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

Sieges: curious to hear from SB folks

Recommended Posts

At game launch ToLs would have 1500+ binds (includes Alts).

 

 

Yeah, even later some of the CN cities had tons of tons of binds. There wasn't ever a limit on it.

 

 

There was a limit imposed on the amount of cities that could be subbed. You could technically have however many subs you want but only 6 or 7 could have a tree.


C4sIZDW.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone with 0 experience will HATE sbemo and MB.

 

Sieges were Shadowbane.  The created some of the most memorable experiences I hate in gaming.  Defending against an entire server and then burning it down until they closed it.

 

15v50 and winning.  15v50 and losing.  20v20 for hours.  

 

and my personal favorite BUCKET HEALING.  Suck it.

 

 

I can remember being awake for 48hrs straight to bucket heal the walls of a city.  No one else was available to make sure the walls stayed up while we waited for the actual bane.  Talk about frustrating!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This got moved to the SB forum but I feel like that kind of defeats the original purpose of this thread...

 

Because we're dirty sb'ers. Keep the trash in the ghetto.

 

I always find it curious though that non-sb inspired threads get moved here if they have anything to do with SB. Maybe because of the tendencies of shadowbane related threads to de-rail.

 

But, I guess when you think about...they could've just came to the ghetto and ask the question here instead of being lazy and putting it in general discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

+1 on the derail as well as our normal rough and tumble

 

hey...i only go tone point so far...so credit where it's due, they will give a lot of leeway if you play it right....

 

now, iam a one of a kind king troll...so all you peons GEDDOFFA MAH BRIDGE!!!

 

/under

 

Excelsior!


FIQw0eP.png

let the Code build the World and it's Laws....let the Players build the rest...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This got moved to the SB forum but I feel like that kind of defeats the original purpose of this thread...

Agreed. I'm grateful for the info posted here. I had been reading up on SB since the Play2Crush website release, but guides and wikis often assume a level of understanding that I didn't have. Some of the stuff here has helped me better understand how things actually worked in Shadowbane. Thanks for that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed. I'm grateful for the info posted here. I had been reading up on SB since the Play2Crush website release, but guides and wikis often assume a level of understanding that I didn't have. Some of the stuff here has helped me better understand how things actually worked in Shadowbane. Thanks for that.

I think one of the things the SB players is hoping for, especially after seeing there will be siege warfare, is that the penalty for the defender losing the siege is not as high as SB was. Guilds that didn't dupe would spend months farming in SB to build a city (Cities leveled up just like players did and they cost a lot of gold) and farming in SB was equivalent to watching paint dry. So after all those months they would get baned and if they were a 1 tree guild they had no home after losing and with the prospect of repeating that months long paint drying session in an attempt to rebuild. A lot of those guilds left early on when that happened. Of course OTOH we don't want pre made citys that just need to be captured either, like in GW2, because it takes the risk out of player/guild/nation actions.

 

Hope they find the sweet spot.

Edited by gauis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

+1 on the derail as well as our normal rough and tumble

 

hey...i only go tone point so far...so credit where it's due, they will give a lot of leeway if you play it right....

 

now, iam a one of a kind king troll...so all you peons GEDDOFFA MAH BRIDGE!!!

 

/under

 

Excelsior!

 

 

Once the competition got out of the way ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I recall correctly, I lost the first three cities I joined.  Eventually joined a guild and helped build a city. Lost it.  We built another, then one of our members bad mouthed a QFT member so they baned us.  Whooped our butts but good.  Then told us we were good sports and they really enjoyed the bane and gave us our city back.  

Lost a lot of cities during my SB career, won a lot of them too.  The ONLY time I ever felt like quitting was when HOD would bane us. Hated going to a bane only to freeze up and not be able to move until the bane was over. Felt like quitting, but didnt.

And yes, I remember a bane or two that lasted so long that guildies slowly fell out until it would only be myself and the guild leader fighting.

Good times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This got moved to the SB forum but I feel like that kind of defeats the original purpose of this thread...

 

yeah, this thread was about crowfall, sorting through what the siege image tells us. it was supposed to be a way for sb folks to help those of us coming from other gaming backgrounds to understand some basic siege concepts (i.e., what we can anticipate in cf). meh, **** happens.

Edited by dead sparrow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think one of the things the SB players is hoping for, especially after seeing there will be siege warfare, is that the penalty for the defender losing the siege is not as high as SB was.

 

I think that's exactly what we are looking for.  What's the point of burning someone's city down if they don't completely lose it?

 

If you haven't played SB, it's hard to describe the feeling of accomplishment after weeks of preparing for banes, days setting them up, and hours fighting them.

 

It would be awful if you wasted all that time for the loser to get some half built starter city just so they didn't lose everything.


HfLOYLH.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that's exactly what we are looking for.  What's the point of burning someone's city down if they don't completely lose it?

 

If you haven't played SB, it's hard to describe the feeling of accomplishment after weeks of preparing for banes, days setting them up, and hours fighting them.

 

It would be awful if you wasted all that time for the loser to get some half built starter city just so they didn't lose everything.

 

Coming from EvE, I'd hope for a lot longer (Weeks, Months, even years) wars.  Having a single, blow out fight with a binary (all/nothing) outcome seems too simplistic to me.  Personally, I'd hope that the Guild's need to build/keep stuff would scale with the group size.  No defeat should be complete, nor should any victory.  In EvE, It's all about group cohesion, such that if your group is wiped off the map it's quite possible to still be a huge threat and to grow big on the map again.  In EvE, there are very powerful entities that NEVER held (conquered) territory longer than it took/takes to sell the land off to new "owners". 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Coming from EvE, I'd hope for a lot longer (Weeks, Months, even years) wars.  Having a single, blow out fight with a binary (all/nothing) outcome seems too simplistic to me.  Personally, I'd hope that the Guild's need to build/keep stuff would scale with the group size.  No defeat should be complete, nor should any victory.  In EvE, It's all about group cohesion, such that if your group is wiped off the map it's quite possible to still be a huge threat and to grow big on the map again.  In EvE, there are very powerful entities that NEVER held (conquered) territory longer than it took/takes to sell the land off to new "owners". 

 

 

Trust me, wars don't generally end in one bane. Most nations have several trees and everyone in SB at this point is extremely resilient to losing turf and then getting back up to retake it. Yes, it really sucks to lose a tree and it can be devastating to morale but that is where you have to come back and figure out what you custarded up and how to fix it.

 

Recordings aren't just for showing the world good fights. You can learn a lot from rewatching fights as well as monitoring voice communication for the correct call outs, target calling, etc.

 

It is hard to catch it all on the fly.

 

You find a similar thing with SB and cities. A lot of time conquered cities get sold off to new guilds. Problem with that is generally the guild that lost it wants it back. So those new owners of the city now have purchased something that may be targeted. Depends on the guild though. If it is legitimately a new guild, some guilds will let it drop for the sake of allowing more competition to flourish.

 

A guild's needs most definitely scale with group size in that any new spec requires full sets of new gear that need resources to be rolled. Mines aren't mentioned often on here but outside of banes, controlling mines is hugely important for getting high end gear. Some guilds circumvent this by running only a single or a couple of specs. That is somewhat out of the ordinary but certain specs are tried and true for some guilds. I've always liked having multiple tools for as many situations as possible.

 

It is very difficult to adequately describe SB in a few paragraphs. While the PvE aspect of the game was pretty simple, the PvP aspect is extremely complex.


C4sIZDW.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.angelfire.com/ex/xanten/

 

Check 'at out boyo but shield yer eyes from tha brightness.  It tells tha tale of one of tha most epic sieges 'at happened shortly after tha land of Aerynth came to be.  Hundreds were involved.  Tha scale was massive.  It lasted three straight days - day an night - as it was before tha changes 'at prevented a degree o' asset destruction before tha bane went live.  One of me fondest an' earliest memories.

Good memories. I spent 8 hours that first night scouting inside their walls and relaying info back to the commander of the Hands of Providence. I was with the Penshire Street Bakery descendant guild, the Dragon's Blood Laundry.

 

I managed to PK a few people at their tree, as well as a couple of naked guys running around gold healing the walls. My favorite moment, however, was standing on the NE corner tower among their main AoE force, and popping out of stealth to snare a couple guys from an allied guild who were just jerks and needed to die. Xanten's defenders killed my enemies for me, and because no one really recorded chat logs at the time, I doubt they ever knew why they got so slow all of a sudden. I'm sure they blamed lag. :)

 

By the way, Armin, I was the scout who relayed the unwatched gap the initial fury fly in popped through. I'm not sure if your screenshots are from a subsequent one or not, since the first wave took a couple of groups of tanks and flew them all the way into town, where they wreaked some havoc on their AFKs and REMFs. I know that was about 1.5 hours before I finally called it a night and hit the sack, so it may be that the one you show is a subsequent push that another scout deserves credit for.

Edited by vandarr

CF_Van.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A recent dev quote....

 

 

hey gang,

 

...without (hopefully) derailing your thread, I will go "on the record" saying that one of our major design goals for Crowfall is to dramatically reduce the traditional "grind" common to MMOs today.

 

hope that helps,

 

Todd

ACE

 

I wonder how this reduced grinding will affect sieges.  It sounds like the entire process was very "grindy;"  the build city, conquer city, lose city.  Lots and lots of money involved to both build a new city or to bane an existing city, then of course the consequences of a loss.  All that money had to be farmed.  I'm curious how SB sieges could have worked, and be as meaningful as they were, without the grind involved.

Edited by lucius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A recent dev quote....

 

 

I wonder how this reduced grinding will affect sieges.  It sounds like the entire process was very "grindy;"  the build city, conquer city, lose city.  Lots and lots of money involved to both build a new city or to bane an existing city, then of course the consequences of a loss.  All that money had to be farmed.  I'm curious how SB sieges could have worked, and be as meaningful as they were, without the grind involved.

They worked far better after the first year, when the "city build" grind was lessened (largely by adding mines, but also with cost reductions). You knew baning someone would get you a fight, not lose you an enemy when they quit the game.


CF_Van.png

Share this post


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...