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.

Blacklists

Flari-Merchant
Bob
Mistwalker
I am not seeing anything that Bob said to indicate that blacklisted characters could not access the bank - the rest of the player made buildings and training, yes, but not banks.

Was that the intention Bob, to restrict access to the banks?

You can restrict access to the bank, though we are planning to allow you to withdraw things that are already there. We didn't want someone to find themselves suddenly losing all their stuff.
And that solves that question that I keep forgetting to ask. Thank you, Bob.
Bob
Midnight
My basic philosophy is that PvP should be required to control other players.

The winning philosophy is that you should be able to PvE your way to poop structures onto the map that will exist as build and forget control mechanisms because vigilance isn't fun.

Just to clarify, our general design philosophy is that extremely focused vigilance isn't fun. Being on guard duty, with nothing to do but watch the screen for attacks, is only really fun if the player is in reality doing something else, like watching TV or playing a different character in another window. We want to avoid requiring that kind of vigilance.

As a result, things like guards at your holdings and outposts aren't really meant to hold off an attack. They're just meant as a buffer to let players see that the attack is happening and get there in time to defend their territory.

The behaviors of your own structures is a little different. The settlement owns the structures directly, so they get to tell the structures what to do, and what not to do. That control may not be perfect, and we may eventually allow ways to circumvent that control, but some level of control is essential.
Bob
As a side note, though it's called a blacklist, you could actually use it as a whitelist. Just say that unaffiliated players have no access to your facilities, then give blacklisted players access to whatever facilities you want.
Bob
Hobson Fiffledown
*finds partially decomposed horse in a token that says it will be a bag of holding one day*

Any longer-term thoughts regarding the reinstatement of the Bluff feat as a possible countermeasure to blacklisting?
As an added bonus, I would finally stop asking you to bring back the Bluff feat. smile

That's the kind of thing we'd like to think about eventually, but there are a lot of other features that didn't make the roadmap that would likely get tackled before that.
Bob
Smitty
Am curios if all black listing will be manual. Or if during feuds.. a system will auto list players involved for the duration of the feud.. if so at what levels..

If not all manual entries and the act of feuding populated the list will it also blacklist folks during raids.

That's a good point. We'll do some thinking on what to do about players involved in feuds.
Bob
Decius
Is there a way to view what another settlement's policy is towards third parties?

We're not planning on adding anything like that right now.

Decius
If I understand right, there is intended to be four categories: member, ally, other, foe; with permissions and taxes being configurable for each group individually. Is that the ee12 exepectation except that taxes are ee15?

Those are the four categories we're currently looking at, with separate tax rates for each category coming in EE 15.
Midnight
I was an eve player who enjoyed small gang patrols, which was basically enforcing our right to exploit an area. While this builder-centric crowd will be happier with more automation and less vigilance, I know there's an audience (a hundred times larger than this game's population ever was) for vigilance if a sandbox rewards vigilance and makes vigilance a key way to exert power in a sandbox. Heck, we even set up 23-7 gate camps at bottlenecks to exert our power, and were often rewarded for our vigilance by looting the wrecks we caused.

I totally get that you have to make choices, but you could also have chosen to make vigilance fun and rewarding. There's still time to do that later when things like threading get in the game. Maybe factions could present such opportunities.
He who wrestles with us strengthens our nerves and sharpens our skill. Our antagonist is our helper.
-Edmund Burke
Midnight
How do you make vigilance rewarding during a PvP window?

Treasure Goblins.

OK, just kidding, you can't rip off Diablo 3.

How about gushers?

Make it so the ONLY time gushers occur is in hexes with an open PvP window. You'll have no shortage of folks wanting to pull guard duty, and no shortage of folks wanting prime-time PvP windows instead of graveyard shift PvP windows.

Or use any other event that makes it so fun/rewarding that both defenders and attackers might even be tempted to set aside their battle in order to fill their purses.
He who wrestles with us strengthens our nerves and sharpens our skill. Our antagonist is our helper.
-Edmund Burke
Flari-Merchant
Midnight
I was an eve player who enjoyed small gang patrols, which was basically enforcing our right to exploit an area. While this builder-centric crowd will be happier with more automation and less vigilance, I know there's an audience (a hundred times larger than this game's population ever was) for vigilance if a sandbox rewards vigilance and makes vigilance a key way to exert power in a sandbox. Heck, we even set up 23-7 gate camps at bottlenecks to exert our power, and were often rewarded for our vigilance by looting the wrecks we caused.

I totally get that you have to make choices, but you could also have chosen to make vigilance fun and rewarding. There's still time to do that later when things like threading get in the game. Maybe factions could present such opportunities.
Your opinion is fair enough. Those conditions would be very hard core sandbox type stuff. They are only preferences though. You and some others would prefer it one way and GW with some different "other" would prefer it as it is planned.
In your examples you are talking about choke points that are used more often than random settlement A. At those places you see more action than what we are talking about here, so your example has a much better chance of being fun. I can't see guarding a settlement 23/7 as being fun no matter how much I think about it. Even with threading, there still has to be action to get the rewards possible from the gear dropping.
Now gushers and raiding Holdings and similar things are where that is at. Hopefully those will be introduced with some better PVP opportunities.
Fiery
Midnight
"Heck, we even set up 23-7 gate camps at bottlenecks to exert our power, and were often rewarded for our vigilance by looting the wrecks we caused.

Note the mention of bottlenecks. Vigilance is made far, far easier in EVE due to its nature - you can only enter or exit a system through a gate, which is a natural bottleneck. You can see a list of all players in a system, to warn you of a move even if you aren't monitoring gates. You can locate and warp to players.

This game is not designed for vigilance. Given enough population, there are times when vigilance is still the best option (there are some natural bottlenecks and some areas are of far greater importance than others), but ultimately vigilance is inestimably more difficult than it is in EVE.
 
You must be logged into an enrolled account to post