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
  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.
  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.
  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 crafte
  • Create New...