hopping) is consenting to combat PvP.
Consider that, taken to absurdity, that implies that anyone who owns property in a nation that is at war and stays to defend it is consenting to being attacked.
To reach me, email d20rpg@gmail.com
Bringslite
Delete please.
Virtute et Armis
-Unknown
Tyv Blodvaerd of Aragon
Caldeathe Baequiannia
Midnight
Nihimon
It must be truly shocking that a group of players who generally avoid PvP games, and who fell in love with the promise of PFO largely because non-consensual PvP was supposed to have consequences for the aggressor, might grow bored when that promise is revealed to be hollow and they find themselves in just another PvP game with no consequences other than the consequences that already exist in every other PvP game.

Have you seriously considered what the game would be like if those consequences had actually been in?

Define non-consensual. Because almost all of the PvP I've enjoyed during the last 203 days was sanctioned combat PvP.

Anyone who seized a tower and anyone who showed up to defend a tower was consenting to combat PvP. Anyone who drops a holding or outpost and shows up to defend it is consenting to combat PvP. Anyone who attempts to overrun a holding or outpost is consenting to combat PvP. Anyone who remains in a feuded company (while it is so easy to dodge feuds by company hopping) is consenting to combat PvP.
Consider that, taken to absurdity, that implies that anyone who owns property in a nation that is at war and stays to defend it is consenting to being attacked.

Yes, that is what refugees are. Some will take up arms and defend and others will flee. But to try to make this comparison is beyond silly, it actually borders on immaturity.

You do realize this is a game, don't you?
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
Midnight
Caldeathe Baequiannia
Consider that, taken to absurdity, that implies that anyone who owns property in a nation that is at war and stays to defend it is consenting to being attacked.

Property is a fiction.

Humans are the only species gullible enough to pay rent to exist on this earth.

But much of society has bought into the ridiculous fiction of property and anyone staying to "defend" property (when the entire earth is theirs to walk) is certainly consenting to combat. All concepts of property exist only through the use of force or the threat of using force.

"They claim this mother of ours, the Earth, for their own use, and fence their neighbors away from her, and deface her with their buildings and their refuse."
-Sitting Bull
He who wrestles with us strengthens our nerves and sharpens our skill. Our antagonist is our helper.
-Edmund Burke
Bringslite
This is a sticky wicket.

If we go with the philosophy that joining a company or a settlement is "opting in" for possible PVP the rewards are (beyond the fun and social aspects) training beyond X, and joining future factions is "opting in" for highly likely PVP with the rewards of mechanical benefits and maybe some unique trainable skill sets or boons… then that is all consensual, right? PVP outside of those was supposed to lead to a very reduced potential for mischief and few would endure that type of play.

Just like Nihimon pointed out somewhere back, at some point(possibly when it was realized that subs were not going to be on a waiting list), GW turned the ship away from the unexplored waters and decided to hug the coast lines like all previous games. They had a dedicated base of players that seemed to be somewhat OK with PVP and a large enough base that wants PVP real bad.

GW likely concluded that they could focus a good deal of effort on player conflict: feuds, holdings-outposts, flagging, player identification, husk looting, settlement mechanics (so there could be real wars), etc… PVP centric stuff. They may have thought that enough (regularly non PVP) players would endure and they could (somewhat) entice hardcore PVPers with these fairly tame penalty PVP actions (though low rep, both game and meta does appear to sting). And, unfortunately, they lost some investors.

Possible mistakes in no particular order in feud implementation:
1. No way to "win" and force an opponent to yield or be destroyed.
2. No way to limit how much you can be attacked even if you beat the aggressor more times than not.
3. Turning feuds into wars by allowing entire settlements to participate.
4. Making feuding be easily affordable 23/7/365.
5. Unless I am mistaken, allowing feuding to spill over and be allowed inside settlements, including NPC towns. Even Darkfall and EVE have some safe or almost perfectly safe areas. Is PfO supposed to be more hardcore PVP than those games?
6. No ready answer or "pre answer" or consideration for PVP fatigue. Feuding is not an only 1 hour every night thing despite what some say.
7. I've got no reason to PVP, feud or no feud.

Probable mistakes in MVP:
1. Assuming that enough MMO pop would see the MVP the same way (as GW) to make it a real MVP. I know that I was a diehard supporter and fought, thinking that I could convince more to see it GW's way/version as acceptable.
2. Not addressing and really examining the outside or inside community's critiques much, much earlier. Not sure if there was anything that GW could have done without that last bit of investment, but I do wonder.
3. It doesn't seem like there was a real good and flexible, plan B strategy.

General mistakes (IMO):
1. PVP systems not implemented all at once. Not sure if it was a coding problem or non modular code design. If either, there should have been basic PVP functions and that is ALL, until ALL was ready.
2. Because the implementation was done the way it was: many, many coding/planning hours were wasted designing and coding "temporary mechanics". I can accept that parts of those are useable for the future, but not many.
3. Too much investment in PVP and settlement mechanics (or again, PVP) and not enough in PVE.
4. Way to little (besides lip service) investment in making this "feel" like PFRPG. What could/should be a strength is, instead, a weakness. I don't mean breaking the OGL or that it should be a themepark. I mean a PFRPG mini themepark inside a PVP sandbox.

All tied together just like it is for the NPCs in the real PFRPG. Those that rule things, craft, trade, and plague the lands with their evil agendas. Those parts can be player parts in the stories. <—What does that mean and why can't we have it?

Now, there is a better chance to fix these things than there ever was, even if it takes awhile.
Virtute et Armis
-Unknown
Just Dak
So I am assuming the Forever War is now the thing that exists exclusively on the forums?

Neat story.
Give me a reasonable despot any day. Someone that constantly reminds everyone that they are virtuous and honorable can not be trusted to be either. If you are good we will know by your deeds, if you are reasonable we will know by our deals.
Bringslite
Just Dak
So I am assuming the Forever War is now the thing that exists exclusively on the forums?

Neat story.

Oh, I bet it is on hiatus or "timeout". Which does possibly conflict with "Forever".
Virtute et Armis
-Unknown
Midnight
Just Dak
So I am assuming the Forever War is now the thing that exists exclusively on the forums?

Neat story.

Phaeros would need to build more holdings and outposts for it to liven up.

Mere feuds could work, but it is getting hard to find anyone on the map, much less entire companies worth feuding; things seem to have slowed down immensely since Lisa's announcement on funding for the game.

Also, the dissolution of the EBA takes a lot of eligible folks out of the war (until it sparks up again and they have to decide whether to help Phaeros).
He who wrestles with us strengthens our nerves and sharpens our skill. Our antagonist is our helper.
-Edmund Burke
 
You must be logged into an enrolled account to post