Bob

Bringslite-Dominion Soldier
I can't speak for settlement leaders, especially as I am not really one myself, but what I imagine is that they all already know what the Paizo response will be.

"We would love to do that now. We are planning to do that in some fashion in the future. Right now we are on a tight and locked schedule that is absorbing more time than we have already."

Not sure whether to be happy or sad that I've become so predictable, but that's pretty dead on. It has admittedly been quite a while since we did anything along these lines, so hopefully we can find a time to do one sooner rather than later, but no promises at this point.

Giorgio
@BL,

Speaking of these forums not having the ability to send PMs, I would like to let you know that if I HAD THE CHANCE to directly PM each settlement leader about this topic and engage in an "off forum" conversation first, that would have been my first choice of action.

Then I could have made my case directly to the settlement leaders and gauged interest and participation numbers.

Not having that option, I had to resort to the general forums to try to catch the attention of 30 (or so) different settlement leaders.

Giorgio

Bringslite-Dominion Soldier
PM Bob or Lisa.

Wow BL, could you have tried a bit harder to insult me? I would have preferred a straight up "shut up and take your conversation private as I think its a waste a time and I don't want to read about it" instead of telling me to contact the developers privately.

I have had conversations with you directly so I seriously doubt you meant your comments that way, it but sure came across like that to me! (Before you edited the post and added a smiley face; still the first response was not exactly a friendly one)

1- I know how to contact the games developers besides the forums, and I have previously contact GW on this request; I don't publish their private response without prior permission.

2- I did my research before I posted this thread, and I did not see anyone in the last two years requesting a meeting or laying out a case of why one is necessary. I also recall participating in a few of these meetings to be of value, and I imagine so did GW as the did it more than once.

3- There is a reason I posted in the "General Public Forum" and not by a private communication.

4- There is also a reason that GW has not had an OC meeting in the last two years. There is also a complete lack of interest expressed by settlement leaders on the forums for another one. I disagree with that "I couldn't care less/its completely pointless" prevailing attitude.

5- I am not forcing you to read or participate in this thread; if you don't like it don't respond. If you feel that OC meetings are pointless, feel free to advocate for the Keepside Chats to be renewed, no one else seems to care about the lack of direct verbal communications with the game developers but me it seems. I also don't see anyone brining up the fact that Keepside Chats haven't been done since April of 2016, why is no one concerned about that or working to bring it back? For those players "screaming" that the OC is "elitest" and "pointless" why are they not advocating for a general public meeting instead?

Midnight

Bringslite-Dominion Soldier

Midnight

Bringslite-Dominion Soldier

You are a Troll
Maybe making every new account a DT account would give new players more incentive to stick it out? Getting to try different things on two different toons both earning XP would go a long way to keeping people long enough to get pulled into a settlement and more deeply connected.

0/ <— Gots my vote. Especially as an easy way to add value to a subscription and double the things that a player can really explore in a short period of time.

My guess is that new players will have to receive bargains that will make me and some other vets feel ripped off. I already feel ripped off for the $100 starting cost on each of my accounts after they allowed players to simply subscribe with no starting cost.

You believe that starting the entire game over after almost 3 years of progress might be a good idea but would feel ripped off if new players were to have an extra character earning xp?

That isn't an accurate portrayal of my view.

a) I already feel ripped off for the reason I listed: "box cost".

b) I didn't say starting over is a good idea, I am just skeptical that game consumers want to start behind as our serfs. It would be fairer to say that I feel the smart move would have been to never offer to let us keep xp into Open Release. However, such promises are a big part of why I (and many of us?) spent so much money.

c) a free DT is unlikely to be enough to lure people into starting years behind, thus my guess that they will have to offer enough OTHER bargains that it will make me feel ripped off, before they can acquire enough players to make the game sustainable.

d) since none of my accounts is a DT, should I get free DTs, too?

Midnight

Bringslite-Dominion Soldier

You are a Troll
Maybe making every new account a DT account would give new players more incentive to stick it out? Getting to try different things on two different toons both earning XP would go a long way to keeping people long enough to get pulled into a settlement and more deeply connected.

0/ <— Gots my vote. Especially as an easy way to add value to a subscription and double the things that a player can really explore in a short period of time.

My guess is that new players will have to receive bargains that will make me and some other vets feel ripped off. I already feel ripped off for the $100 starting cost on each of my accounts after they allowed players to simply subscribe with no starting cost.

Bob

Bringslite-Dominion Soldier
I thought that Freehold husks had "owner access only" funki majic?

The husk is marked as belonging to the owner of the Freehold, but as with other husks, that just means the owner is the only one who can take everything out of the husk quickly. Everyone else has to run a short gathering animation and can only grab 5 encumbrance worth of items (1 item minimum) from a single stack each time.