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

You Can Only Build Cities On Specific Plots In Campaigns?

Recommended Posts

Answer this first....  Results...

 

Lets start off... maybe its just me.... Its entirely possible. When this game was originally presented I either missed entirely, it wasn't outright stated, or I was distracted by the constant references to Shadowbane; In Crowfall, as I understand it, players will NOT have the ability to plop down a city/castle/building/wall/etc anywhere they want. Instead players/guilds will find "ruins" scattered and pre-placed by ACE on their procedurally generated maps, Players can then rebuild those ruins and THOSE are the player cities (players CAN build structures/walls anywhere they want within the confines of these "plots"). Inferring from this, players will not be able to build walls or towers or other structures to guard choke points, points of interest, or strategic locations.

 

I'm not going to dive into why I think I've been misled (you've already got my money and its on me for not reading closer), but the real issue is the difference between what existed in Shadowbane and whats being presented in Crowfall. What sort of long standing ramifications does this alteration of the originally perceived system imply on the game as a whole?

 

As I see it this makes Campaigns slightly more interesting as their are very real "land-grab" rushes at the beginning of a campaign. If your guild is found without a chair when the music stops... your only options seem to be to "pledge fealty" to a guild that "won" a chair... or declare war on them and take it from them. Interesting for sure, but how does this impact the "cityless" and where they respawn? If I don't have a city, why am I now at a suddenly huge disadvantage in terms of regrouping (assuming I respawn randomly if I dont have a city yet) versus that guild that just happened to get to a city and rebuild it first?

 

edit: Long term.. apply how export/imports could lead to an impossible to overcome slope where the victor from one campaign can immediately import the necessary resources to construct a city before newcomers (who lost the last campaign and have no resources to import) could.

 

Simultaneously, this decision seems to shortchange the logic behind POI's and resources nodes. If cities are pre-placed to be in proximity to resources, doesn't that sort of invalidate the idea of strategically placing cities (ala Shadowbane) to be close to the ones most important to my guild? That chance of making a mistake and removing my ability to make decisions feels very opposite of the Kickstarters theme and overall message of "you have lots of choices, not all of them will be right... and you will die. a lot".

 

There are countless other advantages/disadvantages to this system, just kicking off the discussion with the two biggest issues I have with this system.

Edited by scree

Obsidian-ForumSignature.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd also like some clarification as to why Castles and Strongholds are being pre-placed as "ruins" at the start of the campaign. Strategic placement near specific resource factories or other PoI's makes early exploration all the more important and valuable. Later, those strategically placed strongholds make for tempting targets to guilds and nations looking expand.


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

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, like you said, you're looking at it from a Shadowbane perspective. Indeed, if you didn't get a city at server-up, you had to pledge fealty to someone who could get you a city. And you had to do that, because in order to take a city -- you had to have a city (or at least the guild you subbed to had to). This may not be the case. If LOTD claims a city first but PAX didn't get a city, the possibly they could just zerg Valor and take his city from him. Assuming that any guild could siege a city in this fashion. They haven't disclosed siege mechanics yet.

 

Also with Shadowbane, if you died within your city grid, you didn't respawn in your city. You respawned at a ruins. According to their POI map, there's graveyards where everyone will respawn. If they get a city near a graveyard, then yeah that's a significant advantage -- depending on how graveyards choose who spawns there. As long as plays who die in a city don't respawn in their city, then that won't be a huge thing.

 

Good questions though. I feel like they're just working on combat for the next year and mechanics like these will be on the backburner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure I see it as musical chairs persay. Sure a guild may land in a chair before others but if they aren't capable of defending it then they will lost it in a very, very short order.   That is, unless they forge alliances in exchange for some of their newly acquired resources which is half the fun  :) .

 

I just think there could be a lot of unforseen consequences if guilds can place structures / cities anywhere. Not to use the 'Shadowbane' example too much but after a few months owning a city was no prize. The map was littered with them. They could all be destroyed but often people didn't bother if they didn't serve an immediate purpose.

 

I'm sure the city placements made by the development team will be in some pretty ideal / interesting places.  Whether a city is preplaced by a desired resource or a guild plops their city by one the ensuing battle / diplomacy will probably be the same.

 

(To be honest I'm still too new to realize preassigned plots was in effect if that's the case but understand the rationale)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not to use the 'Shadowbane' example too much but after a few months owning a city was no prize. The map was littered with them. They could all be destroyed but often people didn't bother if they didn't serve an immediate purpose.

 

 

As it stands the second major patch to Shadowbane (as I was told... I'd quit by this time) limited the number of cities in geographical areas. One could easily understand them limiting the number of cities based on the size of the map. Free placement does not mean I wouldn't support limitations as to the number of cities on any given Campaign. That element of strategy would still exist. You could even further limit the number of cities to guilds/alliances (only one per guild-hierarchy and all sub-guilds pledged to it, etc).

 

I guess I'm taking issue largely with their removal of a choice (or a mistake depending how wisely one places a city) from the players. I wasn't expecting an Archeage style PvP world where the locations are preselected for us and we just build on their plots. This feels like a step back from Shadowbane and to be honest a complete misrepresentation of the game as a whole during the pre-kickstarter/kickstarter conversations.

Edited by scree

Obsidian-ForumSignature.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lets start off... maybe its just me.... Its entirely possible. When this game was originally presented I either missed entirely, it wasn't outright stated, or I was distracted by the constant references to Shadowbane; In Crowfall, as I understand it, players will NOT have the ability to plop down a city/castle/building/wall/etc anywhere they want. Instead players/guilds will find "ruins" scattered and pre-placed by ACE on their procedurally generated maps, Players can then rebuild those ruins and THOSE are the player cities (players CAN build structures/walls anywhere they want within the confines of these "plots"). Inferring from this, players will not be able to build walls or towers or other structures to guard choke points, points of interest, or strategic locations.

 

Trust me, it's not just you.  I've seen many people having this misconception.  Nowhere have I seen or heard them say that this is the only way it can be done.  Just because they said there's going to be ruins and you CAN build them up, doesn't mean that's the only way it can be done.

 

A couple excerpts from their FAQs:

 

Additionally, remember that these worlds are dynamic; players can BUILD and DESTROY features ON, and the features OF, the Worlds themselves. Find an old castle ruins, clear it out, and rebuild it into a fortress. Gather stone and build a stronghold at the mouth of a river. Collapse a mine to deny someone the production of Iron. Drop a forge to garrison your army, then build a wall around it to defend it from attackers.​

 

 

 

 

Players collect unique reagents to create BLOODSTONE TREES. A Bloodstone Tree, once planted, cannot be moved – it can only be destroyed. And these areas are distinct – the area around two Trees cannot overlap.

You can build defenses (and structures) around your Bloodstone Tree. At the time of planting, you set a cycle timer for that tree (X hours PROTECTED, followed by Y hours UNPROTECTED). This cycle will be continued until the Campaign ends or the Tree is destroyed.

When the Tree is PROTECTED, the city is safe. The tree will magically protect all of the structures within a radius, protecting them from harm. During this time, however, the tree does not produce many BLOODSTONES.

 

I think both these quotes show that it's going to allow for a bit of player choice in where you're allowed to build.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea, it'd be cool if we can choose where to build but it probably comes down to development time. It's probably far easier for preplanned plots to be generated than working out terra forming and such for placing buildings anywhere. Hopefully after the core mechanics are all complete this is something that can be added down the road. That's one of the brilliant things about dying worlds, there are always new worlds to build on when new features are added.

Edited by dreaden

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like I told scree in Slack, if you want to understand how the building will work in the CW, you can't ignore the EK FAQ and info drops.  Ace has mentioned numerous times that they first develop for the CW and then provide those same things for players to use within their EKs.  So, in particular to placement, read the EK FAQ #16 and #17: https://crowfall.com/#/faq/eternal-kingdoms

 

We will have "free-placement" within the bounds of these footprint grids, which you can see an example green grid in this image:

 

EK_2-ParcelManagement_RC1.jpg


> Suddenly, a Nyt appears in the discussion...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel this is a major consequence of randomly generated maps. In Shadowbane the map was accurately built to allow players to build cities pretty much everywhere. Having players build anywhere on a randomly generated map will probably be dangerous, unless the map gets very polished first.

 

I have seen pre-placed city spots work before (on DF), so I am not really troubled by their choice, even if I'd like to see free-placement as well.

Edited by Fenris DDevil

y9tj8G5.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I voted predefined location but honestly like everything else the have released or told us, there is so much up in the air, who knows what will actually be in game or not.

 

They spew tons of talk and ideas but concrete substantial information is a pretty rare commodity. I have come to the conclusion they are building as they go... The end may not even be what anyone expected.

Edited by Nakawe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since worlds are not permanent, they are free to experiment. If something does not work, they'll do something else. They way they have the worlds implode every month is perfect for running little experiments and taking the best results for refining the experience for the next Campaign.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didnt play Shadowbane, but due to this sir Todd who seems to be one of the founder of Shadowbane and is one of the founder of this game, I think you should give him a bit more credit if you liked Shadowbane.

You shouldnt just pick one condition that differs from Shadowbane, even if its maybe in your eyes a very important one, and then go spin off on that and start to believe the game is ruined now because of that.

I think ACE is thinking about what they are doing and why they do it, so i guess they can reasoning why they are doing this game like that way.

 

Also from what I understood, the places where you can build a town arent assigned by the devs, the system makes it, the maps are all automatically generated.

Edited by Urahara

After EverQuest Next is gone, its Star Citizen for me.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe that there is some choice in where we can set up buildings and cities, given what they've shown us in the kickstarter and in the FAQs. Now, will everywhere be available to be built upon: don't know. There hasn't been much talk about building in the campaign worlds, just the EK, but they have stated that their tools in the CW is translated over to the EK, so I believe building in the CW will play a part.

 

I remember them saying that the main "gate" to building is available and collected resources, but they were talking about the EK at the time. So before everyone begins shouting fire, do we have any word from the devs about building on the CW? Maybe a link that we could all see?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe that there is some choice in where we can set up buildings and cities, given what they've shown us in the kickstarter and in the FAQs. ...

 

The cities are pretty much strongholds/forts in a ruined state and require upgrading.    Strongholds and forts are pre-established on the plots that are placed within the world (EK or CW), and since the CW will be generated/built by Ace, the strongholds/forts and other POIs will already be pre-located on the map.

 

...So before everyone begins shouting fire, do we have any word from the devs about building on the CW? Maybe a link that we could all see?

 

See the most recent Dev Q&A as they answered my question on this, which is that players will have the ability to construct the buildings that go in/around the strongholds/forts.  It will be similar to the cottages and other buildings you place on plots within the EK, since it uses the same system.  You can see an example image that I posted in my prior reply.


> Suddenly, a Nyt appears in the discussion...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like I told scree in Slack, if you want to understand how the building will work in the CW, you can't ignore the EK FAQ and info drops.  Ace has mentioned numerous times that they first develop for the CW and then provide those same things for players to use within their EKs.  So, in particular to placement, read the EK FAQ #16 and #17: https://crowfall.com/#/faq/eternal-kingdoms

 

We will have "free-placement" within the bounds of these footprint grids, which you can see an example green grid in this image:

 

How I understood it was that ACE was trying to reassure PvP players that development time wasn't spent specifically for EK stuff, that most of those things would be used both in the CWs and EKs. 

 

I think it doesn't mean that EK and CW systems / content are identical.

Edited by courant101

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How I understood it was that ACE was trying to reassure PvP players that development time wasn't spent specifically for EK stuff, that most of those things would be used both in the CWs and EKs. 

 

I think it doesn't mean that EK and CW systems are identical.

 

The differences between the two are:

 

  1. the gameplay rules:  CWs are bound by seasons and time, with a victory condition, while the EK is permanent, without a victory condition, and the players define the rules (e.g. PvP) and who controls the territories.  POIs and territories within a CW are fought for, while they are assigned to players by the EK owner.
  2. world design: CWs are generated/built by Ace and to support the CW rules along with establishing and naming the territories, while the EK is built by the player however they wish and with whatever they want to name their territories.
  3. maximum world size: EKs are far smaller in size than a CW.
  4. plot types and building structure availability: the CW will obviously have far more options than the EK ever will.

Otherwise, objects and functionality will most likely be the same, except that the EK has a limited/reduced scope.  I'd be surprised if they'd waste resources developing 2 separate games when they can do it with 1 development effort and just toggle specific features per object on whether it's used in a EK or particular CW.

 

The route they're taking is very smart, since they're focused on building the CW and it's very easy to just expose some of it to players for their EK, without additional development.  It's the same system, but just a difference on who controls it.


> Suddenly, a Nyt appears in the discussion...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How I understood it was that ACE was trying to reassure PvP players that development time wasn't spent specifically for EK stuff, that most of those things would be used both in the CWs and EKs. 

 

I think it doesn't mean that EK and CW systems / content are identical.

 

When ACE said this, they meant that any content like assets that were available in the CW could be available in the EK world. The EK/CW always had the same world building system. I think the procedural generation of the CW comes from the fact that no one owns the campaign world and the parcels have the be placed somehow. 

Edited by purplestreak

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you want to understand how the building system will work, and how the CW may be generated, and the various building options we may have available.... learn everything about the EK.... regardless if you have any interest in your personal EK.  The info is actually relative to the functionality within the CW as well, even if some of it will be handled for you.


> Suddenly, a Nyt appears in the discussion...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The way I think CW buildings will work is that towns, resources factories and other POIs will be pre-placed at the beginning of the campaign, in a ruins state, while certain strongholds may be freely placed by the players on the map but with restrictions.

 

As boogiee wrote, the FAQ mentions that there may be different types of construction and placement of building in CWs : Rebuild ruins, build a stronghold at the mouth of a river, drop a forge, build walls, build defenses and structures around  Bloodstone Trees, etc.

 

In an interview, they talked about how buildings that are destroyed can be built back up, that we can build the walls, just like in the KS demo. In another interview, they say that players will have building tools to build castle walls and towers and place buildings.

 

The devs also talked about this in a Q&A and said that in CW, when players find a structure that was dropped by the system, it will be in a ruined state, and when a player drops one, it will be in construction state.

Developers answered some questions in an interview, one of them was about the impact of players actions on towns, NPCs, etc. and the answer was that players will be building and upgrading villages in-game, and to another question about the ability for players to create new villages by themselves, the answer was that they could in their Eternal Kingdoms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The way I think CW buildings will work is that towns, resources factories and other POIs will be pre-placed at the beginning of the campaign, in a ruins state, while certain strongholds may be freely placed by the players on the map but with restrictions.

 

As boogiee wrote, the FAQ mentions that there may be different types of construction and placement of building in CWs : Rebuild ruins, build a stronghold at the mouth of a river, drop a forge, build walls, build defenses and structures around  Bloodstone Trees, etc.

 

In an interview, they talked about how buildings that are destroyed can be built back up, that we can build the walls, just like in the KS demo. In another interview, they say that players will have building tools to build castle walls and towers and place buildings.

 

The devs also talked about this in a Q&A and said that in CW, when players find a structure that was dropped by the system, it will be in a ruined state, and when a player drops one, it will be in construction state.

Developers answered some questions in an interview, one of them was about the impact of players actions on towns, NPCs, etc. and the answer was that players will be building and upgrading villages in-game, and to another question about the ability for players to create new villages by themselves, the answer was that they could in their Eternal Kingdoms.

 

... and all of that can be done within the current plot and "footprint" system they have designed.  Now, things are subject to change.. and one thing that they have made clear in recent months, is that strongholds will be pre-placed in CWs.  Most likely because they're part of the plot system and not free-floating structure entities like cottages.  Players don't have plot level access within CWs, like they do in the EK.


> Suddenly, a Nyt appears in the discussion...

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...