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 of Staalgard
Is it already the case that Allies can't Feud Allies?

I don't believe there are any restrictions, so any company can feud any other company. That could potentially cause some weirdness about how guards react when conflicted about who to support, but in general we want to allow we don't want to mechanically enforce things that are better dealt with by settlement/alliance leaders. If you like your companies fighting amongst themselves, let them go at it. If you don't, then boot them.

The only mechanical things we really want on that are the current one-hour minimum delay for starting feuds, and the incoming 48-hour delay before you can start capturing territory.
Bob
I've filed a feature request for this. It shouldn't be too hard to do, but I'm not sure when we'll be able to fit it into our schedule.
Bob
Bringslite of Staalgard
Bob
I left all the resource types alone and just altered the numbers for each resource. As an example, here are the new upkeep numbers for Inn Holdings:

+0: Bulk Food 11
+1: Bulk Food 14, Trade Goods 2
+2: Bulk Food 18, Trade Goods 4
+3: Bulk Food 22, Trade Goods 6, Bulk Wood 1
+4: Bulk Food 26, Trade Goods 9, Bulk Wood 2
+5: Bulk Food 30, Trade Goods 12, Bulk Wood 4

Geez I am hardly leaving you time to work with all the discussion and questions! Simple one: Is this likely the final set for Holding upkeep, Sir Bob?

Yes, these are the likely numbers to deploy with EE 12. I believe they'll also still work once the holding production bonuses go in. Of course, we'll re-evaluate them as needed when other changes or new systems are deployed, but I don't think we have anything planned that will require it.
Bob
Bringslite of Staalgard
I had thought though that the entire overarching goal was to drive us to want to reach for settlement lvl 20?

Well, you do get some other stuff for going to settlement level 20, but we really only wanted to push people to run at higher levels overall. We don't really expect this to motivate the settlements that are already running at pretty high levels to run much higher, but we do hope it will motive some running at lower levels to run a little bit higher, perhaps 1 below the level they can fully take advantage of.
Bob
Bringslite of Staalgard
What if my trained rank is 20 and my settlement is set to 19? Why would I pay for 20 if the only basic advantage is a slight craft time bonus?

I'm assuming in this case that what you mean is that your trained rank is 20 for a feat that has 20 total ranks and generally requires support level X for feat rank X, like most crafting/refining skills. In that case you'd see a trained rank of 20, a supported rank of 19, and an active rank of 20 because of the rounding up. In other words, for the vast majority of feats, level 19 support is indistinguishable from level 20 support.

However, there is currently at least one exception to that, namely Power, which goes to rank 40. If fully trained on Power, you'd see trained rank 40, supported rank 38, and active rank 39.
Bob
This semi-unlimited influence is only intended to be very temporary. We have some thoughts on a more permanent solution and believe we can fit something into the schedule, but we're not quite sure exactly when we'll be ready and able to do so.

When we do get something put in, some companies will fairly quickly find themselves with insufficient influence if they've spread too far. There aren't any specific numbers I could warn people about going beyond at this time, but I'd just say that if you really have to push yourselves to earn the influence to get those buildings placed/upgraded now, there's a good chance you won't be able to keep them later.
Bob
Edam
One thing I am not clear on. Does the settlement hex itself counts as one of the 4 allied hexes ?

Yup.
Bob
WxCougar of KOTC
There was a time that the main holding would eventually help raise numbers of certain bulk production (Trading Post Holding increasing production of Trade Goods for example). Will this still be a thing? And if so, would it kick in when all the holding/outpost changes go in?

It's still a thing, and we still intend to do it eventually, but it's not on the schedule yet.
Bob
Decius
Would it make sense to just remove influence caps entirely, and also remove or drastically reduce the recovery of "banked" influence when it is cleared? Maybe also adjust influence in and costs?

We have in fact considered temporarily removing the influence caps (technically, we'd just make them ridiculously high). We have concerns similar to those raised here, but after a quick discussion, we've decided to go ahead and make that change for EE 12.

I'll also look at reducing the percentage of banked influence that gets recovered, though I'm less worried about that side of things. Plus, that wouldn't kick in for anyone who doesn't feud and never loses a holding or outpost. Still, it's a trivial spreadsheet change and might at least partially offset this change.

As for changing the influence requirements of things, that's more of a problem. In particular, once somethings banked, we don't currently re-check those values. That means buildings placed before a change would be based on the original values, while those placed afterward would be based on the new values. I'd like to avoid dealing with that for now.
Bob
Duffy Swiftshadow
My last ditch effort: I ask you to just hold off for now then. It's not going to affect the majority of us if it was turned on tomorrow anyways. According to my math if we had no holdings we could run Canis Castrum and Hope's End with T3 support for at least 2-3 more years with the current supplies, and I'm sure our stockpiles are the lowest among the old guard. Revisit support when you get to the individual building upkeep, it seems like it will need a major tweak at that point anyways. See how things are by then, when a bunch of the systems that could achieve some of the goals of support have been active for awhile. Or if something really comes up between now and then it sounds like a small enough change that you can hot patch it in if necessary.

The actual goal of once more linking support level to settlement level isn't so much about guaranteeing that some people will be hit by lack of support. With settlement warfare coming in, and with bulk resource production being brought more in line with original projections, we just feel the need to make settlement level a much more meaningful choice at this point. If all it does is push settlements to start spending those bulk resources now, that's fine too, but at least it's based on a meaningful choice.

As a side note, I should admit that the thread title "Bringing Back Support" is a bit of a misnomer. Support has been in all along, it just currently only affects characters that aren't in a settlement (they only have support level 8, but I don't think there are many of them running around), and does so to a much greater degree than it will after the EE 12 changes. The changes we're making will actually reduce the effects of losing support by being booted from a settlement, though they will mean that you may have less alternatives to join that offer you full support if you're highly trained.