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
Bob
The game was always designed to reward the ability to bring superior numbers/training/gear to the battlefield, though of course we'd like superior tactics to matter as well. We haven't focused as much attention on more interesting tactics yet as we have on a deep training and equipping system, so I'd agree that numbers/resources currently play into that balance more than we'd ultimately like them to. That said, it's clear that tactics, both in terms of battlefield maneuvers and the ability to combine feats to greatest effect as individuals and groups, do make at least some difference in achieving victory. We can do better on that front, but at some point superior numbers/resources will always win the day eventually, at least until they're too overextended to exert that force consistently on multiple fronts. Of course, there's also more work we need to do on making it advantageous to tightly control small amounts of territory (so that falling back to what you can better handle is a good strategy) and disadvantageous to loosely control large amounts of territory (so that overextending is clearly a bad idea). DI is a step in that direction, since its generation formula is biased heavily toward the first few hexes a settlement owns, and we'll keep expanding on that principle as we go.

I think that development of some kind that allow actual battle tactics to have more weight would be a great improvement for Holding conflict. Maybe if they had more obvious impact, more would stand their ground and try them out rather than abandoning if they see they are badly outnumbered (which honestly does not require a very large numbers differential to be powerful). Glad to hear that you are considering such things. smile

In the case that is described above, I have to say that I admire that "the other side" did not give up and really did give it a valiant try. No reason for bad feelings there. At the same time I give Fiery kudos for his tactics and do not begrudge him for his pride. We all want to be tactically great thinkers, but it was the right tactic at the right time, whomever commanded it. He deserves to feel proud of it.
Flari-Merchant
@ Bob

Can a group attack guards at a holding pre-window and reduce the number that will spawn throughout the window?
Flari-Merchant
Flari-Merchant
I am not sure that you two are talking about the same battle here Paddy. From the very start of the battle that Fiery is talking about, we had a total of 6 dedicated to the guards and in close to the holding. Sure we would aid the PVP outside of the holding while the guards were down or were covered by 3 or 4 of us.

I know that you guys were outnumbered and it felt like your gear was not all T3, but it happened at the +4 holding pretty much how Fiery describes it. At least that is my memory of it.

The tactics were to mass burn the guards down then stay close to handle as they spawned. It was a massacre because A. You were late. B. You were heavily outnumbered. The tactical initiative was taken away too fast for you to have a chance to recover or do much. Otherwise would have been a much longer battle.

I do remember something like what you describe now though that some small part of our group was down there before the window testing the guards out. Not sure if that was significant or not as the window has its own set of guards and counter for them. Probably they were trying out the tactics that you describe seeing. You are describing Pre-Window activities and Fiery is describing Window time activities.
Flari-Merchant
I am not sure that you two are talking about the same battle here Paddy. From the very start of the battle that Fiery is talking about, we had a total of 6 dedicated to the guards and in close to the holding. Sure we would aid the PVP outside of the holding while the guards were down or were covered by 3 or 4 of us.

I know that you guys were outnumbered and it felt like your gear was not all T3, but it happened at the +4 holding pretty much how Fiery describes it. At least that is my memory of it.

The tactics were to mass burn the guards down then stay close to handle as they spawned. It was a massacre because A. You were late. B. You were heavily outnumbered. The tactical initiative was taken away too fast for you to have a chance to recover or do much. Otherwise would have been a much longer battle.
Flari-Merchant
Lisa Stevens
Smitty
@ Lisa
As to how to make holding warfare more interesting …

First it sucks to declare a feud- go on a raid - and find nothing but that days resources in a vault.. ( not taking it over just raiding..).. How about we put perception to use? Give people a hint of what they can find in a vault based on skill -
spending 30 minutes raiding something- to gain little to nothing- is the worse -
So at the bare minimum- give people a way to see what holdings are worth raiding { even if its not 100% accurate .. its better than blind guessing )
Next
Fix the Loot- make more than just bulk appear in the chest .. , with the advent of ammo I know I have to keep stuff all over the place now .. why not loose stuff from all vaults when a hex is raided?
Finally
It makes little sense for a vault to remain attached to a character/company even after a hex is taken over.. the victors should get all stuff out of all vaults- once a hex is over run..

These are all ideas to make holding PVP more rewarding. What I am really interested in is making it more interesting to actually do the raid! Sitting in a holding watching a timer is about as boring of a task in an MMO that I can think of doing. I actually prefer running around the map to holding PVP. Now, if somebody shows up it gets more interesting.

But I am interested if anybody can suggest mechanics that would make the actual act of taking over a holding more interesting than it is. The bar is low, but I have yet to come up with a better idea so I am all ears!

-Lisa
Well the base problem is that players do not value holdings as much as they value T3 gear. So it doesn't really feel worth it to defend (when badly outnumbered) compared to the cost of the Holding. That may change as Bulk becomes more and more important.

There are possibilities but they really are dependent on combatants being there. The walls around developed Watch Towers, the raised platforms at developed Barracks for instance should all be able to be utilized. The whole thing should work to where the defenders actually have advantage unless grossly outnumbered. That will encourage defenders to be there more often.

Not much room for improvements otherwise unless the whole system where different.
Flari-Merchant
Good enough answer for me. smile The only thing is I would prefer that they leave it until they can do it fast, unless it is a pretty trivial matter to set up, I would rather see time spent on something that might broaden interest in the day to day game first.
Flari-Merchant
As I hope I have made clear, I am not really opposed to having costs on security/no security. I do want to make sure that it is equal, fair and balanced. I do still see it making or having very little impact on any large group and instead really screwing smaller groups.

So lets say that it does open up, or revert some hexes back to "default" Med Sec. You know that you still won't be able to attack players in those hexes penalty free without a 1 hour feud declaration, right? That has always, in the past, been too steep a penalty. What has changed? So what will have been gained that is beneficial to anyone?

Edited: for clearer meaning
Flari-Merchant
Paddy Fitzpatrick
Bringslite
Hmm…. Didn't think that rated a removal but I'll roll with it and try again.

What is the end state that would be the game and PVP scene which would satisfy the most PVP hungry of any of you out there? Back to "Before Sec" with rep penalties? Just wide open PVP with no restrictions?

And lastly, since I am too weary of this to re-ask all of my unanswered questions: Why do you think that the state before Sec Hexes would be any different/better for you than it was back then?

Half of these questions you keep asking arent relevant because there isn't anyone advocating for going back to before sec, or unrestricted PvP, or removing all limits.

I dont see why you keep asking them.
How about, what will happen if you get your wish? Time and effort is spent to put costs on security settings. Those settings get paid or they get reverted to Med Sec. You still can't find anyone cause there is no one there?
or
It gets left alone. The population grows and there are 10x the players roaming around than there are now. Builder Groups get to have Security in their areas they can hold. More aggressive groups get to have PVP penalty free in all areas they can hold. No time and effort gets spent on what is really a low pop problem?
Flari-Merchant
If they could get a few "Factions" going (just even something primitive) I think it would be neat for a certain faction rank to grant "ignore security level" for "x rounds or seconds"
Flari-Merchant
Paddy Fitzpatrick
Fiery wind
Trade secrets smile

Translation: Nothing smile
"pssst - the secrets are in The Kama Sutra. You just have to read it upside down…"