Blacklists

Bob 03.31.2017 10:36
	Bob Midnight If they no longer belong to a settlement they now only have suport to level 8. At that point your trainers are of no more use than Thornkeep trainers. We're actually looking at letting you train beyond your support level, since this new support system will let you at least partially take advantage of such training. Given this particular way of gaming the system, I'm thinking about adding a surcharge to the coin costs in such cases. If your settlement's not supporting your use of that feat rank, then clearly they're not supporting your training either, so the trainer has to work that much harder. Of course, your crafting will be worse and your ability to defend yourself will be worse while in town, so lack of support could still be a significant issue. Quote

Bob 03.31.2017 10:36

Bob
Midnight
If they no longer belong to a settlement they now only have suport to level 8. At that point your trainers are of no more use than Thornkeep trainers.

We're actually looking at letting you train beyond your support level, since this new support system will let you at least partially take advantage of such training. Given this particular way of gaming the system, I'm thinking about adding a surcharge to the coin costs in such cases. If your settlement's not supporting your use of that feat rank, then clearly they're not supporting your training either, so the trainer has to work that much harder.

Of course, your crafting will be worse and your ability to defend yourself will be worse while in town, so lack of support could still be a significant issue.

Quote

The Eternal Balance 04.01.2017 09:10
	Bob The best answer ultimately is for us to better deal with company hopping so that players won't regularly do so just to game their way around various restrictions. The main deterrent at this point is the support loss that others have mentioned (a great example of what I mean when I say that the support mechanic is currently woven into so many systems that we need at least some form of it now, and then we need to deal with its shortcomings over time). We also hope to eventually put in other things to deter company hopping (one possibility is lowering your company's max and/or available influence the moment you leave, instead of at the next downtime), but don't have any of that scheduled at this time. That would be great - players use company hoping to regularly work around game mechanics. It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society. Quote

The Eternal Balance 04.01.2017 09:10

Bob
The best answer ultimately is for us to better deal with company hopping so that players won't regularly do so just to game their way around various restrictions. The main deterrent at this point is the support loss that others have mentioned (a great example of what I mean when I say that the support mechanic is currently woven into so many systems that we need at least some form of it now, and then we need to deal with its shortcomings over time). We also hope to eventually put in other things to deter company hopping (one possibility is lowering your company's max and/or available influence the moment you leave, instead of at the next downtime), but don't have any of that scheduled at this time.

That would be great - players use company hoping to regularly work around game mechanics.

It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.

Quote

Paddy Fitzpatrick 04.01.2017 14:35
	Wouldn't you just hop into the company that has the highest support levels anyway? Unless they have been cut off from all support or it goes back to the more unforgiving losing all support immediately version I don't see how this will change much. Losing influence immediately would give some pause. 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 Quote

Paddy Fitzpatrick 04.01.2017 14:35

Wouldn't you just hop into the company that has the highest support levels anyway? Unless they have been cut off from all support or it goes back to the more unforgiving losing all support immediately version I don't see how this will change much.

Losing influence immediately would give some pause.

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

Quote

Paddy Fitzpatrick 04.01.2017 14:40
	I would also work see about alliance mechanics and how that would work too. That would probably be the other major way to do this since supporting allies in a tight is one of the main reasons company hopping happens in the first place. 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 Quote

Paddy Fitzpatrick 04.01.2017 14:40

I would also work see about alliance mechanics and how that would work too. That would probably be the other major way to do this since supporting allies in a tight is one of the main reasons company hopping happens in the first place.

Quote

Flari-Merchant 04.06.2017 09:56
	Is it already the case that Allies can't Feud Allies? Quote

Decius 04.06.2017 10:37
	Bringslite of Staalgard Is it already the case that Allies can't Feud Allies? Pretty sure not. At least, companies can feud other companies within the same settlement. Quote

Bob 04.06.2017 10:53
	Bringslite of Staalgard Is it already the case that Allies can't Feud Allies? I don't believe there are any restrictions, so any company can feud any other company. That could potentially cause some weirdness about how guards react when conflicted about who to support, but in general we want to allow we don't want to mechanically enforce things that are better dealt with by settlement/alliance leaders. If you like your companies fighting amongst themselves, let them go at it. If you don't, then boot them. The only mechanical things we really want on that are the current one-hour minimum delay for starting feuds, and the incoming 48-hour delay before you can start capturing territory. Quote

Bob 04.06.2017 10:53

Bringslite of Staalgard
Is it already the case that Allies can't Feud Allies?

I don't believe there are any restrictions, so any company can feud any other company. That could potentially cause some weirdness about how guards react when conflicted about who to support, but in general we want to allow we don't want to mechanically enforce things that are better dealt with by settlement/alliance leaders. If you like your companies fighting amongst themselves, let them go at it. If you don't, then boot them.

The only mechanical things we really want on that are the current one-hour minimum delay for starting feuds, and the incoming 48-hour delay before you can start capturing territory.

Quote

Decius 04.06.2017 11:12
	I haven't had companies within the settlement feud since all settlement members were blue/unattackable. Might need to check if fued red has priority over settlement blue, or if it even should. Quote

You are a Troll 04.06.2017 15:26
	I don't think this question has been answered yet: will Blacklists include the tavern in the settlement or no? Quote

Bob 04.06.2017 15:29
	You are a Troll I don't think this question has been answered yet: will Blacklists include the tavern in the settlement or no? Yup. To be technically pedantic, permissions will include the ability to control who uses your settlement tavern, and you will be able to set the permissions for those on your blacklist. Quote

Cookies Disclaimer