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.

Pathfinder Online will be ending operations on November 28, 2021. For more details please visit our FAQ.

All posts created by Bob

Bob
Bringslite-Dominion Soldier
On the odd chance that a siege gets foiled or abandoned will the siege holdings dissolve on their own sooner than non maintained decay or have to be destroyed?

Nope, they'll have to be destroyed to get rid of them sooner.

Bringslite-Dominion Soldier
Will the target settlement be able to capture some "siege pieces" the same way that the attackers could have captured and repaired some buildings?

They could be taken over like any holdings or outposts, but the target settlement would most likely just want to tear them down, unless they'd lost the siege and wanted to capture the siege equipment as part of retaking the settlement. However, since the victor has building rights in the core 6 for a week and is protected for a month, it's more likely that the victor would tear them down and replace them in that case.

Bringslite-Dominion Soldier
Could siege holdings be dismantled (later use elsewhere) if captured or only destroyed?

Currently, being torn down doesn't leave anything behind. It's an interesting thought to have some portion of the attacking siege equipment wind up in the defender's hands if they win. We've considered similar ideas for other attacks, like raids and feuds, but it always gets complicated trying to keep the system from being overly gameable.
Bob
Duffy Swiftshadow
Since you can't claim an elevation change hex you would inherently need a small gap, but does that mean in cases where there is no elevation concerns you can make a supply line by using every other hex instead of an unbroken chain? Also allowing possibly shorter paths by jumping over monster hexes and maybe even other enemy holdings?

Yes, the allowed gaps are there to cover cases where hexes along the way (e.g. pass, monster) can't be claimed. Ideally, the path only needs to claim every third hex, but depending on exactly where the unclaimable hexes are along the way, it might be necessary to sometimes claim two hexes in a row.

And yes, you can jump over enemy holdings to establish the supply line. However, you're probably best off owning every possible hex along the path so that hexes can be lost without breaking the chain.
Bob
WxCougar of KOTC
I wonder if three traversable hexes mean you can't ignore elevation changes. That the supply line must go through a pass hex if there are different elevations between the attacking settlement and the target settlement.

That is correct, the big point of traversable is to force the supply line path to make use of pass hexes instead of going up/down cliffs. I've updated the original post to try and make that clearer.
Bob
Bringslite-Dominion Soldier
If I can read the Wiki correctly, the Master's Siege Engine has "elite guards" but less total PVP spawns than equivalent barracks or towers. Is that how they are designed?

The siege equipment overall has less guards than other holdings or outposts, on the principle that players are choosing to actively attack and therefore don't need as much warning time to cover the 6 main hexes each day. If you're taking over a settlement, you should be pretty focused on that takeover for that period of time.

I also decided to have the number of guards be identical at each plus value for both the Professional's and Master's versions of all the siege equipment. Between the increased damage potential and the increased quality of the guards, having the numbers just keep going up from there felt like overkill, but I still wanted to provide a big incentive for adding higher plusses rather than sticking with the base T3 siege equipment.
Bob
Demiurge
So the supply lines only need to be kept up for the first 3 days to establish the siege and can then be taken down?

I edited the rules to say that the supply line has to be active in order for any damage to be done to the settlement. That means that if you can keep the supply line broken for 3 straight weeks of PvP days, no damage will be done and the siege will have to be restarted or abandoned.

The supply line could be a little tricky to deactivate without actually taking over hexes along the way because the attackers might have different PvP days than the defending settlement. If so, the supply line could reactivate before the settlement's PvP days if all you manage to do is defeat the outposts. That means attackers might choose purposefully to offset their PvP days, but in turn that will require pressing the attack for 3 days and defending territory for 3 days. Pretty risky choice.
Bob
Bringslite-Dominion Soldier
Bob
Oh, and just to whet your appetites for the new escalation, anyone ever heard of the Ruby Crypt clan?

Ninja Clans of Minkai?

Never heard of them but I can search message boards. smile or smile ?

Ninjas indeed. The Ruby Crypt clan and their employers, the imperial Shojinawa family (who apparently aren't as dead as everyone thought), have come from Minkai to get their share of the Emerald Spire's power. They're not messing around, either, sending the toughest warriors any of you have faced yet. You'll face the best ninjas, samurai and wizards the Shojinawa family can throw at you. The threat will grow steadily through 4 phases (plus the final boss phase), with 11 possible events popping up along the way to the final boss battle.
Bob
We're getting very close on EE 14, but we decided to spend more time on the player housing than we had originally planned to do as part of this update. In part that's because we decided to give them more capabilities, and in part because we decided to provide quite a bit more variety. We also came to realize that some of the capabilities we wanted to give them required doing some polish work we'd intended to hold off on until the last couple milestones, but that were worth doing now instead. I'll go into more details on the housing next week once we get a bit more work done and can commit to more specifics.

For the other big tasks, ammunition is in and working, we've already fixed several of the issues that were found with Line of Sight , and the new escalation is up and running. All of these have gone through some initial testing and polish work, but still need a few more small fixes and a bit more testing before they're ready for the test server. They're very close though, so they shouldn't slow things down much.

Given all that, we think we're looking at 1-2 weeks before we're ready to go to the test server, and then hopefully just a small bit of iteration after that before we can deploy to Live. My apologies for the delay, but I think you'll be pleased when you see where all the extra work is going.

Oh, and just to whet your appetites for the new escalation, anyone ever heard of the Ruby Crypt clan?
Bob
Bringslite-Dominion Soldier
Is anything further, than has been applied already, scheduled to go to the test server?

We don't have anything small and easily pulled out from the main build (like the initial Line of Sight implementation was) that we'd like to put up on Zog at this point, so the next build there will likely be a full build for EE 14. We're closing in on that, but I'll give a more detailed update in my next post.
Bob
Bringslite-Dominion Soldier
If other settlements not upgrading training facilities, and so mooching off of highly invested settlements is any kind of concern (which it probably should be), remember that settlements control who can train and where they can train. Give us more granularity of control by allowing us to set COSTS of training if we invest in upgrades and upkeeps for higher ranked training facilities and let those invested reap those rewards.

That's definitely part of the taxation plan. It probably won't be super-granular (you probably won't be able to set different charges for using different trainers, just one overall training charge/percentage), but we do want settlements to get rewarded when characters use their facilities, and at different rates for members/allies/others.
Bob
Bringslite-Dominion Soldier
Will Siege Holdings be subject to Invasions? Can they be subject to Raiding?

Yup, they act just like holdings in those regards. Big difference would be that raiding wouldn't have any daily production to steal, assuming the "outposts" are siege camps (since they don't produce any), but could still steal some bulk resources from the vault.