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.
|Smitty 03.25.2017 11:00|
One major positive of PFO. Is there isn't roles that you lock your self into. If you want to do leather rogue stuff for armor and cleric domain for you feature. It's your call.. or you could reverse it do cleric healer armor.. and then concentrate in rogue weapons..
The versatility of the system is one of the best parts of the game right now.
As to settlement choice.. best advice I can give is find one that is active during your prime play times.
Decide if you want a good focused organization. Or would you be interested in being a bandit.. or at least okay with playing with them.
|Smitty 03.25.2017 08:18|
MidnightMidnight, We had a similar thread not long ago discussing company influence..Bob
I have to disagree with you on the just dump everyone out of their company if they are inactive.
We do have entire companies that have disappeared from the game with no active players, we have large companies with only a tiny active population- Yes that is a problem..
But the solution cant be kick them out- You want these people to come back- you don’t want their welcome back to be “Glad your back now start over”.
They wouldn’t be new players, so achievements wouldn’t help build influence for them faster. Entire company vaults could be lost if they had no active player, and come back to a settlement that is no longer active.
My view is they need to add another layer to influence, that decays over time when players go inactive. They need to track the inactive influence total of the company as well as the active influence. The active influence would represent active players, and the inactive influence would be available when and if players returned.
I just don’t see any good coming from wiping away previous accomplishments and making returning players start from scratch as a good idea in welcoming them back.
|Smitty 03.24.2017 13:42|
Restocked some buy orders.. Will see if Lilith goes 50c each again in cosl.. if not there is i put one up for 20c…
Added some t3 gem orders but not that much apiece. I use them bit not in huge quantities..
Added some more guys for t3 ores. but I'm wizard and don't know much about metal things..so my bids may be lower than what your willing to take.
I keep placing wizard stuff up and for a while it sold immediately.. so up the prices a bit.. just so I can keep up making things as they sell.
Lilith has put up some bows and things that appear to be selling as well and fairly quickly… if folks are looking for some thing specific let us know here.. or talk with Tuffon in game
|Smitty 03.22.2017 12:04|
Appreciate the responses.
Wasn't meaning to nit pick the process apart (i was just wondering how the entire picture looked)-
As long as reasons exist(or are eventually part of the road map ) to show up and participate every day during a time of conflict -
So that one side cant just walk away and not be affected by that decision, then i think you are on the right track.
Also good that it sounds as though raiding will not be tied to the same feud mechanics!
We need levels showing our displeasure with each other without actually trying to blow up/take territory.
Raids sound like they may fit that niche.
|Smitty 03.22.2017 11:19|
Thanks for clarification- was getting bit confused- with how all that was going to play out-
and really didn't like the idea of taking damage for 7 days when you can only try to break a siege for 3 days.
That being said-
Still one question with 3 day windows..
Day 1 you take 2 outpost.
Day 2 you fight over the holding.. you win..
Day 3?? you don't fight because on day 4 you cant actually take a holding making anything you do on day 3 a waste of time-
(unless you manage to take 2 outpost on day 2- day 3 is a meaningless conflict day.)
So Will the vulnerable state of a holding carry over to the next 3 day window?-
Meaning that if you take 2 holdings on day 3 then on day 1 of a following week- the holding is vulnerable?
|Smitty 03.22.2017 06:05|
May be a different topic- but I was under the impression Sieges were going to use the same PvP windows and Feud mechanics that exist elsewhere.
If that is still true…
Can you address this?
What i think we know about Sieges.
A Siege can be done by multiple settlements and they use the PvP window and feud system.
These windows are suppose to overlap the defending settlement ( or as close to it as they can get)..
So If a siege takes place..
All the settlements involved align their PvP windows ( and now days? ) to the settlement they attack.
The defender can try and remove camps and engines for 3 days?
After 3 days the Defender takes damage from the siege engines for 2 days( as long as the engines are supplied),
without fighting back because there is a 2 day pvp free window?
|Smitty 03.21.2017 11:56|
Hoping the bonus you alluded too is coming or the numbers get tweaked quite a bit..
Because this is still what i see with this proposal….
A perfect wood hex- can easily produce 700-750 wood a week-
Now if we have to put 128 units into maintain that production- instead of 10 ( or even 70 like original cost )..
and also mule over 250 units from 2 other holdings (those 250 units have to come from somewhere-)
Just to maintain 550 wood a week -
while banking 200 more influence for the +4 holding and 400 more influence on the 2 +0's to supply it..
as well as finding time to run a mule back and forth between the 2 +0's to the +4 to keep it stocked ..
It would make way more sense to just do 2 +0 hexes- for 400 influence total, and eliminate the all the hassle.
one perfect wood, and one almost perfect wood hex ..
You could probably get 450 -500 wood units a week
Both hexes would be self sufficient..
No running around to stock em..
defense would be an issue- but blobs and numbers are more of an issue- no matter the + of the hex..
|Smitty 03.21.2017 07:27|
So for now this is strictly a math based formula ?
A wizard that is attached to a settlement without wizard training- will only need to worry about the level of support,
and not the fact their settlement actually has no wizards to train them.
|Smitty 03.20.2017 12:44|
Answered one of my questions,
Holding upkeep is currently daily..
A +4 holding will use 3 resources at the rate of 18/day each..
so 126 of 3 resource types consumed to operate the holding ..
For a total of 378 resources used
A +0 Holding will use 14 resources for the week for one type..
A settlement that wants to run at level 15 will use 150 of all 5 resources types .. (750 total)
Rank 14 will use 95 of each type.. (475 total)
Rank 13 will use 55 of each (275 total)
Rank 12 will use 28 of each ( 196 total)
A +4 Holding is going to consume the same amount of resources that a level 12-13 settlement is going to consume a week..
That seems crazy to me..
Its probably likely that 3 hexes running at +0 are going outproduce a +4 hex(for the same influence cost)
+ 4 Holding influence cost = 100 to place - 50 for each plus (200).. so 300 influence
2 +4 outpost - Influence cost - 50 each to place (100) plus 25 for 4 plus( 200) - so 300 influence
total influence running 1 hex at +4 is 600
+0 holding is 100 to place ( 100)
2 +0 outpost is 50 each to place ( 100 )
total influence for a +0 hex is 200
You can run three of them for the same influence cost..
Those 3 +0 hexes will use a total of 42 resources-
While A +4 will look pretty and use 378 resources
(and that is if they are the right type and you mule around the things you need to stock it..)
Hoping to get Bob's thoughts on if these numbers are going to be tweaked at all,
Lots of you guys have done holding and outpost stuff more than I have - So Perhaps the +4 outpost production
makes up for the difference- But I am not seeing it, help me do so if I am missing something.
The +4 Holding Option seems like a good thing to have in case of feuds, war time, etc. but to run holdings at that expense full time doesn't look that appealing to me..
|Smitty 03.20.2017 10:29|
Would like to hear more about -
"Restrict Outposts to only producing bulk resources at the upgrade level of the Holding."
1. Holdings that run at +1 and higer require a secondary , or even a third resource ( when you get to +3 and +4).
Will those Values be evaulated?
(someone refresh my memory are the current holding cost per day or per week?)
Are the cost of holdings going to be reviewed / changed?
I Also See this
"Bring back support, but provide partial support to learned ranks above those supported by Settlement Level."
1. Will Support mean that my wizard has to be part of a settlement that offers all wizard training and that settlement will have to run at what ever level my max skill is?
2. Or will my wizard work just as well with any settlement as long as they run at the highest level skill I have?
Finally the fun One…
" Add elite (T3) variants of selected T2 escalations."
Is it not fun to picture a legend and Hero Goblin..
Or an entire Natures Wrath with super hard wolves?!?
Not sure how why- but makes me smile thinking of a T3 goblin escalation..
Boss Loot on escalations..
Cleric, wizard seem okay with the variations..
Fighter and rogue escalations .. well they need help..( due to not that many items on those tables)
How easy would it be to add expert expendables to one and free holder expendables to the other?( just feels like there needs to be an escalation boss drop for those 2 things besides the random T3 ones)