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.

All posts created by Azure_Zero

Sorry for Necro.

But I think it might be a good idea to revive the Keepside chat, Now I would not expect to it be the Weekly Keepside of the past, but at least once a year or yearly quarter.
The mule ability to either or both of those structures would be great IMO.
Although what about a step further and either allow us to craft a simple mule post structure and/or purchase a mule post that we can set down and use saddlebags where we want?

There was a commitment made at some stage that nothing sold at the cash shop would offer features unavailable in some form elsewhere in game.

Generally speaking that is still the case. You can basically get the benefits of a crafter cottage for example by raising your settlement, there are other ways to get the sort of buffs offered by an adventure cottage etc etc. There are clearly advantages to buying the shop items or they would not sell but they do not offer anything substantial not already available elsewhere in game to some extent.

The simplest way to achieve this goal is make the mule stall a separate shop item that can be attached to any player housing OR player crafted camp.

My personal take:

  • adding mule stalls to freeholds, cottages and camps would be useful and not particularly unbalancing
  • a good option would be a reasonable price paid "addon" with a separate deed you can attach to any player housing whether camp, adventure/crafting cottage or freehold. They should also work with crafted camps. On knocking down the relevant holding both deeds return to inventory.
  • a nice touch would be to have the mule stalls attached to things like freeholds work for all players all the time rather than just the owners party when the owner is logged in (the same way the campfire does).

I think that the Mule stalls on; Holdings, Freeholds and Base camps should have a control system so the owner (or company in the case of holdings) can control Who can mule from the building.
So if a feud/fight happens a enemy can't mine out needed resources from a hex deep in the other's territory and escape with a load of goods on a Mule.
I think someone forgot to update the News in the patcher to include mention of EE17.

Also XP boost does not seem to of activated.
The PVP system, needs more thought, especially for those that CHOOSE to opt out of PVP.

For OPTING out of PVP also optional at the company level, where the Company gives it's players PVP immunity (sans low sec hexes), BUT they in-turn CAN NOT control any Holdings as those are Part of the PVP system. The Company can still be feuded, but now there is less reason to do so.

This is a bit of a twist on High Sec hexes and not true. Actually those hexes are vulnerable to feuding just like any other holding hexes in the game. Nothing has been said about "Opting Out" of PVP protecting holdings from being vulnerable. Non flaggers will just not be able to defend their holdings.

Feuding is not a solution as there are a NUMBER of problems with the system and too much delay, and since Holdings are part of the PVP system any company that Opts out of PVP should never hold a holding so as they are not a feud target in any settlement or group conflicts unless they do something to a group that turns them into a feud target.


OPTING out of PVP should also have the following restrictions; NO T3 crafting, refining, gathering, gear, and equipment.

As BlackMoria points out and I tried to, above and further back in this thread, doing that will defeat the entire reason for adding the Flag system at all. How would offering a game with dated graphics, incomplete systems-limited features, limited PVE(not even any dungeons), still many combat bugs, limited weapons, races, class types, a $15.00 sub cost and "Oh, you can only enjoy the first 2/3 the content, not the good stuff", be attractive?
This is being done to attract more players that will stay and play, not to find players that like to be punished and limited.

This is to make Opting into risky play a reward, and stop any funny business that could be done with PVP immunity.


They are still vunerable to PVP in LOW security Zones so they can not gather without risk in any good monster hexes.

I would like to see something to off-set this. I think Bob first brought this up but has not mentioned again… Some kind of way to officially "claim" T3 hexes and set rules for either "owner permission to hunt/gather there or pay a "tithe" on the rewards for such. Suggestion: setting like Tithe = "0" or "every other" or "every 3rd" or "blah-blah"

To save; development time, development resources, money, and various other resources and do a simple answer, this is the best answer with the least chance or way of doing any gaming of the system.


They Never generate influence,

Never? I think they should when they play flagged for PVP. No single choice should cause a permanent penalty.
That is fair, but if the Company has opted out of PVP they still generate 0, since the company has No need for any influence since they don't want to PVP at all.


You as a Individual can ONLY change your PVP Flag once a Week toggled on Monday server UP, this is to STOP ANY gaming of the system and force a choice for the week.

I'm fine with this. Flagging should not be used like a light switch
Glad you agree it should not be like a light switch.
I think we have TOO many carrots and not enough sticks in this game, and that is what is making the game very boring.
I do recall when EE 10.0 or EE 11.0 hit that a number of players were telling Ryan that it was too soon for the settlement system upgrade and that he should of focused on fixes for other systems like; the vault system which when Lisa took control ordered it to be fixed.

I also recall that a number of folks at various points in time did tell Ryan that settlements were put in way too soon, and that the Land rush was a failure because it was put out before the game was even in Alpha.
Sorry, but since PC settlements are supposed to be targeted in Fueds and sieged, they are Part of the PVP system, no Buts.
If players and companies want out of PVP, they settle in NPC towns and take any other restrictions that come with NOT Opting into PVP.
In fact it pretty almost fits what you said

So what is the difference between Carebear Land and the rest of the map. In Carebear Land, the cost are increased in everything. Crafting queue times are significantly longer. T3 crafting is out of the question and T2 may be capped at a certain level, for example. Gathering is also limited in yield and T3 resources cannot ever be found in nodes and monster hexes… perhaps certain valuable T2 resources also cannot be gathered. No enchantment resources are found anywhere in Carebear Land. Structures and holdings can be built but costs are much higher for resources and influence. Training cost are higher and also limited. For T3 training, they have to leave the kids sandbox and maybe T2 is capped somewhere. Escalations in monster hexes in Carebear Land are limited to middle T2 or lower. High T2 and T3 is only possible outside Carebear Land.

Oh We already have a Carebear land in game it's called; ThornKeep.

And increasing the Map size will only make the game feel more empty then it already is killing it faster.
I do agree that funding is a big issue, along with needing to get to Full Release.
But we have a problem, right now the only ones funding the game are us old players, and new players are not retained.
So the best thing to do is keep the old players playing and get things to the point new player(s) would want to join.

Now Shrinking the map would cut server costs though, and with the extra money they could funnel it into development.
The shrunken size would lead to more interaction among players and make the game feel more alive then a empty void where you are the only one.
I do think I know the best answer for those that want to OPT out of PVP.

Since Holdings, Outposts and Settlements are part of the PVP system, it makes it simple.
Players and any Company not wanting any PVP CAN NOT be attached to any PC settlement as a player and or as a company since Settlements were designed to be sieged and fought over in PVP.

It makes it simple, in a PC settlement, your a PVP target.
While I don’t disagree that the game has stagnated, let’s not forget that it is still Early Enrollment. The biggest failing right now, and IMO the reason no one new is subbing, is because no one wants to pay $15 for a game that is not in Open Enrollment. Yes, the major systems are in place, but it is not ready for Prime Time. Too much for polish still needs to occur (most notably having RIVERS in the River Kingdoms, lol.)

I agree with you Azure that something needs to be done to shake things up a little. But fully finishing this game and getting it into OE status should be the main focus. Not focusing on bandaids.

And One of the reasons no one new is subbing is Because the game feels empty and void of life, this another reason that the map NEEDS to shrink a lot.
What good is getting near to Finishing the game when there are No players left playing it, the answer is nothing.
If nothing shakes things Up out of stagnation Now to stop the loss of the current player base, the game will be dead in less then three years if we can't retain the old and new players.

The Game itself needs more then a little shake up, it needs a big shake up that forces interaction(s) between groups to stop any stagnation from happening.