Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. The arena part is whats upsetting people right now imo. Its just not big enough for there to be safer areas where you can avoid others. Nor are there people on your side. On a proper campaign map there should be enough space that people wont just be blundering about, but rather raiders and harvesters will be looking at a map and deciding where to go to find resources/victims. Because raiders dont want to be wandering around an empty forest where they'll find a single harvester once per hour, so said forest propably will be a fairly safe spot most of the time. But in turn the reason raiders dont go there is because harvesters dont go there, which is presumably that it isnt the best harvesting spot. So if you want to avoid getting ganked as a solo player you have to expect that you wont be finding the best harvesting solo, risk/reward etc. Also the free for all nature. On a larger campaign map you also have the issue of map control. Where you'd be safer in your own factions corner of the map than you are crafting in between your faction and the enemy's areas. Because while the enemy will be sending out roaming pvp gangs to harass your factions harvesting, your side will also be sending out their pvp gangs towards the enemy. And said raiders will be running into one another before they get to you. With a well organized system of pvp patrolls and raiders fighting the enemy in conjunction with scouts giving you a heads up to run away, your faction should be able to keep an area reasonably safe. And by safe I mean allowing you to realistically play the game as a harvester/crafter, not some kind of immunity from harm.
  2. No it isn't. There won't be safe zones in the sense that you can't pvp there, but there will be plenty of areas in the sense that OP asked for. In that they are safe places where a crafter can craft without getting ganked. Castles, forts and other strongholds will be walled compounds where you can safely place your crafting benches, forges and so on. And if the enemy wants to gank you they'll first have to siege you out. There will also be campaign rules that don't even allow you to besiege enemy strongholds outside certain times of day and/or without completing certain prerequisites, for example Bloodstone. Because of the prerequisites for sieging its likely that most walled compounds will go unchallenged for the first part of the campaign, because you'll need a bunch of siege equipment. And that siege equipment needs resources, resources that are also needed for gear. If you/your guild dont have any safe walls to hide behind you'd better ally with/bend the knee to someone who has. If you are a solo player or smaller group you might be best off playing in one of the higher world bands where its faction v faction or god v god, so that you automatically get placed with a larger amount of friendly players. Rather than the guild v guild or free for all campaigns where powergaming will be much more prevalent. Really its harvesting and moving caravans from POIs that will be drawing the fights, not crafters. Who will be hiding behind the walls 90% of the time. Raiding and escorting will be the main component of pvp. If you are a solo harvester/crafter you better be real sneaky and keep far away from the trodden paths.
  3. I think there has been a large disservice in splitting up pvp and pve, which causes strange incentive structures and aberrant behaviours around stuff like PKing. Having split pvp and pve means you are forced to to strange things like tack on made up rewards. The better way is to have the two married. Territory is part of it, but not the whole story. You want gear? You need to mine. Want to mine? You need to PvP the other guys away from the mine. Want to PvP? You need gear. This creates an integrated circle where PvP and PvE are intrinsically linked, and players are not separated in goals by game mechanics but united by them. The people fighting for the mine and using it are effectively the same people (even if there is probably specialisation within the group). It also means PvP is heavily rewarded via control over economic resources, and loot is merely a supplement. Thus the killing itself is merely a means towards a goal. Goals and rewards mold the player base's attitudes and actions. If you reward the kill with loot then players will seek out the easiest kills, which ends in PKing and harassing new and younger players instead of proper PvP. If you instead don't reward the kill but make the kill a tool for achieving some greater objective such as control of economic/strategic nodes there is no incentive in hunting newbies as there is little reward in merely looting bodies. Instead the greatest rewards is in going after either the nodes or caravans going between nodes. And the best nodes will generally be held by the stronger players, who will tend to overextend in an effort to win the campaign. Obviously rewarding objectives over kills don't entirely fix all dumb player activity, but it does move a lot of the player culture from rewarding harvesting tears from the weakest players to harvesting tears from the territorially established players. As an addon to this; for territorial gameplay to work. For a crafting economy with full gear loss and looting to work. Lower level gear has to be easily made and not too terribly much weaker then top gear. New players can't be too terribly much weaker than a fully levelled player. If the gulf between min and max player power potential is too big you'll see cascading power imbalance and the weaker players giving up and not wanting to play. Limited campaigns means you can have these imbalances and a PlayToCrush without the game failling, you can even have them be fun for the losing part if they get to mount a tenacious campaign of resistance. But for them to do that they have to have a chance of winning battles, given some smart manouvering, despite being at a disadvantage in terms of gear and xp. At the same time these things have to be good enough for players to feel like there is a point of taking that silver mine so they can make better alloys for their gear. XP growth has to feel like it matters enough for a feeling of character progress. As a general rule a fully maxed out player with all the character and gear stats min/maxed to full potential take on 2 naked new players and perhaps 1,5 every-day geared mid range players. Obviously individual skill, game knowledge, and team coordination would tend to tip all this in the veterans favour, but as a pure stat thing 15-20 fresh characters with access to limited raw materials for gear should be able to ambush 8-10 geared older characters. Given equal player skill, veteran players v newbies will ofc tend to skew the numbers a lot.
  4. So I was looking in the pledge store and was presented with several different fort, keep and castle options. Just looking at the smallest one we have 2016 small fort -40$ 2015 small fort -30$ kickstarter fort -30$ What is the difference between them, and why is the 2016 one more expensive? They all seem to have the same flavour text and concept art. Is it just a colour swap? Does the little banner on it have any meaning?
  • Create New...