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


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. Can't agree more with pretty much everything Zom had to say. All kidding aside these last few days have been a blast. I'm just happy to have been in on the start of this journey and I look forward to continuing to grow and compete. It should be a hell of a ride.
  2. I am concerned about it being too easy to fake an attack. I'm just okay with it being possible to do so on occasion. Durability loss is an example of a knob you could use to accomplish that. Taken to its extreme, you could make siege weaponry one-time use items. While large guilds certainly could afford to do that more often than others, I don't think that it is accurate to say that guild behavior cannot be affected by calibrating the costs appropriately.
  3. Let it be gamed to a degree. Such a thing would not be without some strategy. Impose durability loss on deployment to discourage overuse of the tactic. If the vision of fort/keep encounters is a pvp experience, then the number of players required for an assualt will be highly variable and mostly determine by how many human defenders there are. Also, an encounter that is too easy or too predictable may just as easily discourage game play. In a PVP centric game I think the design goal should be to facilitate play which directly plots one force against another.
  4. Probably a straight percentage reduction from the prevailing travel speed of most players. If that is mounted, then maybe .8*mounted or some such. Then the transition from transport mode to assualt mode could be used to build in some additional delay if needed. The exact way you would do it would of course need to be tuned. The main thing though is that travel time from rune gate to fort or keep should naturally approximate the response time of the defense. The response on defense would involve time to communicate, time to deliberate whether to respond, time to hearth back to the temple and then finally time to travel to the keep or fort.
  5. One of the subjects brought up in the recent developer discord chat involved finding a way to make defense of forts a more interesting focus of game play. Right now unless you are in the immediate area, it isn't really possible to actually assemble a defensive force and make your way to the fort in time to make a difference. The ideas I heard discussed in the developer chat involved implementing some sort of notification system which alerts you when NPC guard at a fort would be able to see any opposing faction. First of all, I don't think this approach would be effective or fun. You would end up getting many false notifications and even then you would still only get perhaps 30 seconds additional time to respond. That is not nearly enough. In my opinion, you need approximate 15-20 minutes to effectively respond in force to a remote location. To make something like that possible, here is one way that I believe would make for some interesting game play. The first step is making it so that walls absolutely prevent all assaults which do not include a sufficiently powerful siege weapon. The second step is to make it so that siege weapons can only be deployed in the area surrounding the rune gates at the periphery of the maps. From these locations, the weapons would need to be escorted as they are slowly rolled into position. Perhaps forts can be attacked using a lighter and faster class of siege weapons, while keeps require a heavier and slower weapon. Opposing factions would be notified when siege weapons are first deployed at these peripheral areas. This would set up the scenarios where the offensive force must act first in defending their caravan of siege weapons as they make their way to the location of the assault. The defenders would be rushing to rally and locate the caravan. All of this would require a fair bit of balancing to make it so the siege weapons in transport are hardy enough that they aren't easily destroyed without first defeating the escort force. There could perhaps be a transport form of the siege weapons where they are packed into a cart and are more tanky. Then, once ready to deploy there could be some sort of transition time where the siege weapons are move into the attack configuration, and finally the actual assault of the fort or the keep. Hopefully, if such a mechanic were in the game, it would avoid the need to have fixed vulnerability time slots in quite the way they are implemented now. While these vulnerability time slots do help attackers meet defenders with more regularity, they do it in an artificial way. Whereas a siege caravan mechanic could do the same thing in a very thematic and strategic way.
  6. I feel you have some pretty significant misconceptions about the game. There are a variety of ways, including levelling, that players experience progression while playing the game.
  7. Yep, learned that one the hard way.
  8. Haha. Yeah, I got you. It is easy for me to get carried away with all of my imaginings of what this game might end up being. I'm very enthusiastic about what I'm seeing so far and often find my mind wandering down distant paths of how this or that might eventually work. That's why I wanted to throw out the food upkeep idea.. I actually don't like the idea of durability on vessels and wanted to share my idea of another option in case it was of any interest.
  9. Agreed. I'm aware those options are being considered. I do know which sort of preference I have. My point here was that with respect to those campaign options, I do think the current vessel design can be a problem for some campaign types (and ok for others).
  10. The time limited skills would still carry forward. Time limited skills (and your knowledge) are what largely determine you ability to rapidly progress from nothing into something. Crows with Blacksmith skills will still be blacksmiths. Harvesting skills will still allow you to harvest and so on. All of those things allow you to indirectly build up your factions power much more quickly. You are not truly starting over. Also, crafted items and gathered resources are transferable. That is why I like preserving those traits across campaigns. Time accrued combat skills are not transferable. I think these still need to exist as well, but I hope their impact is only moderately significant. And yes, your knowledge does greatly make a difference. That will hold new players back as well. However, that is not as concrete and it is not out of the players control to remedy the lack of knowledge. On the other hand, starting the game with 100 strength when everyone else has 300 due to their vessels will be a bigger obstacle. I also suspect that few necromancers will be handing out top tier vessels to new players if they are anywhere near as difficult to piece together as it seems to be now.
  11. My opinion depends on whether we start new campaigns with fresh vessels. I like the idea that a new player can pretty much enter a new campaign and have the potential of being roughly equivalent on the battlefield to someone who has played for years. Crafting and flexibility of roles are the rewards that I like to see carried over through the time limited skills. And even with crafting, I like the idea that within a campaign there will be an opportunity for the factions to progress through a sort of arms race early on as they gain access to progressively better equipment as their top crafters move into more powerful vessels. As it is I think the amount of combat parity at the start of a campaign is in a pretty good spot currently. Vessels, on the other hand can definitely disrupt that balance. It seems likely that top tier vessels will be significantly more effective in combat. So, for that reason I hope that if vessels carry over between campaigns that there be some system to limit them. As a limiting mechanic, however, if one is needed, I would prefer using food as a way to impose an upkeep of sorts on high tiered vessels. Maybe, green tier vessels can only eat green tier food, blue vessels blue tier food and so on. Higher tiered food would of course be more difficult to obtain and there would be an incentive for players to use the upgraded vessels only on a more limited basis. It would also provide the cooking profession with more meaning and relative importance. Thematically, it also makes sense since a powerful spirit would naturally need more fuel to keep those fires burning.
  • Create New...