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

Go go Giorgio! smile
Hobson Fiffledown
I think we're all OK with LoS and are moving on. We're just railing at this point, no de needed. smile
Hobson Fiffledown
What if a PvP death sent you back to your home settlement? smile

Our original design thoughts for this were along the lines of steadily increasing your respawn delay each time you died in relatively quick succession, or increasing the respawn delay at a particular shrine whenever it's getting used heavily. It could also be possible to then select a further away shrine to avoid the delay, allowing you to get back to playing but making it take even longer to get back to the battlefield, so it would mostly be an option for those who've decided to quit the battlefield for the moment.

None of that is on the roadmap at this point, though there's a good chance that we'll at least take a quick look at the way characters log in and use shrines as part of the polish phase, since they're related and do cause some problems, particularly while new users get used to how that all works.
As you can see Bob, we are passionate about getting PVP to be more enjoyable than it has been. It seems obvious that some of us WANT to PVP. We just find it lacking and cumbersome and clunky and too drawn out for fun small battles so far. We know that you are stuck with what you have for now and have pretty small amounts of unplanned time for things, but we will probably still flare up on the subject here and there. smile
You couldn't stop a group's making deals with your "supposed allies" for a closer place to respawn without even more enthusiasm numbing "no no rules" anyway. Also something could possibly be said for… if you are feuding me you can't respawn at a shrine in my or a true ally's controlled territory.

There may be some answers there and possibly even more depth to the political and surprise hex takeover game. "Why do you think they took that hex? It doesn't make sense!" or does it?

Edit: Even a solution as simple as players can only repawn at a shrine once in a certain period of time. Next time Zog chooses the next closest shrine for You!
Duffy Swiftshadow
Today's alliance breakdowns don't reflect the reality when War of the Towers was going on very much. Additionally UC never had special protections, they just made deals with everyone. Hell, the League attacked some of their holdings after some members' transgressions. I think the reason none of the Kathapalas guys are getting anything is because during WoT their settlements just didn't end up participating in the game much at all at that point.
I have never felt that UC had a "marker" of any protection on them at all. They simply were not on the radar for any Free Highlander conflict. If they were very naughty(or some were) it didn't come to our attention… but we were pretty busy at times already. I think what is now Mediash attacked OV on the 1st or 2nd day of WoT. Might have been 2nd week, but that was long ago and aged memory.

Certainly is fun to think back that far about the history of the server, smile
Hobson Fiffledown
Just rip the bandaid off and send 'em all the way home, Bob. smile

You guys posted a road map and are delivering it in a timely manner. That's fine progress as far as I'm concerned. However, the in-game response and critique of field combat being a boring slog of gear-wear has been pretty unanimous. I know the forum crowd doesn't rep the player en masse, but I don't think I've ever seen any positive reviews of PFO field combat (ever. Ever. since day 1 EE, from any current or unsubbed player). That affects player retention as well as new player interest (for those who do research before subbing). I do hope you look into this if time allows. It would be nice to get back online to the "hard is fun" and "choices matter" ideals.

-Would be nice to fear "death" a little bit and for there to be consequences to it that really matter.
-Would go both ways for fighting on the "borderlands" of territories.
-Would give groups a "defender's advantage" the closer the enemy gets to the settlement, which helps curb "Aggressive Blob" problems for smaller land holding groups.
-Though I know the intent is to make PfO very different than most MMO's of the past, this is not an uncommon PVP feature and PfO is already very different. It might be comforting to have a few "old school" recognizable mechanics as well as new concepts.

Edit: Thread Derailed smile
I fully agree with you guys on porting back to town when nixed in PVP conflict(killed by an enemy player).

Two things:

1. Bob has written about such possibilities and, though I don't know how far they have looked into it actually, he said that it seemed it would be a pretty complex bit of coding. <–If I recall his thoughts correctly.

2. If it can be done, it might be more interesting were players able to build temp(but destructible) shrines in available places more near to battles. Do you remember all of the "Twice Blessed" KS packages? Some early thoughts were that those powers would allow for player built shrines… Back to home base for a starter iteration would be great.

As an aside: I still think that actual desirable loot (sometimes called gear) should also drop. At least some and not necessarily all but at least to give impetus toward rewarding PVP at all levels. I truly believe that such things would improve the "capture for subscription percentage" of the "Tens of Thousands" by more than just a little bit.
Kenton Stone
I was unable to heal or place any buffs that targeted myself. I pressed F1 and every self affecting feat greyed out. It just kept saying no line of sight to target.

Well duh, you can't fully see yourself, so this is perfectly logical. Still, I suppose we could make this work if being able to heal yourself is really that important.
lol… smile
Every single alliance listed is a differently composed entity now than it was then. That shows what time and politics and behavioral effects have on the game. If BHA(or EBA or whatever) were still made up as it was then, they would be the Grand special kit winners at this time.

But they aren't. In contrast, The Dominion is now made up of 2 formerly separate alliances that were active then. Each settlement that won kits has been expecting to get the just reward that they earned as promised many times. Going back from that promise would be bad mojo.
Bringslite-Dominion Soldier
I was in TS the other eve with 2 players working on a gusher. "Player A" found it but was logging soon. "Player A" started it and they were in a party, allied but of diff settlements. "Player B" found that he lost rep every time that he pulled from the container.

Is this an intended result?

I had thought being in the owner's party would protect you from rep hits, but perhaps not. Was Player A still logged in when Player B took the rep hits. If not, then the problem is just that Player B isn't technically in the same party as Player A anymore, Player A not being in any party at all. To protect the party beyond logging out, we'd have to do something a bit more complicated like remember a list of multiple owners. If Player A was still logged in, then clearly that aspect needs some more testing/fixing.
I want to say yes both logged in, which is why it seemed odd, but had better let one of them confirm.