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.

Banked Influence Loss 25%, Not 10%

Bob
This was mentioned in a roundabout way in the EE 10.2 Release Notes under Feuds, where we pointed out that finishing a feud without taking a holding would now result in 25% influence lost, while you'd lose nothing if you took a holding. That change was actually done by simply changing the percentage of influence returned whenever banked influence is given back from 90% to 75%. So, if you end a feud and still have 100 influence banked in it, you now get 75 influence returned instead of 90. If you took a holding during that feud, then the 100 influence banked in the feud is now banked in that holding.

What was obviously not as clear is that we use that same number when returning influence that's banked in holdings and outposts. So, tearing down or losing a holding now results in only 75 influence returning out of the 100 influence that was banked in the holding. My apologies for not pointing that out more clearly.
Bringslite
Bob
This was mentioned in a roundabout way in the EE 10.2 Release Notes under Feuds, where we pointed out that finishing a feud without taking a holding would now result in 25% influence lost, while you'd lose nothing if you took a holding. That change was actually done by simply changing the percentage of influence returned whenever banked influence is given back from 90% to 75%. So, if you end a feud and still have 100 influence banked in it, you now get 75 influence returned instead of 90. If you took a holding during that feud, then the 100 influence banked in the feud is now banked in that holding.

What was obviously not as clear is that we use that same number when returning influence that's banked in holdings and outposts. So, tearing down or losing a holding now results in only 75 influence returning out of the 100 influence that was banked in the holding. My apologies for not pointing that out more clearly.

Again. Thanks for clearing possible fog.

What's it like to go from occasionally posting here about escalations and mobs (rates, treasure, future mechanics, etc… ) to being the primary "bullhorn" for the whole shebang? It's only really an increase of about 1000%…. smile
Virtute et Armis
-Unknown
Bob
Bringslite
What's it like to go from occasionally posting here about escalations and mobs (rates, treasure, future mechanics, etc… ) to being the primary "bullhorn" for the whole shebang? It's only really an increase of about 1000%…. smile

It's definitely been an interesting month. Fortunately, a lot of good work was done getting things prepared ahead of time, and Lee and Stephen aren't quite annoyed enough by my frequent questions to put me on their KOS lists, at least not yet. Still, and I can't say this enough, I appreciate the patience you've all shown as I work through the bits and pieces that inevitably fell through the cracks.
Hobson Fiffledown
Well, it is what it is. Losing months worth of Inf to find out was a little rough…

I'll point out though, that what was introduced as a penalty for feuding without capture isn't really a penalty for that if it affects all structure removal. It's just a penalty for playing with the holding and outpost system in general.
This space for rent.
Caldeathe Baequiannia
I'm with Hobson. Putting the penalty on anyone who wants to change holdings is punitive. We're missing the ability to hand off management to other companies, so at the moment settlements can't even transfer hexes internally without a large influence penalty on top of the cost of replacing the holdings.
To reach me, email d20rpg@gmail.com
Bringslite
The only good thing is that the aggressor takes a hit of 25 for failing. We (at least some of us) have been asking for SOMETHING possibly costly for the aggressor and we got it.

Thank you, GW.

Now could you (time permitting) please take a look at the owner's auto loss for losing the Holding or wanting to transfer it to another company? Maybe also a surrender mechanic that does not cost one side or both a loss of 25?

@ Peoples

Remember that things are done in steps and things take time.
Virtute et Armis
-Unknown
Bob
Bringslite
Now could you (time permitting) please take a look at the owner's auto loss for losing the Holding or wanting to transfer it to another company? Maybe also a surrender mechanic that does not cost one side or both a loss of 25?

I've filed a feature request to look into that. I think it's all possible, but definitely will take code.
Smitty
Haven’t been in game much or dome much feuding recently but question on how this works..

If you feud and don’t take a outpost? Or holding ? your company loses the influence you banked by a total of 25%? ( so 100 to bank to start feud then if don’t take anything you lose 25% and get 75 back.. )

If you tear down a holding or outpost your company loses 25% of the influence banked ?

So if my company feuds yours takes over a holding ( the influence I banked to feud yours gets assigned to my company to control the holding). Then when allowed I tear down the holding because it is super far away from my settlement and controlling it and moving the resources around is not something I want to do so far from home… And when I do so I lose 25% of the influence banked that gets assigned as banked when I take it over

Is that really what this is saying? Or have I missed something ?

What are the influence numbers for controlling 2 +2 outpost and a +2 holding? ( assume the +3 versions are taken over during a feud and the conquering company has to bank influence to control those until such time they are allowed to destroy them…)
Is This saying you now lose influence banked for destroying things taken over ? 25 % feels like you have to pay a ton more in lost influence for winning than what you would pay for losing.. unless im missing something.
Bringslite
The cost to place and have both a holding and outposts varies a lot because each "+" of any of the structures costs more banked influence.

When you attack any structure, it drops a notch in the "+" it was set at, win or lose. I wonder if the true "banked influence" total is considered for the true cost of whatever is left when you take it over. In many cases the actual influence needed could be over 100.
Virtute et Armis
-Unknown
Smitty
Was under the impression the +’s of the outpost and holdings only reduced by one + after a holding changes hands ( just attacking them didn’t reduce them , only taking a outpost didn’t reduce the + unless the holding was taken the following day)

If a holding was taken then all structures lost a + and if the attackers had enough influence then influence was banked to take full control of the structures ( am not sure what happens if the attacking company didn’t have enough influence, but was under the impression the structures just didn’t produce trade goods but that is just a guess)

I am pretty sure it was a 2 day process until the attackers were able to tear down the structures and influence was banked from the attacking company (if there was enough available)
If all that is correct still….
I attack holdings and outpost that start at +3, I win and they reduce to +2.
For 2 days my influence is banked to control those things.
Once I am able I can tear them down, but will lose 25% of the influence banked on controlling them.
So winning(taking the outpost and holdings during a feud) will cost me 25% influence for each structure.
Losing ( not taking a holding..) will cost me 25% of 100- so 25 influence for a 2 day feud
Winning ( if your desire is to tear stuff down..) is going to cost a ton more than actually losing, so why exactly would I want to win?
Does that not seem right to anyone else? What am I missing

 
You must be logged into an enrolled account to post