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.

abandoned settlement takeovers

Midnight
Why have companies been allowed to take over settlements while still members of another settlement?

Has ANYONE had to take over a setttlement as an unattached company with the 23/7 windows that unattached companies had?

It sort of seems like a crock to me that we told new players they had a chance to gain settlements, but in almost every case it just turned out to be an expansion of an existing power bloc.

Even where *that* isn't the case, why were conquering companies allowed to use another settlement's more limited PvP windows than the 23/7 windows that would have been used by an actual group of newcomers with no settlement membership?

Yeah, this might have been more helpful if mentioned months ago, but sometimes you find yourself just witnessing the tide of other people's play before realizing just how much the system was being gamed.
He who wrestles with us strengthens our nerves and sharpens our skill. Our antagonist is our helper.
-Edmund Burke
Ryos
Midnight
….

It sort of seems like a crock to me that we told new players they had a chance to gain settlements, but in almost every case it just turned out to be an expansion of an existing power bloc.

….
Yeah, I heard the League did influence recycling (with the same company) with just holdings to take 3 settlements, and stock them with one man companies, talk about gaming the system to expand their territory.

I think upkeep rules should be changed to include;
1) the controlling company MUST have 600 influence minimum, and that 600 influence minimum needs to be banked into holdings and outposts (2 holdings with two outpost each minimum).
2) The Core 6 of any taken settlement MUST have minimum 3 holdings (with 2 outposts each) in the core 6 under their control or an allies control (so no completely empty core six).
3) Settlement Upkeep minimum level to stop take overs should now be either set to level 14 (or 13 which is reasonable to make sure locking it up is not cheap (7 bulk for the week)) or removed.

If one does not meet a minimum of 2 of these they should be vulnerable to takeover by another company, now admittedly this could also be gamed with trial accounts
Paddy Fitzpatrick
If it makes yall feel any better, when we got Dun Baile our PvP window INCREASED to two hours somehow despite having only six holdings at the time. It made even less sense as we kept losing them lol.

I thought it was supposed to grow with MORE holdings not less. Seemed like for us it was like golf or something.

I don't get how stuff works in this game sometimes.
As for unattached companies, we all know ya can't do jack shit for yourself if your boys ain't in a settlement. Of somehow Fianna could exist and do anything useful (like ya know, level up) without one we would. Really it don't make sense for us to have one at all for the kind of stuff we do. But we gotta do it cause ya can't even do basic T2 without it.
Paddy Fitzpatrick - Rí Ruírec of Fianna, roaming bands of noble warriors!
Member of the Kathalpas Coalition and home of bandits, privateers, and anyone looking to get away from the shackles of law.
Find us on PFO Discord
Tigari
The original plan for The Bloody Hand was to be settlementless mercs/assassin's, but change of plans, and now we run the EoX lol.

Also, Midnight, I'll say both Fianna AND Freedom Alliance did it right. Both are non alpha groups that split off from their original settlement, and from my knowledge, are no longer members of the same "power bloc".
Midnight
Fiana had the Aragon PvP window, not the 23/7 PvP window of an unattached company.

I'm not singling them out, though. We've watched multiple take-overs where it didn't even occur to me, until today, to question why intended takeovers were being allowed that luxury.
He who wrestles with us strengthens our nerves and sharpens our skill. Our antagonist is our helper.
-Edmund Burke
Tigari
Trying to take another settlement WITHOUT being attached to another settlement is stupid though. You restrict yourself to lvl 9 training. Also if it was a 23/7 window. It would be impossible to take a settlement, and there would be no pvp, but just holding destroying when no one is around to defend like in ARK.
Tyncale
PFO, in its current utterly unfinished, unbalanced and abandoned state, is being taken advantage off by those that decided to stick around.

The whole range of opportunism is there: from legit hoarding of XP to get ahead if the game ever goes live again, to care-free and safe harvesting and stockpiling of T3 materials in what supposed to be dangerous and contested Monster hexes, to stockpiling Bulk Goods from uncontested Holdings, to training anywhere and crafting anything you like due to the half-implemented Settlement-level system, to taking over settlements while no one is looking, all the way to straight up duping. They even disabled Escalation spreading to make it easier. There are no Wars, there is barely PvP, as if there's some unspoken, unofficial Truce so that every can keep lootin…erm, playing the game in peace.

It's like a huge, abandoned cookie-jar, Midnight. smile

Imo this is the primary motivation currently for subscribing. I am sure people are having some fun with their few leftover buddies while doing this and maybe there's *some* altruism in pledging your dollars to keep the game afloat, though I am sure the XP is a nice bonus……

I do not think you should get too upset about those settlements changing hands: if Newcorp truly manages to revive the game then I think we will see a lot of shifts and changes anyway.
Regalo Harnoncourt, Leader of the River Kingdoms Trading Company, High Council of Callambea.
This is the character that I am playing almost 100% of the time. (Tyncale is my Sage/Mage)
Smitty
Have no problem with iron gauntlet and free vale takeovers.. those guys needed their own home. Yet I do agree with Ryos though.. about the SW.. The same group has taken over every part of the map that they can .. because they can..

Their motivations are their own I guess.. but new Corp needs to examine that situation .. and make it impossible to continue..

I don’t agree with controlling the core 6 as a requirement .. but I do feel the settlement should have companies with that amount of influence ( enough to control the core 6) attached to it.
Duffy Swiftshadow
Midnight
Why have companies been allowed to take over settlements while still members of another settlement?

Has ANYONE had to take over a setttlement as an unattached company with the 23/7 windows that unattached companies had?

It sort of seems like a crock to me that we told new players they had a chance to gain settlements, but in almost every case it just turned out to be an expansion of an existing power bloc.

Even where *that* isn't the case, why were conquering companies allowed to use another settlement's more limited PvP windows than the 23/7 windows that would have been used by an actual group of newcomers with no settlement membership?

Yeah, this might have been more helpful if mentioned months ago, but sometimes you find yourself just witnessing the tide of other people's play before realizing just how much the system was being gamed.

Those inactive settlement hexes (the ones never part of the land-rush) are for eventual new growth, though they will probably get gobbled up by the bigger groups anyways once they are turned on. A brand 'new' group walking into the game and taking anything is pretty slim for a few reasons:

  • Building holdings/outposts up themselves would probably require settlement membership as the recipes are mostly early-mid T2 engineering, but they could get lucky with drops and might not care about efficient outpost matching.
  • All the structure recipes are late T2 and would require a lot of farming or purchasing of recipes/expendables, right now that would take forever, in the future with lots of people probably not as bad but still requires settlement membership.
  • Other option is purchase all those (not that cheap) and remain independent with a 23/7 window and limited power level below T2 against a map full of people in late T2 and early T3.

The chances are pretty low of an unaffiliated company ever taking a settlement that way today, much less in the nearish future without significant changes somewhere. I think the way to eventually mitigate that problem is via factions, which will let a company get that training support to put it on even footing.

Ryos
Midnight
….

It sort of seems like a crock to me that we told new players they had a chance to gain settlements, but in almost every case it just turned out to be an expansion of an existing power bloc.

….
Yeah, I heard the League did influence recycling (with the same company) with just holdings to take 3 settlements, and stock them with one man companies, talk about gaming the system to expand their territory.

I think upkeep rules should be changed to include;
1) the controlling company MUST have 600 influence minimum, and that 600 influence minimum needs to be banked into holdings and outposts (2 holdings with two outpost each minimum).
2) The Core 6 of any taken settlement MUST have minimum 3 holdings (with 2 outposts each) in the core 6 under their control or an allies control (so no completely empty core six).
3) Settlement Upkeep minimum level to stop take overs should now be either set to level 14 (or 13 which is reasonable to make sure locking it up is not cheap (7 bulk for the week)) or removed.

If one does not meet a minimum of 2 of these they should be vulnerable to takeover by another company, now admittedly this could also be gamed with trial accounts

Hi Azure!

You're close, we used two different companies to do it, Vox Silentii for two of them and Gold & Steel for the 3rd. Gold and Steel will be moving to Marketstead once they get all the structures built (little slow cause codices and missing recipes) and we've already got a few people moving into Corvus (which ended up being a handover from the original owners in the end). Hangman's will probably have to wait for some new recruitment blitz when things pick up or one of our other existing groups decides to move over, but again structures are kind of a pain new recruits would hopefully help mitigate that with T1 recipes and expendable influxes.

The privateering and strip mining the HRC is funding/doing is kinda slowing that down a bit (mostly the latter), but they're getting there. The occasional fight is a bit fun and interesting though, plus a good bit of RP conflict is a nice change.

Anyways, we could very well lose these settlements in the long term if we aren't able to defend them and bring new recruits into them, we haven no illusions about that. But with folks finally starting to gobble up the last couple empties we felt it was prudent to grab a few of the closer ones before we found ourselves with some more neighbors in our backyard we didn't get along with.

As to those requirements, we could have easily met all those pre-reqs above or left the core sixes we had up and moved companies around, but it is inefficient to do so at this time. Upgraded hexes are way better than more +0 hexes for the influence to bulk ratio. Besides that's a pretty unfair general rule as some core six are really horrible hexes and the only reason anyone considers them sacred is a holdover from when they had towers in them.
Midnight
Tyncale, I'm not particularly upset. It is sort of spilt milk at this point, no one is going to make all those companies do it over.

I was just asking why we allowed it. Like was there a particularly good reason for it, or was everyone just asleep at the wheel? The abandoned cookie jar analogy suggests the asleep at the wheel answer.

And, Tig, I do realize how difficult 23/7 windows are, but that's what real outsiders would have faced without kissing up to an existing settlement. As it is, we didn't get as much fresh blood as I'd like to have seen. I'd rather many of those settlements were still empty and waiting for new players (BECAUSE 23/7 windows *are* difficult), than simply becoming extension campuses of the existing power blocs.

But that's just my preference.
He who wrestles with us strengthens our nerves and sharpens our skill. Our antagonist is our helper.
-Edmund Burke
 
You must be logged into an enrolled account to post