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
Losing an inhabited AND defended settlement hasn't really happened yet. It probably will happen eventually if there are some more bodies around to handle the massive logistics involved. Pretty sure that everyone is aware of that.

Not too many are aware of how much work and material goes into building one up from scratch… except for EVERY SINGLE ALLIANCE of more than one settlement currently on the map now. Every group has taken over abandoned settlements and most have done some work on getting them up to more than a bank, a tavern and a large parking lot. If you haven't yet seen to that, even with the FREE buildings given by GW, then maybe yeah…. you have a hard time understanding how those people would not want to have their settlements any more minimally defendable than any others.

Yes settlements will likely get sieged and lost eventually. Yeah, alliances allow for allies to have options to move to other settlements. No, not everyone will be ok with having to do so if the reason is an unequal mechanic.
"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
@ Bob

On the wiki, is it an error that mine holdings get a bonus of stone and quarries get a bonus of iron? Seems the only two that are out of sync.

Edit: Opps! Also nice to see those come in and the upgraded skins too! Bravo Cole!
"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
Duffy Swiftshadow
I am fairly pumped over this one, can finally flesh out some of the empty spaces with a reasonable amount of effort.
Lol, we don't have the Recipe/Expendable Collection Tyrant(Blessed be His Self) that we used to. Good thing because Bob is putting him out of work! smile
"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
Bob
The Eternal Balance
Bob
(aside from some well-known raw material distribution issues, which I'll be fiddling with a bit for EE 13).

Curious - will this be done with the aim to try and promote more trade, or to try to make each settlement self sufficient with regards to all raw materials?

It will be partially to fix a few places that don't really have anything desirable, partially to fix some obvious discrepancies between hex types and available resources, partially to spread around a few things that are currently a little too isolated, and partially to provide more of some things that are simply too rare at the moment. We still want to promote trade over self-sufficiency, but we don't want to overly promote hoarding by making it too easy to establish a cartel.

I know that this is further along in the roadmap. But yeah. I agree with Fiery's above post. Having to move stuff to places where it is scarce. Having to work out trade deals or take by stealthy harvesting. NOT HAVING enough of everything you need scattered around in the various hexes that you control is where you will see action stimulated. At least so long as you have something else that THEY don't have enough of.

We've been in this box a long time. We know where to go to get little bits of what we need to accumulate enough to get by without having to trade for it. At least the T3 is better regionalized and I hope that isn't too messed with. Maybe amounts available increased a bit so that there is enough to trade, lol. smile

But seriously, if you want to see more interaction both conflict wise and trade wise, it has to be more complicated to get what we want at the T1 and T2 levels as well… Wouldn't be a bad thing if coin took on some value as well.
"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
Interesting. Is a codex still just going to count as "one" in what is needed for a particular codex collection? So the neat thing here is that you can make a codex with less material, just using higher level ingredients?
"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
Bob
FYI, Aeon Stones will also have some prerequisites for equipping them. Anyone can equip a Basic stone, but the more powerful versions all have ability score prerequisites as follows (at least one ability score must meet the requirement):

  • Lesser: 12
  • Major: 16
  • Rare: 22
  • Superior: 30

While making those capable of handling complicated prerequisites, we also made some adjustments to items like potions and tokens. For each of those, we set them to still be usable by anyone with the originally listed ability score, but also to be usable by anyone with any other ability score just a little higher, as follows:

  • T2 Grenades: Dexterity 11 or Any Other Ability Score 12
  • T3 Grenades: Dexterity 19 or Any Other Ability Score 22
  • T2 Potions: Constitution 11 or Any Other Ability Score 12
  • T3 Potions: Constitution 19 or Any Other Ability Score 22
  • T2 Misc Alchemy: Wisdom 11 or Any Other Ability Score 12
  • T3 Misc Alchemy: Wisdom 19 or Any Other Ability Score 22
  • T2 Misc Tokens: Constitution 11 or Any Other Ability Score 12
  • T3 Misc Tokens: Constitution 19 or Any Other Ability Score 22

Thank you!
"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
You are a Troll
Bob
Paddy Fitzpatrick
It's hard to judge, because the compensating advantages might come from totally different features. Perhaps those settlements already have certain advantages, and the fact that they don't get as much benefit from this feature as some other settlements do actually makes things more balanced. Or perhaps another scheduled feature will benefit them more than others. What we're shooting for is to make sure that everyone gets at least some positive advantage out of this change (everyone can do some layering) and nobody gets too much positive advantage (like a permanently-defensible position). Our focus is on making any fixes needed to avoid those extremes.

Ultimately, we want every settlement location to be valuable to somebody, for no locations to be so inherently valuable that nothing else is worth bothering with, and for different locations to be valued differently by varying groups of players. If there are locations that truly offer no worthwhile advantages to anyone, then we'll need to revisit those, but I'm not aware of any locations that are that problematic at the moment (aside from some well-known raw material distribution issues, which I'll be fiddling with a bit for EE 13).

Seems pretty clear to me: not every settlement is, or should be, equal in all respects even as it pertains to game mechanics. How about those *dry moats* some settlements have that you can't get out of allowing access to the settlement only along the roads?

Glad it was pointed out, but as Hobson said, time to move along and just deal with it. No King, nor their kingdom, does (or should) last forever. Some silly people even build castles in swamps, and when they sink, rebuild them there!
That too is an odd discrepancy. However, so far and for another year + another roadmap, getting inside a settlement has nothing really to do with capturing a settlement.

How many hexes have to be taken to pick apart the puzzle of how to get all core six hexes so you can siege a settlement has everything to do with capturing a settlement.
"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

It is true that the aristocrats, as you love to call settlement leaders, are mostly(but not exclusively, BTW) the ones speaking up here.

If it isn't a settlement leader's job to also look after the viability and survivability of the settlement, then whose is it?
"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
What about allowing core 6 hexes, without the potential to be "protected hexes", to have 3 Outposts? Honestly it does look like the worst of these cases do have a more difficult time getting enough hexes for Bulk in comparison…
"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
Until those mechanics are in, Bob has hinted that these structures will add a good deal to wearing you down during a siege. They can serve a purpose even now.
"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