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

Bringslite of Staalgard
@ Bob

To summarize Raiding:

*Raids are eligible at any time that outposts are in a "vulnerable to capture" state.
*Raids neither capture nor destroy-degrade a holding.
*Raids follow feud rules except they require only 1 hour pre set and bypass capturing outposts for direct attack on holdings.
*When holding guards are defeated and holding capture points are achieved, a husk will drop near the holding that contains that holding's daily produce and 5% of the Bulk inside the Holding Upkeep vault.
*The "husk" will act, and be accessible according to the mechanics of a player husk with a 2 hour lifetime.

Is that about right?

That all sounds right. Just to be super-clear on one tiny detail, the husk will be a little different than a typical player husk in that it won't have an owner, so all players will be treated as "not the owner" and nobody can just take everything from the husk at once.
Would it be hard to code for Character Inventories to stop taking items the moment the character is max encumbered? I.e. when both gauges of the Encumbrance meter are filled?

It would be a little tricky just because we'd have to consider all the different ways that things can get moved into inventory, and we'd probably have to write the restriction into each circumstance. For things like transferring from a vault to inventory, or from a mule to inventory, we could pretty easily just reject the transfer. Not hugely complicated, but again, we'd probably have to find all the similar cases and put in a tiny bit of code to check the encumbrance and potentially reject the transaction.

Things get trickier when you start thinking about trades (which essentially create a separate escrow inventory that gets returned or transferred when the sale is rejected or accepted. They also get weirder with auto-looting, though we could probably just not worry about overloading you in that case, since you probably can't do much looting while immobile.

These are all things that have solutions, and we'd like to tackle them eventually, but inventory feeds in and out of so many systems that we'll need more time and resources to tackle it properly.
Do our goods just stay in the bank until the bank also gets destroyed?

Do those offers go away, or come back when a new auction house is erected?

Right now, banks can't really get destroyed, though their ownership can change, and we don't move things around between vaults when that happens. As a result, anything in those vaults remains, and you'll at least have Withdrawal Only rights to pull everything from those vaults.

Auction houses can get destroyed, but they're really just interfaces to offers that are running in the background. As such, even if the auction house is destroyed, the items for sale and bids for other items stay protected, and when they time out the money or items held in them will be returned to the appropriate vaults, where again you'll at least have Withdrawal Only access (The same is true of any crafting or refining projects that are scheduled). If a new Auction House goes up, those offers/bids will be accessible by anyone with auction access, and the proceeds from any transactions will go to the appropriate vaults, even if the owners of those vaults don't have auction access or have Withdrawal Only bank access.

As a temporary solution, how about you can't log out when so encumbered that you can't move, unless you are at a bank.

Might be a small issue if you have internet issues, and stay logged in in the wilderness.

Eventually, everyone gets logged out for Daily Maintenance, so that would have to be part of the consideration. Still, something like this would at least leave you vulnerable until that point, so it could help with any problems of characters overloading from a raid then logging out until a safer time. For problems of alts acting like banks, it would just push people to stock the alt up right before Daily Maintenance.

Still, we're eventually going to have to tackle the issue of inventories when logging off, and encumbrance will likely be an important part of any solution.
Bringslite of Staalgard
As Bob has said, we should be seeing more profit output through at least +3 for at least one holding combination per hex type, right?. We are not.

To be clear, I am not saying that your production should be getting more efficient up to +3. I'm just saying that upgrading to +3 should increase your net production by at least 1 as opposed to actually reducing your net production. When you're doing a lot of 4-for-1 exchanges, or can't produce bulk resources efficiently, upgrading past a certain point will actually reduce your net production.

Of course, going through an entire upgrade just to increase production by 1-2 bulk resources probably isn't worthwhile compared to taking another hex, but in some situations it still might be important to eke out those small improvements.
I originally did the numbers without taking into account the holding bonuses, so the improved profitability from upgrades should happen regardless of the holding bonuses, which scale up linearly and therefore don't suffer from diminishing marginal returns.

Your numbers look right when not counting the bonuses. The important thing is that at every stage, you're gaining more in production than you're adding in upkeep, just in decreasing amounts.

If you're shooting for self-sufficiency, things get a little trickier and the increasing profitability likely stops at +2 or +3, depending on just how efficiently you can produce the second bulk upkeep requirement (which also might largely come from your bonus) and whether you can produce the third requirement at all. I ran a variety of possible situations, and it looked to me like most hexes could be self-sufficient and profitable, though some without any particularly high bulk goods to base production on wouldn't be worth upgrading past +1 or +2.
@Bob am hoping you can lend more insight to what this means…
Premium Items
• Introduce Azoth, which can be used to improve crafting/refining output or converted into game time.

How are they going to be used in crafting and refining- How will they help- what limitations are there - etc- basically from crafting perspective how will one use azoth, what will it make etc?

We're still finalizing the design for Azoth, but in general, Azoth could be used on any crafting/refining project that involves the possibility of upgrades (so not on Aeon Stones, for example), and the biggest limitation would be that you couldn't upgrade past +5. You'd apply Azoth to your project much as you do the other ingredients.

The preliminary work that's been done focuses mostly on using Azoth to improve crafting projects. Essentially, once you've chosen all the ingredients for your crafting project, you'll have the option of adding X units of Azoth to the project to get to the next plus on the resulting output. Each recipe requires a different amount of Azoth for that upgrade.

Using Azoth to improve refining output is a bit trickier, since upgrades there are based on probabilities and random rolls. We're leaning toward saying that X units of Azoth will increase your crit chances by Y.

One aspect we're debating for crafting is adjusting the Azoth cost based on how close you are to the next upgrade. In other words, if it would cost you 100 Azoth to take what would barely be a +2 all the way to a +3, then it could cost 50 Azoth if you're already halfway to a +3.
Bringslite of Staalgard
Story Quest for New Players

•Give new players a quest storyline to follow that offers a more structured introduction to the world.

Settlement Improvements

•Add Town Criers to Thornkeep that point new players toward existing settlements.

@ Bob
These two agenda item's. Are they being done from scratch? Are they worth your effort at this early stage?

We felt both of these were important to get in before increasing our marketing efforts to new players, and that they were both achieveable, so they made it on the roadmap. They go together well because they're both about new users and because the quest mostly involves me and the Town Criers mostly involve Cole. In terms of exactly when to do them, we wanted to do something substantial for new players early on in the process, and these tasks didn't have any dependencies on other work, so we pushed them toward the front.

The Town Criers are new but had a lot of planning work done previously, and the quests leverage existing tech, so they're not overwhelming amounts of work, fortunately.
In most hexes, there should be at least one holding-and-two-outposts combo that gets more profitable with each upgrade, though diminishing marginal returns means that each upgrade adds less profitability than the previous one. In most cases, this increasing profitability will require stocking small amounts of the third bulk resource required for upkeep at the highest holding upgrades, otherwise the 4-for-1 trade to pay your upkeep will eat into the increased output. Even without that, profits should increase at every upgrade until +3 or so.

The idea is for upgrading to generally be worthwhile, and a reasonable alternative for companies that prefer to manage less hexes, but for it to be more efficient to take more territory than to upgrade your buildings. That way there's always a temptation to spread out, inevitably bumping into others with the same ideas. We're hoping there will be a mix of spreading out vs. upgrading in place, and what we really wanted to take care of was the extra stockpiling of bulk resources that was possible before by only upgrading the outposts.
Bob, I think it's fair to consider whether the trickery comes from a low xp alt, also.

Low xp alts are disposable, and thus the victim and the community don't have as much social leverage against the offender as they would have against trickery from Midnight, for example.

Of course, with multiple accounts and DTs, players can still lay low with high xp characters… so that's a consideration, too.

Absolutely. The ability to use alts and multiple accounts for various shenanigans is always a concern. Policy enforcement can be done across accounts and arguing "but my alt did it" won't get anyone very far, but that's only for behaviors that actually violate our policies. We'll keep finetuning the mechanics around alts, multiple accounts, and off-line characters to get the right balance and prevent them from being too useful for avoiding social consequences.