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

Bringslite
There is a lot to be said about the actual value of building everything from the ground up. We are probably spoon fed far more than is actually good for retention. Things are more valuable (to me at least) when they are difficult to build/achieve.

That ship has sailed, long time passing.

@ Bob

Is that quoted revised list by Lee no longer the plan?
Also, can you give a brief reason why whatever kits we may choose are more time consuming? My gut is telling me that they must not be "objects" like the ones that GM's create with a command.
One more ???: Could you just reactivate the mechanic on the login screen that gave us the New Player Packs and put the kits in those? Couldn't you even do that and have it activate when EE11 goes live?

Because there have already been a few blunders implementing "fixes" and things that just did not work out well, I (Ozem's) suggest that you offer a choice of kits (one per settlement plot) by plot size and just call it a day. The kits are not recipes. The kits are (in general) only lowest tier versions. None of this will be an issue in about a month after EE11 goes live.
Virtute et Armis
-Unknown
Bob
Bringslite
Is that quoted revised list by Lee no longer the plan?

If we decide on a plan that's in some way based on the original templates, then I would still use those lists for each template. For example, I could just let each settlement pick whichever template they want, or settlements could pick a template and then be allowed a small number of changes.

Bringslite
Also, can you give a brief reason why whatever kits we may choose are more time consuming? My gut is telling me that they must not be "objects" like the ones that GM's create with a command.

For the template lists, I created what we call treasure boxes containing everything in them for each template, except for the Cathedrals which require a specific choice from each settlement. Once I teleport to the settlement representative, I type in one command to add the appropriate treasure box, possibly two more commands to add the Cathedral +0 and +1 kits, and then just trade everything in my inventory over to the representative. Getting the proper items into my inventory is pretty quick.

If everyone can choose their items, then even if I get lists in advance, I have to manually create each kit. The most straight-forward way for me to do that is to use a GM command for each kit, which makes for typing a lot of commands accurately without copy/paste. At least I get to repeat the +0 commands to add the +1 versions, but it definitely makes it slower for me to get the proper items in my inventory before arriving for the trade. Alternatively, I could make treasure boxes containing every possible kit that I need and then just carefully add the ones I need to the trade window. Either way, it requires a lot more care to make sure I give each settlement exactly what they're supposed to get.

I suspect with the template kits, it would take no more than 2 minutes to prep my inventory and put all the items in the
inventory. Adding a little variety on top of that might add 1-2 minutes to the process, while having every settlement get a totally unique list might push it to 10 minutes, largely because of the extra care required to make sure I get it right.

Bringslite
One more ???: Could you just reactivate the mechanic on the login screen that gave us the New Player Packs and put the kits in those? Couldn't you even do that and have it activate when EE11 goes live?

That's an interesting thought we hadn't considered. I'll have to look into that on Monday. If it's feasible, I still couldn't apply the kits to the appropriate accounts until EE11 goes live, but I could at least do it pretty quickly, and without all that time-consuming teleporting.
Tyv Blodvaerd of Aragon
Bob
Bringslite
One more ???: Could you just reactivate the mechanic on the login screen that gave us the New Player Packs and put the kits in those? Couldn't you even do that and have it activate when EE11 goes live?

That's an interesting thought we hadn't considered. I'll have to look into that on Monday. If it's feasible, I still couldn't apply the kits to the appropriate accounts until EE11 goes live, but I could at least do it pretty quickly, and without all that time-consuming teleporting.

That would likely put the structures in the hands of essentially inactive players, who hold the deed for the settlement, dating back to the land rush.
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
Schedim
<sidelining in from the left> I haven't really been active lately {coff, coff} but I always had the belif that we where to build everything from the ground up … A really Robinson Crouse experience … <hook comes in from left and drags me off the scene> I guess It isn't feasible when really thinking about it …. <sounds of thumping>
Schedim: Peddler and dealer in stuff easily transported, restless wandering the land of the River. Trying to find out how to reawaken the cult of Hanspur. To realise this ambition I created the company named Rats of Hanspur.
You can reach me on: pfo.schedim@gmail.com
Tyv Blodvaerd of Aragon
Schedim
<sidelining in from the left> I haven't really been active lately {coff, coff} but I always had the belif that we where to build everything from the ground up … A really Robinson Crouse experience … <hook comes in from left and drags me off the scene> I guess It isn't feasible when really thinking about it …. <sounds of thumping>

Yeah, that would have been feasible if the server population was 20k (where it was supposed to be at this point).

I think a lot of the things they are doing or were looking to do have to be viewed through the reality that there are only 100 - 200 actual players in the game.

Systems need to be made easier, not difficult, at least until they have a product GW is ready to "reopen" it's doors for massive invitations to try the gane again.
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
Schedim
Tyv Blodvaerd of Aragon
Yeah, that would have been feasible if the server population was 20k (where it was supposed to be at this point).

Hmmm … True, true, but sad sad! With this population it would actually make much more sense to to a post-apocalyptic twist and force us all to band together in one town and build it upward from there …

I know it isn't possible as it is to easy to just quit playing, but it would be interesting to see if it was possible to overcome a year of constant arguing over every dot and cross … I mean after … Seven months, the discussions are still more or less the same as they where when I left …
Schedim: Peddler and dealer in stuff easily transported, restless wandering the land of the River. Trying to find out how to reawaken the cult of Hanspur. To realise this ambition I created the company named Rats of Hanspur.
You can reach me on: pfo.schedim@gmail.com
Duffy Swiftshadow
Yea we couldn't build much from scratch due to lack of recipes. And since it's days per building and you'd have to start or entirely use NPC crafting rating it's not really fun to go from settlements and training to nothing for weeks and then maybe a few low level buildings. We got enough problems.
Azure_Zero
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.

Being able to swap one of each building size is a bit redundant, since all class combo templates have the two large buildings they may want.
When I said 3 buildings, I ment ANY 3 buildings of ANY size
(i.e. swapping; 3 smalls, 3 mediums, 1 of each, 2 mediums and 1 small, 2 smalls and 1 medium, 1 Large and 2 mediums etc).
Thod-Theodum
Let's try to square the circle here …

1) Some settlements spend a lot of effort gathering resources / acquiring recipes - we need to ensure they are kept happy
2) Some settlements spend a lot of effort taking over inactive settlements and expect a reward for that work
3) Some settlements have planned considerable changes in their build up
4) Some settlements didn't hoard resources for all future building work
5) GW has less manpower as before and we want to avoid problems

Can we keep the parties in 1) happy? They might grumble here now - but I could see the advantages of taking over defunct settlements for the sake of getting 'free' buildings - so if I could see it then tough on parties that didn't take advantage of it. Hard is fun as Ryan always said. Anyhow - in my view these settlements have the edge for the +2, +3, +4 and +5 buildings. If they feel cheated then because others took advantage that they didn't. Their wrath is unlikely towards GW.
This leaves the parties in 2). Giving them a choice of template seems a great advantage - until you realize this advantage is only short term - they never participated in the WoT and shouldn't get and +2 kits !!. +0 and +1 kits allow you to function - but we are now in the era of T3 and they are useless for that purpose. Not giving them what they expect will feel like goal posts moved.
Some settlements have contemplated considerable changes in the build up. EL is one of these. We want an AH (a trade has been secured long ago). But it leaves us to look for the medium sized buildings that are on no template at all. So no matter what - we will need to do a considerable building ourselves. For all who want larger changes more freedom is better.
Settlements who didn't hoard resources - I heard you clear and loud Cheatle. Your suggestion would be okay with several month warning - but building from scratch would wipe out or cripple some settlements for quite a while if done now. There is long term planning involved. For RP reasons I gathered resources for a +4 library - this is USELESS if I suddenly have not even a +0 smithy. Again - changing goal posts that late would cause a lot of players disgruntled against GW.
GW manpower. I really would feel bad if I just get what I have now. I planned everything long ago around the templates that Lee posted. I don't care if some alliances get some extras if they conquered defunct settlements. Kudos for them to see that option and exploit it. Giving me a few extra choices - I will take them - but I'm fine with the template that Lee offered us.

Anyhow - you will need some modifications if you add the +2 choices for the WoT. I always saw these as the major option to have choice. +0 and +1 are just to prevent you being crippled. I know what I talk about - trading my University for an AH will cripple me in the area of wizard training for weeks until we are able to build or trade in what we need (medium sized wizard training). But that is a cost I'm willing to pay.

There will be enough scramble for building +2 and +3 kits as well as filling the holes that I'm not concerned about settlements that got taken over.
Thod/Theodum are the OOC/IC leaders of the Emerald Lodge - a neutral settlement in the center of the mal that tries to the first to explore the Emerald Spire - should that part of the game ever become available. We have a strong in game and out of game relationship with the Pathfinder Society.
We welcome both hard core players as well as casual players with or without tabletop experience. We have a strong group in Europe and are slowly expanding into the US. We are predominately PvE as our neutral political stance means that we tend to use PvP only in self-defence. We are not anti-PVP - but expect limited PvP opportunity with us.
Takasi
As a participant of "conquering" dead settlements, we had no plans to "farm" these kits. We genuinely want each of those settlements to have a future and plan to use the kits we receive in those settlements. They were captured as waypoints and homes for all friendly players of any alliance to use. The name "New Rathglen" was chosen with a feeling of hope for a future where Rathglen is gone, Fort Inevitable is alive and well and a "stepping stone" for new players after their first few weeks of training. We have no intention of transferring kits to other settlements and gutting captured towns.

If it's not that much more work on Bob we are willing to wait a few days or even weeks after launch if it means being able to pick what initial kits we can have so we can start settlements in the way we envision them in the future. Having the power to choose would be a nice perk and very much appreciated by those of us who are optimistically participating in the current state of the game.
 
You must be logged into an enrolled account to post