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

Influence gains are based on achievements I believe. That is fine in theory but the fact that a new player gains numerous achievements quickly is not at all balanced for running a settlement, since older characters need to be a lot more active to gain the same influence.
I honestly think the whole influence system needs to be reworked cause it is just not at all balanced and is a very inaccurate measurement of character activity.
I have a couple characters who have Expert 10 in their main weapon as well as Bandit slayer 10 (and wolf 10). They also have Midden Digger 10. So if I run gushers in normal hexes full of Bandits for something like wool or other stuff from scavenger nodes because settlement buildings need a ton of T1 mats, then I gain a tiny amount of influence compared to a new character grabbing a club and bashing 25 goblins near thornkeep.
It just isn't working at all, IMO.
Yeah. You do run out of gain until you branch out. Then you can get a little more progress. Like working a different weapon up the Expert rankings. Trying for a mob type that I haven't maxed yet. Etc… Used to do it all the time.
I'm all for new activities generating Influence, like crafting etc… However, keep an eye on how easy it is to do that generating or a "New Influence Tax" will not do any good for Holding Hog Control.
Harad Navar
"River Kingdoms" might work except there are no "kings".
Eheheehhehe Short on rivers too smile
River Kingdoms Adventures
I am mostly referring to what the actual long term players have been saying needs fixing. Not the ones that pop in as "try-outs". Do listen closely to their comments.

My point is that, as players, we have asked for many things over the years and Paizo has given some of them to us as well as proceeding with what they think needs done in what order they can. None of these things have been able to pull the new player and "retained" player base up.

Again part of that is probably because the world doesn't know about all these neat things that have been added. I forget more than 1/2 of them myself. Flip-side: No one that tries the game stays around long enough to notice all the "nuances".

If Paizo's main goal(above all others) is to increase that pop level immediately, well, neither what they have been doing (whether player driven ideas or Paizo driven plan) has been working too great. So that kinda shows that some of our "Old Timer" advice ain't worth spit. I didn't say ALL, just what Paizo has been able to work into the game over the years.

If Paizo's main plan is to hover at idle pop lvls and SLOWLY improve the game until a critical "perfect game" is achieved then I can understand.

So in short, yeah listen to new try-ee feedback for what it is worth. Take what we "Old Timers" seriously advise as critical change with a grain of salt.
Actually thinking…. do Y'all really want all skills easily accessible to all classes. Don't you want certain roles to have unique things about them?

It is well pointed out that Wizard spell/skills and potions already give that stuff to players.

Maybe it really is the same old issue that the world is underpopulated so we all have gotten used to having to travel far to get things done and maintain things.
I think one of the Things that NEEDS to be done, if the game resets is a name change, no exception.
The name of the game CAN NOT and SHOULD NOT reference the Pathfinder system, it causes an expectation that the game is using the Pathfinder RPG System and it turns folks off after they enter the game and see the Truth/Lie that this is NOT Pathfinder, but fantasy Eve.
Would, I feel also, be a good move if they could rename/rebrand the game with a similar powerful IP distinction instead. Pathfinder Online(as the title) is probably doing more harm than good at this point. smile
Paddy Fitzpatrick
Or maybe it is inaccurate to state that as there has never been a sufficient incoming group sticking around long enough to try and build a settlement from nothing.


Come now Brings surely you haven't forgotten about how we built up Dun Baille did you?

It was an extreme pain in the ass, settlement maintenance was like a second job we didn't ask for and there was no way we would have even captured the settlement without our allies much less built any of the structures. The only exception to that was many years ago when I got two fully made large structures out of one alliance where I pretended there was a bidding war when said bidding war never existed lol.

Of course I don't think most groups would do what I did and scam another alliance like that (which goes to show you that even as a settlement owner there are still ways to do banditry), but even then it cost more to maintain and set up all that.

If that was the difficulty level for my guild that DID have help, I guarantee you that a group coming in all by themselves will have an extremely low chance of pulling it off. That group will most likely just leave and the settlement will die and be open to a settlement collector once more.
I only point out that the spot was already there. Forgive my exaggerating my case in point if it slights you. Not sure if there were lots of "free" buildings with it or not. Forgive me if it was bare bones empty lots. No intention of slighting your guys' personal achievement therein. smile

PS: "Brings isn't here right now Mrs Torrance."
The REAL TRUTH is that no one, myself or anyone else can for sure predict exactly what a bunch of hypothetical new players will really want. Probably does have much to do with the type of game. Some want a level playfield. Some want(or do not mind) starting with experienced players of all various power lvls.

Edam brings up a good point that once done, a precedent of "resetting" the field could be dangerous.

What players probably want is an "eye-candy" rich game.
They want mentally stimulating experiences that are well balanced and have a nice tangible effort to reward progression ratio.
They want good QoL functions like banking, UI, easy use manual instructions and inter-player communication.
They want exciting combat that feels impactful and has few bugs.
Many want unrestricted PVP.
Many want PVP that is somewhat manageable on their terms.
Many want top notch crafting, trading, economy.
Of course, I could go on and end with: Most also want a side of fries.
There is some or at least a shadow of some of that stuff. Much is lacking still.

Bob has made it clear repeatedly that what I would like to see are things that are not really in the realm of being considered as "seriously doable" at this point and will not be for some indefinate long time. I have to respect and accept that. No matter how sad it is, from my perspective. Bob and or a Paizo collaboration set the tone-subject-direction of game-work projects and (with some caveats) seems pretty firm in what direction that stuff is going to go in, how and when. That is their call.

With the MMORPG choices at hand now, this makes the gamer soul sad… smile

Much that we have clamored for has been addressed as the years have passed. Can't say that nothing has been done on/for the game. CAN say that what we have asked for COMBINED with what Paizo HAS DONE have not shown stellar results to date. Not if the goal has been to increase and keep a healthy numerous player base.

So what do I know that will "work"? Not as much as I think.
It all really comes down to population. Nothing can work right, nothing can even really be examined to see if it works without players to muck it around.

i.e. In the case of PVP where the wolves usually chase off all the sheep(fate of most open world PVP games) we didn't ever have enough sheep to attract wolves OR enough wolves to chase off the sheep, except for a very limited time span during the War of Towers, possibly(debatable).

Honestly, the systems and the mechanics, the checks and balances, the nuances are pretty ingenious. There just isn't a pop to allow them to shine.

I won't argue against an "Influence Tax" anymore but I also have doubts that such high level mechanics are the roots of the real issues with player retention.