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.

The Continued Silence Worries Me Greatly

Flari-Merchant
Azure_Zero
Bringslite of Staalgard
Even without funding yet but a written "nod" that they are still willing to try, would be nice to see. I tell you, make it so we can loot Holdings when captured and I will be in high gear again! We are still playing in The Dominion with more than a 6 man party on more than a few nights a week. There is still great interest despite all my bitching.smile

I hate being that guy, but even with the writ, having heard ZERO news on whether PFO getting the defib or it's plug pulled, and is more worrying the longer it takes to get that news.
And all parties involved need to address the elephant in the room, Will PFO get its funding or not.

We as the paying gamers also now need to decide;
Do we give Newcorp as much time as needed (currently happening and is most worrying),
Give Newcorp a time limit (Like to New Years Eve on the decision of life or death, this will also light a fire under some folks to get stuff done or talk),
or we all decide on a date where we pull the plug on the game because we've heard nothing and no longer have faith in Newcorp saving PFO (this will also put pressure to talk and get things done).

Hostage or extortion type pressures are not my style. You can count me out of any attempts for info backed by threats.
I will probably continue to harp about my concerns that the player base will dwindle if a few easy(what I think are) changes can't be made. I will probably also continue to posit ridiculous and impossible actions as alternatives to bulk funding. They should talk more with us to get me to stop that at least!
Udo
Yeah, I'm not good with ultimatums and certainly don't advocate a group departure based on a deadline. Most of my recent posting is merely to show frustration about the lack of communication. I am (ugh) "happy" for The Dominion, however.
“Those who surrender Freedom for Security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one”
-B Franklin
Flari-Merchant
Udo
Yeah, I'm not good with ultimatums and certainly don't advocate a group departure based on a deadline. Most of my recent posting is merely to show frustration about the lack of communication. I am (ugh) "happy" for The Dominion, however.
Most kind of you, Sir. You also seem to be fairly active as a group. Perhaps as much as we are. Do not sell yourself short.
Drizzle
Bringslite of Staalgard
Udo
Yeah, I'm not good with ultimatums and certainly don't advocate a group departure based on a deadline. Most of my recent posting is merely to show frustration about the lack of communication. I am (ugh) "happy" for The Dominion, however.
Most kind of you, Sir. You also seem to be fairly active as a group. Perhaps as much as we are. Do not sell yourself short.
Yep, longterm the game will do fine. Also the 3 or 4 in game groups that are currently very active will also do fine.

Whether the (un-named for diplomatic reasons) large groups that have gone AWOL in the belief that they can wander off for a bit on the basis that "having multiple settlements and holdings and claiming half the map as territory guarantees there place in the new world order when it comes about" will prosper - that remains to be seen.
Paddy Fitzpatrick
Yeah a mass exodus or a timetable for an exodus would not guarantee a speedup of the timetable, it can instead more easily become the final nail in the coffin.

That said, the reason I made this post was to try to get a real answer cause if ya take the pulse morale is at an overall low.

For me I am not leaving, but I have been focusing elsewhere. I kind of have to tho cause I just cant enjoy a game that I am not sure will still exist. I will still be around if needed of course, but right now the focus is elsehwere.

I totally get if folks wanna give this game less of a focus. But an ultimatum from folks that really have no actual clout or power aint gonna do much.
Paddy Fitzpatrick - Rí Ruírec of Fianna, roaming bands of noble warriors!
Member of Aragon Alliance and home of bandits, privateers, and anyone looking to get away from the shackles of law.
Find us on PFO Discord
Flari-Merchant
A few simple things could spice this game back up for a time. Being able to loot holdings that we take would appeal greatly to the PVPers and the bandit types. Especially those who are not pleased with big groups that are AFK! smile A mule persistent until it's timer ends for the RP and quest minded. Bronzey is single handedly going to revive the economy by getting prices for things up where they need to be.

We just need to know that Lisa is willing to stick it out until She can find a good company to finish and publish this here thing.
Edam
OK I see that loot holdings suggestion as misled.

At very least, if your going to loot holdings on destruction you need to bring back the original plan that required siege engines to destroy them. At least then defenders have some hope of inflicting damage on the attackers.

One of the reasons contributing to the big exodus a while back was it is far to easy to feud indefinitely and take out holdings on a random day that suits you as an attacker. Even large groups that tried to have players on call 7 days a week where unable to prevent destruction of holdings by quite small companies that simply feuded indefinitely and logged on at random when it suited them. Keepers lost the last of our dedicated PvP players when it became increasingly obvious that defeating attackers was a no-win thing that gave you no benefit other than needing to be back tomorrow at the same time to stand around just in case your needed to do it again.

Your suggestion would change the game a lot. Keepers for example would simply demolish most of our remote holdings and just use the influence to take our close to home ones up to +4 or +5. Or potentially even get rid of all the holdings and drop our settlement level back to 10 or so the way 7th Veil did for a long time. Of course that is likely to drive more players away. In fact the most sensible thing to do with lootable holdings is empty and demolish them, drop your settlement level and go on an indefinite break till the game hots up again smile

Regardless of all that, I suspect you are also misunderstanding the motivation that drives people who enjoy PvP. It is not about getting loot or having the most "stuff" - it is about beating other players, both in actual combat and in terms of who has the most kills on their killmail list/boards and who is the most "notorious" in game, in chat and in forums. Chances are if you let typical PvPers loot holdings they would not then get 20 mules and mule run the 20,000 bulk they got home they would trash the loot and demolish the holding, just to be annoying.

Flari-Merchant
Edam
OK I see that loot holdings suggestion as misled.

At very least, if your going to loot holdings on destruction you need to bring back the original plan that required siege engines to destroy them. At least then defenders have some hope of inflicting damage on the attackers.

One of the reasons contributing to the big exodus a while back was it is far to easy to feud indefinitely and take out holdings on a random day that suits you as an attacker. Even large groups that tried to have players on call 7 days a week where unable to prevent destruction of holdings by quite small companies that simply feuded indefinitely and logged on at random when it suited them. Keepers lost the last of our dedicated PvP players when it became increasingly obvious that defeating attackers was a no-win thing that gave you no benefit other than needing to be back tomorrow at the same time to stand around just in case your needed to do it again.

Your suggestion would change the game a lot. Keepers for example would simply demolish most of our remote holdings and just use the influence to take our close to home ones up to +4 or +5. Or potentially even get rid of all the holdings and drop our settlement level back to 10 or so the way 7th Veil did for a long time. Of course that is likely to drive more players away. In fact the most sensible thing to do with lootable holdings is empty and demolish them, drop your settlement level and go on an indefinite break till the game hots up again smile

Regardless of all that, I suspect you are also misunderstanding the motivation that drives people who enjoy PvP. It is not about getting loot or having the most "stuff" - it is about beating other players, both in actual combat and in terms of who has the most kills on their killmail list/boards and who is the most "notorious" in game, in chat and in forums. Chances are if you let typical PvPers loot holdings they would not then get 20 mules and mule run the 20,000 bulk they got home they would trash the loot and demolish the holding, just to be annoying.
Hmmm… I would not want anything new and fancy to drive undue amounts of players from the game. In my mind I see holdings as (in the proposed loot situation) as containing far less than 20,000 anything, cheap to build(they are), and so, cheap to replace And a "for sure" notice that another group is ready to fight you if they have taken some holdings…

When I first described them as being lootable, what did you think I meant?

P.S. Siege engines would be great too. There seems to be a need for something in this game to be capturable and also worthwhile from some small gain perspective. <–Otherwise known as rewarding If that cures "Holding Sprawl" is it all that terrible?
Edam
A good holding with high level outposts generates around 2500 to 3000 bulk a month. That is two mule runs a month to keep it down it reasonable. In the case of Keepers that means someone needs to do 35 to 40 mule runs a month to maintain our holdings at a manageable level. However often people move bulk from several remote holdings to a closer more central holding and also backlogs can build up. Two of my remote holdings currently have over 15,000 bulk waiting to be moved (most of it moved there from more remote holdings).
Flari-Merchant
Edam
A good holding with high level outposts generates around 2500 to 3000 bulk a month. That is two mule runs a month to keep it down it reasonable. In the case of Keepers that means someone needs to do 35 to 40 mule runs a month to maintain our holdings at a manageable level. However often people move bulk from several remote holdings to a closer more central holding and also backlogs can build up. Two of my remote holdings currently have over 15,000 bulk waiting to be moved (most of it moved there from more remote holdings).

Any chance that with everything so unfinished we use and deploy Holdings not quite as was envisioned?

For instance, Ozem's Vigil produces far more bulk of all types than it needs for the current system. It has way more Holdings than it really needs. Staalgard, instead of capitalizing on bulk iron and stone operates its Holdings to be self sufficient AND provide Food, Wood, Trade Goods where they are not optimal to focus on… nothing needs to be muled in.
A couple of cases there that show two ways Holdings and places for Holdings are not being used to their best advantage because there is no need to do so.
I would, Your Honor, submit that I believe that Holdings were envisioned to be fought over, taken, looted, burnt, rebuilt on a pretty active basis… Like it would not make the Nightly Gen Chat News. TRUE that the ability to shut down an aggressor, by beating him enough, should be part of the mechanics. It is nothing but complete chaos without any balance to the system otherwise.
So why not require a company to have at least one Holding for every day they feud? Mutually Assured Destruction.
 
You must be logged into an enrolled account to post