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 Flari-Merchant

Leatherworker. Senechal for the Collections smile

The "Role Collections" are not in alphabetical order for some reason(on the wiki)
Hopefully some middle ground solution can be found that does not allow players in a level 10 settlement to run around with level 20 skills. <— That is the real issue here.

It is imbalanced in every way that seems important. Such a settlement10 has a much smaller PVP window. They have a ridiculously smaller Bulk Upkeep cost. They can afford to build a large number of Holdings and are barely affected at losing a great number of those holdings. Yet with this set up they can run about with the same level of skills that a Settlement20 has to pay for.

That is the situation that we are in right now. If GW is reluctant to cut out all of the inflated Influence pools that are out there and accessed by us, how else can they try and start to bring things back into balance without a Support Mechanic?

I seriously agree that there are some possible dangers in this of limiting the options of new players because vets have strangle holds on lvl 20 capability. The Vets are entrenched. Players progressing toward 20 will have fewer and fewer options to play at maximum as they go.

But lets be realistic here. It is going to take quite a LONG time for new players to have to worry about Level 20 Skills. I think that we all are more worried about ourselves and our Level 20(or close) Skills.
@ Paddy

I am hoping that GW will deal with any obvious and extreme griefing like you are describing. If they won't, then they will not have as many subscribers as they might like to have.

As for stuff that involves powerful groups throwing their weight around… well what is this? A territorial PVP conquering game or Hello Kitty Island Friends Coalition?
No other game has had the same amount (really ability/possibility) of PVP AND been able to suppress griefing to a satisfactory level for all sides concerned. As you like to say "It is an interesting social experiment" It will sink or swim on it's principles. <—That is if it will not change should it see bad leaks.

Yeah, using phrases like "The Cool Kids" is annoying to see over and over. Whoever they are, they just have different ideas about what is fun than you do. They do not get anymore power to steer the game than you do. These PfO basic principles were set down long before the game had it's first day.
I was an eve player who enjoyed small gang patrols, which was basically enforcing our right to exploit an area. While this builder-centric crowd will be happier with more automation and less vigilance, I know there's an audience (a hundred times larger than this game's population ever was) for vigilance if a sandbox rewards vigilance and makes vigilance a key way to exert power in a sandbox. Heck, we even set up 23-7 gate camps at bottlenecks to exert our power, and were often rewarded for our vigilance by looting the wrecks we caused.

I totally get that you have to make choices, but you could also have chosen to make vigilance fun and rewarding. There's still time to do that later when things like threading get in the game. Maybe factions could present such opportunities.
Your opinion is fair enough. Those conditions would be very hard core sandbox type stuff. They are only preferences though. You and some others would prefer it one way and GW with some different "other" would prefer it as it is planned.
In your examples you are talking about choke points that are used more often than random settlement A. At those places you see more action than what we are talking about here, so your example has a much better chance of being fun. I can't see guarding a settlement 23/7 as being fun no matter how much I think about it. Even with threading, there still has to be action to get the rewards possible from the gear dropping.
Now gushers and raiding Holdings and similar things are where that is at. Hopefully those will be introduced with some better PVP opportunities.
So I am dabbling in another MMO these days. An MMO that had a truly terrible start and round of publicity but has turned all of that around is amongst the highest grossing MMO out there now so there is room for comeback, BTW. Anyway, I found that I really needed a guild spot to play in the way that I want. In this game it is pretty regular for Guilds to mandate a certain amount of participation in raffles, playing(including number of days a week), minimum amounts of sales per week in the AH for the tax revenue, etc… <–These are pretty much mandatory things and I pay them gladly to have that "spot" on the roster because it allows me to accomplish what I want to in this particular game.

I do not find it be extortion. I find it to be paying for some privileges(cost of membership) which would not be available if the Guild was not there. Realize that the Guild has many expenses because of the privileges that it can offer it's members.

Extortion, I pretty much leave in the realm of someone taking something from me by force or threat. If players come in to the game and set up settlements and membership requirements for membership like taxes or X amount of materials per month or whatever, it will be my choice to weigh if the cost is worth the gain. If I do not have any other choices besides all sucky high "tax" settlements then that is kinda a failure on GW's part. They need to ensure that there is enough room for enough high level settlements that players have a choice.

But anyway, it sounds like you feel that there is some sort of "special" slice of player base(the cool kids) who have more influence and say than any others. I think you are wrong. Sspitfire is gone and he can't wreck ranged attacks anymore than he has already.
I am not seeing anything that Bob said to indicate that blacklisted characters could not access the bank - the rest of the player made buildings and training, yes, but not banks.

Was that the intention Bob, to restrict access to the banks?

You can restrict access to the bank, though we are planning to allow you to withdraw things that are already there. We didn't want someone to find themselves suddenly losing all their stuff.
And that solves that question that I keep forgetting to ask. Thank you, Bob.
Bringslite of Staalgard
Well we are already extorting player behavior for membership, are we not?


And to people paying $14.95 a month a $10 annual guild dues or website subscription to belong in the coolest of the cool kids clubs will be an easy sell.

I'm pretty sure that if we already had 10,000 players I could trade company membership (we have support eighteen) for a primal ancient set in diablo 3 an hour after offering it.

Do you feel extorted when your gaming guild asks for donations to maintain the website? How about if they ask for 100 iron ingots to help Joe get past his armorsmith gate? What if they wanted to tax all of the citizens for settlement upkeep? No pay taxes, no live here. Is that extortion?
Well we are already extorting player behavior for membership, are we not?
Bringslite of Staalgard
Finally options other than WAR(not much fun yet and heavy handed), Shaking a pointer finger and declaring: "KOS!"(useless….)!

+10 Guys!

Edit: I forgot an end to the frustration of seeing a gang you dislike banking on your own turf.

Hmm, I was just thinking that being blacklisted by Settlement A means that Settlement A no longer serves any purpose for me, and thus no longer deserves to exist, and should be sieged.

I understand that control freaks want control and this definitely gives it, but I doubt this actually does anything to de-escalate conflicts, it will be just like the other ultimatums currently in use, except it requires a lot less effort from the issuer of this particular type of ultimatum. Blacklisting is the lazy man's ultimatum.
lol Midnight! You have never liked seeing ANY control for people over what they build and maintain for themselves. You feel like I am a control freak for wanting the option to say "No you can't train here". You might wait and see how it gets used (especially when taxes or fees come into play) and why it gets used.
Right now I can't think of anyone that I would put on a Blacklist… except maybe Duffy if we are still at war. ;P