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.

Distribution of +1 and +2 Structure Kits

Bob
In preparation for the upgradable settlement structures coming in EE 15, I'm going to start handing out the +1 structure kits. I'll get in touch with the leaders of each settlement separately to arrange delivery, but in general all the settlements that haven't switched ownership through a hostile takeover since the last distribution will be getting +1 versions of all the buildings they originally got +0 versions of, along with a Keep Structure Kit +1.

I'll also be distributing the +2 structure kits for participation in the War of Towers. The number of kits rewarded is based on participation (towers held/taken), with an emphasis on the later days of the war, and particularly on the last day. Settlements get free choice of which structure kits they want, except that they can each choose at most 2 large +2 structure kits and they can't select one for the Keep.

Here's the number of +2 kits awarded to each settlement:

3 +2 Structure Kits: Alderwag, Brighthaven, Canis Castrum, Golgotha, Keeper's Pass, Phaeros, Talonguard, University Commons
2 +2 Structure Kits: Callambea, Emerald Lodge, Forgeholm, High Road, Hope's End, Carpe Noctem, Ozem's Vigil, Tavernhold
1 +2 Structure Kit: Hammerfall, Sunholm

The remaining settlements either changed hands in a hostile takeover since the War of Towers, or just didn't quite meet the bar for getting a +2 kit.

I'll start reaching out to settlement leaders shortly to distribute these, so now's a good time to start thinking about which kits your settlement wants and who's going to accept delivery of them.
You are a Troll
And how exactly did you determine these numbers? I see some getting lots for basically doing zero PVP for most all of the game.
Bob
You are a Troll
And how exactly did you determine these numbers? I see some getting lots for basically doing zero PVP for most all of the game.

Those results are based on our records for towers held/taken during the War of Towers. They aren't based on any PvP outside that period of time.
Flari-Merchant
You are a Troll
And how exactly did you determine these numbers? I see some getting lots for basically doing zero PVP for most all of the game.
Looks about right to me as I recall Ozem's doing a good deal of fighting in the WoT and mostly against Golgotha. At the end 1/3 or so I remember that The Free Highlanders made the move to pool our towers under Alderwag's Flag. So the places that we landed: Oz second Tier and Alderwag top Tier look about right if tower counts are the factors that matter.
Duffy Swiftshadow
You are a Troll
And how exactly did you determine these numbers? I see some getting lots for basically doing zero PVP for most all of the game.

IIRC it was all based on holding towers during the War of the Towers phase. Specifically fighting over the towers themselves wasn't a major component, just how man were held week to week. There was some fighting here and there but ownership stayed pretty static for the most part, especially in more remote corners of the map.
You are a Troll
So places people were pretty much forbidden from attacking (like UC) or places that expressed neutrality while trying to please everyone get to come out ahead now?
Flari-Merchant
@ You are a Troll

Take a Server Wide War. There are aggressive types and they came out well. There are defensive types and they came out well. Finally there are political/idealist concept types and if they are good with negotiation or "neutrality concepts" they too can do well. Those all seem like choices made in PVP situations, like strategic concepts and types of PVP all by themselves.

You can recognize those things, can't you? Are you just a player that wants to start trouble over almost everything? Why is that, as you seem much reasonable and easier to get along with(most times) in game? If you are who I think you are: Quasi-Secret Guy. smile

Edit: BTW, I never felt like UC was off limits to being attacked. I felt like I would be a "dick" to take away towers from an institution built to help new players. A brilliant strategy or a simple game concept on their part, but it worked well in that case. smile
Decius
You are a Troll
So places people were pretty much forbidden from attacking (like UC) or places that expressed neutrality while trying to please everyone get to come out ahead now?
Some settlements won by having fewer enemies.
Giorgio
Based on my recollection of the WOT events, Forgeholm's participation in the middle of the list sounds about right to me. smile
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
Giorgio
Bob
I'll start reaching out to settlement leaders shortly to distribute these, so now's a good time to start thinking about which kits your settlement wants and who's going to accept delivery of them.

I already got the ball rolling on this dissuasion on the Dominion of the Northern Marches forums as its part of our ongoing conversation on how to differentiate our multiple settlements. I expect the other alliances and non-allied settlements will be doing the same very soon. smile
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
 
You must be logged into an enrolled account to post