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 Edam

Congrats, hope you got the resources to keep running everything that high.

Well technically we are not ALL +5 as our gardens, statues, wells etc are still at +0. We still make a slight profit on all bulk types with the main settlement at all +5 and are running it that way at the moment, however there is nothing to stop us winding buildings with less demand like the library back a bit if we want to save bulk. Being all +5 gives us the option of running all +5 but we always have the option of running some of the buildings below the maximum if the need arises.

Currently Keepers Pass has an Auction House and all refining, all crafting, temple, seminary, rogue, skirmisher, freehold/expert and library trainers at +5:

+5 Keep
+5 Auction House
+5 Guild House
+5 Temple of Sarenrae
+5 Seminary
+5 Lab
+5 Smith
+5 Spellwright
+5 Co-operative
+5 Jeweller
+5 Tailor
+5 Library
+5 (all current refiners)
You are a Troll
LOL - for once I agree with Edam….since EARLY enrollment is technically a super long Beta Test, NO ONE should be able to buy XP dating back to the beginning of it, but only back to the beginning of OPEN ENROLLMENT.

However, how about some info on how GW/Paizo plans on getting some actual people willing to play the game long enough to even have the remote thought of actually wanting to drop more cash than the sub fee to buy xp? If Open Enrollment is looming, whats the marketing plan?

It is also worth pointing out that subs are dropping in price substantially.

Unless purchasing XP ends up something like 4 or 5 times more expensive then the new sub rate, it is highly feasible purchasing XP to get a new character backdated to EE Day 1 will cost vastly less than it cost to get the same XP by keeping a character permanently subbed.

Players should be able to buy XP to get characters to whatever level an Open Enrolment character can attain by remaining subbed and no more.
The new +5 Cooperative has now been placed and the +5 Library is ready to drop on the queue.
I hope that you DON'T allow the game to be completely Pay to Win with buying extra XP.
I'd like it if there was a CAP, where one can't exceed what a Day 1 character would have, or you'll have some whale players buying enough EXP to be level 20 in everything right out the door.
What about having the cap be based on the age of the account? Something like max XP purchased per character limited to same amount a subscription would give?
Meaning on 2 day old account (24hrs old) the purchase limit would be 2400 xp, and so on.
This limit would mean that someone could get double the xp if they maxed out and had the character subscribed, but would that be too much?
Maybe a time based purchase limit of only buying a max amount of xp per month? 72k xp per month would then be doubling xp for a subscribed character.

Your feeding the Pay to Win whales with what you said.
No, the Cap should be set at What a perfectly subbed Day 1 account would have at the any moment.
This would stop any Pay to Win whales from getting level 20 in everything, or getting to it twice as fast.

Allowing players to buy XP to the point they can double a current characters XP would add 4 million XP more or less at present. Problem is in 10 years time that will blow out to about 15 million XP you can buy.

Characters with that much XP will not necessarily be combat monsters but they would certainly excel at virtually anything they turned a hand to.

The EVE solution to this was to require you purchase the XP off another character who lost XP. This way the game was not creating XP out of thin air. Of course what happened is people created XP farming alts to generate the XP for their main characters. The reason I finally quit EVE once and for all was they introduced selling XP.

TBH … I think the cap should be whatever a day one OPEN ENROLMENT character would get.

This will give new players he ability to buy XP for any time lost after OE without it being exploitable. It would also stop returning vets pumping there characters up to the point they would have got to if they had subbed all along. There is something not quite right about the idea that someone who copped out and sat back and refused to sub can come back in and build an optimised character that will effectively be better than characters that played through all the rule changes and nerfs and sub optimal game mechanics.
Sounds like a really positive change.

Three questions:
  1. Currently we cannot log in two characters on the same login simultaneously, will this change ?edit - answered above
  2. Are we still restricted to creating just 3 characters per login? If not, will it now be possible to amalgamate accounts?
  3. We currently can transfer/trade entire accounts between players. Will we be able to now just transfer individual characters?
It will be interesting to see if things like this become possible:

IronBank created a brand-new character and used around $28,000 worth of injectors to max out every possible skill he could acquire to level 5. A total of around 2,846 injectors were used to boost the new character up to 473,344,000 skill points that would normally take over 20 years of skill training time to acquire.
After thinking about this some it occurs to me that the daunting list of hexes with sequences would be much different if it would have been applied to just the assigned hexes.
Even with inactive or dead settlements, if the sequence would have been just spawned into hexes assigned to each settlement there would be plenty left for active settlements to work on after their own but would also be more balanced to the current population.
Would it be possible to isolate this year's sequence or whatever is done to just the "assigned hexes"? Or does anyone have thoughts on this?
The sequence could have been taken down but instead most groups have chosen to farm them. Hexes not being worked on were progressed to either a shadow or a wrath for two reasons. Firstly the nuhr escalations do not decay so you get to preserve the sequence to work on later. Basically "saving" the T3 stuff until you have time to work it. Secondly the nuhr escalations are relatively harmless to gather in and do not harass adjoining holdings overly much.

There was actually no good reason to take the sequence down. There was no reward as such for taking them all out, just the slightly annoying possibility that the Aristocrats would start popping up uncontrolled in places they were not wanted.

I would have been relatively simple to just keep clearing bosses as the hexes naturally decayed down to each new boss and by now we would be down to the last handful of hexes. There was just no good reason to do that.
Last year's holiday event of the Nhur Athemon Sequence was my first in this game and I liked it but after logging an insane number of hours in the game by 1/7/2019 I was more than a little burnt out. I'm not sure I would push that hard again. Oh and my characters are just T2 so not sure what PVE elite qualifications since I just join in with any party that will have me.

Reasonably built T2 characters are definitely viable all the way up to Aristocrats. They do die about twice as much but their gear is vastly cheaper to replace so they just need to bank more often.

As far as "Elite" characters go, I am not seeing any huge changes in builds with these new high levels, possibly a tendency to learn more big hitting single shot expendables as they now have a purpose that justifies the XP and power used, but otherwise its business as usual. To be honest, the biggest changes in character builds in recent years is from things like the longbow/great-sword nerfs and the ridiculous and particularly stupid knee jerk nerfing of things like Devourer's Caress - seemingly based almost entirely on the uninformed observations and prejudices of casual players as anyone that partied regularly with a Devourer Caress wizard would soon realise they died way more often than a proper tank. people did it for fun, not because it was overpowered.

TBH … a lot of what I am reading here seems to be driven by a desire to make the game more "co-operative single player" like and hence moving away from being a pure competitive sandbox MMO . Combat difficulty scaling to your characters current level (aside from being incredibly hard to implement in this game a sensible fashion) is very much a single player game thing. Single player games are designed so that you can lose interest and wander off for a long while and come back and takeup where you left off. They do not get "harder" while you are away.

The idea a single player should be able to easily run an entire settlement is also single player thinking (in single player you are "the one" who changes the world, not just one cog in a much bigger picture), as is the desire for vast amounts of developer created special shiney content to keep people entertained.

Maybe a move away from a sandbox is necessary, who knows? However interestingly, some of the above suggestions go the opposite way and actually seem designed to messup struggling settlements run by casual individuals as they will force people to log in to defend whether they want to or not.

That said … there are a a lot of good ideas from various people mixed in there that are worth pursuing smile Its important not to throw out the baby with the bathwater.


One thing to consider for the xmas events might be something that gives individual characters/players rewards over and above the settlement based rewards. Potentially a PvP tournament, controversial as that may be ? Or maybe just something as simple as greatly enhanced chances of stone drops while participating in event escalations on particular days?
For bonuses, here are the constant bonuses each feat would focus on. The more specific the bonus is, or the greater the number of bonuses, the lower the actual bonus amounts would be. In some cases, the limited amount of constant bonuses would be balanced by putting greater bonuses on the per-keyword list. Those have a lot more details, so I haven't fully worked through them yet, but would focus on the usual mix of hit points, defenses, recovery, knowledge and skills. I'll post more info on those once I've worked through some initial thoughts on them.

  • Chymist: Negative, Holy, Force and Psychic Resistance
  • Concocter: All Resistances, Base Attack Bonus, Regeneration
  • Fermenter: Acid Resistance
  • Metaphysicist: Energy Resistances
  • Sapper: Fire and Sonic Resistances, Ranged Attack Bonus
  • Scientist: Fire, Cold and Electrical Resistances
  • Seeker: Speed, Perception, Light Melee Attack

Advancement would be very similar to that for all the other armor feats, but focusing on Adventure or Crafting for Category Points and Intelligence for Ability Scores.

Random thoughts …

  • It is hard to know how those will pan out without seeing the keyword bonuses.
  • The resistance theme on everything but seeker is interesting.
  • Only Concocter boosts Physical ? One thought, if Concotor is meant to be defensive, consider giving Concoctor similar keyword recovery bonuses and keyword save bonuses to the cleric healer armor.
  • Also, the perception offered on seeker is a fairly mediocre bonus (useless in PvE but might be a benefit to PvP) however I can see how it fits the role. Maybe give seeker a small physical bonus ?
I am not sure limiting the token processing to characters with the alchemist combat role actually makes sense unless it is something they do "on the fly" whilst in combat.

Making it a feature of the existing alchemist crafting role seems much more logical.

Also out of curiosity, what is planned for armor feats ? Some thoughts:

  1. rather than creating entirely new armors or just using existing armor already in game for the feats, how about giving the alchemist craft role recipes that "transform" select existing armor items into an alchemist version that better matches alchemist armor feats. This could use the same game mechanics as invoked when enchanting armor, except its done by an alchemist not a spellcrafter. NOTE this would transform the armor to a new type with new name, new keywords and base effects, not just add a feature like resistance the way spellcraft does.
  2. alchemists in tabletop do not suffer spell failure in heavier armors so I assume the same will apply here
  3. regardless of spell failure, making specialist alchemist armors light or cloth would seem to fit the theme
  4. whilst specialist armor that enhances alchemist attacks or improves saves and resistances fits the role well, consider some unusual or funky armor feats that nothing else has as well
  5. random example of "unusual" armor feats might be armor that recovers power or heals on a critical hit or adds extra effect power to alchemical potions and expendables