Goblinworks Game Designer
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
To add to what Ryan's been saying, the design team doesn't think this will be a problem for a number of reasons:
- We're deliberately avoiding creating any resources that are limited to a small area. Harvestable/Gatherable components are deliberately spread out all over the map. Creatures with valuable drops appear in escalations that can appear lots of different places on the map.
- There is no instant transport/mail. If someone tries to corner and move a resource, you can kill them and take their stuff.
- There are no global auction houses. You have to buy at a local market and take your purchase where you want it (opening you to ambush that way as well).
- Even if you somehow did corner the market on one resource, there is no resource that's required for all goods. If you, say, somehow controlled all the Adamantine, Fighters and Paladins would have to use a lot of Tier III gear that wasn't designed for them specifically, other roles might have to sub in different Tier III weapons and armor than what they'd prefer to use, and casters would be largely unaffected. But you wouldn't be able to use your dominance to ensure that you're the only ones with Tier III gear to make it easier to maintain your monopoly.
Cornering the market on a resource might be possible for a really huge alliance. If so, it would take a ton of effort, and create a LOT of interesting opportunities to break that monopoly in a variety of ways, before we even saw the need to come in and trust bust.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I'm way late in commenting on this topic, and some of the posts are way too long for IPhone reading.
The Ops comparison in based on WoW, by far one of the worst MMOs ever developed. Wow consistently included functions that made gold farming easy, and they did this in the name of high subscription numbers. Sure they will ban an account here and there, just to say they did.
Want to end this?
No mailing of items or money, outside of your own account.
All trade is face to face.
You can buy game time using in game money, but you can not convert game time to in game money.
I had suggested earlier what to do with identified gold farmer / boys. Flag them with a ZpVO flag and make them a FFA Full Loot target.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
No mailing of items or money, outside of your own account.
Why should you be able to do it within your account? That would still allow people to safely transport things without risk, and seems to run counter to the design.
You can buy game time using in game money, but you can not convert game time to in game money.
Are you suggesting that players should not be able to transfer the plex-equivalent they purchase with cash? So, to buy it with in-game currency, you'd buy it from an in-game NPC? That seems like it would really cut into GW's profits. Under the current system, all training time results in money to GW. You're proposing introducing a way to get training time that does not.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Bluddwolf, your suggestions amount to throwing the baby out with the bath water. Not to mention flying directly in the face of some of Ryan's ideas that I think it's fair to say are foundational. Oh, and it still won't stop people from "gold farming" and selling coin to other players.
Eve does not have the concept of mailing goods...neither should PfO in my opinion
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I may be wrong, but it looks like some posting here forget that:
1) PfO isn't WoW or EVE and Ryan has stated in blogs and posts he won't allow this to happen (see above post).
2) There is no game-wide AH. Markets are local in communities and settlements, so while it may be possible to exercise a monopoly over a single market or even a few, it will be much harder to do so game-wide given alignment and reputation restrictions on entering various markets, even with a cabal of a dozen players.
3) Gold farming, as in the typical Chinese convict labor making tons of game gold to be sold for real money isn't likely to happen in PfO, given its target audience is almost certainly too small to be worth the time and effort of gold-farmers and sellers. It will be years before PfO, after EE, to reach even the numbers EVE has playing that game. PfO is about, and for, a small, dedicated group of gamers.
4) The entire system discussed in the blogs that will be used for crafting has enough variables involved that the quality and quantity of raw materials will also hamper such actions. "Nodes" will not be stationary, thus can't be camped, Bandits will always be looking for targets, T1 resources can have varying quality values, etc...
5) Economic warfare is possible, so an attempt to corner the market on certain goods or resources is allowed under the current rules, subject to revision of course, especially if a spy does this in Settlement A as a prelude to Settlement B declaring war on A to prevent Settlement A from building the needed weapons of war. How does anyone, even a GM or a Dev know the whys and wherefores of any such action until it has played out? Killing another player because you suspect him/her is doing it to gold-farm, as Nihimon stated, is a good way to get yourself banned, especially if you do it repeatedly, simply because you don't know what they are truly doing. The Devs and GMs will be able, after investigating it, to determine if the actions are gold-farming for a bannable reason or a legitimate in-game reason.
Given these factors, especially the small size of the player base in comparison to the games used in the posted examples and Ryan's determination not to have PfO ruined by those who would ruin it for sport or greed, I have to conclude both this thread and the thread dealing with "real life money buying in-game items" are just seeing issues where none really exist. GW, either via Ryan or any of the Devs, is on record as saying they will be watching things closely. I trust them to do this. They have seen what has ruined other MMO's and give every indication that they have learned from others' mistakes.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
You can buy Plex with I game currency or cash, directly from GW. You can not buy it from another player or convert Plex into in game currency.
This makes it so that Plex is only a Player to GW transaction. It is completely secure and protects the economy from abuse.
It also rewards dedicated and long term players with a means of buying a months worth of game time, every once in a while.
It also protects the game economy from a very wealthy person in RL. Plex in Eve sells in game for about 400 million isk. If I were wealthy enough in real life I could buy a few thousand dollars worth of Plex and become a trillionaire in game , in a matter of minutes.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There is no instant transport/mail. If someone tries to corner and move a resource, you can kill them and take their stuff.
There are no global auction houses. You have to buy at a local market and take your purchase where you want it (opening you to ambush that way as well).
These two things make me happy.
@Bluddwolf
The reason buying plex from other players is good, it means that those who are cash poor but time rich can still play. It causes no inflation and it deters gold sellers.
GW in addition make no money of allowing you to buy plex from them from in game cash so why would they do that.
Plex in Eve works very well for its intended purpose not to forget that it is also lootable. You might find it one of your customers :)
Why you dislike the concept?
If you have thousands to spend on gw plex then especially in the first 6 months you might find you get a lot less than you expected as people will not be buying them as they havent the cash to do so for the amounts you expect. When the game is more mature yes it will be possible but so what...you are a millionaire or whatever the magnitude of coin is....wont help you much against the assassin or the bandit.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
PLEX is destroyable in EVE. The sad thing is that it doesn't even need to be transported. People can buy PLEX anywhere, and convert it back and forth between an in-game item and a note on a game account. That means there is never any need to carry the in-game item from place to place.
People still load the in-game items into spaceships, and get blown up with hundreds or thousands of dollars' worth of them in the cargo hold. Sure, that's part hardcore bragging rights for CCP, but it's also part player ignorance. Some people probably don't realize that the conversion between account note and in-game item runs both ways. EVE doesn't always explain itself well.
Plex is definitely lootable
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
Making Goblin Balls a coin drain for PFO instead of an income stream for Goblinworks is a suggestion so bad I think I misunderstand what was suggested.
The major goal is to monetize the players who don't have a subscription. Rather than do so by trying to squeeze blood from the stone, the choice was made to allow players who have money to buy subscription time and trade it to players who want subscription time. In exchange, the players who get said subscriptions pay coin.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Thing is I was afraid the only way to "win" a conflict was though military superiority. And a lot of the above reads like it has to be ensured that economic warfare does not become as efficient as military warfare. I was just afraid the only alternative to military superiority as supported in the system was to use economic superiority to buy military superiority.
But if economic warfare is still possible and viable I'm happy.
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
PLEX is destroyable in EVE. The sad thing is that it doesn't even need to be transported. People can buy PLEX anywhere, and convert it back and forth between an in-game item and a note on a game account. That means there is never any need to carry the in-game item from place to place.
Once PLEX is an in-game item, you cannot use the "reverse redeem" system (turning it back into an out of game flag) to move it around safely. (from the EVE wiki: "Please note: Once a PLEX is redeemed it is locked to that station with regards to the redeeming system. In the event the Reverse Redeeming option is used the original station that the PLEX was redeemed to will be the only station the PLEX will be able to be re-redeemed to. The redeeming system cannot be used as a method to transfer PLEX between stations.")
Which is why people are flying around with the (lootable and certainly destroyable) in-game PLEX items, taking them to and from the major trade hubs.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Thing is I was afraid the only way to "win" a conflict was though military superiority. And a lot of the above reads like it has to be ensured that economic warfare does not become as efficient as military warfare. I was just afraid the only alternative to military superiority as supported in the system was to use economic superiority to buy military superiority.
But if economic warfare is still possible and viable I'm happy.
My take on it is that economic warfare will be integral to the way settlements wage war, and that what is permissible at the micro scale in PvP will be found permissible at the macro scale in settlement warfare: that is, if your settlement has valid meaningful reason to wage economic warfare then actions will be permitted that would be disallowed without a valid meaningful reason to wage economic warfare. What remains is to define the details and characteristics of 'valid meaningful reasons' that are measurable and quantifiable... such as a declaration of war or various states of conflict leading up to that.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
My take on it is that economic warfare will be integral to the way settlements wage war, and that what is permissible at the micro scale in PvP will be found permissible at the macro scale in settlement warfare: that is, if your settlement has valid meaningful reason to wage economic warfare then actions will be permitted that would be disallowed without a valid meaningful reason to wage economic warfare. What remains is to define the details and characteristics of 'valid meaningful reasons' that are measurable and quantifiable... such as a declaration of war or various states of conflict leading up to that.Thing is I was afraid the only way to "win" a conflict was though military superiority. And a lot of the above reads like it has to be ensured that economic warfare does not become as efficient as military warfare. I was just afraid the only alternative to military superiority as supported in the system was to use economic superiority to buy military superiority.
But if economic warfare is still possible and viable I'm happy.
I think economic efficiency will be the core to success for settlements?
Indirectly being able to have the best supply lines and networks is going to improve the gear and increase the attractiveness of the settlement for members, traders and anyone else. Securing those lines and protecting them I think will be where war is going to kick in and the settlements with the best economies are going to have the upper hand when the sabre-rattling begins?
Therefore as said, cornering the market is a no-no because it's an "I-Win" move, but chipping away at a multitude of the enemies' economies, eg even undercutting their supply lines with cheap offers or taking their custom and so on, then indirect and direct "economic war" in action.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You can buy Plex with I game currency or cash, directly from GW. You can not buy it from another player or convert Plex into in game currency.
It's not clear if you're talking EVE's Plex (in which case, I don't understand the reference to GW), or if you're talking about the PFO equivalent.
If you're talking about the PFO equivalent, then what you said is not accurate. You can not buy it for in-game currency directly from GW, and you can buy it from another player. It always starts out being bought from GW for real money. After that, it can be traded freely among players, for Coin or not.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@HalfOrc:
1) Do you think it will be possible to distinguish multi-box and farm-toon scrip activities from formation combat?
If it's mechanically flawless precision and the same pathing and actions over and over again, yes. That said, you'll never win the war against cheaters and 'meta'-gamers, but that doesn't mean you stop swinging if you can get an opening!
2) Would anyone (except GW) be able to distinguish Apis Consortium style RP game activities from the activities of the "small cadre of players" to which you referred?
Economic Intrigue can be a good thing, especially when helping a militarily-weak Charter/Company/Guild take the fight to a militant but economicly-weak rival Charter/Company/Guild. I was worried that we might end up with a situation where a massive alliance of players could becoming a dominating juggernaught able to throw wave after hideous wave of mercenaries and assassins at anyone that looked at them sideways, which could result in a very one-sided and unpleasant game as Ego overcame Common Sense.
3) Do you expect this "small cadre of players" to ever have a company charter issued by an NPC(GW) controlled settlement?
Maybe, it depends entirely upon their actions and the final set of 'rules' we get issued in the actual game.
What worries me more is that Controlling Factions might let the Cartels operate to the point, either blindsided by trust or bribes, to the point where the Cartel cannot be removed without crippling the Settlement, which is in it's own way, an aspect of warfare.
As Stephen Chaney said ...
*We're deliberately avoiding creating any resources that are limited to a small area. Harvestable/Gatherable components are deliberately spread out all over the map. Creatures with valuable drops appear in escalations that can appear lots of different places on the map.
This is going to murder farm-bots and multi-boxers. Randomized spawn locations, especially over such huge maps, are going to kill the ability of anyone to become the sole-farmer/provider of specific resources.
That is, unless, you're a big alliance with lots of players working together, but at that point, the profit will be so heavily diluted it's going to be for 'gearing' rather than 'economic shenanigans'.
*There is no instant transport/mail. If someone tries to corner and move a resource, you can kill them and take their stuff.
*There are no global auction houses. You have to buy at a local market and take your purchase where you want it (opening you to ambush that way as well).
The english language lacks the emotional depth to describe how happy this makes me.
*Even if you somehow did corner the market on one resource, there is no resource that's required for all goods. If you, say, somehow controlled all the Adamantine, Fighters and Paladins would have to use a lot of Tier III gear that wasn't designed for them specifically, other roles might have to sub in different Tier III weapons and armor than what they'd prefer to use, and casters would be largely unaffected. But you wouldn't be able to use your dominance to ensure that you're the only ones with Tier III gear to make it easier to maintain your monopoly.
And of course, holding all those materials makes you a prime candidate for a bit of economic shenanigans yourself when the enraged player-base decides to channel a bit of Galt and come after the Cartel in question.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Therefore as said, cornering the market is a no-no because it's an "I-Win" move,
I'm still confused as to why. Killing someone and taking his stuff is an "I-Win" move too. Or to stay in context having a hugely overwhelming military force and wiping out a settlement and taking their land and stuff with it is an "I-Win" move too.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It's too extreme an advantage I'm assuming, Papaver? If a settlement or kingdom becomes the best place for a certain resource that provides them with an advantage but not an insurmountable one as concerns other settlements? It's through their efficiency and collaboration that they are able to say sell a resource at the best price and be profitable doing so. Whereas if something is worth cornering the market; it's probably going to lead to disproportionately high wealth creation for the players that seize it? If it's not worth cornering the market because it's either non-essential or just raises the price elsewhere for others to go looking for it themselves, then it balances out I think and is therefore not cornered?
I'm no economist so hopefully one of our social science friends will jump in. :)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I stand corrected on EVE PLEX. I guess the best strategy is "Only redeem PLEX in a market hub." Not too difficult, once you know all the factors.
On a side note, I sincerely hope that PFO will do a better job than EVE at introducing players to all of its complexities. EVE's tutorials have gotten better, but joining the game without extensive prior research or a very well-written guide is still a daunting process.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Therefore as said, cornering the market is a no-no because it's an "I-Win" move,I'm still confused as to why. Killing someone and taking his stuff is an "I-Win" move too. Or to stay in context having a hugely overwhelming military force and wiping out a settlement and taking their land and stuff with it is an "I-Win" move too.
I don't think I saw anything along the lines of killing someone and taking their stuff is an I-Win move. Cornering the market on the most powerful items is what people are fearing as an I-Win move. IE all top gear requires X, groupA is the first to gain the ability to get X, and in doing so they use their new-found strength to prevent anyone else from getting X. Of which the rest of the world now being drastically behind them due to the power of X, nobody can stop them.
Now of course in addition to the things steven has already pointed out that prevent this from happening. I also have a feeling that T3 gear isn't going to be strong enough that even if only 1 group had it, large quantities of players with t1 or T2 gear wouldn't be able to overpower and overtake the group that has T3 gear. As well as players infiltrating groupA smuggling such out, etc...
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
There is also a difference in scale to consider when trying to understand why it is not okay to corner the market on a necessary commodity while it is marginally okay to kill someone and take their stuff.
GW's revenue stream depends on players playing. If you corner the market such a way that those people are discouraged from playing you are cutting into that revenue stream. Taking one guy's stuff is nowhere near that scale.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
There is no instant transport/mail. If someone tries to corner and move a resource, you can kill them and take their stuff.
There are no global auction houses. You have to buy at a local market and take your purchase where you want it (opening you to ambush that way as well).
I was going to ask about local economies before I saw this reply. This, folks, takes care of everything. It makes economies vary by location, makes merchant/trader professions meaningful, and makes it impossible to corner the market in the entire game (such as what happens in WoW). I'm very glad they are going in this direction, please no global AH, ever!
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
There is also a difference in scale to consider when trying to understand why it is not okay to corner the market on a necessary commodity while it is marginally okay to kill someone and take their stuff.
GW's revenue stream depends on players playing. If you corner the market such a way that those people are discouraged from playing you are cutting into that revenue stream. Taking one guy's stuff is nowhere near that scale.
Yeah... agreed 100% there, pretty big difference between, moderately setting someone back a couple days work, vs putting a brick wall so that nobody can move forward ever.
The key to MMORPGs is the desire to get better, when you get killed by someone, you have the hope that you can get more powerful, get the right connections, gear etc... and get even.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
erm..... okay I may have missed out an important detail. I am talking about cornering the local market not the entire game.
And i'm talking in terms of the scale of one conflict. If you kill someone and take their stuff or loot and pillage a settlement you have won the conflict at hand. that's what i was interpreting the "I-Win" move to be. A move that makes a guaranteed victory in the conflict at hand. Like in the above examples military superiority.
I'm not entirely sure if this example was brought up already but in case of a siege the defendant may corner the local markets on siege weapons and parts thereof a long time before the siege. Or the attacker cornering the local markets of supplies or stuff needed for defending ( arbitrary example i know ).
|
CEO, Goblinworks
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The example used was someone cornering the whole server market for critical materials needed by many (most) players to advance their skills, done using obvious bots, and done repeatedly over a long enough period of time to attract bans and the notoriety of the whole server.
Do that in Pathfinder Online, and we'll put a stop to it.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Or GW could just have NPCs offering contracts for their heads, or telling various Thieves guilds (of which I assume some CC will be) who they are, or manipulating their CC/Settlement in some way that offends others. Sure, ban them and slap them around the head, but invite the rest of the playerbase in to stomp on them (purely IC) also :)
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
The example used was someone cornering the whole server market for critical materials needed by many (most) players to advance their skills, done using obvious bots, and done repeatedly over a long enough period of time to attract bans and the notoriety of the whole server.
Do that in Pathfinder Online, and we'll put a stop to it.
... possibly by making changes such that the bots don't work, and possibly by politely requesting that the offender stop. There are lots of possible ways to prevent the abuse that are more effective and less drastic than simply dropping the hammer on the offenders.
Also implied is that maintaining vicious control of all lumber in a region by price-fixing and killing competitors is a design feature, since lumber will be available in other regions (even if it isn't quite as good for wandmaking) and since powerful groups making lots of weaker enemies who have a method of retaliation is meaningful interaction.
Contrast the case where a bot cycles through all of the possible resource nodes and with little/no risk gets almost all of them, with no way for a competitor to muscle in and no alternate supply source.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
In Rift, where I ran a harvested raw materials supply company, I had at least one player accuse me of being a "bot" simply because I had such large supplies of crafting mats on hand. The truth was that all I did in-game was harvest, so compared to players who did everything else as well (crafted, adventured in dungeons, raided, etc.), I did have a rather large stash of pretty much everything crafters needed. I bring this up simply to emphasize that we need to be careful not to assume players are somehow cheating simply because they may be far more organized or dedicated to one particular game endeavor than most other players.
Personally, I believe in a free market system in-game. I even have no problem with a monopoly being created if it occurred naturally and due to a group's hard work and dedication. At the same time, I think others will get tired of paying through the nose to that monopolizing faction and take more drastic measures to hinder said faction. If you don't like Settlement-A's monopoly on iron, you can hire thugs to attack their harvesting camps, attack their supply lines, organize a boycott of their goods, or go all the way and lay siege to their settlement. Few games give you these options, but I suspect all these tactics, and more, will be used in PFO to deal with your economic competition.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@hobs Your absolutely right about people who are dedicated to a single purpose or cause. I knew of mining corps in Eve that have people mining day in and day out because of the "dues" imposed on them by the corporation. There needs to be care and consideration put into this before the ban hammer or other measures are taking because it could be someone honestly working towards a goal. I personally am not that focused except in my kills, but I can understand the focus and desire to do so. I think if enough tools (assassinations and bandit tactics for example) are given to the players, along with some observations from above (GW Devs) we can make sure that the game is enjoyable and allows for many different and varied methods of play.
Side note, there will be, by design, the ability for a massive economic empire to rise and control the markets, at least a good portion of them. It is the same about the chance for a pvp heavy guild to take over the world through warmongering. Stay within the rules and do it properly and it is possible. That is the main thing we all want (i'm assuming), is for rules to be established that encourage a particular style of play and that they are enforced.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Hopefully, the overall design will not allow any one interest to dominate any one area of play. It will not be fun if there is one major kingdom that dominates all, or trade becomes impossible due to a 3:1 bandit ratio, or PVP is impossible due to a huge band of "Brothers of Ganking". A short dominance in an area sounds like fun but not a long lasting one. My two cents.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hopefully, the overall design will not allow any one interest to dominate any one area of play. It will not be fun if there is one major kingdom that dominates all, or trade becomes impossible due to a 3:1 bandit ratio, or PVP is impossible due to a huge band of "Brothers of Ganking". A short dominance in an area sounds like fun but not a long lasting one. My two cents.
Again this depends on the scale of the world and will be localized. Don't like the economy in the area you're in, or the high ratio of bandits, or anything really? Pick up your stuff and move. Sure it may be an inconvenience, but it will also be fun for many people to find their niche in the world.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Better to ask a question and spawn a debate that can be used to help spawn more ideas that might solve other problems than to sit there in mute silence.
At the end of this thread, we can safely say that:
'Server-Wide' Monopolies aren't going to be possible in any way, shape or form without ludicrous amounts of out-of-game shenanigans and thousands of players willingly working for dirt-poor wages to enrich a small handful.
People who attempt to form Cartels to cripple economies or forcibly take control of resources are very vulnerable to 'directed apathy' from their competitors and buyers as Bandits in turn focus their efforts on the Cartels alone.
We're playing in a game where it is entirely possible to hire an Assassin to kill the greengrocer because you think he charges too much on his apples.
Resources are not restricted to a specific region, thus economic shenanigans are restricted to much smaller regions, and the random spawning of 'nodes' and 'resource'-dropping Mobs prevent bot-farming techniques and the Multi-Boxing Army of Gatherers.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@HalfOrc
That is true. We did have access to these solutions already available through blogs, postings, and interviews, however.
I am not saying that a thought experiment is not fun. It is great if it generates forum activity and also reconfirmation of previous Dev statements. There are a lot of newer people looking around here, not having a large knowledge base, and finding concerns about how the game's systems will fit together.
HalfOrc, I hereby retract my statement that your thread was "non necessary" and apologize if I offended you. It, at least, sparked some debate and re clarification. :)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
'Server-Wide' Monopolies aren't going to be possible in any way, shape or form without ludicrous amounts of out-of-game shenanigans and thousands of players willingly working for dirt-poor wages to enrich a small handful.
Even then, I believe GW's likely to bounce them if their behaviour's disruptive to the "proper" development of the game and its economies.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Oh, I wasn't offended, I in turn apologise if I came across as son, but I think we'll all be served best in the long run by topics like this, where the potential customers outline issues they have experienced, or ideas they think would work, and then people like mr Dancey and said Customers can talk and brainstorm together.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I think territory control is the solution. In order to get a stranglehold on the market of a certain good you'll have to control the area where it's produced.
This won't be done by one or two players. It will be done by large organized groups. Groups which can be overthrown.
Also I really hope auction houses don't exist.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
We're deliberately avoiding creating any resources that are limited to a small area. Harvestable/Gatherable components are deliberately spread out all over the map. Creatures with valuable drops appear in escalations that can appear lots of different places on the map.
One of the things Pathfinder Online advertises is trade. If there are no localized resources won't that drastically cut down on the need for trade between hexes?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...I really hope auction houses don't exist.
Stephen Cheney said:
"There are no global auction houses. You have to buy at a local market and take your purchase where you want it (opening you to ambush that way as well)."
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One of the things Pathfinder Online advertises is trade. If there are no localized resources won't that drastically cut down on the need for trade between hexes?We're deliberately avoiding creating any resources that are limited to a small area. Harvestable/Gatherable components are deliberately spread out all over the map. Creatures with valuable drops appear in escalations that can appear lots of different places on the map.
Just because a resource can spawn in 50 different hexes, doesn't mean it will be available in your hex. I don't think any single area will produce all the resources needed, just that no resource will be confined to an easily controlled area.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Just because a resource can spawn in 50 different hexes, doesn't mean it will be available in your hex. I don't think any single area will produce all the resources needed, just that no resource will be confined to an easily controlled area.One of the things Pathfinder Online advertises is trade. If there are no localized resources won't that drastically cut down on the need for trade between hexes?We're deliberately avoiding creating any resources that are limited to a small area. Harvestable/Gatherable components are deliberately spread out all over the map. Creatures with valuable drops appear in escalations that can appear lots of different places on the map.
I seem to remember woods for heh wood and hilly/rocky heh hills/mountains for iron etc and indeed ponds and rivers for fish possibly too etc? I think even different mob types will have different locales too in the map. I guess it means no one settlement will be gimped due to location but at higher and higher levels different resources differences/avenues of production might occur variably across the map?