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

Threading needs to become a thing sooner rather than later…

If we have a year of wearing T3 and using T3 weapons .. without choices of do I want to go with protection offense, etc .. just wear your best stuff all the time because there is no risk ..
Always felt if you wore a T3 item that was going to be most of your threads.. was thinking T2 would have a few items but not all and T1 can keep everything.

Threading needs to be put into game and fast .. just my thoughts
Wow missed a lot while I wrote that.. but going to add this..

The lets just make alt characters in order to play with our main character that we actually want to play is not a solution that should be on the table. The system is messed up if you have to find a work around for actually positively participating in PvP in a open world PvP game.

Wow sorry for the derail subject in the other thread - I just wanted to illustrate what could happen if people ask for a solution to a perceived problem in a system. I also felt it easily could have been viewed from afar as certain groups feeling entitled , asking for and receiving a change to a system, but the change we got is not really good for the game.

I understand some folks wanted Attacking companies to pay more than 10 influence for a 2 day feud, they wanted to have a condition / penalty imposed upon the attacker if a feud ended and no item changed hands
The change that was implemented was if attackers do not take a holding ( not just take an outpost the first day..) they lose 25% of banked influence of the feud –
Yet look at what an attacker actually gets for winning a feud…
They now have to bank that influence to control the holding and outpost ( no choice in that matter., the + of the outpost or holding is reduced by 1 though). The attacker now has a choice to make, do they tear down the structure and lose 25% of what is banked , or do they wait for the previous defender to take it back from me and then lose 25% of the banked influence then.
When a attacker is victorious, they end up losing more influence than when they supposedly lose the feud. This is the part that makes zero sense to me.
The only way to actually feud right now is by creating a company, earning 100 influence then feud with that company. Which is what is going to happen if feuding ever picks up again… ( then we can look forward to people complaining shell companies are accepting tons of company hoppers and our influence is being destroyed by what are essentially throw away companies)

This is what is wrong with the system, the ‘why’ its wrong is that currently this is the only option for accepted PvP in the game. Everything else has rep hits and is considered bad form by most. The reason there should be cheap options for PvP right now is because the game is suppose to be about player conflict, but there is no way to actually participate in accepted PvP.
Folks that maybe interested in the game don’t know all this. If we cant tell them in a couple lines through a /w then the system is messed up. It should be as easy as get your 6 buddies, form a company, earn 100 influence and chose who you want to fight. (Yes this is true up to the point except 2 days after a feud, they look at their influence and do a WTF!!, we have to farm another 100 influence to do that again!!!!? and i don't even want to think about telling them to make a bunch of alts play the game 2 weeks into playing a main character, what does that say about the design of the system?

The lose 10 influence wasn’t that big of a deal but – 25 for a lose or 25% of whatever it takes to bank a holding and 2 outpost if you win .. that seems like a ton – especially when it is the only accepted PvP system that is currently working.
In response to just this portion ..
“On entitlement. Very sick of all the ways this is being used. There might be a case for using it if people were arguing that their holdings/hexes should be invulnerable to attack or capture. Haven't seen that claim though. Has anyone? What do you "entitlement phrase" people think is being demanded through a sense of entitlement??”
Time line .. July 10 or so - tower fights taken off line..
Holding war fare put on hold for 30 days till like Aug 10.. ( 30 days of no pvp engine)
2 Weeks into feuds - people say there is too much feuding, the system needs influence penalties..
Financial announcement ( 3 weeks post feuds being on line)- EoX puts the game pretty much on hold and all organized feuding stops.
Few weeks back (n ot sure of date..) – Influence changes made to feuding system - now have to take a holding or lose 25% - tearing down s structures = lose of 25 % of, (so if you win the feud your influence is banked to cover all the structures and you lose it when you tear it down..)
That pretty much is what happened from my perspective - the squeaky wheel got the grease , the majority of “good” players think/thought this was/is a good idea . Yet the end result is the majority of the people playing made an uproar about the feuding system and the fix they asked for and got killed the entire feuding system.

You may disagree with all of that but hopefully at least see how listening to the larger more vocal etc side of an argument does not necessarily lead to a better outcome for the overall game.

In just response to T3 loots ..
My voice is one of caution in regards to T3 loots, I did an average amount of escalation farming, always tried to fine T2 to do, didn’t focus on grinding T3 loot and have 4-5 T3 recipes over the last few months. I didn’t run scholar nor did I put my skills into rank 14. I got a ton of T2 recipes because I fought T2 mobs with Rank 10-11 knowledge skills ..
I don’t mind the discussion about T3 stuffs but I don’t want the loot in the game to be easy mode.. I only want to see an uptick of T3 items in T3 escalations. ( preferably with rank 14 + knowledge skills so the knowledge skills mean something) .
I certainly don’t want to see T2 escalations drop more T3 loot. Mostly because when T3 escalations are made I don’t want groups to say let’s just farm the T2 for the T3 recipes/ maneuvers we need because the risk is less and the reward is comparable.
The under 10% elder elemental in that escalation is the point at which i heard multiple saying they received T3 recipe drops. I got 2 out of my 4( perhaps 5) from those guys.
Guess that is where are not seeing eye to eye, id like to see what happens if a party devoted themselves to loot drops for an escalation type. If the time, effort and xp spent on maxing a party on knowledge skills doesn’t produce vast increased chances of loots, then yes it is a problem…

If a party puts the time, and effort and xp into it, and are rewarded then why make their choices cheapened by just upping the drop rate. ( now if groups like that exist and aren’t getting T3 things more regularly then there is a problem)

I know I only have handful of T3 recipes, after months of farming but I haven’t taken my skills much past 100 or 120.. so am not expecting huge T3 drops until I get my knowledge skills past the rank 14 threshold. It would be like expecting my T2 minor to get loads of T3 materials at rank 10.. I get the 2 systems are not synonymous but there should be a correlation between the tiers and the ranks even with knowledge skills and loots.
I still don’t get why you think T3 recipes increasing is a good thing for the game, say they are increased and in 4 months everyone has every copy they need … then what exactly are you going to do in game? Just because some folks have raced to be at the cutting edge of the crafting portion of the game and are now at the mercy of random drops isn’t a reason to turn the game into loot piñata.

The devs killed T2 escalation rates because the population, which in turn has an effect of the number of T2 mobs in the world that have a chance to drop T3 items. How bout they go back to old chance to spawn T2 + escalations and see what happens. ?

What are the average knowledge skills in your groups over the last 10 months? Are your groups all in the 150 – 200 range for the types of mobs you are fighting ? ( what effect would that have on drop rates if your full group all had 200 in a skill ?)

I think T3 recipes are about where they need to be, they should be super rare. There just shouldn’t be an abundance of them because with our population how many are really needed? Each settlement needs a copy perhaps 2 at most of them, what happens when the 2 people in your settlement that need the recipe already have it. They become bank fodder just like the T2 recipes did.

If they are going to up drop rates they need to leave recipes alone ( maybe a .5% increase chance at most), but they need to up the maneuver and spell drops for T3 as more players will be moving to T3 as combat participants than crafters moving to T3 ( but not wizard spells that lich event flooded the market with wizard T3 spells).

Oooo and of course we are discussing dark elves with no proper title of what their race..
Since this thread is influence generation..
Doesn’t help right now, but if the game picks back up with investors - monthly events were a thing, each month a new escalation comes out- new escalations and mob types = new achievements. New achievements mean efficient influence gain.

If need be ask for a bandit / goblin faction to be added or some other achievement you can work on for a while. Hopefully adding achievements and groups isn’t a big ask at this point. and new achievements are probably the most efficient ways to gain influence be it with 1k alt or a main.
The feuding situation - the current situation is horrible - the general idea I think the devs listened to was some folks wanted a greater cost if the defenders were victorious. What we actually have is the cost is so great to the attackers no one is going to bother with the system.
The cost for defenders winning a feud at 25% seems okay on the surface - except you have to feud 5 companies to encompass the defenders companies.
It takes 2 days to actually take a holding, meaning the first day defenders don’t actually have to worry about defending because the only thing that matters is the holding.
If you want to fight you may win, but you are going to die and chew up gear, and it is probably more cost effective to rebuild your holdings and outpost than it is to defend them.
If the attackers “win” the feud by taking the holding, their influence is banked to control those structures for 2 days before they can tear them down, and when they do tear them down they are losing 25% of the banked influence.
The one piece that needs to be fixed, or examined: Is do the defenders lose 25% of the banked influence when their holding /outpost is over run??
You add that to the equation and the fights begin to mean something to the defenders but as of now the defenders do not actually lose anything except bulk good generation, and the attackers lose a little if lose , and lose more when they win.