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.

Dear devs...

Midnight
Bringslite
Midnight
Decius
Motte and Bailey.

If you count "I pay taxes to live in an area where ganking is rare" as constant, ubiquitous, and inescapable PvP, then PvP does not have the negative implications that you are trying to evoke.

I'm going to approach this from a different direction…

Tier 3 players choosing to be steadily pickpocketed on schedule by some authority because the world became more dangerous once equipped gear starts dropping won't detract from my premise that equipped gear dropping will make the world more dangerous, and that Thornkeep level crafting will have more appeal.. if for no other reason than those equipped in that lower gear may be better able to skip payoffs to protection rackets.

Why not just craft lower quality gear AT your settlement where it can be crafted faster and for less cost?

Always an option, but if this game goes retail and succeeds, the big money the first 2 months will be selling to 400,000 people starting in Thornkeep.
He who wrestles with us strengthens our nerves and sharpens our skill. Our antagonist is our helper.
-Edmund Burke
Bringslite
I can see that, of course everyone starts at Thornkeep. It seemed that the slant of your premise was that no one will want to wear higher quality gear because they are likely going to get shook down every few days. A prediction that I doubt will see reality, but who knows for sure? So they will want to give up advancing their characters and live in Thornkeep…. because that will be worth $15/month?
Virtute et Armis
-Unknown
Midnight
Bringslite
I can see that, of course everyone starts at Thornkeep. It seemed that the slant of your premise was that no one will want to wear higher quality gear because they are likely going to get shook down every few days. A prediction that I doubt will see reality, but who knows for sure? So they will want to give up advancing their characters and live in Thornkeep…. because that will be worth $15/month?

Part of my premise is that lower level play allows a wider skill selection and more adaptable characters. I'm actually curious just how much xp one could spend on training without leaving Thornkeep.

Admittedly, there is every chance that tier 3 play and settlement living will be the longterm way to go, especially if the devs do more to drive players in that direction. But if you look at Eve Online right now, there are probably 10,000 characters online who decided to eschew sovereign warfare (with its player governments and player made rules and requirements and bureaucracy) to play in a part of the game that has lower rewards but less ability to be bossed around.

Even though I have personally chosen settlement life, I know how players are and it's not going to be every player's cup of tea. Thornkeep life may be as popular as Eve's High-Sec, even though both those choices come with limitations to one's power. We'll see.

Another factor will be how often even those who like settlement life have to evac to "safety" and whether the Devs intend Thornkeep to be "safe" for veterans. EE12 and sieging could cause a refugee crisis in Thornkeep. smile
He who wrestles with us strengthens our nerves and sharpens our skill. Our antagonist is our helper.
-Edmund Burke
Tigari
Every time I look at these forums, I feel like coming back, and this time, TO really just harvest tears.. You thought how I played before was bad? I'll show you how much Phyllain actually held some of us back smile
Bringslite
Midnight
Bringslite
I can see that, of course everyone starts at Thornkeep. It seemed that the slant of your premise was that no one will want to wear higher quality gear because they are likely going to get shook down every few days. A prediction that I doubt will see reality, but who knows for sure? So they will want to give up advancing their characters and live in Thornkeep…. because that will be worth $15/month?

Part of my premise is that lower level play allows a wider skill selection and more adaptable characters. I'm actually curious just how much xp one could spend on training without leaving Thornkeep.

Admittedly, there is every chance that tier 3 play and settlement living will be the longterm way to go, especially if the devs do more to drive players in that direction. But if you look at Eve Online right now, there are probably 10,000 characters online who decided to eschew sovereign warfare (with its player governments and player made rules and requirements and bureaucracy) to play in a part of the game that has lower rewards but less ability to be bossed around.

Even though I have personally chosen settlement life, I know how players are and it's not going to be every player's cup of tea. Thornkeep life may be as popular as Eve's High-Sec, even though both those choices come with limitations to one's power. We'll see.

Another factor will be how often even those who like settlement life have to evac to "safety" and whether the Devs intend Thornkeep to be "safe" for veterans. EE12 and sieging could cause a refugee crisis in Thornkeep. smile
If you belong to a Settlement that is not setting aside a stash in case of disaster… well that IS scary.
Virtute et Armis
-Unknown
Paddy Fitzpatrick
Well brings, once settlement sieges come in that stash aint gonna help all that much lol. Best keep those kinds of stashes at TK really.

So here is another thought i had, another scenario i see as more likely…

I can see someone claiming TK as their sphere of influence or territory, and claiming exclusive rights to things like recruitment, access to new players, jurisdiction over refugees, facility use, etc. Now i see this as nesr impossible to enforce for right now but what about if they ever implement fall damage? Now it isnt nearly so tough.

All of the talk so far has been scenarios where people are prevented or intimidated into not going out from TK, but what about a sufficiently large group that comes in to blockade, bully, and keep everyone else out?

What is the stance on that?
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
Midnight
Umm, having "stuff" (even in TK) isn't that useful if you're still getting pounded and getting sent to the shrine every few minutes. If one side has the kind of numbers and/or persistence to destroy your settlement, they certainly have the numbers/persistence to make life hellish at Thornkeep (if the devs don't disallow vet on vet violence at Thornkeep).

If the two sides of a war haven't reached peace terms after a settlement is burnt down, I would expect that war to continue wherever the losing side tries to hide.

While most settlements already have refuge offers from friends and allies, once people see the kind of juggernaut formed that can actually burn down a settlement, they might have second thoughts about sheltering unrepentant losers who will drag that juggernaut to them.

So that leaves Thornkeep and Rotter's Hole (hopefully they've gotten rid of the old starter settlements by EE12).

If players are allowed to be territorial about Thornkeep, then the blob can keep it from being a refuge for those they defeated.

Which brings up the question, will people pay $15 a month to be a guerilla force on the run with no home and no refuge? If your answer is no, then imagine a blob coalition of 40% of the players being formed and beating a smaller coalition of 30% of the players. If 30% of the players quit a month into EE12 where are we? If the remaining players keep shuffling coalitions and fighting (perhaps because they have gripes about how the spoils got divided last time, or perhaps because they just enjoy combat), you could see that repeated every month or two.

This is why I suggest PFO could wind up being more hardcore than Eve. There's a time honored tradition of loser evac and licking one's wounds in Eve, because Eve offers varying levels of relative safety.

I'm not hearing devs tell me I can't dominate vets (or be dominated by vets) in Thornkeep or blue shield hexes so I'm wondering if unsubscribing will be more common than evac for those on the losing side.

Stealth edit:
I re-read Bob's reply and realized what I bolded above isn't entirely correct… for the moment it seems like you are safe in Thornkeep because of this:

Bob
That said, we have asked everyone to avoid PvP in NPC settlements and other starter areas until we're able to beef up the Thornguards there.

On the other hand, if Thornkeep is some sort of safe refuge, will the risk/reward ratio of settlement life be good enough to continue to attract folks to it even though it can all go horribly bye-bye from a siege?

I can easily picture a coalition trying to have a monopoly on settlement life. Either you play by The Mittani's rules or your settlement gets burnt down… until there is a single entity making alignment/religion/faction/gathering/PvE policy for those who want to live the Tier 3 life.
He who wrestles with us strengthens our nerves and sharpens our skill. Our antagonist is our helper.
-Edmund Burke
Paddy Fitzpatrick
For a game with this kind of pop, I can't see a huge revolving door of active players (and especially like 30% of em) possibly being a healthy thing for the game. If we had lots and lots of folks (we're talkin hundreds of thousands or something), then yeah this game could take hits like that.

Plus if there ain't a way to make a comeback or form new coalitions (and no in game ways to sort of mitigate some of this so called blob mechanics), much less accomplish anything, then we're back to the issue we have already. Ain't no way to accomplish anything in war on either side.

Either that or get in that factions thing I keep hearing about so people who don't wanna play the politics game have another option or something. If your only choices are submit to the monopoly or never do anything in game there's no competition.

The reason I am thinkin the devs haven't anything could be more of a "we'll cross that bridge when we come to it" type thing. I guess given the small staff and crazy workload it makes sense but at some point personally I would hope we can revisit this.

Personally I think the easiest and most sensible idea would just be turn off PvP in new player hexes. If the new player is reminded "yo, you going out of the safe zone", then they are more likely to keep the very real fact that you can get roughed up anywhere in mind. As long as you're up front with people and remind them when ya need to more people would be open to a more harsh, ultra hardcore environment. Others may just up and leave. This game didn't strike me as another Albion or Linkrealms tho.

That's why I don't like these half and half proposals. If ya don't want pvp in the starter towns just disable it. Ya know someone is gonna run into a group who zerged enough to still beat down the TG and in these games we all do it, someone's gonna try to push the guards to the limits. Why make more work on balancing when if you just turn it off you send a much clearer message (if you stay here you're safe, if you don't, you can get rekt at anytime), it solves the entire problem and is less likely to bite ya later.

I dont mind if it gets more hardcore but the game design and marketing's gotta just be up front and clear that's all. Otherwise if you aint clear people are gonna play and be like "wtf is this shit I didn't sign up for this" and I can see that giving the game some really bad publicity. I can adjust either way whatever they do but I'm just a leader of a tiny group of silly bandits. We're all just a tiny group of guys crazy enough to keep playing this, and definitely aint a representative sample lol.
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
Paddy Fitzpatrick
Either way, if you make it clear and up front what it is everyone can point and say "look man, this is what you signed up for and you knew what you were getting yourself into." Otherwise you're game's gonna get a lot of toxicity and bad impressions on people.
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
Midnight
PFO got to where it is today by allowing EVERYONE to imagine it is the game for them.

I've seen kickstarters this year that seem to use Ryan Dancey levels of slipperiness to their game description.

I've come to expect developers to be slippery and non-committal rather than to tell a million gamers (before they spend) that this isn't the game for them.
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