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?

Midnight
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".

I get the impression the playerbase is on hiatus, since Lisa's announcement on funding.

Finding a good feud target is getting difficult. Even reading the ogres event thread the largest group I noticed being talked about was 6 whole players in one place at the same time and they might not even have been Phaeros. smile

In my travels through monster hexes (for T3 gathering) I just don't find 18 people beating down an escalation anymore… do you?
He who wrestles with us strengthens our nerves and sharpens our skill. Our antagonist is our helper.
-Edmund Burke
Bringslite
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.

I don't think that Lisa's announcement has anything to do with what Phaeros is doing. At least not totally. They probably see little value in having holdings if they are weary of fighting so much.
Virtute et Armis
-Unknown
Bringslite
Midnight
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".

I get the impression the playerbase is on hiatus, since Lisa's announcement on funding.

Finding a good feud target is getting difficult. Even reading the ogres event thread the largest group I noticed being talked about was 6 whole players in one place at the same time and they might not even have been Phaeros. smile

In my travels through monster hexes (for T3 gathering) I just don't find 18 people beating down an escalation anymore… do you?

Me? Not 18.
Virtute et Armis
-Unknown
Midnight
doublepost
He who wrestles with us strengthens our nerves and sharpens our skill. Our antagonist is our helper.
-Edmund Burke
Caldeathe Baequiannia
Tyv Blodvaerd of Aragon
You do realize this is a game, don't you?
Which is why I specified "Taken to Absurdity." The point being, even without the absurd extension, that some of us feel responsibility to our comrades, regardless of whether it is a game, or not, and may take actions we would prefer not to, in support of those relationships. So to make the claim that any such participation is de facto consensual is to make a false claim.
To reach me, email d20rpg@gmail.com
Caldeathe Baequiannia
Midnight
In my travels through monster hexes (for T3 gathering) I just don't find 18 people beating down an escalation anymore… do you?
The HRC had seven for a while last weekend (one healer/buffer on the outside), and could have had at least nine at that time, but there are currently zero advantages to having more than six since the loot is restricted to a company. That night I was willing to be extra-party to test out some new gear and expendables. We do not generally bother taking more than six into an escalation unless removing the escalation quickly is the point of the exercise, which has not been required since they stopped spreading. By supper Sunday, we had five fallow monster hexes in our region. When escalation infection/spread resumes, I expect people will once again start sending multi company parties into dangerous escalations.
To reach me, email d20rpg@gmail.com
Yrme
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.

I think Phaeros might have learned from EoX's example. EoX figured out that they didn't need to spend on holding and outposts at this time. I think Ryan said a settlement without holdings should suffer an economy hit. The unstated part was likely "… and we'll get around to that later, maybe in 6 months. Enjoy the PvP."

The PvE/settlement/economy development had been put on the back-burner. Holdings were just something you paid for so your enemy could attack you. Eventually, people figured it out. Holdings do provide bulk production, but often they aren't worth fighting over. Phaeros, logically, can choose not to play that side of the game if they want.
At some point, crowdforging suggestions seem to be like fan fiction. Some good, some bad, some repetitious and predictable. But maybe there are some gems out there.
AlexanderDamocles
And that to me is the greatest failure of PFO: its too ruddy easy. Every major settlement (and likely most of the minor ones) can last for months if they don't have holdings. Resources are built up to the point that we don't actually *need* anything new. And considering that exp just banks in the background, there is no reason to log into the game. Grind more of the old recipes and trash we've done for 9 months? Why? To burn through gear that we have huge surpluses of?

If we were meant to be each others content, there had to be a price for failure.

I think that the usage of materials for settlement upkeep should be *drastically* increased to draw down the excess while holdings have their production lowered. Once the excess has been burned off, turn consumption back to normal.

Suddenly, holdings have some merit. You need to defend them if you want to remain viable. And that requires gear, which means gathering is once again needed. Right now, the economy is all income and no sinks.
Yrme
AlexanderDamocles
I think that the usage of materials for settlement upkeep should be *drastically* increased to draw down the excess while holdings have their production lowered. Once the excess has been burned off, turn consumption back to normal.

Suddenly, holdings have some merit. You need to defend them if you want to remain viable. And that requires gear, which means gathering is once again needed. Right now, the economy is all income and no sinks.

Agreed with the first part.

Imho, GW made warfare way too easy, a blunt force approach. Declare a very cheap feud on 4-6 companies at a time and bunny-hop your combatants into a single 60-man company.

What if, instead, they had given us tasks that had to be completed in our held hexes during our PvP window instead? We'd have to be online to manually shift the Outpost production to the Holding, for example. Then there would be the chance of meeting engagements between scouts, haulers, etc., because people looking for a fight would know that targets were very likely at some moment in time.

But yes, building all faucets and few drains is an issue.
At some point, crowdforging suggestions seem to be like fan fiction. Some good, some bad, some repetitious and predictable. But maybe there are some gems out there.
Edam
AlexanderDamocles
Every major settlement (and likely most of the minor ones) can last for months if they don't have holdings.

If things stayed as they are KP could last more like a year without holdings by running a very low training rate most weeks and ramping up to a higher level every 3rd or 4th week on a schedule so people can time their training to match the high weeks.

If your settlement got income from out of settlement characters training there may feasibly be a benefit to maintaining holdings and running a high training level but under the current system there is no reason.

Also - even if you need holdings, from a pure cost perspective its cheaper to replace outposts than take the gear losses trying to defend them.
 
You must be logged into an enrolled account to post