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

Multi-Zone Campaigns - Official Discussion Thread


Recommended Posts

Great Article @Hanseshadow - the map tool is really cool. I think if I got my hands on it I could spend hours  just generating new maps and exploring them. 

One question for you though:

Quote

In the future, we will be separating “adventure” zones from “siege” zones – primary activities will be more spread out: adventure zones will still have strongholds to fight over (but fewer of them) and siege zones will still have monsters to fight (but fewer of them).

Why separate adventure zones from siege zones? Often times the reason players siege a particular keep is because you want the resources/adventure zones that are near it. Separating them seems counter intuitive to this end.

Is this a performance related concern? I.E. the more NPC's in a zone the higher the load therefore it's harder to have larger player fights in that same zone? 

I predict the few keeps that are in the adventuring areas will be the most valuable ones and draw the largest sieges. If this in fact a performance related change, it may actually draw the largest fights to the zones with the most NPC's. 

Edited by blazzen

Blazzen <Lords of Death>

YouTube - Twitch - Guild

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, blazzen said:

Why separate adventure zones from siege zones? Often times the reason players siege a particular keep is because you want the resources/adventure zones that are near it. Separating them seems counter intuitive to this end.

Agreed. I'd prefer these activities not get too walled off. A keep near an adventure zone is something worth fighting for. It would be a shame if there was no such thing.

IhhQKY6.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great article, and really neat to see all the effort from this side and then play in the world.  Your distributions are really being seen in game. I have seen a big difference between the snap test last weekend and the one last night.

I have a question on concentration of ranks vs types. Why is the approach to concentrate ranks where higher ranks just make getting higher tier resources easier; instead of making concentrations of specific resource types which would fuel wars? Allowing for some resources to be concentrated in specific areas of the map, and nowhere else, would mean that fights would break out for control of those concentrated "type" areas.

Will this be the "formula"  for maps moving forward, where there will be tendrils?  Will we be able to see special edge parcels around the edges of the open areas along the tendrils so we're not looking over the terrain at an abyss? I really enjoy the layout and dispersion of the parcels, but also feel it is lacking because the open areas aren't in. Would it be hard to fill those in with Todd's arch enemy - water?

lUvvzPy.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, blazzen said:

Great Article @Hanseshadow - the map tool is really cool. I think if I got my hands on it I could spend hours  just generating new maps and exploring them. 

One question for you though:

Why separate adventure zones from siege zones? Often times the reason players siege a particular keep is because you want the resources/adventure zones that are near it. Separating them seems counter intuitive to this end.

Is this a performance related concern? I.E. the more NPC's in a zone the higher the load therefore it's harder to have larger player fights in that same zone? 

I predict the few keeps that are in the adventuring areas will be the most valuable ones and draw the largest sieges. If this in fact a performance related change, it may actually draw the largest fights to the zones with the most NPC's. 

more caravan-ing of resources from field to safety/processing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@blazzen / @Jah

what if the adventure map only had a fort with no siege protection. compared to the riskier caravan-ing of materials (both building and loot) to the more distant but more secure keep or castle that you would have greater investment in etc

Edited by Tinnis
Link to comment
Share on other sites

- Separation is for a performance concern.  We'll test this more with 5.8.

- Concentration of resources on higher rank parcels occurs with themes.  One canyon has ore and the other has stone.  So, we are concentrating general categories of resources.  I have a tool that can restrict or eliminate resources on a parcel, as well.  It's something we can further experiment with, but we're still evaluating 5.7.

- Tendrils are interesting features to the map.  The voids between parcels are filled with cliffs, which will have a thick fog over them that we've been experimenting with (not water).

- Once we have a 5.8 cluster of more zones, we'll evaluate adventure versus siege zones.  Nothing is set in stone, yet.  We don't have any data points to make a final decision.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Hanse said:

- Separation is for a performance concern.  We'll test this more with 5.8.

- Concentration of resources on higher rank parcels occurs with themes.  One canyon has ore and the other has stone.  So, we are concentrating general categories of resources.  I have a tool that can restrict or eliminate resources on a parcel, as well.  It's something we can further experiment with, but we're still evaluating 5.7.

- Tendrils are interesting features to the map.  The voids between parcels are filled with cliffs, which will have a thick fog over them that we've been experimenting with (not water).

- Once we have a 5.8 cluster of more zones, we'll evaluate adventure versus siege zones.  Nothing is set in stone, yet.  We don't have any data points to make a final decision.

lol dont u have an admin account so dev tracker shows responses like this? 

40 minutes ago, Andius said:

W/HoA were held up as like these mystical forces of highly skilled players with legendary theorycrafters chained to a desk in some deep dungeon holding all the arcane secrets we could use to win if only we knew them.

wiDfyPp.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Hanse said:

- Concentration of resources on higher rank parcels occurs with themes.  One canyon has ore and the other has stone.  So, we are concentrating general categories of resources.  I have a tool that can restrict or eliminate resources on a parcel, as well.  It's something we can further experiment with, but we're still evaluating 5.7.

This has to happen, please follow through on this. I suggest exaggerating it. As I run through the world, I should be able to predict fairly well what the next resource type I see is. If I am seeing Iron, the next node I see should be more likely to be Iron. Random resources is a PvP and Economy killer. Cluster those suckers!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No stronghold should be in the same area as prime POIs, Adventure Zones or Special Spawns. Logistics and economy give depth and meaning to "the war effort." It also causes additional points of a stress that can be applied by enemies. Building a network of security provides more game play incentives and rewards than easy win conditions like having an AZ in my castle front yard. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Keaggan said:

No stronghold should be in the same area as prime POIs, Adventure Zones or Special Spawns. Logistics and economy give depth and meaning to "the war effort." It also causes additional points of a stress that can be applied by enemies. Building a network of security provides more game play incentives and rewards than easy win conditions like having an AZ in my castle front yard. 

But wouldn't holding that castle and building it to begin with be difficult enough to reap the rewards? 

40 minutes ago, Andius said:

W/HoA were held up as like these mystical forces of highly skilled players with legendary theorycrafters chained to a desk in some deep dungeon holding all the arcane secrets we could use to win if only we knew them.

wiDfyPp.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Keaggan said:

No stronghold should be in the same area as prime POIs, Adventure Zones or Special Spawns. Logistics and economy give depth and meaning to "the war effort." It also causes additional points of a stress that can be applied by enemies. Building a network of security provides more game play incentives and rewards than easy win conditions like having an AZ in my castle front yard. 

What about with the build systems in the dregs? Would you restrict building based on proximity to POIs?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Zatch said:

What about with the build systems in the dregs? Would you restrict building based on proximity to POIs?

It'll be restricted the same way it is in EK's, by token limits. 

Blazzen <Lords of Death>

YouTube - Twitch - Guild

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mandalore said:

But wouldn't holding that castle and building it to begin with be difficult enough to reap the rewards? 

I see this as one dimensional gaming. The SH that sit right on AZ/POI will hold substantial power. This would adversely impact the whole risk/reward CF is built on. 

One example of this would be the need for traveling to the important resources on the fridges of a CW and caravan them back to base. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Keaggan said:

 

One example of this would be the need for traveling to the important resources on the fridges of a CW and caravan them back to base. 

Are we even sure that's going to be in the game?

40 minutes ago, Andius said:

W/HoA were held up as like these mystical forces of highly skilled players with legendary theorycrafters chained to a desk in some deep dungeon holding all the arcane secrets we could use to win if only we knew them.

wiDfyPp.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please consider changing the border of the rune gates to match one in concept art i.e white glow on the border.

"When you fear death, your sword becomes useless. When you fear nothing, the world fears you".
~ Connacht The Wolf.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Eschatos said:

Please consider changing the border of the rune gates to match one in concept art i.e white glow on the border.

I'm happy enough they still ended up looking like shimmery gates into another world.

rSHxVEY.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Keaggan said:

I see this as one dimensional gaming. The SH that sit right on AZ/POI will hold substantial power. This would adversely impact the whole risk/reward CF is built on. 

Making every Stronghold more equivalent is one-dimensional and makes choice of where to build essentially irrelevant.

There should be places to build that are better than others, and some should be way better. With procedurally-generated worlds and ending campaigns, it's a temporary, and well-earned benefit that takes planning, speed, and some luck.

I intend to lead my Dwarves to snowy mountains, and expect to attempt to corner the market on some ore or stone that only we have good access to.

I will also probably only play Dregs free-build campaign offerings, though, so...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Keaggan said:

I see this as one dimensional gaming. The SH that sit right on AZ/POI will hold substantial power. This would adversely impact the whole risk/reward CF is built on. 

One example of this would be the need for traveling to the important resources on the fridges of a CW and caravan them back to base. 

It is unlikely that any AZ or POI would provide everything you need, and thus allow for a self-sufficient base that removes the need to caravan.

And if a particular location holds substantial power, that automatically increases risk. People fight over the best spots.

IhhQKY6.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...