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

Flari-Merchant
Edam
Bringslite of Staalgard
LoneWolf
Dungeons
IMO, dungeons could be accomplished with a Hex in "space". That is a hex not part of the regular map that is accessed via some of the teleport mechanics that we have for /stuck and other GM commands.

That might work providing they are not "instances" generated on the fly for a particular group and are instead part of the single shard world and available to everyone else to enter if they find the way into them. Though entrances like hidden/locked stairs under the Spire leading down are far more elegant.

Instancing with people able to zip off to their own seperate quest space that no one else can enter would go right against the basic design tenants of a single shard sandbox world.
Of course they should be available to all that can know about the entrance. How that would work, I would leave to GW.

Thinking about dungeons and our communal belief that they would really jazz up the game for all of us…. What exactly is it about dungeons that we think they would be different or so much better than escalations? What are we expecting from "dungeons"? I really am curious…
Flari-Merchant
LoneWolf
Dungeons
IMO, dungeons could be accomplished with a Hex in "space". That is a hex not part of the regular map that is accessed via some of the teleport mechanics that we have for /stuck and other GM commands.

The largest obstacle that I see to it is LoS and "solid" objects are lacking. Pretty weird to kill NPCs or players while they are separated by solid walls or sides of ravines.
Flari-Merchant
The Ravings of the Insane: TDLR(or whatever): Fix the feuding system and the influence system. Don't just continue to bury them.

The original beef was that there was no way to stop aggressors, cause them to have to break up constant feud chains, defeat them so that they could not feud you for some time period. No way to get a break. This caused PVP fatigue. This caused some loss of interest in the game.

Then it became clear that there was no tangible realistic benefit either materially or strategically to taking Holdings from your enemy. In fact there was no tangible benefit involved in defending your holdings. People stopped showing up to defend and the whole operation became a clock watching festival. Now you have further loss of interest and more dropped accounts.

These two problems together, 1. no way to mitigate implacable, unending, nightly chained PVP aggression with 2. no way to utterly crush your enemy and win, leave us where we are right now. For #1 there is possibly capitulation and/or politics but they only become worthy of consideration if there is something at stake that is worth saving by gaining peace. No one feels like Holdings alone are worth losing face by basically surrendering(call it Gamer Hubris). For #2, no solution until GW's proposal now. Let's look at it and see if it really solves issue #2.

Theoretical: By besieging your enemy's settlement until his Bulk resources are depleted and further until all of his buildings are ground to powder you take away his power base. He is wrecked for some time.
But is this true?
I would venture that it is NOT TRUE. I and my mates still have our skills. We still have our companies and all of their influence. As soon as we find a new home(temporary or permanent) we are back in the game. We have been inconvenienced, to be sure, but we can't die and we have universal support. That is a fact of MMO's and they would be far less fun if most of this were not true.

If GW is going to push this mechanic forward simply to put another piece into the puzzle of it's major promised features, that is understandable. The features do need to be put into place eventually. They need to be looked at, working together, to see what needs tweaking and how they all fit together to make a great game. If they are doing it to make PVP more palatable, fun, satisfying in the short run… this will not do that, IMHO. It leaves large gaps in the essential problems of the Feud System, The Influence System, The unrewarding PVP System in general totally buried and festering.

I urge GW to not make the mistakes of so many other Developers. Do not pile new features on top of features that cause frustration and even apathy(about using them) just to say you have Done Something. I do not speak for all, but I would prefer a focus on what is bad cake. Despite it taking longer, fixing the cake is better than more layers of frosting.
Flari-Merchant
Bob
Jumppuppy
Question, how will this affect the universal standing? Will it be removed so the city managers can ban [deny] certain companies or individuals from utilizing their facilities/trainers [make them hostile to the guard force]? Also, you can only train and/or produce products in your home city or those you are friendly to?

This is very high on our list of things to work on, but will be pretty complicated. Settlement warfare certainly adds the potential to make this more aggravating, but we'll have to focus any solutions on just the specific aspects added by settlement warfare, like the building of Siege Engines and Camps.
Maybe if we had some idea why it is so complicated, explained in as layman a way as you can, we could understand Mo'Better. To us it looks like a move of some part of code from Holding trainers to Settlement trainers…
-or-
A setting for Settlement guards to aggress all red (non settlement) characters.
Flari-Merchant
Thanks for the feedback on feedback, Bob. smile
Looking forward to see what you come up with that mitigates some of our concerns.
Flari-Merchant
In any case, something so radically altering the status quo as this might do, has been the final blow to many an MMO. There are plenty of examples of drastic changes like this going bad. Very much appreciate that you are open to feedback on this idea.
Also consider this:
-This is another mechanic for settlement level play rather than a mechanic for everyday player experience improvement.
-If it were to become reality and utilized very much(which I have my doubts about), it will be pushing more PVP combat level play on a current player base that really does not like such PVP, in general. That would probably be a bad choice right now.
-I may be very wrong, but I do not think that you can get this done in a way that offers immediate rewards to those that use it. Unless that can be done at the same time or VERY SOON after implementation, it probably will not be much used at all.
So(and I could be wrong about this because… no specifics yet) this is really a new feature that could force PVP on players that want little of it, does almost nothing to improve individual play, and is not rewarding so will be used little if at all. Reads like a recipe to be either a waste of valuable time or a disaster or both.

* Get ammunition in or fix ranged attacks that cause stationary BS.
* Introduce ways for smaller groups to homestead. <–Get them invested in territory and "ownership"
* Line of sight. Let's have some. smile
* Gushers
* New recipes that offer variations on gear stats when using say… Blended Iron Blanks instead of Dwarven Steel blanks <—single example. Make them SUPER RARE though.
* Mule drawn carts and "mule spawn doors" on holdings.
* Make sure that all feats are working as intended.
* Throw some damn convenience things into the game store.
–Name change
–Exp respec
–Extra character slots that can earn xp
–Goblin mule skins, otherwise known as "Goblin Porters" <–Credit for this to Glinder She was first to suggest it to me or within my hearing range. smile
–Race change
* Make tools for GM devised adventures like "undeciphered treasure maps" or NPC job offers or even clues to find "outside the map hexes" that are "Dungeons" <–hexes that are not part of the map but can be entered at certain temporary locations.
* How about(rather than Settlement take overs) make "raiding" possible. Invert the 25% loss from character death to 25% lootable from captured holdings. You capture a holding and you have the option to either loot or destroy but not both.
Flari-Merchant
Well ok guys, if this is not the right time for a such a feature, what is it the right time for? Please do not answer with "nothing" or "waiting longer". There are enough players still active to make fixing and adding things important. No game was built in a single patch…
Flari-Merchant
My first impressions are that GW is shooting for something a bit more abstract to start with rather than something that requires a lot of new art and code writing. Things like the guard tower and barracks holding models. As things are, we can carry a large Cathedral in our pocket and flop it down just like that.

What I am most excited about is that this shows me that GW can make and add new recipes and items to the game with a little bit of effort. Also that maybe they are done with NOT DOING THINGS to improve the game because they are concerned potential investors will not like the changes.
Flari-Merchant
Here's the thing. We did ask for ways to resolve conflict. Ways in which we could make a difference in an enemy's ability to war on us. This proposal is one way in which that could be made to happen. Looks like much of it would be manual GM work, so I appreciate that part the most.
-First though, we need controls over who can and can't use facilities(banking training, resting, etc…smile in our settlements. Fighting off aggressors and wining, losing, getting owned is all part of PVP and can be stomached. I am not sure whether GW appreciates how infuriating and demoralizing and all around annoying(NOT IN A CUTE WAY) it is to watch enemies banking and training and recouping power right there in the city you have built. If GW does realize this, I have to believe it would have been "fixed" long ago.
-Second, you need a way to control when/if we can deposit bulk resources in our Settlement Upkeep Vaults(for siege purposes. As expensive as full sieges look like they will be, it will not be dangerous to move bulk into the besieged vault. Meaning that it isn't as if most attackers could throw up multiple sieges, making lowering any other stockpile not really dangerous.
-Third, motivations for crushing and evicting(completely) any enemy from their settlement is really an uncommon goal. It will be very expensive and time intensive. Sure, if this gets in, there will be a few ASAP just to try things out. Until/without more supporting features, all of your work will wind up being unutilized.<—Speculation
-Fourth, at this stage of the game's development, it looks pretty unrewarding for the overall cost and effort that is implied. Without some kind of loot possible, all it will be is another avenue of PVP without any gain. At least for the foreseeable future.

Any ideas?:
How will you control us from just throwing more bulk into the vault when we are besieged?
Will evicted players(from their settlement) have ways, other than joining a new settlement or taking a new one away, to get new "digs"?
Will these evicted characters be able to compete to do any of this when they have NO settlement and they fall to lvl 8?
Flari-Merchant
Excellent and Thanks Lisa! It is mostly overlooked that, though you are in charge, this MMO CEO gig isn't your playing field typically. Sorry about that. smile