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.

Settlement Kits for EE11

Bob
My understanding is that a fair amount of trading has been going on based on the structure kits various settlements have been expecting to receive. Some players might regret some of those trades if they turned out to be unnecessary, though perhaps some additional flexibility in which structures they're getting would balance that out. And if those trades were for recipes, those will still be necessary to get +2 and above kits when upgrading becomes possible.
Azure_Zero
~/AZ/Home~> Sudo Rant
pass:
Rant Mode ON

—————————-

I for one support allowing those that spent the Time, Effort, and Resources to capture a settlement the right to choose what that settlement is as those that did so, did it based on what was written.
It was that we COULD change the settlement type after capture, just as if you were an original settlement owner. If you Deny it to those that did a settlement capture then to be equal to EVERY settlement, EVERY settlement should revert to the settlement type it was during EE 1.0, or even better they are randomised.



If folks look at the Map see the distribution of classes in a geographical region both within and outside of Powerblocks?
There are large voids of class(es) in some areas, add in that Cleric training will get a restriction later and then it gets even worse for clerics in certain areas.
And when Alliances get online and can block off training to those outside their alliance, the options for training in an area get really small, to the point you may even need to go about a quarter of the map for training, that is NOT fun.
Also the building kit drop rates and RNG have been the biggest suck for those trying to customise their settlement, as you can guess the odds for folks who do get the rare settlement drop and it is either; a duplicate they have or one they don't need or want (and some of these are un-trade-able since NO ONE wants them).

Now should we be able to Cheery pick the building, NO. The settlement will have most of what it wants, and can learn to be resourceful with what is given or trade for what is needed to perfect the settlement to it's owner's will.

exit
Rant Mode OFF
Duffy Swiftshadow
It seems the universal safe choice is let every settlement pick which kits they want. It covers the new owners getting stuck with templates they don't want, it allows those that were relying on trades to simply not have to, and it allows us to make more unique decisions instead of being restricted by a few preset templates from the end of the Landrush.

We're just gonna build what we want anyways, giving us kits we don't care for based on our preset template is a little silly and kind of a waste. Diverse settlements are better anyways. We'll still need to make kits for upgrading, not really giving us a free pass or anything. I would say custom settlement is a decent reward for those of us that have stuck it out.
Bob
FYI, the option of letting every settlement choose from among the template-based kits is not significantly more complicated than restricting settlements to their current templates. It's only when settlements can make specific kit choices that things really start to slow down. It's still possible, just slower, and it might be hard to be patient while your settlement sits empty.
Azure_Zero
Why not simplify it, if your allowing custom kits so as not to be bogged down.

Let the rule be; Pick a settlement template and limited up to 3 building swaps.

This way the amount of complexity of a custom kit is reduced, yet allows for a unique settlement kit.
It'll also mean that if they wanted more than 3 building swaps they'll need to trade, or find someone who can craft the building they seek.
Bringslite
Bob
My understanding is that a fair amount of trading has been going on based on the structure kits various settlements have been expecting to receive. Some players might regret some of those trades if they turned out to be unnecessary, though perhaps some additional flexibility in which structures they're getting would balance that out. And if those trades were for recipes, those will still be necessary to get +2 and above kits when upgrading becomes possible.

I certainly won't claim to know what everyone is doing or has been doing. I think that kind of speculation situation is why some were figuring on getting different settlement templates for those captured settlements. They wanted to trade lots of kits.

In other words, those that will be most disappointed may well be those that captured settlements.
Virtute et Armis
-Unknown
Brighthaven Leader
To be honest, I feel GW has basically handed us everything on a silver platter. I kind of would have liked to see us build from scratch with the recipes we have gotten so far, it would makes things far more interesting, and it would require more people working together than are currently.

That being said, GW is just going to hand us the buildings. I believe picking templates after the fact is undermining the hardwork put into find recipes these last few months, as well as those that sacrificed for the buildings that they have (and were going to trade). I wanted to pioneer building a settlement from the bottom up, not have it handed to me, and for the materials we were going to get in the form of those building kits, those settlements that are unique will have their value once again undermined.

What ever happens, I am 100% against picking your own building makeups.

I see 3 Choices: 1) Lee isn't here, he is no longer Lead, hand out the templates as they are already designed/designated, 2) Let EVERYONE choose from the available templates, 3) Let people build their own templates.

I thought it quite ridiculous from the start giving new groups chances to change their settlement. The whole damn mechanic for taking over settlements were to revive those specific settlements. I didn't see it as a way for people to expand territory, build new settlements, or break off from current groups, especially when our main problem is that were too spread out already.

I do think that those that participated at the varying levels of War of Towers should get to choose their buildings for their hardwork.

Edit: WoT comment - Choose those specific 1-3 kits.
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!
Bob
Azure_Zero
Let the rule be; Pick a settlement template and limited up to 3 building swaps.

Something along those lines could be a reasonable compromise. Another variant would be to allow everyone to swap one building of each size (S/M/L). Either way, it would only add a couple minutes to getting each transaction prepared, and I'd probably still get kits delivered to everyone who could make themselves available that first day.
Seith of Coedwig
Bob
FYI, the option of letting every settlement choose from among the template-based kits is not significantly more complicated than restricting settlements to their current templates. It's only when settlements can make specific kit choices that things really start to slow down. It's still possible, just slower, and it might be hard to be patient while your settlement sits empty.
There was nothing that ever led me to believe we'd be able to make individual kits. Simply having the option to select a new template is all we ever expected.
Bob
Seith of Coedwig
There was nothing that ever led me to believe we'd be able to make individual kits. Simply having the option to select a new template is all we ever expected.

Understood, but as expected, opening up this conversation got people talking about the possibility of everyone being given even more choice than that. I'm certainly not against that, but I'd like to both keep the amount of choices reasonable and give everyone the same choices (with the exception of the extra choices available based on the War of Towers, which are clearly only for specific settlements).
 
You must be logged into an enrolled account to post