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

I don't think that it is such a big issue with companies. There are tools available for that as you have pointed out. A settlement is a different animal, however, and MUCH more is at stake.

Yes a founding leader should be able to demote leaders. Still, I lobby that an unsubscribed leader that is uncommunicative (virtually), should be replaceable by a subscribed and active leader if the Settlement all wants it so. There is no tool for that.

I totally get that Paizo does not want to ruffle the feathers of any players that might return. I do not get why a nonsubbed and totally missing leader should be in charge of a settlement and that there be such a potential back door to wrecking so much effort.

We are talking about demoting a character here and then using the tools that we have to set security levels, not about erasing accounts.
@ Flari
Read this again- it was 2 years ago Dec 2016 - last I heard it was still valid..
“The only situation so far where we allow one player to request that another player be demoted from company leader is when the official settlement owner requests that a leader of the settlement's founding company be demoted, and that's only allowed because it's kind of essential to being a settlement's tyrant. ….. “

After that was written- Bob made sure every settlement had an active subbed character attached to it. that person is on some list as the leader of the settlement.
I am inferring from that that whoever is on bobs current list is the defacto settlement god( they can be a tyrant, and pretty much do what they want, they own the settlement).

That person can kick any company-
That person can demote any leader in their own company.
They are the top dog of the settlement -
They are required to be active accounts - maybe not all of them are playing but in GW eyes they run that settlement..
If that needs to change - then talk it over with that person- have them notify GW of a change and get a new top dog..

If they are truly AFK and gone - but are still paying GW - they are still active in eyes of GW and to the rest of the map -
If you are living in a settlement like that and that is too much risk for you - think about moving - and do better in the future about who you trust to be your settlement leader..

You may not like the tools you are working with - but they exist.
@Stilachio Thrax
Not even sure what to say other than ..

If you take a break .. form the game.. Tell your settlement mates

If they think you are going to run off and sell your account during this break, well you guys have interesting term for buddies and friends.
If that is an issue - perhaps they can drop you a line to have you demote yourself before you take that break … Or
You can send an email to Bob to demote yourself before you sell ( if you care about them, if you want to screw them over.. sell it to whoever and watch the world burn, sure they will blame you just as much as the person doing the deed)..
IF you take no actions and screw your settlement mates over - That is on You not on GW to protect you ..
@ Flari -

This is a response I received from Bob in Dec 2016 … I asked how I could remove a leader character - that Quej had in my company because he was selling his accounts..
“The only situation so far where we allow one player to request that another player be demoted from company leader is when the official settlement owner requests that a leader of the settlement's founding company be demoted, and that's only allowed because it's kind of essential to being a settlement's tyrant. …. Quijenoth could of course voluntarily demote himself if his accounts are still active, or he could send an email to asking me to demote him. “

AS to non settlement founding companies …

“..My best advice would be to do what you can to protect yourself from losses by putting any vault contents (both at settlements and holdings) someplace safer, then negotiate with Quijenoth or his successor to either remove Aleena from leadership or to make sure you feel comfortable with _____ remaining as a leader. Your other alternative is to split off into a new company, taking anything not tied down, but that of course has its own issues.”

“Hopefully everything will work out, but there's always some risk when allowing in a co-leader or when signing on to a settlement. You never know for sure what that person will do in the future. Always best to protect yourself, and to have a plan just in case your company is compromised or your settlement is no longer to your liking.
Good luck!

… The above email was 2 years ago … So what exactly should change ?

Are you asking for the founding character from the company to be able to demote a leader in that company ? I could get behind that - as long as GW has records of who founded the company.. but that was the very question that is responded to above..

Beyond that …

Your risk was a known thing … even if you didn’t think about it .. IF it worries you now start a new company today .
If you have Jakaboo as a leader and don’t know where he came from or where he went that is still on you .. Even more so If you bought the account - and aren’t sure if you are the founding leader or a promoted leader ( GW shouldn’t have to tell you who founded the company.. youshould know that if you are wanting to use it, if you aren’t sure.. you should probably do something to make sure you know that information in the future )..
If you have waited years and are just now figuring out this is a risk - that is on you -
You could of started a new company when influence caps disappeared and your current problem wouldn’t be a GW problem..

So If you or anyone else wants to fix this issue.. Fix it The tools exist to do so .. But it is going to take work on your end -

If you want to keep those questionable companies around - tie them to a welcome back settlement- ( you guys have how many settlements - designate one of them as the high risk settlement for companies that may or may not fully controlled )-
Put minimal resources into the bank there and if someone comes back- they are still somewhat attached to you -
IF you feel they can be trusted - move them too the real settlement..
You can create companies you emphatically trust to use for your more valuable players.. and settlements

If you don’t want to loose the holdings / influence - ally that welcome back settlement to yours- you still get protection from ally settlements.. heck you can create a good buffer to hexes you want to protect..
IF they happen to control one of your Core 6 - you may want to change that hex out with a company you trust ..
None of this sounds like a GW issue - it sounds like a realization that you are taking a risk - so do something about the risk..
You already have an option to address taking full control over that company..
Have the player that owns the company send an email from the account - that founded the company - in that email have them tell GW that that person wants you to be leader-
After that GW should be able to deal with demotions as needed- since it is your company at that point..

The fact that GW is willing to do this is super cool - I would expect most companies to ignore the request outright..
Like I said - if dealing with a settlement founding company it’s a bit harder- but if you are just worried about a company that you took over- where the original company founder doesn’t play- - And you think it is too much of a risk – phase out that company -
Asking GW to fix your risk- just because you wanted to use that companies influence is on you.. (This was a real thing when we had an influence cap - but that went away months ago..)
IF you have continued to use those companies - because they were established - you picked the easy road- It was your choice to continue to use those companies - now you are asking GW to protect you from the risk you took in taking that easy road..

As long as we aren’t talking about a settlement founding company- the tools that exist are fine - Does it mean you have some work to do.. It Absolutely does.. But It was your choice to build your settlement that way -

Perhaps im missing your guys point - but to me it sounds like you bought some companies - you don’t have founding leadership in them - you have been using them for years now ( instead of building up your own) .

And for some reason you think it is in GW best interest to protect a choice you made -

Here is why GW should have no business doing anything - other than dealing with emails from the founding company..

Avenger Company
Founded by
Captain A - Leader
Metal Dude as officer
Captain A stops playing
Then Metal Dude - quits sells account his account to you..
You play metal Dude you love Metal Dude - you Build up the avengers and take control of land you control for 3 years..

You some how convince GW that Metal Dude is the leader are the Avengers.. because Captain A hasn’t been around.
You have GW demote Captain A to recruit ..
Now Captain A returns - to find out Metal Dude- who was actually an imposter of the original Metal Dude is now running the Avengers..
Captain A Looks at GW and says WTF - you took my company away from Me ! I have been the Avenger for 10+ years in every game I play- You guys suck.. Im out of here..

Regardless of what you feel you are owed for building up the Avengers for 3 years - Captain A is right! GS has no right to give the Avengers to anyone other the Captain A .. Unless Captain A has told GW to do it..
GW wants Captain A to return- and should do everything in their power to not piss off Captain A- should he come back..
To my knowledge
The devs are more than happy to accommodate changes in company leader ship - even involving characters that are not active. Even email alone is all they require .. as long as the email comes from the email of the leader of the company.. ( I went through this with one of Golgotha’s companies, when try to get a hex under my control so I could manage it)..

I finally got it worked out with an officer in the company and didn’t need to involve the devs, can the original owner come back? Sure. Can they sell their account- to someone who can then own one of Golgotha’s core 6? Sure - I have reservations about that- but I accept the risk because I want to use the influence to control the hex- if I ever feel the risk is too great- then I will tear down that holding and put that hex in a more secure company leadership role -

For more than a year the active players have been more than happy to reap the rewards for using companies like the one I took control over .. If the risk ever is too great - I will do the work to eliminate the risk- but until then- I have gained 2-3 years of gains from accepting the risk with my actions..
I think settlement founding companies are a bit harder to deal with- but just for companies - the current system is fine- don’t change a thing ..
@ Iram

I think you are wrong.. people want interaction -
right now even if I recruit 6 new people to play - .. they are going to spend the first month in game seeing no one but the same group of people , they are going to get bored and stop logging in because they are just fighting the same escalations over and over with the same people, in the same locations - with no risk involved..

The map is huge - in order to at least introduce the idea of risk and conflict we need areas that people are funneled too.

Escalations hexes being low security is a good step - but now folks live in there little areas of the map - you can go months without seeing a person that is not blue to you on you mini map.. –We cant shrink the map - but we can work on funneling everyone into areas – and when we do there is more chances of conflict( which is a good thing).

So Yes I groan when I here people ask for dungeons - I know what they are actually asking for is conflict and risk and players interactions, something to fight for and over ( what do people do? What do you fight over etc )…
Some may very well want to crawl through dungeon - but most are just looking for ways to interact with other players..
Also people that play Pathfinder Online want to see Pathfinder stuff -
Lick Toad Swamps - Yes we need another swamp …

How about the fields around the haunted house from rise of the rune lords ?- Scare crows and goblin ghouls ?
Saventh-Yhi, the legendary City of Seven Spears - in the jungle ?- wonder what critters they could come up with for that..
There are tons of locations they could pick-
Giving us static hexes to teleport to not only gives us interactions with other groups it gives us the chance to see the places from adventure paths - which means a lot to some players- and more over players who would want to play the game to see those places ..

So Yes I think this is still the best idea- we need ways to interact, we need to funnel folks to areas and introduce conflict/ risk -

I don’t want it to be normal to go month + without seeing someone that is not blue on my mini map.. (and as long as it is that way we aren’t going to attract and keep players for the long haul)..
Have thrown this out there before - I know it wouldn’t be the lowest hanging fruit.. and would require tech time..

That said the idea is modular and would allow growth and new content to be introduced as staffing and popularity increased( if it does happen).

One of the questions uttered in general by any new player is “Are there Dungeons?” … the cricket response of brutally honest “No..” is something none of us looks forward to typing..The map and generation of the hexes wont support dungeons … but some sort of dangerous place is expected in computer game.. I don’t think we should have instance zones - it goes against the idea that was PFO.. but static zones that can be entered by multiple entry points would work..
So my idea for content/ and bringing more pathfinder to PFO and Introducing Dungeons.

Escalations are vanquished- and then we have a fallow time in those hexes.. My idea is to create a portal that would send characters to a static hex/collection of hexes. The themes for these hexes would come from the many pathfinder adventure paths.
Create a handful of these static hex collections for T1 and T2 , T3 .. just take themes from the adventure paths and make hexes match those themes.. match the Tier of the escalation cleared to the tier of static hex collection that you can transport too.

Make these theme zones static hexes - but the entry point to these areas changes when current lion hexes are killed off -
What could we put out there to make players want to visit ?
Where do the raiders store their goods after the raids? Can you add a world boss that spawns every time a portal opens with a BH chest and put the Bulk goods gathered form the raids in it?
Can We take the resources that are gathered from nodes in the most recent hex that died and change the gathering nodes in these static hexes to match the escalation hex that was cleared most recently?
Perhaps daily boss spawns on random timers.. etc

Anyway - This is still what I want to see in PFO-It will address - where are the dungeons? This idea hits on that- while not true dungeons - it would be something we could point out as dungeon like..
Also There are how many adventure paths with 6 modules each? Or link it to the society event for one of their scenario cycles - bring pathfinder flavor into PFO using these hex’s
Tech that is needed- ( no small task, but modular enough that can be redone for each theme after hexes are built )
Building the hexes…

Figure out how to teleport players to the hex group – ( circle that activates every 5-10 minutes, stand here get moved… like old school EQ?),
person to talk to that just sends you there if you ask..
perhaps give A gatekeeper a victory marker and get a ride there? - ..
what about deaths? Where do you respawn How do you get back?
Are there shrines in this areas ? ( I vote no .. but should be discussed..)
Can a player put a holding in those areas? ( once again I vote no, no shrines no storage in this area.. etc, give players risk for being there..)
What happens if the escalation you cleared is now started as another escalation (OR DCed and coming back to this zone or after a month long absence etc .. if you just go back to your settlement, then no big deal )?
Are Mules allowed? ( I vote no . keep this players only. low security ( perhaps medium in T1 versions)

Should each settlement have a gatekeeper where get you ported back to or show up if you die in those zones- ( that is my vote - but would be expensive for new players if you require a victory marker.. perhaps T1 is copper coins- T2 and up is victory marker or something..)
That’s my want/ desire for content - not sure if it will ever happen but will post it again none the less..
yes have to return to the settlement you sold stuff at in order to get the funds.
I agree Zax selling xp is PTW – but would give GW $ - so am all for it –
I do like the other option ..
GW gives a high character level start option - ( new and returning sub) - other games have a start 1 character at high level option- for returning players - Star wars EQ etc .. SO That wouldn’t be viewed as PTW.. it is just something you get for having an active sub.
hand 1 million or 500k xp to a single character on an account ( make a rule no character can ever have more than what a month 1 character has.. hard cap on the XP number).

Would work well with DT idea -
extra money for the sub = character training slot -
3 training characters for old DTs - 2 for other accounts –
( only way this gives GW $ is by more subs extra DT slots on existing subs)

In regards to the view new people can help in T2 and they can do do stuff in T2 after 60 days -

sure - but what stuff ?
They don’t have settlements to take over ( we own all of them ), .. How high would a crafter have to be to actually make a siege engine / camp? rank 15 / 16 ? ( how much xp is that??)

So anyone that wants to play PFO as a group ..
finds out in 30 days they need to have help ..
or wait a year and half..
In order to actually take part in settlement warfare( one of the main goals of the game..).
This feels like an issue to me -
There needs to be a way for a group to be able to at least have the skills needed to compete with anyone on the map in way less time than a year.
@ Edam


If they just put a hard cap on xp that can be purchased per character – what is the problem?

Can create a cap 2 ways that I can think of that wouldn’t affect my month 1 characters -

Option 1 hard cap 1 million xp- ( can do a ton on a single character with$1 million xp)

Option 2 - floating target of max xp based on total of a day 1 character - 25% - that way day one characters always have a 25% advantage… harder to keep up with but could sell more of them to same character
 Either option - sell packs of xp 10k , 50k 100k 250k 500k 1million.. character cant claim more than the cap …

Either of those things means little to a character that was around for the start of the game ( they would never catch up in xp )-
To the I would riot if this allowed crowd ….
We knew what we signed up for - even with the changes - and rebalancing …
Our biggest gain for dealing with all that…
Settlements- the way we got them was 1000% easier than what any new group will have to do to take one over..
You demand a respec/riot because XP is on sale to new then those new comers have every right to demand Goblin works rework the settlement takeover rules / land rush .. so they can claim one as easy as we had it in the past..

And this game needs players - the game needs new money - this would be a way to do that- it gives new comers a chance to be vested in the game - and not sitting around for 1.5 years before than can put plans into place —
This is something that needs to happen -
The only question I would have is when it should happen.. my guess would be after early enrolment is declared over- and they do a marketing push- to try to get more folks playing ..