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

Caldeathe Baequiannia
Paddy Fitzpatrick
At some point there ain't gonna be new settlements left to take, there ain't no settlement conquest mechanics that I can find.
Settlement conquest/seige-mechanics are not implemented, but are intended. There will also be political ways to take over, as some settlements will opt for populist forms of government when the ability to select charters for our settlements is implemented.
To reach me, email d20rpg@gmail.com
Edam
The idea that new players with a couple of freinds will be able to rock up and take settlements in 5 or 10 years time is crazy. Settlements are designed to have populations in the thousands. Also the seige mechanics discussed seem to involve war engines and equipment such as trebuchets that it was implied would be like EVE Titans in terms of the size of group needed to make and maintain them.

There has always been a discrepancy between the envisaged concept of scale in the game and what some players are thinking.

Basically a small group of friends or smallish guild of 20 or 30 people fits a company in game and a company of 20 people is not meant to be taking a settlement down longterm. No more than a new player in EVE can reasonably expect to get a few friends and take out the 40,000 players in CFC or the similar number in the RUS alliance.

Nor would these new players necessarily want the settlement once they had it. Many settlements at the moment are still running because a couple of active playera are putting 20 or more hours a week into moving bulk goods with mules and keeping everything running. Allowing a new group at this point to take settlements by force woudl see the original settlement memebers quit ( as they just wasted 12 months work) followed shortly afterwards by the new owners quitting because running a settlement is actually a grind and hard work and someting of a PITA.
Quijenoth
Takasi
said stuff

Maybe your right and I'm wrong, you raise many points where this game needs to improve, that I am in no disagreement with what needs to be improved.

But maybe I'm right and your wrong. there is certainly two sides here. being the first and being the best is one of the top drives for anything in life, not just in games. competition is paramount in games be they themepark, single player coop or sandbox. I find your statement there a bit naive but I'm not saying its totally wrong, on a company level its probably spot on, but settlement wise its a different story. That's where this game is missing key features and it gives me the impression its tried to run before it can walk - developing the high end first instead of focusing on a smaller group and growing as its needs require.

HRC is a perfect example of what a settlement should be, many companies running one settlement as a whole, instead (because of the tools you have been given) you are running multiple settlements as single (or small groups of) companies and creating an alliance of settlements (the coal road) because there are no mechanics to support your perceived high end.

The same can be said for all alliances in the game right now - They should be one settlement only but they arent, why? because people have their own goals and yet still want to do everything, they cant do everything in a single settlement so they create more with as few resources as the system will allow.
Takasi
Quijenoth given the current state of the game we are all a microcosm of the future.

There are probably only 2000 active xp spending characters in the entire game. There are only 500 hexes. Each hex starts to feel crowded after two groups of 6 begin hunting after mobs. There are 30 active settlement plots with at least 50 available on the current map and over 200 on the planned OE map. If the game catches on and you have 50,000 active players there is always room to expand.

Until then any organization with 100 active xp spending characters today is still 5% of the population and it should be represented on the map and in the gameplay offered to the current population. With a projected population of 50,000 that same group potentially represents 2500 players and should be planning accordingly.

To me you sound like you're constantly making suggestions to hamstring people who have put up with more than any other MMO I have ever seen. In my view though the result either way is a pinprick in the long run. We are held back enough already in this game, and the gains we receive are laughable compared to what you get in any other game. Even if you get to Tier 3 the system has so much to offer that spending 100K+ xp on training is a huge risk. We do not know if this game or anything we're doing will even be around in a few months, and if it does survive several years we have no idea what our current purchases are going to look like after other systems are implemented.

Quijenoth if you feel passionate about consolidation then why don't you abandon Callambea and put all of your resources somewhere else? You were just recently working with Aragon to help create another settlement. If the new developer appears and Xelias returns in full force do you suggest they not construct Golgotha and Kreuz Bernstein?
Smitty
For the last year or so, many of us said no to a wipe because in our eyes it is just a head start in xp, but the more we push to end game with incomplete systems. ( training all our T3 crafters, gaining all our T3 combat skills ).. Then the” its only a head start in xp” sounds like BS to anyone joining the game now or a year into the future…

These achievements will be super hard for any new group to accomplish once all the mechanics are in, getting these skills now means future groups will feel they have the right to ask for the same difficulty level in obtaining them as we faced.

Haven’t said much yet on this subject, as I like many others are waiting to see what changes if/when the game is sold..
The further folks are pushing T3 boundaries with incomplete systems , the more I feel a wipe will be needed just to create a level and fair playing field..With all the issues we have had ( holdings stock piled, web voting on a land rush, support to +5 without actually having +5 etc ) I feel just giving us the xp back.. , but killing everything else is not that far off.

Takasi
Yet none of the people who might complain in the future are playing today.

This is no free schmorgesborg of good stuff here. It's a monotonous slog that an extremely tiny population of gamers are barely putting up with.

We need a buffet of carrots. Add barbarians. Add druids. Add rangers. Add dragons. Add dungeons. Add factions. Add gushers even. People should stop suggesting that we haven't been beaten down sufficiently to earn the scraps we have today.

Go on any MMO forum and tell people that PFO players have spent $300 on the current state of the game and some are suggesting a hard cap, after over a year of playing, of level 14 out of 20 in ranks of a skill based system for only 4 available roles out of 11 promised. I would love to read the replies. We are laughed at out there for putting up with and God forbid paying anything for this game today.

Look at Tier 3 recipes as a perfect example. Today it is like winning the lotto to get this stuff. Add a few more mobs and they could be common place. You don't know. Maybe the game will be much easier in the future. Ranged attacks without rooting. Higher yields from nodes and outposts. Guards that spawn to prevent PvP in safe areas. XP purchases and discounts in the cash shop. The game may go free to play entirely with loot, training and even settlements available for the right price.

Let's see what the new developers have to say, assuming they even get the money they need to keep the game alive. We could sunset this summer or even sooner for all we know. People are debating with future assumptions rather than talking about what they're actually playing today. If someone feels they're being held back because someone else has something more than they should then go ahead and complain about what you're seeing, but so far I haven't seen anything you can do in this game that requires anything above T1 and a good group.
Duffy Swiftshadow
Smitty
For the last year or so, many of us said no to a wipe because in our eyes it is just a head start in xp, but the more we push to end game with incomplete systems. ( training all our T3 crafters, gaining all our T3 combat skills ).. Then the” its only a head start in xp” sounds like BS to anyone joining the game now or a year into the future…

These achievements will be super hard for any new group to accomplish once all the mechanics are in, getting these skills now means future groups will feel they have the right to ask for the same difficulty level in obtaining them as we faced.

Haven’t said much yet on this subject, as I like many others are waiting to see what changes if/when the game is sold..
The further folks are pushing T3 boundaries with incomplete systems , the more I feel a wipe will be needed just to create a level and fair playing field..With all the issues we have had ( holdings stock piled, web voting on a land rush, support to +5 without actually having +5 etc ) I feel just giving us the xp back.. , but killing everything else is not that far off.

What achievement have we accomplished now wouldn't be EASIER with more people and our existing infrastructure to support and help them in the near future? Why is this particular year going to be any different for new players than say new players starting next year or the year after? Why is a theoretical future player's feelings about achieving something more important than honoring the players who actually have been playing this whole time's efforts?

When some of those systems get implemented a lot of those edges will start to disappear. T3 proliferation will plummet with threading, bulk resources will start getting churned through at higher upkeep levels, resources will get destroyed as we start vying over territory control to support settlement DI, bulk will start to disappear as holdings and outposts are destroyed or raided, entire vaults can possibly disappear or be ransacked in a siege. If the game didn't change sure there would be issues, but it's gonna change and it's gonna add more and more things that can curb the existing edges.

And if need be I'm sure they can come up with a few ideas to maybe curb an edge that got out of control here and there without resetting the whole game world over it.
Caldeathe Baequiannia
Takasi
Look at Tier 3 recipes as a perfect example. Today it is like winning the lotto to get this stuff.
TBH, I think per dollar spent on subscriptions, if you looked at scratch-and-win lottery tickets the Major Prize (say $1000+) ROI would be higher for those than for T3 Recipes in the game.
To reach me, email d20rpg@gmail.com
Edam
I may be biased but as an EVE player the wipe requests sound far too much like the continual "EVE is unfair on new players, how can we compete with people that have been playing 10 years" whining you get in EVE general discussion.

Those players have some weird idea they can somehow "win" EVE if they can convince CCP to wipe the game.

THERE IS NO "WIN" OR "END GAME" IN A SAND BOX.

CCP is very adamant about never wiping EVE. The reason is simple. The only way to get people to commit to a game with potentially 20 or 30 years of training is to promise to never wipe it EVER. If you wipe a "no XP cap" game even once for "special reasons" no one will ever trust you to not do it again.
Smitty
I get what you are saying Takasi.. you want to be able to play the game( and everything that is in the game right now.. it is your right to do so.. because you pay to do so..). Just because the coding supports taking our white and yellow mobs of a PvE camp without agroing everything .. doesn’t mean you charge into camps without doing so in a difficult fight. Just because for 2 months the Usties were a bunch of pansies doesn’t mean groups didn’t farm the crap out of them. Just because the poisoner dark elves help blow up the melee guys that run at me doesn’t mean I engage them first..

We are paying to play the game as is , we know things are suppose to get better, we know the systems are incomplete.. we also know the game has pretty much stopped producing new content.. which means we are just getting further and further ahead with none of the limiting systems being worked on. And no sight of them being worked on anytime soon..

The problem is the game will not thrive with the current player base .. it might be able to remain on life support for a good while, but it will not grow..

Any investor that comes in can look at the 500 players and 2k active accounts and think that is a nice start, but how do we increase that to 20k players ? How do we do that knowing that the player base we have is playing checkers out blocks of woods , while the game they want to sell is chess with fancy carved pieces..

So by all means push the boundaries , play the game but in 6 months when something like we are wiping ____ away , and you can keep ____. Is announced and you are not happy with the you can keep ____. Statement

Any argument you can make to why you should be able to keep more is being thrown in a shredder by just pushing and pushing and pushing to the end game with a bunch of systems that are incomplete..
 
You must be logged into an enrolled account to post