Added discussion thread for Goblinworks Blog: Player-Created Buildings and Structures.
Goblin Squad Member
|
Each hex can have a variety of potential locations suitable for construction. The developers will build these into the terrain as the hex is designed.
Hideouts normally cannot be found once constructed, although the potential exists for certain types of characters to learn how to find them.
How long do you expect it will take before the complete list of Construction Sites is published on the web? Once that happens, will it be practical for a group of Thief Hunters to travel to each possible Hideout location, use their skills to reveal any constructed Hideout present, and destroy it? Is this behavior expected and supported? Or will something be done to lessen the likelihood that anyone will have a practical knowledge of all Hideout sites?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If anyone's ever had any dreams of running an Inn in a fantasy setting, now is the time to jump for joy.
Like what I'm seeing, I'm sure there will be other, more specialized structures (probably tied to player settlements) to be revealed in the future. I'm particularly interested in structures that automatically harvest resources such as farms, mines, and sawmills.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Nihimon
Finding these locations will enable characters to erect a building on the site
My interpretation of this is that each person will need to find these sites rather than revealing their location to all once discovered.
If the sites can be found by just locating them, but finding a hideout requires a greater level of skill, then I see it likely that players who wish to create their own hideouts will try to be quick about finding such locations and then quickly building the hideout before anyone else knows that it's even an option. Perhaps do it as a group and set up guards in the area to attack anyone who gets too close before it's ready. You know, make them think it was just a random attack taking advantage of the PvP opportunities in the unlawful wilderness...
Of course others will be scouting early on just for fun. So if players playing assassins or bandits want to keep their headquarters extra secret, they'll get themselves organized and do what they can to at least lead people away from their base while it's being prepared, upgrade it as soon as possible to make it even harder to find, and then afterwards try not to draw too much attention to the actual location. I'd personally go so far as to create secondary "decoy" bases so that people won't get too suspicious about not finding anything in a hex where they suspect assassin or bandit activity.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
There comes a point later on in the life of the game where if construction sites are always static, then eventually everyone will know where every possible build site is.
I'm not sure if that's a problem or not.
Maybe each hex can have a number of possible locations for certain types of buildings, but a cap on the number of buildings per hex?
But that seems kind of silly too. *shrug*
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
So instead of having to use very specialized equipment to drop people out of fast travel, you can build a structure near well-traveled areas? Awesome! Thieves will have to decide where to put their hideout: Near busy roads for more targets? Or in less-traveled areas to make them harder to find? Nicely done.
As for the other structures, I'm hoping that what the blog meant by "suitable locations", it meant AREAS for building, not exact spots. If the suitable locations for buildings are restricted to certain hotspots, it wouldn't be too hard to locate each one and post a list of them on a wiki. That would make finding structures way too easy. Instead, suitable locations should mean a suitable region for building; you can put your fort anywhere within an area of, say, an acre of this point in the hex (as an example).
posted by Ryan Dancey on Wednesday, Friday 29, 2012Probably meant to be February, not Friday.
Curse these silly human fingers! I can guarantee that I won't make this mistake on the next blog :)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
So instead of having to use very specialized equipment to drop people out of fast travel, you can build a structure near well-traveled areas? Awesome! Thieves will have to decide where to put their hideout: Near busy roads for more targets? Or in less-traveled areas to make them harder to find? Nicely done.
The answer is bothNear busy roads for ambushes. In less traveled areas for their own security. As well as decoys, of course :D
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
This blog is great and I'm very excited with the amount of effort and depth being placed on construction in PFO!
Ownership of buildings can be transferred-
This makes being a builder potentially very profitable which is great for players that want to roll as a builder/crafter as a main.
Docks which will permit watercraft -
Very excited about using boats to transfer goods and for exploration. Would be fun to build a hideout alongside the river and wait for cargo ships to pass by!
There are a few things that I find troublesome:
Destroying Buildings -
I like the idea of being able to destroy buildings but what about the solo players? How can you expect as a solo player to be able to defend your own building?
And how will GW prevent large charters from destroying every building in the game? Sounds like a good way to grief. Maybe if it just takes a very very long time to destroy buildings and don't reward players for it, this might not be so prevalent.
I could be totally off here but my first impression was if your not in a large guild and are primarily a solo player you will eventually feel disconnected from the world.
One on the most important mechanics in sandbox games is being able to carve out your own little section of the world, to know you have a home in- game that is yours. This makes players feel connected to the world/game. I hope the solo adventurer will not be forgotten, or maybe PFO will turn out to be designed primarily for very large charters and that's ok to. But I have found in most sandbox games a good portion of the player base is solo.
Anyways great blog and I'm excited to here about what middlware GW is going to use and what it's capable of.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
ABlackUhuru the blog does say that ownership of a building can be transferred, but nothing about transferring the building itself.
Yes transfering ownership (selling buildings). I don't mean actually picking up your inn and transporting it to a new location, I don't think that would make much sense.
Edited my original post to better clarify...
Goblinworks Founder
|
The one thing with buildings from Ultima Online and Darkfall experience. Is that it will be needed to test thoroughly for exploits. With what spells and craftables might be in game, probably some potential threats.
But otherwise I like the idea of being able to create, repair, and upgrade structures depending on material availability and time. It's just makes crafting even more exciting.
The roleplaying possibilities with inns/hideouts... OMG it's a mind explosion of good stuff in this blog.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
You do have a good point though about making good money selling them. I can see some lovely partnerships forming between scouts looking for prime locations, specialized builders throwing up a site quickly, and the guards who protect them while they do so, and then selling the whole thing to a would be land owner.
And lastly selling the location, for anything that's supposed to be secretive, to potential bandits >:D "So and so is at such and such a location with a brand new building which he's stocking up and getting ready to upgrade. Said he and his whole guild were going to be storing stuff there too..."
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
You do have a good point though about making good money selling them. I can see some lovely partnerships forming between scouts looking for prime locations, specialized builders throwing up a site quickly, and the guards who protect them while they do so, and then selling the whole thing to a would be land owner.
And lastly selling the location, for anything that's supposed to be secretive, to potential bandits >:D "So and so is at such and such a location with a brand new building which he's stocking up and getting ready to upgrade. Said he and his whole guild were going to be storing stuff there too..."
Yes and then after you sell the secret hideout to the bandit you could double cross them by selling information about where the hideout is to a bounty hunter!!!
Muhahahahaha *winks*
|
Goblinworks Founder
|
You do have a good point though about making good money selling them. I can see some lovely partnerships forming between scouts looking for prime locations, specialized builders throwing up a site quickly, and the guards who protect them while they do so, and then selling the whole thing to a would be land owner.
And lastly selling the location, for anything that's supposed to be secretive, to potential bandits >:D "So and so is at such and such a location with a brand new building which he's stocking up and getting ready to upgrade. Said he and his whole guild were going to be storing stuff there too..."
Yes and then after you sell the secret hideout to the bandit you could double cross them by selling information about where the hideout is to a bounty hunter!!!
Muhahahahaha *winks*
Now this is good roleplaying material right here he he
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
*just read the blog* Oh by Calistria's right buttock, I think I just had a nerdgasm! That right there is awesome. I do worry about players griefing settlements by attempting to build their own watch-towers within a Hex, but at the same time having a horde of enraged players descend upon your structure with axes because you're blocking the creation of New Mos Eisley and won't sell will also be lots of fun to watch.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
This post made me think about something... we´re talking about a persistent world that is affected by player action. In that sense, player-built buildings, once abandoned, would be this world's "ancient ruins"
which leads me to the other point. It sounds like it would be interesting if there was a system to turn these abandoned buildings in npc lairs
On a similar note, what about a system that turns an area into haunted if too many people die there? Say, your guild built this keep and, a while later, another guild comes over and butchers everyone and takes over. A little while later, the keep becomes haunted, spawning skeletons and ghosts, including a boss ghost that looks like the higher level character who died in the area. It could be done with an attribute that increases with every player killed in the area, triggering the event on a certain point. This could also lead to haunted battlefiends, streets, etc...
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
This post made me think about something... we´re talking about a persistent world that is affected by player action. In that sense, player-built buildings, once abandoned, would be this world's "ancient ruins"
which leads me to the other point. It sounds like it would be interesting if there was a system to turn these abandoned buildings in npc lairs
On a similar note, what about a system that turns an area into haunted if too many people die there? Say, your guild built this keep and, a while later, another guild comes over and butchers everyone and takes over. A little while later, the keep becomes haunted, spawning skeletons and ghosts, including a boss ghost that looks like the higher level character who died in the area. It could be done with an attribute that increases with every player killed in the area, triggering the event on a certain point. This could also lead to haunted battlefiends, streets, etc...
Holy FRICK!!! That would be awesome. I'm all down with haunted ruins and battlefields. That would definitely increase its connection to traditional fantasy fiction material. That's a +1000 on that idea for me.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Exterior size = Interior size + Wall thickness
I never want to enter a building and go "wow, it's a lot bigger on the inside.
So it is crucial you don't start the base game with under-sized buildings.
On a similar note, what about a system that turns an area into haunted if too many people die there? Say, your guild built this keep and, a while later, another guild comes over and butchers everyone and takes over. A little while later, the keep becomes haunted, spawning skeletons and ghosts, including a boss ghost that looks like the higher level character who died in the area. It could be done with an attribute that increases with every player killed in the area, triggering the event on a certain point. This could also lead to haunted battlefiends, streets, etc...
Hauntings would only make sense if there are lots of NPC's killed. Anything soul-bound won't come back as a ghost. So if a guild comes and decimates a city, and leaves it empty, all the NPC's would come back as undead. If the city is re-built the ghosts wouldn't come back.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I still hold out hope for as much is possible given the obvious technical and resource limitations.
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I am slightly concerned about this latest blog post. If all building positions and types are predefined. It sounds like players have no real choice what to build and where. So the town will be just like in DarkFall where your only choice is to use a building or not.
The danger of that is that building spots are simply control points that change hands from time to time. But places you don't really care about because they are not really yours anyway.
This is directly opposite of games like Shadowbane where there was still rules to where you could build (you had to build a town and they could not be too close together). But you could do what you wanted with your plot of land. This meant you spend time deciding what to build and how to place it. So you get more invested in a town as it is 'yours' and not a place you are currently occupying.
Also please don't make the mistake thinking that making these places hidden will have any real impact on anything. As it has already been pointed out, the locations are bound to be posted online quickly. So while it may be fun for explorers. It will have no significant impact how they are used.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Tiran has a point, but I thought of a different problem. That basically amounts to aging.
If there are a limited number of building spots, then theoretically they'll all be claimed at some point. Even if they aren't all claimed, it's likely that most building points within any given area would be.
Imagine a new player six months to 2 years into the life of the game, lured in by the idea of being able to build stuff and actually shape the state of the game. He comes in, wanders around, looking for a good building spot. But everywhere he looks is already occupied. Sure, there are plenty of inns for him to rest in, a fort or two, but no place to call his own.
I imagine that player would be disheartened fairly quickly. Far from the 'make your own mark on the world' as advertised, he's found that all possible marks have already been made. At best, he's going to be able to hang out with others that have already made their mark, possibly help them in their own fights.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
There is that, but also consider we're starting in a hex equivilent to the size of a large city in America (I forget which one) and the River Kingdoms are, quite simply, MASSIVE in scope. Something like over a hundred hexes. If they release a new hex every 1.5 years there will be no end to the open spaces to build.
Also remember that a 'Hex' or 'map' is, I believe, somewhere close to 12 miles across. That's a considerable amount of space, and while only a single town might occupy a Hex, to make that Town, rather than a collection of buildings, you need to make a Fort, which they have mentioned to be THE capstone of the building mechanics thus far, and must then be upgraded to allow a town to be built nearby.
'Villages' would likely be players building outside of the town's immediate region due to a dislike of the current 'ruling' players, a wish to avoid the taxes or just plain old because-we-like-this-particular-spot-dammit!. No guards, the only crafting stations are ones built by the Players, so it's unlikely they would have access to the very best tools, but they have the advantage of being closer to the resources, not fighting your way through crowds of PCs and NPCs to get to a crafting station, no taxes, no thieves guilds fleecing you, no Guard PCs hassling you about how shifty you look.
Of course the downside is 'no NPC Protections' so a Village will likely depend heavily upon NPC Guards spawning from the Town and the defensive actions of the PCs in the village.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
From the blog -
We also envision the ability of characters to build and improve roads that increase the speed of characters using fast travel, to erect docks which will permit watercraft access to rivers and lakes, and to build bridges to allow roads to span those rivers.
----
The above has some interesting ideas. Does this mean if someone builds a dock then others could construct fishing boats and therefore enter the fishing industry?
What if the "King" of a particular kingdom wants to make a visit to a nearby kingdom? Would someone be able to build the royal ship?
Many intriguing questions arise from each and every blog.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
How long do you expect it will take before the complete list of Construction Sites is published on the web?
For most structures it won't be that meaningful. In most cases it should be pretty obvious where a certain kind of building would rationally be built or a dock or bridge erected or a road improved.
The Hideouts are a special case. Even if you know exactly where a Hideout is, if you don't have the skill to find it you can't access it. You could camp out nearby and try to waylay a bandit entering or exiting, but they'll almost certainly know that you're in the area and be prepared for you.
The site where you build a Hideout and the portal where you enter and exit from it will likely not be the same. The Hideout has no visual representation in the game world so we have the flexibility to put the access point anywhere - even place it randomly. I could even see enabling the owner to change it. (I'm talking within a few hundred meters of the construction site here, not halfway across the map).
The only reason that we'll limit Hideouts to specific locations is to avoid the problem of having every Hex just infested with them. The limited number will keep griefers constrained. Plus it makes them valuable - now there's a reason to join a thief's guild!
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I am slightly concerned about this latest blog post. If all building positions and types are predefined. It sounds like players have no real choice what to build and where. So the town will be just like in DarkFall where your only choice is to use a building or not.
The Player Settlements are a special case and will require immense amounts of development time & resources. In fact I expect that they'll evolve over time from something relatively simple to something very complex. The arrangement and appearance of the buildings within them will also likely start simple and evolve.
The other types of buildings and structures are more utilitarian. When you build a Watchtower, its form is mostly defined by its function. But it will still be yours, you'll have built it, it will not have been there before you constructed it, and if it is destroyed it will no longer be in the game world.
Of course we see the potential to do things like allow you to hang banners, raise flags, apply paint, do some landscaping, etc. so you can customize the "look" of your constructions even further. Such things will come with time.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The only reason that we'll limit Hideouts to specific locations
By this, do you mean set predefined locations for hideouts? or do you mean a set cap within a hex, but different set locations for each hex locations? or set distances from specific nodes within a hex and capped at a set maximum?
If you do in fact mean the first, then there's not really much point in building a hideout if everyone knows precisely where to look for it, in which case there goes your reason for joining a thief's guild.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
the River Kingdoms are, quite simply, MASSIVE in scope. Something like over a hundred hexes.
The Crusader Road area, which is the tiny little red rectangle on [link=https://goblinworks.com/images/RiverKingdoms.jpg this map] is about 250 Hexes, roughly the size of the Philadelphia area. The full River Kingdoms will be thousands of Hexes.
If they release a new hex every 1.5 years there will be no end to the open spaces to build.
Hopefully we'll be a bit faster than that. :) The design assumes a median character density of 100 logged in characters per Hex. Once we hit our stride I expect we'll be adding Hexes on a very regular schedule.
Also remember that a 'Hex' or 'map' is, I believe, somewhere close to 12 miles across.
The Crusader Road area is 11 miles by 12 miles. A Hex is approximately 1.2km/1.2km.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Sounds really good so far. My only real concern is the ability to provide some automated defenses for the smaller structures. It'd be nice to have some way to avoid the... It's 2:00 AM on a Sunday Morning, 1 or 2 miscreants decide to log on and wipe out the structures of every guild/group within 4 hex's...and because no one happens to be online to stop them at the time, they can do it.
Games should not force Guilds/Builders into taking on a 2nd real life job in order to achieve some level of persistance with structures. It's going to be a tough balance to strike....obviously if an organized group engages in a concerted effort to take something down they should be able to do it... but there should be some measures availble for builders of small structures to make it difficult for 1 or 2 characters to take those structures down when they aren't around.
Perhaps something like the ability to hire a few NPC guards to provide protection. Nothing super-powerfull mind you...but enough if you are willing to spend the money that 1 or 2 individuals will have a difficult time tackling it on thier own.
Even relatively decent sized guilds aren't going to be likely to have enough coverage 24/7/365 to protect thier resources. I'd hate to see all but the largest guilds completely locked out of the building game. A small/medium sized guild should be able to at least construct something like an Inn and have resonable assurance that it won't be taken out by anything less then the efforts of an equivalent sized guild.
I'd be interested to hear GW's thoughts on that?
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
The Crusader Road area, which is the tiny little red rectangle on this map is about 250 Hexes, roughly the size of the Philadelphia area.
Fixed link.
Sounds really good so far. My only real concern is the ability to provide some automated defenses for the smaller structures. It'd be nice to have some way to avoid the... It's 2:00 AM on a Sunday Morning, 1 or 2 miscreants decide to log on and wipe out the structures of every guild/group within 4 hex's...and because no one happens to be online to stop them at the time, they can do it.
Games should not force Guilds/Builders into taking on a 2nd real life job in order to achieve some level of persistance with structures. It's going to be a tough balance to strike....obviously if an organized group engages in a concerted effort to take something down they should be able to do it... but there should be some measures availble for builders of small structures to make it difficult for 1 or 2 characters to take those structures down when they aren't around.
Perhaps something like the ability to hire a few NPC guards to provide protection. Nothing super-powerfull mind you...but enough if you are willing to spend the money that 1 or 2 individuals will have a difficult time tackling it on thier own.
Even relatively decent sized guilds aren't going to be likely to have enough coverage 24/7/365 to protect thier resources. I'd hate to see all but the largest guilds completely locked out of the building game. A small/medium sized guild should be able to at least construct something like an Inn and have resonable assurance that it won't be taken out by anything less then the efforts of an equivalent sized guild.
I'd be interested to hear GW's thoughts on that?
I echo Mel's thoughts and would also love to hear GW's opinion on this.
Also, if Roads and docks/ports are to be an option, then would also the option of canals be available? Transporting goods via waterways, man-made or otherwise - as opposed to trudging through miles of road/trail, etc would be a fun idea to explore and offer yet another ingame career for players as frieght haulers on barges, etc.
|
The external appearance of each building will be defined by the development team—functionally identical buildings may be graphically different to ensure they are appropriate for the terrain where they're located.
It all sounds good except for this, which makes me worry some. Does this mean that we will be unable to choose how the buildings we create look? If someone wanted to build a settlement with say an French design or a Middle Eastern appearance, would they be SOL because this hex is the Germanic appearance hex.
I was personally hoping to get a group of players together to create some kind of Asian themed settlement. Probably kind of silly, but hey... the game has monks in it. I can dream! :D
|
Goblinworks Founder
|
we'd like to ask the community for your help. We have a number of projects in the works that would benefit from your participation. We'd like you to shoot a short (10–20 second) clip of yourself talking about why you love Pathfinder and why you are looking forward to Pathfinder Online. Post your video to YouTube, and then post a link to it in this thread on the Goblinworks forum along with a note that Paizo and Goblinworks has your permission to use your video (don't forget that part!). We intend to use excerpts from some of your videos to enhance presentations we're working on for Pathfinder Online!
Please take note of this quoted request in the blog. If you can, please do your best to post a video clip to help the Goblinworks effort.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The external appearance of each building will be defined by the development team—functionally identical buildings may be graphically different to ensure they are appropriate for the terrain where they're located.It all sounds good except for this, which makes me worry some. Does this mean that we will be unable to choose how the buildings we create look? If someone wanted to build a settlement with say an French design or a Middle Eastern appearance, would they be SOL because this hex is the Germanic appearance hex.
I was personally hoping to get a group of players together to create some kind of Asian themed settlement. Probably kind of silly, but hey... the game has monks in it. I can dream! :D
Actually, since the entire game takes place in a geographical area about the size of a single small county, I like the idea that the designers will be controlling the astetics of it. I would like them to have a few options for style, since the area takes in a lot of refugees, but I don't want things all over the place.
|
Goblinworks Founder
|
Exterior size = Interior size + Wall thickness
I never want to enter a building and go "wow, it's a lot bigger on the inside.
So it is crucial you don't start the base game with under-sized buildings.
Hauntings would only make sense if there are lots of NPC's killed. Anything soul-bound won't come back as a ghost. So if a guild comes and decimates a city, and leaves it empty, all the NPC's would come back as undead. If the city is re-built the ghosts wouldn't come back.
On a similar note, what about a system that turns an area into haunted if too many people die there? Say, your guild built this keep and, a while later, another guild comes over and butchers everyone and takes over. A little while later, the keep becomes haunted, spawning skeletons and ghosts, including a boss ghost that looks like the higher level character who died in the area. It could be done with an attribute that increases with every player killed in the area, triggering the event on a certain point. This could also lead to haunted battlefiends, streets, etc...
But what if the city is built on the spot where all these npc's died!
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Even relatively decent sized guilds aren't going to be likely to have enough coverage 24/7/365 to protect thier resources. I'd hate to see all but the largest guilds completely locked out of the building game. A small/medium sized guild should be able to at least construct something like an Inn and have resonable assurance that it won't be taken out by anything less then the efforts of an equivalent sized guild.
I'd be interested to hear GW's thoughts on that?
I half agree and half disagree, IMO any auto defense should be 1/4th of your guilds stregnth or less. Unless it somehow is disabled when you actually have the majority of members on. I 100% agree that a small band of 7 or less should not be able to take something out when it's guardians are asleep. But the issue I have with it being anything close to the company's power is that 100% forces an opposing force to pick the time when the bulk of your company is asleep. Defense should be at an advantage, but not double the power of the attackers, and well IMO while I like the idea of cover when you are away, it makes it complicated when you factor in that if you are strong when offline, then you are inpenetrable when your forces are all online.
One possible work around NPC guards that defend when your character is in a certain defensive building etc... the more players logged out in the command center, the more guards that go out. The guards themselves should be about half as difficult as the actual player who owns them would be to defeat, but that would give some balance to the Not being a doormat when offline, but not being impenetrable when online.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
But what if the city is built on the spot where all these npc's died!Exterior size = Interior size + Wall thickness
I never want to enter a building and go "wow, it's a lot bigger on the inside.
So it is crucial you don't start the base game with under-sized buildings.
Hauntings would only make sense if there are lots of NPC's killed. Anything soul-bound won't come back as a ghost. So if a guild comes and decimates a city, and leaves it empty, all the NPC's would come back as undead. If the city is re-built the ghosts wouldn't come back.
On a similar note, what about a system that turns an area into haunted if too many people die there? Say, your guild built this keep and, a while later, another guild comes over and butchers everyone and takes over. A little while later, the keep becomes haunted, spawning skeletons and ghosts, including a boss ghost that looks like the higher level character who died in the area. It could be done with an attribute that increases with every player killed in the area, triggering the event on a certain point. This could also lead to haunted battlefiends, streets, etc...
Rebuking would be part of the build process. These undead would wander to another 'ruin', and you have justification for undead re-spawning.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
How long do you expect it will take before the complete list of Construction Sites is published on the web?For most structures it won't be that meaningful. In most cases it should be pretty obvious where a certain kind of building would rationally be built or a dock or bridge erected or a road improved.
The Hideouts are a special case. Even if you know exactly where a Hideout is, if you don't have the skill to find it you can't access it. You could camp out nearby and try to waylay a bandit entering or exiting, but they'll almost certainly know that you're in the area and be prepared for you.
The site where you build a Hideout and the portal where you enter and exit from it will likely not be the same. The Hideout has no visual representation in the game world so we have the flexibility to put the access point anywhere - even place it randomly. I could even see enabling the owner to change it. (I'm talking within a few hundred meters of the construction site here, not halfway across the map).
The only reason that we'll limit Hideouts to specific locations is to avoid the problem of having every Hex just infested with them. The limited number will keep griefers constrained. Plus it makes them valuable - now there's a reason to join a thief's guild!
I suppose that if a friend own an hideout he will be capable to show me its position (taking me here, not simply pointing it onto a map) to me even if I don't have the skills to "see" it.
An alternative could be that I need to be part of the same chartered group to see the group hideout if I don't have the skill to find it normally.
Making the skill to find a hideout a requirement to use it would make it a mandatory skill for everyone wanting to be a bandit or even simply to have a safespot in the middle of the wilderness.
- - -
You have often used the phrase "they allow characters to be logged out of the game safely" describing the different structures in the blog.
I suppose this mean that:
a) the character can safely log out even if he has recently fought with someone and normally would persist in the game world for a specific span of time.
b) if a player was logging out outside of one of those structures his character would persist for some time.
I am right?
- - -
I am a bit worried by the combination of (to paraphrase):
structures can be destroyed and all the gear stashed within the structure will be lost
in particular
"Hideouts can be destroyed by individuals. If a hideout is destroyed, any objects in its local storage are destroyed as well."
The idea that a guy with an axe can destroy everything I have stashed in a hideout bother me a bit. Even more so as he would not get anything, so it would be a simply an act of wanton destruction.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Yay!
The hideout mechanics has so much goodies. And I like to think that discussions on this forum has contributed to the design.
The hideout mechanic is an important piece for both economy and world pvp. Fast-travelling has (dynamic and player-driven) risks, which is great for economy. This is also a mechanic for gankers that could actually make them _add_ to the game, and i see the potential for great player-driven politics (bandit guilds, anti-bandit patrols, caravan guards etc).
One detail that caught my mind - please correct if wrong - is that hideout under construction are visible (as a construction zone). Meaning that even if you cant find hideouts you can still patrol your land to prevent new bandits from settling there.
Diego, yes the axe avenger can destroy your bandit hideout. But only if he can find it, and at risk to himself since he is probably using gear less suitable for pvp should you jump him (for instance if you are inside). Chances of someone stumbling randomly over your hideout and attacking it for fun = low. Chances of a party searching the hex for the hideouts they know must be there because they have been ambushed so many times = much higher. Since hideouts will be associated with banditry, destroying random hideouts may even be considered a good act!
Simply put, if you want to play a bandit, it is time to move your goods to safer storage when the locals start assembling the posse. But puttign loot it in the hideout between combats is far better than keeping it on your body.
again kudos to GW for very interesting design choices!
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Construction Sites
The construction site can be attacked and destroyed, so it must be defended by the builders.
(...)
Destroying a Building
Buildings can be destroyed by hostile players, or even by hostile hordes of monstrous humanoids.
(...)
Other buildings can only be damaged by siege engines—huge machines created to hurl boulders or orbs of burning pitch, or similar large-scale weapons. The process of establishing a siege is lengthy and can be attempted only by the largest and best organized groups of players. Siege warfare is therefore the province of player settlements and kingdoms.
(...)
Forts—The penultimate expression of power. Forts provide a significant strategic advantage to their owners. Forts are large and complex buildings and require substantial time and resources to construct. Forts have extensive local storage and allow characters to be logged out of the game safely. Like watchtowers, forts have a detection radius.
(...)
Forts can only be destroyed by siege engines. If a fort is destroyed, any objects in its local storage are destroyed as well.
Hail the return of the spirit of Shadowbane !!! I really enjoy reading this about PFO, and I really hope it will come true and happen as you describe it.
I enjoyed playing Shadowbane years ago just for the siege experience and the intense battles that took place to take a Tree of Life, and control territory and resources. And the ideas you expose here seems it's going to be so much better !
I remember the thrill of preparing for battle, either as an attacker or a defender, and all the involvement that went into building a fortress that could hold a siege... or not... The excitement when the battle was raging, and the day was won, or not.
/bow Ryan
Moonbird
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
... when a character using fast travel enters the threat radius of a hideout, the characters in the hideout can trigger an ambush...
Does this mean that characters who are not using fast travel will not be subject to ambushes? I realize I may be reading a little too literally, but the implications just occurred to me as I was reading another thread. It also sounds like, even if a friendly faction holds every watch tower and fort in the hex, there still might be one or more hideouts held by unfriendly factions.
If both of those are true, there is an interesting dynamic that is created.
First, if it's true that hideouts only detect characters using fast travel, then there will be an incentive not to use fast travel in order to avoid being ambushed.
Second, if watch towers and forts are the only way to detect characters that are not using fast travel, then the character who is avoiding fast travel in order to avoid being ambushed will also have an incentive to only travel through hexes that are known to be controlled by friendly factions.
This is a very exciting dynamic to me. Basically, it means I can either use normal travel options staying in friendly hexes but going significantly out of my way, or I can put together a formidable group and fast travel right through the unfriendly territory and hope that my group is large enough to deter the ambushes. This creates a very strong incentive for players to pool their resources into a caravan to make a dangerous journey using fast travel.
Very exciting, indeed!
How about player private houses? We have info about buildings like hideouts, watchtowers and other "useful" city stuff, but how 'bout properties built by certain individuals (In city perimeter, of course)
I might be blind, but havent saw anything on that matter in this post :<
+ I don't know if it's truth, but don't like the idea of preset building sites. Preset areas are ok, but imho these should work like housing in Star Wars Galaxies. You've got that Grid, and you just place things in boundaries of your area.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Preset areas are ok, but imho these should work like housing in Star Wars Galaxies.
I know a lot of people, including some close friends, are very troubled by this, but I believe there are some very specific problems they're trying to avoid.
The restriction on building types and locations exists for two reasons. First, we want to make building sites a constrained resource, as that makes them worth fighting over, and that conflict helps drive player interaction. Second, we want to ensure that the density of the structures added to the world and the places where they are built makes sense and isn't used as a way to artificially segment the game world or to create terrain advantages—a big problem in many other MMOs that allow player-created buildings.
If you can think of ways to get what you want while still accomplishing these goals, now is the time to speak up!
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
How about player private houses?
I think this was deliberately left out for now. Especially considering that we probably won't be able to walk around inside any of these buildings in the beginning, and that the exterior will be determined by the dev team, there really isn't much use for individual player houses right away.
I'm sure that they're aware that we all eventually want to be able to decorate our own houses. If not, it doesn't hurt to remind them :)