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

Siege Windows - Official discussion thread


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 150
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Introducing siege windows for major control points FULL STORY

Siege timers on everything is a great way to turn campaigns into a ghosttown non-primetime, will absolutely kill any chance of a playerbase outside of where the server is located, so unless you intend

I dont like the fact that they are dictating when and where I should PvP... I thought this game was full pvp but instead looks like they are starting to breakdown to carebears that would cry losing th

So, will any of this siege stuff apply to Dregs? Unless I'm somehow mistaken, we're supposed to be able to build our own stuff in the Dregs. Will scheduling apply there? How will it work?

I'm a little concerned about how much effort is being put into making 3 faction campaigns work while ignoring any other campaign types.

Guild Leader of Seeds of War

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Svenn said:

So, will any of this siege stuff apply to Dregs? Unless I'm somehow mistaken, we're supposed to be able to build our own stuff in the Dregs. Will scheduling apply there? How will it work?

I'm a little concerned about how much effort is being put into making 3 faction campaigns work while ignoring any other campaign types.

@Hanseshadow

 

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 post
Share on other sites

Siege timers on everything is a great way to turn campaigns into a ghosttown non-primetime, will absolutely kill any chance of a playerbase outside of where the server is located, so unless you intend to cater for more than just US/EU with servers you are basically telling guilds/players outside of these regions to either play Crowfall for 40% of the true game or look elsewhere. Reacting to neckbeard complaints about losing forts while they sleep during a phase of the game where the playerbase is so small is a kneejerk reaction to a problem that may or may not even exist once the playerbase grows.

Colour me disappointed, now not only do out of region players who have no local server get shafted on latency you add in locking them out of the very reason to play a campaign in the first place.

Forts aren't defended often even during primetime down to there being no reason outside of campaign points or the odd group out looking for a fight. Instead of timers would be better to give players more REASON to defend them over putting artificial restrictions. Simple things like harvesting buffs on the fort parcel for the holder, or add the keep thrall crafting buffs to certain tables in the fort, eg like E-Ville Blacksmith table has the buff, Locke's Harem has a buff on the Runecrafting table and so on.

Edited by Grivyn
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Grivyn said:

Siege timers on everything is a great way to turn campaigns into a ghosttown non-primetime

This change is intended to provide you with more fort pvp, not less. If the time when you play has a lower population, then it makes sense to have fights at fewer forts. That way the smaller population has an appropriate number of forts to fight over rather than spreading thinly across many forts.

IhhQKY6.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Jah said:

This change is intended to provide you with more fort pvp, not less. If the time when you play has a lower population, then it makes sense to have fights at fewer forts. That way the smaller population has an appropriate number of forts to fight over rather than spreading thinly across many forts.

 

The people who complain about this feature don't want fights. They want to be able to cap stuff without fighting, so your explanation will unfortunately fall on deaf ears.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Additionally when they are constantly available to attack theirs almost no incentive to guard them except for the “fun of it”. This creates the scenario where anyone actually playing to win will use their limited playtime to maximize their returns, so they don’t attack forts til they’re empty and do pretty much anything else productive in meantime.

Hence you get the circle cap trading we have today, because holding anything is basically impossible. And as we saw in the limited import campaign it’s far too easy to both shutdown and harass a fort being used as a base when you don’t have a keep without some sort of window restriction.

If all you want to do is fight all the time and that’s entirely where you get your enjoyment from, this is not the sort of game to play. Due to the many caveats of this being a video game and MMO some form of ebb and flow mechanics are required to mesh with the crafting and gathering logistics side of the game. Vulnerability windows are the way to both make winning valuable and to encourage more conflict. Some corner cases aren’t as great due to these restrictions but the overall health of the game is far better with these sorts of mechanics than by having total free for alls.

lPoLZtm.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, DocHollidaze said:

 

The people who complain about this feature don't want fights. They want to be able to cap stuff without fighting, so your explanation will unfortunately fall on deaf ears.

Sure, because currently everytime a fort is attacked in the servers primetime players run to defend it. Most of the time there are no defenders because there are no players nearby to defend (small current player base) and players who are nearby don't care if the fort is taken anyway. Once again give the players a reason to stop xp farming/gathering and actually defend, instead of a bandaid of timers on anything remotely meaningful so the current few that want to constantly pvp can be handheld and told "look go here to capture this thing" which will still be uncontested cause noone but them cares enough to attack/defend it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Grivyn said:

Siege timers on everything is a great way to turn campaigns into a ghosttown non-primetime, will absolutely kill any chance of a playerbase outside of where the server is located, so unless you intend to cater for more than just US/EU with servers you are basically telling guilds/players outside of these regions to either play Crowfall for 40% of the true game or look elsewhere. Reacting to neckbeard complaints about losing forts while they sleep during a phase of the game where the playerbase is so small is a kneejerk reaction to a problem that may or may not even exist once the playerbase grows.

Colour me disappointed, now not only do out of region players who have no local server get shafted on latency you add in locking them out of the very reason to play a campaign in the first place.

Forts aren't defended often even during primetime down to there being no reason outside of campaign points or the odd group out looking for a fight. Instead of timers would be better to give players more REASON to defend them over putting artificial restrictions. Simple things like harvesting buffs on the fort parcel for the holder, or add the keep thrall crafting buffs to certain tables in the fort, eg like E-Ville Blacksmith table has the buff, Locke's Harem has a buff on the Runecrafting table and so on.

Your post assumes that there will be no forts open during non-primetime, but that is a bad assumption.  At any given time, even non-primetime, instead of there being 12 possible locations for a fight, there may only be one.  It is entirely possible with this system that there is ALWAYS one to fight over in any given hour, with the difference being 3 or 4 being open during prime time. It's active population based, so can and will be adjusted to create more, not less, action.

Your post also assumes that the world and fort count size remains the same, and does not in fact become larger than it is, with the increase in attendant forts to accommodate.

Having a scheduled flipping and attack window and the tables for crafting are THE PRIMARY reason to own fort/keeps. 

With fort vulnerability being a known factor, crafters can be reasonably certain that they will not be subject to casual harrassment. It will not stop dedicated assassination groups from crawling into them and trying for some easy kills of distracted crafters, as used to happen in keeps. But PVP and conquest groups will know where they have to go, and it won't be to harass the crafters in a locked down fort.

It will be critically important that your last fort be held at all costs, or your out of the game till you can capture another one. Right now, if it drops who cares. Round up a couple of friends and go take one back (or go solo, that's still possible for a stealther). 

It is probable with this system that there is ALWAYS one to fight over in any given hour, with the difference being 3 or 4 being open during prime time. 

Edited by KrakkenSmacken
Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Grivyn said:

Sure, because currently everytime a fort is attacked in the servers primetime players run to defend it. Most of the time there are no defenders because there are no players nearby to defend (small current player base) and players who are nearby don't care if the fort is taken anyway. Once again give the players a reason to stop xp farming/gathering and actually defend, instead of a bandaid of timers on anything remotely meaningful so the current few that want to constantly pvp can be handheld and told "look go here to capture this thing" which will still be uncontested cause noone but them cares enough to attack/defend it.

 

All of the behavior you described are partially a result of the problems being addressed by the capture windows.

- People don't run to defend unless they are near

- People don't defend because they can just recap later when the enemy has left

 

-When people don't have a keep, they certainly want to have a fort to craft in.

- When people want to win the campaign, they certainly cap forts so they can accumulate points.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Svenn said:

So, will any of this siege stuff apply to Dregs? Unless I'm somehow mistaken, we're supposed to be able to build our own stuff in the Dregs. Will scheduling apply there? How will it work?

Dregs will need siege scheduling in some format - no one wants to have to defend their keep 24/7.  Hopefully this is a system they can build on to let Guilds control the windows for objectives they own in Dregs.

 

1 hour ago, Grivyn said:

give players more REASON to defend them over putting artificial restrictions. Simple things like harvesting buffs on the fort parcel for the holder, or add the keep thrall crafting buffs to certain tables in the fort

There should also be more strategic reasons to hold forts, totally agree with that. I have some concerns about windows (will it always favor Uncle Bob?) but willing to test it and see how it plays.

tiPrpwh.png

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I'm hopeful this will make night fights more exciting by increasing the chances of running into an enemy capping group, but I'm cautious that if taken to an extreme it could entirely kill PvP by making single stack zerg vs. single stack zerg the only viable way to do it, something few people are going to log in for with the current faction imbalance.

Some kind of balance will be needed between capping groups not encountering each other enough, and killing the need to use tactics / ability for a smaller numerical force to resist a zerg.

We'll see how well this balance is achieved.

"To hell with honor. Win."

A Beginner's Guide to Crowfall (5.8.5 Edition)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Andius said:

I'm cautious that if taken to an extreme it could entirely kill PvP by making single stack zerg vs. single stack zerg the only viable way to do it, something few people are going to log in for with the current faction imbalance.

Large group vs large group pvp is the inevitable and seems to be intended goal of those large keep fights.  If your faction, guild, group, cabal, tribe, coterie or murder wants to control an assets but lacks the means to defend it you won’t keep it for long and that’s at the core of sieges in CF.  

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 post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, srathor said:

Let us all go balance then we can all be "winners"

 

It still confounds me that two guilds (40-50) people have so smashed the population so harshly that this is the only recourse left for people.  

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 post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, miraluna said:

Dregs will need siege scheduling in some format - no one wants to have to defend their keep 24/7.  Hopefully this is a system they can build on to let Guilds control the windows for objectives they own in Dregs.

 

There should also be more strategic reasons to hold forts, totally agree with that. I have some concerns about windows (will it always favor Uncle Bob?) but willing to test it and see how it plays.

There should be an initiatory event, rather than having a guaranteed vulnerability window every x hours/days. The attackers should have to commit to the attack by crafting the Bane Tree which beings the scheduling event, followed by the siege event. Finding the materials for crafting a Bane Tree should be prohibitive/expensive, making offensive operations costly and deliberate.

Shadowbane - House Avari/Hy'shen
"Gimp elves get good elves killed." - Belina

Avari Discord - https://discord.gg/Bch24PV

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...