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.

Pathfinder Online will be ending operations on November 28, 2021. For more details please visit our FAQ.

Concerns over Settlement Costs

Lifedragn
Takasi
What happens if NewCorp decides after a wipe to ditch XP altogether and instead tie training to higher coin sinks and adventure/social/crafting/arcane/divine/martial/subterfuge points? Adjusting the costs of course, with the upper end game having a limiting factor of settlement support and gear availability.

Sounds like a grind-fest at that point, unless reaching those caps is equivalently easy to what it is now. In either event, that sounds more like it would be a high-turnover model. Hardcore people would hit their personal growth end-games in days/weeks - joining existing large settlements just to grind through those higher levels as fast as possible. These tend to be the games where people come, max out, get bored, and then leave in fairly short order. If you make reaching that end game a longer-term prospect with more difficult grinding achievements then you cut out a casual player base.

I think Microtransactions involving taking you to a certain XP level would be acceptable. World of Warcraft basically offers a similar product that takes you to the max level of the previous expansion so that you can jump right into the new one. A single use per character 6 month XP pack, for example. But I do not know if that is really necessary.

Essentially, any problem fixed by a wipe is going to repeat itself if the game lives on. The better idea is to examine what problems there are and design a fix for them that enhances the experience.

Is pre-existing XP the problem? I don't think so. Catching up to existing players, at least to a point where you are effective, doesn't take all that long if you know how to specialize. Getting to T2 quickly will be important if you intend to PvP. T3 vs T1 probably won't be much fun. But you can climb from T1 to T2 faster than a T3 can add a single plus, I believe. The gap will be there for a while, but it shrinks faster than expected. Further, it won't be too much longer before the most optimized characters lose their ability to advance on that single line and will need to begin generalizing.

Are stockpiles of Resources the problem? Add some cosmetic items that are resource sinks. Might take some hefty resources to build a Dwarven Tavern skin that customizes the look of your inn. Or an Elven Wizard's Academy. But people will do it.

Are bulk resource stockpiles a problem? Add Tiered Bulk resources. Higher plus holdings enable higher tier resources to be harvested. Higher level settlements/buildings require these higher tier resources. Then enable refining of bulk goods into higher tier bulk goods at a significant exchange rate. New groups harvesting these resources naturally progress regularly as they would now. Older groups would also begin harvesting a newly balanced intake, but they can refine their existing stock. A good design I think would reduce what would be a year's worth of resources to 6 months for a T2 settlement or 3 months for a T3. That way there is still a good bump for work done to date, but it helps solve the issue of having so many resources stocked up that you could fight a prolonged war by logging off until your opponent gets bored.

Most of the problems currently being discussed here are really stemming from math based around a faster development schedule than what has been accomplished. The drains have just not been implemented as fast as they could be, but the faucets have been left on and now things are overflowing. We need to give the plumbing some attention, sure. But I don't think we need a wipe.
Lifedragn
Caldeathe Baequiannia

They need to wipe, they would have the right to wipe, and they probably will wipe.
If more people couched things as their opinions, instead of laying out arguments as though they were absolutes and prima-facie correct, we could probably have more disagreements and fewer arguments

I agree with you, Caldeathe. But people will refuse to do so for the same reason politicians state opinions as facts. Undecided people are frequently swayed through the sheer confidence and conviction you put behind your positions. You do not need to be right to win people over. You just need to sound absolutely sure that you are right.
Doc
If I thought I was potentially way off-base, I'd ask more questions, not make blunt assertions.

And I used the word "probably" in the quote above, hardly an absolute, as I frequently do, and if you read my posts word for word you see I use things like "IMO" "in my opinion", or couch my statements with conditionals quite a bit.

It takes too much effort to keep people from getting their feelings hurt on this forum. I'd rather reserve my effort and furor for things people actually do in the game.
Midnight
Caldeathe Baequiannia
Decius
If you got anything more than 30 days equivalent subscription charged back, I'd change to a company that wasn't using my money to subsidize buyers' remorse or investment losses.
Bollocks!

Maybe you would. But if anyone tried to claim my purchase of goods and services was actually an investment, I'd have to ask to see last year's required SEC reports for a company with that many "investors."

He might be referring to my specific example of IDLE accounts. They *are* an investment, of sorts, in a passive xp game. There is a specific monetary value, as we all know, but they are also a source of potential power in the game. Anything that destroys that potential power (that also breaches the marketing) creates a "loss" to the customer who was paying for that "power".

Now it is about time for someone to claim that nerfs are actionable…. smile
He who wrestles with us strengthens our nerves and sharpens our skill. Our antagonist is our helper.
-Edmund Burke
Bringslite
Thank the Gods there is something more interesting than: IMO, NewCorp is going to do "X", and the famous: NewCorp had better not do "X".
Virtute et Armis
-Unknown
Caldeathe Baequiannia
There was no probably before "they need to wipe." It was an assertion based on opinion, not facts in evidence. Whether I agree with the opinion or not, it is not a fact, and should not be stated as a fact.
To reach me, email d20rpg@gmail.com
Caldeathe Baequiannia
Midnight
Caldeathe Baequiannia
Decius
If you got anything more than 30 days equivalent subscription charged back, I'd change to a company that wasn't using my money to subsidize buyers' remorse or investment losses.
Bollocks!

Maybe you would. But if anyone tried to claim my purchase of goods and services was actually an investment, I'd have to ask to see last year's required SEC reports for a company with that many "investors."

He might be referring to my specific example of IDLE accounts. They *are* an investment, of sorts, in a passive xp game.
My "idle" accounts are because the roles I most want to play are not available, and I don't want to spend any more time than I have to bringing them to a level at which I'm used to playing. They *are not* an investment of any kind or "sort."
To reach me, email d20rpg@gmail.com
Edam
meh … legal action would probably be more successful in equity than contract or tort but seems to me this whole thread is taking things a bit far at this stage.

One group of players (not connected with GW or potential new purchasers) has the opinion the game would be better wiped. Another group of players (not connected with GW or potential new purchasers) disagrees.

There is not at this stage any indication of a wipe or otherwise that might engender some sort of legal action.
Decius
Caldeathe Baequiannia
Decius
If you got anything more than 30 days equivalent subscription charged back, I'd change to a company that wasn't using my money to subsidize buyers' remorse or investment losses.
Bollocks!

Maybe you would. But if anyone tried to claim my purchase of goods and services was actually an investment, I'd have to ask to see last year's required SEC reports for a company with that many "investors."
Would you also ask to see the report from your jewelry store because some people bought jewelry as an investment?
Caldeathe Baequiannia
Decius
Caldeathe Baequiannia
Decius
If you got anything more than 30 days equivalent subscription charged back, I'd change to a company that wasn't using my money to subsidize buyers' remorse or investment losses.
Bollocks!

Maybe you would. But if anyone tried to claim my purchase of goods and services was actually an investment, I'd have to ask to see last year's required SEC reports for a company with that many "investors."
Would you also ask to see the report from your jewelry store because some people bought jewelry as an investment?
So your answer to me saying this is not an investment is to try to make out as though I'm the one who thinks it's an investment? Nice try.
To reach me, email d20rpg@gmail.com
 
You must be logged into an enrolled account to post