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.

Thank You Lisa, for Hope and the Road Map.

In less esoteric terms, I would just say that meaningful conflict boils down to one particular version of capture the flag and that it gets old. MMO PVP is such an abstract form of warfare that I am unsure if much can be done about that.

Part of PfO's problem has to be that too few players are trying to manage too large areas to control effectively. Many have multiple accounts and so can project force fairly well, responding to multi-pronged attacks but that has turned out to be a bit more hectic than fun for some reason. We are set up in a competitive game, in a larger than is feasible to defend required spread of holdings(must have Bulk and must have high level settlements for convenience, at the least), with a low population. This really is an unfortunate condition and not an optimal one for the mechanics that are available. Not that it is anyone's direct fault. It just is what it is. You can't realistically design a for profit MMO for 100 active players and you can't blame players for taking over everything that they can which is easily within realistic reach. It's what humans do.

I may have a delusional memory, but it tells me that conflict in PfO was supposed to be much more diverse than strictly about Holding attack and defense. Some of what I see in the current Roadmap will, I believe, help with some of this. At least it could possibly. Nothing is going to work right until the population is grown significantly. Six active players does not a Kingdom make. Twelve active players does not a Grand Alliance make.

As strange and as abstract(not the same as Duffy means) as MMO PVP and warfare is by nature, such large amounts of territory and so few players to control it only leads to this even more strange situation that the game is in right now. There needs(besides players) to be more reasons to fight than Holdings control. There are SUPPOSED TO BE MORE COMPELLING REASONS for conflict.

I think that GW's plan to look at resource distribution will help a great deal with the lack of "reasons" for conflict. At least it will be their chance to add a few compelling reasons for meaningful conflict. There are enough varieties of materials to spread out and concentrate a bit. Concentrate scarcity to promote trade, transportation, political maneuvers, banditry, privateering, area defense(besides just Holding conflict), also-known-as CONTENT.

Certainly the Influence and Company systems were meant for much more than simply a vehicle for Holding warfare. The reason that they do not work as well as intended is because they are not being used (or the opportunity/incentive/compelling reasons are not there) as they were conceived and the foundation principles were designed for…

This roadmap and more players will help with that, but it is not a short road.
P.S. About a month or so ago, I made the decision to step back. Take a break. Wait and see if the game build could mature a bit to become as engrossing as it was at the start and as it's potential certainly still is. Stay off the forums, I thought. Give it a rest, give it a chance, give it time.
I am already failing to stay off the forums. This is the power of your early concepts and the draw of the game's potential that you have here, GW. There really is nothing quite like it out there or in development. At least nothing close to being finished or ready that does not have some weird annoying "hangnail" planned feature like limited character lifespan, isometric graphics, or less than "sandboxey" configuration.
For the longest time I have believed that the compulsion to "hang in there", I had thought was simply because I had so much heart invested and had a "Big Boy" spot built for myself. That isn't it. It's the strange combination of planned mechanics and META interaction, and strange political intrigue/freedoms AND the over all general concept. It is addictive and pervasive to a gamer's heart. Somehow it just all gels right on paper and in concept, so we hang in there.
A very ambitious approach in a very graphic and content driven market. I am not surprised that more gamer's do not "get it". Those that do are pretty hooked. Now you just need to figure out how to get it from concept to working feature set and we all know that it isn't easy.
Just can't stay away…
Now that there is some clarity on the near future of the game, as detailed in the blog, I am definitely going to be actively playing again.

@Bringslite; yes it hard to walk away. smile

Time for me to rebuild Forgeholm…
First Elder Durin Steelforge; Leader of Forgeholm; Founder of Steelforge Engineering Company

PM Giorgo on Paizo Forums
PM Admin George on Commonwealth of the Free Highlands
As far as tower and holding wars go it is basically a variant of capture the flag so the advantage of greater number is definitely exaggerated. In the extremely artificial hypothetical scenario of a single T3 character killing over and over 20 or 30 poorly armed T1 opponents who keep swarming back the T1 opponents could still win the day without ever killing the T3 guy even once.

Was wondering if people could only count for possession if wearing armour as a shorthand for being combat capable (I know you can fight as long as you have a weapon but armour is a more straight forward proxy)…. same thing with gathering, that people only get to gather if in armour…..
Mercenary monster hunter from Forgeholm
War priest of Angradd… patiently waiting on Goblinworks to deliver him (and greataxes, Dwarves need 2 handed axes).
Time for me to rebuild Forgeholm…
Edam, Durnic, Dorin, Maggie May and all the other dwarves based down at Keepers Pass are pleased to here this.
You are a Troll
I don't think I saw threading listed in the road-map, but couldn't that help with the PVP flaws Duffy was outlining? If people drop most of their expensive gear on the ground every time they are killed then this helps the group/players that are more skilled in killing other players and taps down the BLOB advantage, no? Certainly would make me think twice about the gear I brought to the holding defense at the very least.
The E-mail sent to players contains the WHOLE roadmap from May 2017 to March 2018
Duffy Swiftshadow
Threading was not in the email, I imagine it's a fairly complex thing. Bob will probably comment on it :-P

Would threading help with the PvP problems? I think in specific circumstances, yes. It could make fights a lot shorter which isn't directly related to what I have been talking about but might be good?

It could decrease the advantage defenders have when sides are fairly even. I don't think it would ultimately do much against blobs though. Even if my crazy example of going even deaths with 2:1 odds happened the smaller side that's fighting well would also be losing gear and thus the numbers still win out regardless. Just the alpha strike capabilities and overwhelming direct damage of blobs makes wearing non threaded gear kind of a silly concept. If anything is unthreaded it's probably something 'easy' to replace so you might stage spares or just downgrade to full threading coverage.

It's more likely we would risk non threaded gear gathering or doing PvE which would make the potential reward of decent gear a nice risk/reward for bandits, but I think it would have little place in a battle.
There is an itch in the back of my mind that still tells me that the potential PVP oriented customers will be wanting some form of loot possible involved in the PVP thing. It adds a bit to the excitement. Though even if gear dropped, it may not be the stuff that the victor wants and it would be a hassle to sell since it comes damaged…
Threading (actually the limitations of threading) would send losers home faster, rather than have them keep returning to the battle. That may or may not be viewed as an improvement.
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