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 Smitty

Smitty
Bringslite
Let's try a new discussion. Let's see what we all saw and/or took away from a different subset of conflicts. I realize that a subset will ever lead to references and derails toward the superset that it comes from, but lets give it a shot anyway.

The Battle of Blackwatch as it is called.

Having accomplished (or as close as possible) what it's main goal was, basically the dissolution of Phaeros (or at least a great weakening) why did Golgotha pursue those that wanted to leave? One of Golgotha's oft shouted conditions was that Phaeros citizens would LEAVE PHAEROS if they wanted respite from war. That doesn't appear to have been true.

So, why exactly did Golgotha continue to press those that left?

**Notice just my opinion as one of the folks that participated as much as I could in those battles, my views are not to be read as EoX said ____ * This is only my view as a player with in the Empire..

Your question makes no sense to me… Phaeros, Brighthaven, Keepers Hammerfall , Sylva.. etc ..
They were all one alliance up until 9-1-2015 (EBA).
The same players would come out and fight no matter which holdings were attacked, so when sylva was founded on 8-17-2015 .. they were simply a Phaeros company that expanded to a new location.
The EBA was still in existence.. it wasn’t dissolved until 9-1-2015.
If the question is why would EoX continue to attack EBA members, after destroying all of Phearos holdings, I think that should be pretty clear. We were fighting the EBA because of Phearos, the EBA alliance was still intact, even though Phearos had lost all their holdings, there were 4 other settlements that had holdings that were part of the conflict.. So at best we were 20% done burning things down.. then the funding announcement was made.. most EoX vanished.. and a week later EBA dissolved.
Smitty
I Picked up a Rank 15 alchemy one. Was in a group the other day someone picked up a 16 tailor.. so they are dropping.
Smitty
I get the diplomatic approach you are taking .. but which company is it?
*
I want to know because I want to know if I am associated with these folks in which case that needs to stop or I need to move on .. I want to know if im trading with them in which case I am going to stop… etc..
Smitty
One thing that has come up for me in the last week or so..
I have been fighting dark elves.. they have their version of goblin bombers.. they do AE damage and hit their buddies with their effects..If that damage is the last damage the mob takes you don’t get credit for the kill, or any chance at loot..
*
Not sure if an afflicted/ bleeding etc conditions count as killing blow if the mob has conditions from a player and a mob… Just something to look into for folks that like testing things out..
Smitty
Will throw my please do this here .. as it semi addresses what to do about making resources easy to harvest in highly patrolled areas..
*
Make the crafting system as diverse as the combat keyword system .. make resources have quality ratings and not generic descriptions, make iron gathered in mountains better for making armor, make iron gathered in T3 hexes in meteor hexes make vastly superior weapons etc . At the same time make the iron pick out of trash near a settlement hex great for arrows but crappy for armor and weapons..
*
The crafting system is super generic and could become a lot more if work were put into making it as diverse as our combat keyword system.. if whoever comes in came upgrade do something along these lines then using resources from different areas of the map and different tiers , can and would result in vastly different end products..
Smitty
Caldeathe Baequiannia
Tyv Blodvaerd of Aragon
It is my understanding that March 1 will bring in new development team.
This appears to be getting turned into cannon. What Lisa said is that things are looking good, there is a demonstrated intent, and the would-be new publishers, if they can get their financing in place, would like to take over on March 1st.

I wouldn’t get too attached to any specific date at this point either..

We are talking about 4 different companies working out an agreement with a contract that all of them need to review..
GW and Paizo may be able to easily get on the same page with wording.. as the person running both of those companies is the same person.. but Lisa may choose to use a different attorney to represent each company..
We have a new Dev company and then the financial backers who all are going to review the contract, change a few commas.. change some words .. then send it to the other 3 companies to agree on.. who will move the commas to a third location.. to be sent on to be approved .. you get the point..

This thing won’t be official till that process plays out and 60 days or so seems like a best case scenario..
best we just leave the date open ended at this point and wait for an official announcement..
Smitty
Bringslite
Smitty
This is a competitive MMO , having a group(aka settlement) that is a defacto representative of the development company is not a good idea, not if that group intends to play the territory game that the original vision of the game is suppose to be about.
If the players are anonymous members spread throughout the game taking a pulse on the game , I get your average Joe argument. but if that average Joe is a leader of a settlement or influential company of a settlement.. well he is no longer average Joe is he?

Indeed! Perhaps we should start an Inquisition? Yet I don't feel that there would be anything disturbing about The Owners or Employees starting and having their own settlement as long as they played it straight up. Playing for purposes of testing, experiencing, and character to character feedback is just another (perhaps more important) way to play. They should all be banned though. Or, just not tell us who they are. smile
Do you intend to come across as an ass or is it just natural talent ?

I brought this up a few pages ago when I commented on this in the first place.. I think GW did a great job with consolidating game play with transparency, I feel it is important and hope the new developers do something along the same lines as GW..

Your take is its not important.. I like being as ass to people that disagree with me..

Always great to chat with ya bringslite…
Smitty
This is a competitive MMO , having a group(aka settlement) that is a defacto representative of the development company is not a good idea, not if that group intends to play the territory game that the original vision of the game is suppose to be about.
If the players are anonymous members spread throughout the game taking a pulse on the game , I get your average Joe argument. but if that average Joe is a leader of a settlement or influential company of a settlement.. well he is no longer average Joe is he?
Smitty

The one caveat to a player working for the company taking it over ..

Is for transparency purposes and fairness to everyone we need to know what settlement/ company they are affiliated with. We need to know the company has policies in the place with what their employees can and cant do in game etc..

Think GW did a great job with bloodstone swords in those regards, I hope the new dev team will do the same.
Smitty
Not as concerned as Midnight.. perhaps I should be but for now this is what I heard

A player approached his company and said take a look at this game and see what you think.
The company said looks up and up. Lets find some folks to invest in it..
I didn’t get the sense it was actually the player who owns the company, and even then its not his company funding the idea. The bottom line will be whatever company is doing the development will have to answer to the investment firm.

So if statistics say they can grab ____ subs by making __ changes they will probably do that. If that alienates the 300 people that still play and our 1000 active accounts.. so be it .. if the changes draw in 10000 players with 20000 accounts, our views mean very little.