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.

High sec hexes being low sec during PvP window?

Smitty
Will try to explain how your high sec limits a play style..( at least how I see it)

Going to use Ozems for an example, but you can almost say the same for hammerfall and even carpe to some degree..

These places are surrounded by high sec-
They are also surrounded by monster hexes ..
If im out numbered ( typically the case) .. if I wanted to try banditry.. one of the most lucrative places I could set up would between a monster hex and a settlement .. and try to get ambush you going for ammo or dropping off a special drop you got - or I know you are out muling and have to drop off your bulk at a settlement ..

The reasons are numerous why I may want to set up an ambush next between point a and your settlement - You turning on high sec takes the choice out of my hands - nothing I can do short of feuding you is going to give me that chance ( and even then that could mean 3-6 feuds because I have to catch all the people that may run to town ) ..
Sure I personally could feud you - but if this game was flourishing and people were playing not everyone would have their own company .. so what are just casual players suppose to do - get a company tag of all people in an escalation hex - so they know what 6 companies to ask leader ship to feud - then wait an hour and hope they don’t miss their chance?

Giving people a hide out type option gives them a reason to at least give it a shot ( an activity for a night, may not be successful but its they may want to try i.e a play style)
Flari-Merchant
What about some sort of faction perk that allows you to mark another player and sets his security lvl wherever he may be at the moment but is on a timer of some length?

Perhaps tie your concern into development energy that broadens out the scope of the game(plz add factions) rather than deepens existing mechanics?

Not that your idea is not without merit but sounds like more work, over all.
"I buy Azoth for 5sp/ea. I will trade Enchanting or other rare materials/anything for Azoth. Contact me if interested. GET YOUR COIN EASY!"
uotopia@msn.com
Paddy Fitzpatrick
No more work than it would be to put factions into the game in the first place.

As far as more free PvP, ok so you got monster and ruin hexes. Does anyone have any reason whatsoever to spend any time in a ruin hex? That only leaves monster hexes. There arent nearly as many of those.

Most people will be spending their time in monster hexes, holdings, and settlements. That is where all the action is directed at. People go out gathering and will most likely do so in either monster hexes or random claimable ones (which will most likely have holdings). PvE people will be almost always in monster hexes so you got some action there.

But what about everyone else? People who want to bandit or people who want to go out and protect the merchants. How about other playstyles that may not have yet been discovered? You dont wan a stiffle that.

There is something to be said about giving new players a safe place to start and I agree, but this isnt the best way to do it. You cant shelter them forever. A magical PvP free wonderland will just be an illusion. What happens if and when war comes? If they lose their safety and their wonderland in any way? Will they be prepped for that or will they just leave the game?
Paddy Fitzpatrick - Rí Ruírec of Fianna, roaming bands of noble warriors!
Member of the Kathalpas Coalition and home of bandits, privateers, and anyone looking to get away from the shackles of law.
Find us on PFO Discord
Paddy Fitzpatrick
Also you gotta remember that regarding what playstyles are allowed the current mecha ica give US immense power to decide that mapwide as I have said before.

More mechanics should be put in place to reign in some of that or at least make it a much higher cost. Until then we have a responsibility to accomodate for multiple styles of play.

Is it too much to ask of us to relinquish some of the things we have grown comfortable with and give up so.e of that power for the good of the game?
Paddy Fitzpatrick - Rí Ruírec of Fianna, roaming bands of noble warriors!
Member of the Kathalpas Coalition and home of bandits, privateers, and anyone looking to get away from the shackles of law.
Find us on PFO Discord
Flari-Merchant
Bob
Our goal has always been to nudge the world toward an equilibrium where players who stuck close to home in a powerful alliance could feel extremely safe, but at the cost of limiting themselves to gathering more depleted resources and looting lower-level mobs. Those seeking better rewards could go toward the edges of alliance territory. The closer they got, the more PvP they'd face, mostly sanctioned but occasionally just banditry. Those seeking the greatest rewards would have to head to unprotected territory, where PvP would be much more common, and where even PvE could be quite dangerous.

A lot of that security was supposed to come from simply being surrounded by allied players in-game, so that enemies would find it difficult to get far into an alliance's territory without being noticed. Some of that security was supposed to come from greater abilities to police territory, and the ability to set security levels is a step in that direction. A blunt step very much in need of polish, but a step. Upkeep ideas are definitely plausible, and charging upkeep for any variation from medium is definitely intriguing. We also need to do more work to keep it from being to easy to just run back into safe hexes to avoid PvP that is supposed to be a legitimate risk of hanging out in monster hexes and the like. That's all stuff we plan to tackle over time, it just has to be carefully balanced against the need for many players to be able to minimize their PvP risks, within reason and with fair costs associated. Getting that right is tricky, so we want to make sure any changes are thoroughly thought through.

Over all it reads like there are things that they are already planning to take a look at polishing that you have brought up and also some things that you don't like as much but they feel are important.

Like most of the game, it isn't really finished and there is too low a population for much to really work as intended.
"I buy Azoth for 5sp/ea. I will trade Enchanting or other rare materials/anything for Azoth. Contact me if interested. GET YOUR COIN EASY!"
uotopia@msn.com
Bob
Paddy Fitzpatrick
There is something to be said about giving new players a safe place to start and I agree, but this isnt the best way to do it. You cant shelter them forever. A magical PvP free wonderland will just be an illusion. What happens if and when war comes? If they lose their safety and their wonderland in any way? Will they be prepped for that or will they just leave the game?

Not that we have all the details worked out, and there's certainly a lot more implementation to do, but our goal is to start players off at no real risk of PvP, then make sure they understand what PvP they're opening themselves up to when taking certain actions. We took a step in that direction by making Thornkeep High Security and then adding the warnings when you enter a lower-security hex. Eventually, we want to tell people that they're opening themselves up to feuds by joining a company, along with similar warnings for any other features that add to their PvP risk.

On the flip side, we also want to explain to them the advantages of taking those PvP risks. Want to gather better stuff? You'll need to go to more dangerous hexes. Want higher training? You'll need to make your way to a player settlement. Need more support? You'll need to join a settlement. But if someone really truly wants to avoid PvP, they can always hang out around Thornkeep and learn a wide variety of skills up through trainer level 8. Eventually we want to make the roads safe enough that they could venture further away at minimal risk. But ultimately, if they want to advance beyond a certain point, they'll need to take at least some PvP risk, and we want to make sure they understand that risk at each step. We also want them to be able to minimize that risk by joining stable alliances and staying close to home, but that won't be risk free in the long-run, so we'll want to make sure they understand that they shouldn't put all their eggs in one basket.
harneloot
I really like Smitty's idea of a craftable *something* (maybe working off the current Camp mechanics?) that enables people to alter the security level of a hex for a short time. This would give people more *to do* on a day to day basis that was not tied to Settlement Management, which we need much more of in the game.

I also like Harad's idea of involving monster mobs from nearby escalations somehow in holding raids and captures to make the process more interesting and dynamic.

Finally, I'd like to put forward a motion for adding Spreading of Escalations back into the game, even if at a much reduced rate of spread. The map felt so much more alive and dynamic when the escalations use to spread and interact with each other. Have the spreading escalation affect the holdings in those hexes by becoming the raiding mob type instead of the default bandits or ogres. This might force people out to defend more often and hopefully increase chances for player interaction.
Xyzzy - gatherer, yeoman archer, swamp monster.
Edam
Given that the PvP window is only a couple of hours a day several days a week I do not think its a real biggie either way. People wanting to avoid bandits will just log in at some other time.

By the way I am pretty certain Keepers only made our closer hexes hisec and left our remote stuff at lower security. At least that is the way we have usually done it in the past.
Smitty
so hideouts and scope of work if they look over what they have - ( just my view of how they would look if they wanted to put them in with as little effort as possible)
1. Make hide outs medium camps- use the same logic you created for small holdings ( 2 per hex max)- not sure if regular camps have that logic- never seen them used- so you could just rework those recipes and put fires on hideout camps..
a. Keep logic for placing holdings ( reg outpost, holding not allowed to be placed) in settlements and blue shield hexes
b. Allow placement of camps in all other hexes- code that allows small holdings in monster hexes should help
c. Create logic to change update security setting in the hex when camp is placed –( have to track the status of the security setting each round or minute once the camp is placed)
-
2. Create logic that can determine what security level should change to if multiple camps exist in a hex-
a. 2 High = high
b. 2 Low = low
c. 1 high 1 low = medium
d. 1 high 1 medium = medium
e. 1 low 1 medium = medium
f. Default is no camp present-
-
3. Re use some art from medium camp escalations- medium goblin tents for low, broken man commander camps for high- pick something else for medium
-
4. Create attackable objects (yes requires dev time- but can be reused to enhance holding/outpost warfare - so its not wasted effort)
a. Some of this may be done- targeting dummy and towers are objects that are attackable- so use the same code that allows this with the hit point structure as a guide
b. Create code to remove the camp and update security setting in a hex once object is removed or timer for camp runs out( for holdings war fare you would have to change that to reduce the count number max or give bonus to the count up meter etc)
Nothing wrong with reusing code and concepts you already have- its not a project that can be hammered out in a day or 2 but doesn’t seem like months of work either-
-
-
Side note to factions- the way I see them is they are not something you can turn on or off when ever you want-
so not really a good choice if the thought process is to bring new players along slowly in regards to how much PvP they are opening themselves up to .
example: new guy wants to try being a bandit for a few days - and gives it a shot - doesn’t work out - they can just stop if they use the camp option - but in joining a faction to try it out banditry it is not going to be easy to just switch-
Or is consensus view of faction joining/leaving going to be as easy as /vcleave ? -
Paddy Fitzpatrick
Not really sure why we are still discussing factions. It doesn't look like they are on the timeline. Are factions still planned?
Paddy Fitzpatrick - Rí Ruírec of Fianna, roaming bands of noble warriors!
Member of the Kathalpas Coalition and home of bandits, privateers, and anyone looking to get away from the shackles of law.
Find us on PFO Discord
 
You must be logged into an enrolled account to post