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
Edam
It is actually a concern that "no influence cap", whilst designed to allow newer groups to get a foothold, will actually allow very large but relatively inactive groups to spam +0 holdings across the entire map using threat of bringing back currently inactive players as a stick to stop people contesting them.

Influence will be made relevant again, including the mechanics that make influence less and less efficient to work with the larger your company is. We don't intend to have influence be as unlimited as we're making it in EE 12 for very long.
See that really is disturbing. How many times a year are we expected to redesign and rebuild our Holding networks?
"I buy Azoth for 5sp/ea. I will trade Enchanting or other rare materials/anything for Azoth. Contact me if interested. GET YOUR COIN EASY!"
uotopia@msn.com
Flari-Merchant
@ Midnight

You do see that any group with a large territory perimeter will almost always have more "unprotected" hexes than a group with a smaller territorial perimeter, right?

You do grasp that even if some guys you don't like have hexes that are "protected" you can feud them any and every day including any hour of the week that you like with a minimal Influence cost?

Now, do you think it is an unequal balance between small time, single settlement "groups" vs alliance blobs just because the smaller groups won't try and ally with other small groups near them? That is their choice right?
"I buy Azoth for 5sp/ea. I will trade Enchanting or other rare materials/anything for Azoth. Contact me if interested. GET YOUR COIN EASY!"
uotopia@msn.com
Flari-Merchant
Midnight
Decius
Midnight
MidniteArrow
A large group will *always* be able to have a defended home with a projected force.

Automated defenses are necessary at current scale to prevent chaos. Although, I do think "months" is way too long for automated defenses to hold out.

Turning off a PvP window for a hex goes far beyond anything I'd term "automated defenses".

If we can't handle PvP at the current scale, turn off ALL PvP windows for everyone. Giving blobs a mechanical defensive advantage so they have more free time to offensively terrorize their enemies can't end well.

The PvP window is not the time when terrorizing can happen. The PvP window is when outposts can. E raided or overrun and Holdings captured.

Protected hexes are not immune to PvP. They are immune from outposts being overrun or Holdings being caputured (and maybe raids?).

The boring job of capturing lots of holdings in a row to overcome settlement defenses is something that only people willing to put in the work to acquire and run a settlement, or participate in the top levels of competitive building, will try.

Measuring the accomplishment of builders on timescales of weeks or months is appropriate. Once the long-term game is implemented, people who enjoy the long game can start to play it.

The short game is still there. Banditry will be possible, feuds will trump security level even in places where it shouldn't, and fighting people for escalation bosses will be free.

Less time on defense means more time available for offense. Less time required for defense locally means more time available to exert power globally. When the largest groups get it (on top of their existing advantages) and the smallest groups don't, how can that end well for anyone but the blob?
What do you mean "the smaller groups don't get it"? Everyone gets protected hexes. Everyone gets to check for feuds and only have to worry about Holding takedowns 3 days a week with a 1hr? or more notice. What don't "smaller than blob groups" get?
"I buy Azoth for 5sp/ea. I will trade Enchanting or other rare materials/anything for Azoth. Contact me if interested. GET YOUR COIN EASY!"
uotopia@msn.com
Flari-Merchant
Why not limit the number of hexes a settlement can control(maybe by level) in order to curb "Blob"… imbalances. That might also help keep settlements from raising and lowering their support levels all the time to min/max every piece of Bulk.
"I buy Azoth for 5sp/ea. I will trade Enchanting or other rare materials/anything for Azoth. Contact me if interested. GET YOUR COIN EASY!"
uotopia@msn.com
Flari-Merchant
Nothing works really well in a game where single 1000xp alts are the complete roster of a settlement, a BIG group is 12 players and the total server pop is less than what one settlement really needs to function well if all the buttons were set to "on". These changes are for larger player bases. Either the detractors or GW will be right about them and maybe even BOTH will be right and wrong.

I would have shot much more toward more PVE content and definitely UI improvement, but I don't have a driver's seat on this wagon. smile

We don't have details yet about raiding(even if it takes a feud), but since it is not a capture-takeaway mechanic, maybe even "protected hexes" will have to watch for them. Feuds make you vulnerable in ANY HEX, according to my understanding. You just can't take and burn structures in "protected hexes".

IMO, no matter what the territory capture rules end up being, with another several hundred active players in this game right now escalations would be like 1 day limited time opportunities at the very best. Probably more like 8hr. If you are not quick they will be gone. Whether I have to trot there or sprint. Once ammo is in, magic sprinting is going to be unaffordable. Let's not make the game "unfun" by nerfing regular sprinting.
"I buy Azoth for 5sp/ea. I will trade Enchanting or other rare materials/anything for Azoth. Contact me if interested. GET YOUR COIN EASY!"
uotopia@msn.com
Flari-Merchant
Fiery
You don't need to be a "blob" to steal escalations or strip resources (anyone at all can strip a he with the requisite skill). Even a group with considerably less activity and size can choose to be belligerent, and now they can have a 6+ week buffer before they need to deal with an attack. Although there are some settlements that have fewer geographic weaknesses, and thus scale better with more holdings and allies, many settlements have inherent geographic weaknesses that leave a path to taking a settlement's core six, and that path doesn't scale with holding spread.

To me it looks like GW is aiming for:
Lots more fighting in T3 hexes over resources and escalations. They want that.
Lots more fighting around holdings through raids.
Lots more options and areas that non PVP players can feel relatively safe outside of Feuds and maybe still.. factions. Despite any protected hex, there are Feuds which trump all such safety measures.

Yeah actual war is going to be slowed down to snail like progress, but there are still as many or more ways for lesser forms of PVP coming. These changes are better for both sides of the fence, IMO.
"I buy Azoth for 5sp/ea. I will trade Enchanting or other rare materials/anything for Azoth. Contact me if interested. GET YOUR COIN EASY!"
uotopia@msn.com
Flari-Merchant
Midnight
If I don't have to defend, I can project power globally.

While the 3 day PvP window is ostensibly meant to allow folks a respite from structure defense, large active groups can use that respite to project power globally, like "stealing" far flung escalations, and strip mining far flung territory or even banditry.

Hex immunity, and the slow pace of any possible sieges, grant safety for far flung adventurism even DURING my PvP window.
I can already project power globally if I want to. I can do it with 3-6 players in any escalation that I like. Sure if I am a blob with 500 members, I can do it ALL OVER the map, anytime.

How would you limit a blob from being able to do that? Even with the systems currently active, it happens all the time.
"I buy Azoth for 5sp/ea. I will trade Enchanting or other rare materials/anything for Azoth. Contact me if interested. GET YOUR COIN EASY!"
uotopia@msn.com
Flari-Merchant
Midnight
Bringslite of Staalgard
Blobs again? One blob force limitation is that the larger they grow (size wise) the more territory they need to defend. Another is that your enemies don't really die. They just get more numerous as you evict them and as your borders push outward, these old enemies add to the force of new places that you threaten. At least these things Could become meaningful limiters.

If your recruitment level does not keep pace with your expansion policies… well you eventually find yourself as the "shrinking violet" on the map. At the very least you find youself hitting a "wall".

If you do recruit well and fight well at your expanding borders, why should you be unnecessarily artificially hampered much beyond limits that all share?

Fighting anywhere across the map with no regard to defense (because you have hex immunity) is what I talked about. How did that become fighting well at your expanding border?
Only that when your border expands, your number of unprotected hexes also grows.

Edit: I don't disagree with you that warfare is heading towards WWI European theater style trench war.
"I buy Azoth for 5sp/ea. I will trade Enchanting or other rare materials/anything for Azoth. Contact me if interested. GET YOUR COIN EASY!"
uotopia@msn.com
Flari-Merchant
Sure, groups with more bodies willing to PVP should be better at keeping or gaining territory. I don't think that my problem with concerns about "Blobs" denies that. That is mostly what you mean about Effort, isn't it? That those willing to PVP and having superior force through skill and/or numbers should have an advantage in war?

You do know that I am not real confident about the influence mechanic. The only real things that I do like about it are that it forces groups to do other ingame activities to get and maintain the ability to make war and currently there is a risk to aggressors to lose some ability to make war if they are successfully defended against. Both are still pitiful(cost wise) but they are pretty much the only redeeming qualities the way influence is set up and run.
"I buy Azoth for 5sp/ea. I will trade Enchanting or other rare materials/anything for Azoth. Contact me if interested. GET YOUR COIN EASY!"
uotopia@msn.com
Flari-Merchant
Blobs again? One blob force limitation is that the larger they grow (size wise) the more territory they need to defend. Another is that your enemies don't really die. They just get more numerous as you evict them and as your borders push outward, these old enemies add to the force of new places that you threaten. At least these things Could become meaningful limiters.

If your recruitment level does not keep pace with your expansion policies… well you eventually find yourself as the "shrinking violet" on the map. At the very least you find youself hitting a "wall".

If you do recruit well and fight well at your expanding borders, why should you be unnecessarily artificially hampered much beyond limits that all share?
"I buy Azoth for 5sp/ea. I will trade Enchanting or other rare materials/anything for Azoth. Contact me if interested. GET YOUR COIN EASY!"
uotopia@msn.com