Goblin Squad Member
|
It would be a mistake to try to anticipate what we will choose to do.
In the details, that should be a bilateral understanding.
That said, were anyone to take AC, we would do our best to first find a constructive relationship. If not deemed possible, I do not think the continued presence of a non-constructive entity in that location would be tolerated.
Admittedly, the level of tolerance would be balanced by the limits of our power to enforce our position.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It would be a mistake to try to anticipate what we will choose to do.In the details, that should be a bilateral understanding.
That said, were anyone to take AC, we would do our best to first find a constructive relationship. If not deemed possible, I do not think the continued presence of a non-constructive entity in that location would be tolerated.
Admittedly, the level of tolerance would be balanced by the limits of our power to enforce our position.
Agreed, and a lot of this is really up to the results of the next land rush. Assuming that the Goodfellow was not joking, I'll have to speak with him and hear his opinion on it. Same goes for Xeen and Talon Fox ( Councilors of UNC).
Let the political games begin!!
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I beg to differ, the land rush creates a whole different animal of political scheming.Let the political gamesbegincontinue!!Fixed that for you :)
The sleeping lioness is the same huntress as the hunting one. The political games began years ago, even if it is only now that the players are visibly active.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The sleeping lioness is the same huntress as the hunting one. The political games began years ago, even if it is only now that the players are visibly active.I beg to differ, the land rush creates a whole different animal of political scheming.Let the political gamesbegincontinue!!Fixed that for you :)
You are missing the point. The new phase of politics has nothing to do with how many people are active, it has to do with the map and settlement locations being claimed.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Tyncale, that's some very good analysis. The one thing I would add is the analysis of time.
In the beginning, before the map expands, we should be very much "out of the way"; "Passage 2" on your map will not be present, and the only way anyone could get to "Passage 4" would be through the choke point southeast of Brighthaven, since the way around the forest to the south will also be blocked by the edge of the map. Even if the edge of the map doesn't completely secure the eastern border (which I think it does), folks would have to jump off the elevation change to get down to those plains.
By the time the map expands to the southeast, I would hope we've grown enough to be fairly stable in our control of the region.
Ah, I see, smart move. During EE you guys are indeed in a relatively quiet spot, and when the game grows Phaeros becomes situated in the thick of traderoutes/traffic. You may be more vulnerable to skirmishes then because of the high traffic but I think the advantages of becoming a popular "hop" for caravans and groups passing through the Bowl, vastly outweigh the disadvantages.
I think that area will grow into one of the more interesting ones.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I think it might be best to state things simply.
The owners of the settlement at AC will be alliance members. I very strongly prefer that the group that takes AC in the Land Rush be an alliance member.
Of course you prefer it and want it. Does not mean it will happen.
All up to future votes, and since at the start settlements cannot be taken... Leaves you with a possible enemy right in the middle of your two settlements, for a period of time at least.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Leaves you with a possible enemy right in the middle of your two settlements, for a period of time at least.
We like to think of it as flanking our enemies...for a period of time at least. In all honesty, we agree with you. It was a risk worth taking because even if an enemy situates there, they do little to threaten our passage back and forth. The plains route is uncontested and negligibly longer. Meanwhile, we cut them off from the rest of the map and from the use of half their immediately neighboring hexes.
We do not need to confront an unfriendly directly in AC, we can starve them out without much effort on our part.
Meanwhile, an ally gets access to open trade and the security inherent to the position.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It makes me wonder, how porous is a hex side. What is it 2.5 miles long? What is a characters unobstructed visual range? Terrain impact on both movement and visual distance? Day / Night cycle? Player activity cycle? Stealth?
My feeling is, open borders will easily passable and in most cases without detection, if that is desired. No I'm not including armies, with siege weapons. There should be visual clues, from greater distance, that an army is passing through.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Actually, they can cut you off as easily as you can cut them off. As far as trade goes. Granted AB will not be cut off, but if AC's settlement is more aggressive then either of AB/AD then AD will starve while AC is living off the resources meant to go to AD from AB. And AB will have to find their own resources that was supposed to come from AD.
It will take more effort then you think.
It works both ways though.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Actually, they can cut you off as easily as you can cut them off. As far as trade goes. Granted AB will not be cut off, but if AC's settlement is more aggressive then either of AB/AD then AD will starve while AC is living off the resources meant to go to AD from AB. And AB will have to find their own resources that was supposed to come from AD.
It will take more effort then you think.
It works both ways though.
There is a path AB could take in the east that would completely bypass the choke point that AC is near to trade with AD. Also AD has the north choke point it could control that avoids AC.
AB is close enough to the south choke point it can partially block anything that might go to AC. Basically boxing in AC.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It is actually very important for TEO / T7Y to be on good relations with Y. If Y and AC were allied, and against TEO / T7V, that advantage disappears in cutting off AC.
Besides, like I pointed out early, how porous is the 2.5 miles hex border?
Yes the southern choke point is only one hex side wide. The northern choke point has three hex sides open, and the eastern has two hex sides open. That is 15 miles of open border to try to lock down, and at three separate locations.
If I were going for that region, and hoping to secure 3 locations, I would have gone with AC, AB and Y.
You also have two future or exchangeable settlement hexes on that same mountain range. If those two and AC allied, than AD would be cut off by geographic barriers to its north and could only escape east or west through the choke points ( even though they may be more porous than we might presume).
|
Goblinworks Game Designer
|
If I did the math right, a side is a little under 400 m or a quarter of a mile. Under normal conditions, with an unobstructed view, and no stealth, you can see other players at about 80 m. There will be lots of obstructed views, and stealth reduces that distance by potentially a lot. So, yes, while watching the chokepoints is pretty easy, you'd need to station PC guards at pretty small intervals along an open side to be sure of catching small groups of players coming through. This problem obviously grows the bigger your settlement gets (until, perhaps, the point you manage to take over a whole plateau).
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
AC is a bad position if you are not friendly with TEO and T7V. Any other ally of theirs can take Y and youre screwed blue and tattooed. Any assiance would be blocked up top by TEO and down south by T7V and the third ally.
I honestly do not think they are aggressive enough to pull it off.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Where is this map that shows the Land Rush settlement locations? I looked in the blog and forums for a link and I'm starting to feel blind.This one from here is pretty good. Not that the Official is bad by any means.
The problem I have with Harad's is I can't pull the layers off using an iPad. It is un viewable in that format.
I use this one:
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
AC is a bad position if you are not friendly with TEO and T7V. Any other ally of theirs can take Y and youre screwed blue and tattooed. Any assiance would be blocked up top by TEO and down south by T7V and the third ally.I honestly do not think they are aggressive enough to pull it off.
That honestly depends on who it is that sets up there and their behaviors. Someone engaging in a lot of local PvP against members of other settlements in the region may find themselves becoming a target. A hostile settlement would not last long there. A neutral settlement would not be in a bad place, but may find limited future expansion. A friendly settlement will have many things to benefit from, and we are more than willing to work with a friendly group to make sure they are able to expand without conflict to us, allowing them to pass through our settlements to reach their future expansion points. Though we'd like to be engaged in discussion before folks just go expanding at whim.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think you sincerely underestimate them. I doubt even Golgotha's ability to press their influence at that location. If UNC were allied with Golgotha I think it might be able to be pulled off with moderate success, but really weighing the pros and cons, I don't think it would be worth it. This is my own personal opinion, not to be misrepresented as an official stance by Pax, Aeternum or otherwise.
What I do see is that it will take great effort on the part of new players to make it to this bastion of temperance. This means a lot of military forces away from Phaeros and Brighthaven escorting these younglings through potentially hostile territory. With no MSR within 10 hexes, this makes trade a bit more difficult... and as such, a bit more costly. Bulk ore is one of the scarcer resources on the map tho. I guess time will tell.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Absolutely. It is a great couple of spots (TEO/TSV) and obviously picked strategically (with area control potential). We know that the map will expand so it is possibly a terrific "long range" vision spot.
On the other hand, I am putting my confidence in Pax's choice as EXCELLENT for trade potential. It is a gutsy, confident pick and I like that. A Trade Empire is best served if it's markets are easy and relatively safe (NPC road) to get to and from.
Both areas have their great values. Not equal in all aspects. I am sure overall policies/strategies will be based on these things.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
While I wasn't expecting the details of the Landrush to be anything like this, I'm actually getting crazy excited the more and more I think about it. Being able to see the map shift from week to week is certainly something I'm looking forward to getting to watch.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If I did the math right, a side is a little under 400 m or a quarter of a mile. Under normal conditions, with an unobstructed view, and no stealth, you can see other players at about 80 m. There will be lots of obstructed views, and stealth reduces that distance by potentially a lot. So, yes, while watching the chokepoints is pretty easy, you'd need to station PC guards at pretty small intervals along an open side to be sure of catching small groups of players coming through. This problem obviously grows the bigger your settlement gets (until, perhaps, the point you manage to take over a whole plateau).
I assume "a little under 400m" is ~390m, which would be consistent with 680m from side to opposite side for a hex.
Assuming that stealth vs. perception rules haven't changed then that 80m vision is an incredibly useful piece of info:
p = perception skill (including bonuses)
s = stealth skill (including bonuses)
r = spotting distance w/ stealth divided by spotting distance without stealth
From an older blog we had:
p-s = -300 ---> r = 0.1
p-s = 0 ----> r = 0.5
p-s = +300 ---> r = 0.9
If spotting distance without stealth is 80m, then the r=0.1 would mean 8m. As in within 8m even the most oblivious character could see the most skilled stealther. Maxed out skill on both sides would be 40 m.
That seems farther than many games. Is this right?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Bulk ore is mainly going to be supplied from AB because of the massive amount it will produce and it's proximity to roads. AD/AC could be major suppliers of bulk ore to the SE but the big question is are the kind of groups that will choose to settle around Thornkeep and Inevitable interested in trading with an alliance that is mainly NG in nature?
I don't see taking AC as a viable move for anyone, though it could be as the TEO / TSV alliance is critically lacking for anyone with much PvP experience or desire to take a role in military leadership. Also I'm guessing Keepers of The Circle will be the lucky winners of AC if TEO/Pax/TSV aren't allowed to go for a 2nd settlement in this new landrush.
However you will note the most efficient route from the roads to their mountains runs right past two grey settlements.
This is a serious weakness their enemies could exploit.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
the TEO / TSV alliance is critically lacking for anyone with much PvP experience or desire to take a role in military leadership.
I respectfully disagree. In fact I would say that we are stronger then ever as our biggest weakness is no longer in the way.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Unfortunately it's not a matter of opinion. TEO currently has no military officers and practically nobody expressing any interest in the military branches beyond the militia. TSV lost their primary military leader a long time ago due to allowing people with very little valuable input as far as PvP goes (Forencith) to have too much say in matters concerning the military. I heard him vent this frustration to me very passionately to me on many occasions. In all the time beyond that nobody ever approached me as being the new head guy in charge of the TSV military to talk about coordinating our efforts as Solemor did from day 1. So if they do have a military/military leadership it can't be very large or active. Especially since they always conveyed the feeling to me that TEO would be providing the bulk of the alliance's military forces, something which I don't see TEO being in the position to do right now.
With about a month to go and being placed in an area which will not be at all friendly to an alliance of their alignment, indeed entirely indefensible in the long run by my estimations, they have some serious catch-up to be playing if they want to last very long at all once sieges go live.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Starting to get curious if feather fall spells will be in this. Seems like reducing fall damage somehow would be pretty useful at some of the elevation changes. Good for surprise attacks around choke points. Heck, H seems like you could drop right into it, perhaps.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
IronVanguard, that is a really good point to consider: the whole featherfall thing as well as every other spell that could be potentially available. I believe they were going only evocation things at the start as far as spells go, but its something to keep in mind for the future.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Starting to get curious if feather fall spells will be in this. Seems like reducing fall damage somehow would be pretty useful at some of the elevation changes. Good for surprise attacks around choke points. Heck, H seems like you could drop right into it, perhaps.
I wondered that too. Can't wait to see what areas we can get to and what we can do with spells, etc...
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Starting to get curious if feather fall spells will be in this. Seems like reducing fall damage somehow would be pretty useful at some of the elevation changes. Good for surprise attacks around choke points. Heck, H seems like you could drop right into it, perhaps.
I have been wondering if it will be possible to make ranged attacks across elevation boundaries. Since the nearest choke point could be several hexes away this could be a significant problem for combatants at the lower elevation.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Starting to get curious if feather fall spells will be in this. Seems like reducing fall damage somehow would be pretty useful at some of the elevation changes. Good for surprise attacks around choke points. Heck, H seems like you could drop right into it, perhaps.
I personally and selfishly hope not: I want to drive players off the edge of the abyss and hear their screaming until it faintly drops away to a distant "splat!"
I'd like such ridges to be highly dangerous terrain befitting a wild and dangerous land.
|
Goblinworks Game Designer
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Starting to get curious if feather fall spells will be in this. Seems like reducing fall damage somehow would be pretty useful at some of the elevation changes. Good for surprise attacks around choke points. Heck, H seems like you could drop right into it, perhaps.
Probably eventually. We don't have it now, but it's at least pretty straightforward to explain to programming and animation (which doesn't necessarily mean it'll be easy to implement). Once we have critical stuff done, it's probably a fine crowdforging poll subject for a batch of "nice to have" effects.
Honestly, since falling damage isn't actually in yet, I may be able to talk programming into just giving me a "Takes X% less falling damage" effect without any animation bells and whistles when they put it in. I promise nothing, however :) .
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If I did the math right, a side is a little under 400 m or a quarter of a mile. Under normal conditions, with an unobstructed view, and no stealth, you can see other players at about 80 m. There will be lots of obstructed views, and stealth reduces that distance by potentially a lot. So, yes, while watching the chokepoints is pretty easy, you'd need to station PC guards at pretty small intervals along an open side to be sure of catching small groups of players coming through. This problem obviously grows the bigger your settlement gets (until, perhaps, the point you manage to take over a whole plateau).I assume "a little under 400m" is ~390m, which would be consistent with 680m from side to opposite side for a hex.
Assuming that stealth vs. perception rules haven't changed then that 80m vision is an incredibly useful piece of info:
p = perception skill (including bonuses)
s = stealth skill (including bonuses)
r = spotting distance w/ stealth divided by spotting distance without stealthFrom an older blog we had:
p-s = -300 ---> r = 0.1
p-s = 0 ----> r = 0.5
p-s = +300 ---> r = 0.9If spotting distance without stealth is 80m, then the r=0.1 would mean 8m. As in within 8m even the most oblivious character could see the most skilled stealther. Maxed out skill on both sides would be 40 m.
That seems farther than many games. Is this right?
Would be a good question to know the answer to.
But, the 80m vision is in the best possible circumstances. Regardless, that math does not make me happy. It is a longer distance then I have seen in other games.
