The burden of content creation


Pathfinder Online

Goblin Squad Member

One of the core principles underlying the design of PFO is that the primary content is conflict with other players.

So it occurs to me to wonder: If one day, all the members of the Northern Coalition just stopped logging in, how much content would be left?

For non-NC members reading this, I have some questions:

* Would you be satisfied with a PFO where everyone just farmed escalations, gathered tansy, and crafted increasingly pretty suits of armor, with no significant quantity of PVP content?

* Do you feel comfortable that if everyone on the map were playing the same way you do, there would be enough content to keep the game interesting and afloat?

* Have you seriously considered engaging in content creation? Have you done so? If not why not?

* Have you seriously considered initiating hostilities with anyone who isn't NC? Have you done so? If not why not?

* If the NC is the sole target of all non-NC content creators, how long do you think that dynamic can realistically be expected to survive?

Goblin Squad Member

1) I think when the games systems and it as a whole get more fleshed out in the coming months other "NC-like" groups will find their way to PFO.

2) I think the game will survive until that time comes.

As the NC has essentially declared themselves enemy to all I'm not sure why other entities currently in game would open up "second fronts" by creating hostilities with other groups that just want to stake out their claim and hold it.

If the NC just stopped playing as a whole, well, then I imagine relative peace would maintain until it didn't. That said the new resource regeneration changes will certainly maintain a certain level of conflict as groups seek to police their claims and maintain their crafting endeavors.

* If the NC is the sole target of all non-NC content creators, how long do you think that dynamic can realistically be expected to survive?

Again, until the next NC comes along. They will come and most likely they will see the current NC as competition and adopt a hostile stance toward the current NC (as well as all the rest of us) as well.


V'rel Vusoryn wrote:


As the NC has essentially declared themselves enemy to all

Really?

This is news to me.

Goblin Squad Member

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Truth is, it's us shiny-loving, homedwelling, crafter-loving, safety-seeking, PvE mongering Carebears that, in the end, are the reason that conflict will exist in this world, since it is you competitive and action loving players that will want to try to take it away from us and make our homes unsafe, take our lands and "ruin" our PvE(make dangerous).

You need the civilians who want peace and quiet and shiny and lewtz, so that you can kick down our Lego-dreams(or want it for your own Carebears), so that we can get mad and rally to our cause by employing more of you!

You need Beauty and Stability so that Chaos and Destruction can follow.

Everytime one of us sighs "I wish we could PvE in peace for once", another seed has been planted for strife. Everytime you take away a shiny, we will cry foul and want revenge.

This is one of the reasons that I believe so much work is going into Escalations. You need PvE players in this game and GW knows it: you just need those that can see the bigger picture.

Goblin Squad Member

Savage Grace wrote:
V'rel Vusoryn wrote:


As the NC has essentially declared themselves enemy to all

Really?

This is news to me.

I'll step all back to nearly all as I admit I have not heard of a documented attack on Emerald Lodge members. That's not to say it hasn't happened, just that I haven't heard of it. Nearly all also being in the context of established settlement entities and not including the non-affiliated.

Goblin Squad Member

Tyncale, there's no question in anyone's mind that predators need prey. My question is, how many of those who are currently playing primarily as prey are prepared to step into the role of predator?

Goblin Squad Member

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Gol Guurzak wrote:
Tyncale, there's no question in anyone's mind that predators need prey. My question is, how many of those who are currently playing primarily as prey are prepared to step into the role of predator?

If, by predator, you mean going into the sovereign areas of other groups and killing random gatherers/crafters, from my experience...none.

If, by predator, you mean those who prefer the non-PvP play style yet in the past few weeks have gained interest in it to defend their groups interests...more than a few.

Goblin Squad Member

A NC boycot for a Month would be interesting. People would need to start a holy war and go kill "good" alliances that had a different diety or whatnot. The main problem with NC logging off for a month would be that half would never log in again, which we could all agree would be bad for the game as population is at a premium and peoples free months from kickstarter are ending soon and some if not many will not sub if they feel there is nothing to do or reason to log in. But honestly Golgotha vs the world is not going to be viable when the devs clearly favor the larger population good guys. Aren't the good guys the minority in almost any good fiction which makes it that much more epic when they achieve victory? The everybody is good gameplay ruins immersion and gameplay. I demand a we love Golgotha month

Goblin Squad Member

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Gol Guurzak wrote:
Tyncale, there's no question in anyone's mind that predators need prey. My question is, how many of those who are currently playing primarily as prey are prepared to step into the role of predator?

While having too few predators is a risk, by far the greater risk is having too many. Having too few predators is likely a self-correcting problem. Having too many predators is likely to result in a vicious cycle that drives off prey until all that is left is predator-on-predator, which is what turns games into murder simulators.

Goblin Squad Member

Gol Guurzak wrote:
Tyncale, there's no question in anyone's mind that predators need prey. My question is, how many of those who are currently playing primarily as prey are prepared to step into the role of predator?

Well, thats a very good question indeed.

In my case I can give a specific answer: you will probably never see me in the front lines in direct combat, but I am already "changing my ways" in a for me unexpected fashion since I started to realize that I may loose my home, Callambea. Which is that I am finding myself prepared to put part of my effort in the game towards safeguarding the possibility of staying here, for instance by attracting a Mercenary company who I could then provide with weapons and armor. Less profit for me, but at least I may be able to hold on to Callambea a bit longer.

It's been a long time since I have been lying in my bed, thinking of ways to "save" Callambea. All within my own comfort zone, which is trade and craft, but still.


The community (as a whole) doesn't appreciate our content nearly as much as Ryan does.

The community (as a whole) will not shoulder the burden of engaging in combat PvP if there is any way to shirk combat (such as sneaking into unattended towers).

The non-consensual combat PvP parts of this game are so completely untested that if there were a bug that restores you back to 5000 reputation if you log in at the point in Marchmont where your character first entered the game, that bug would still be undiscovered.

The community (as a whole) has an unreasonable fear of non-consensual combat PvP that is completely unfounded based on the actual risks.

Confining the vast majority of our PvP attention to the largest power bloc has not only earned *their* enmity, but has allowed them to exploit the fears of the rest of the community, to the point where they can claim way more than their share of the map and *we* are still viewed as the bad guys.

I can't see how we'd have done any worse than if we had primarily targeted the weakest settlements, because those people *feel* targeted already, just from what they read in the headlines. Face it, our right to discuss the FACTS about risk end where their feelings start. :-)

This game doesn't have the money to provide the kind of PvE entertainment that AAA themepark games, do. I can say that a low budget sandbox game DEPENDS on PvP for content over and over again, but hundreds (thousands?) of people just hear me telling them "do stuff you don't want to do".

Frankly, there are days that I feel the community doesn't *deserve* our content.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

My "win" button for the game is having fun RPing with other players, really. I have as much, or more, fun bantering with Desan in the Laughing Ogre about the poor state of diplomacy to goblins as I do running from bandits. Will I ever take up the banner and be a "bad guy" for the sake of the game? Sure, I'd certainly do that. It wouldn't be as Erian (unless some grand fall from grace was orchestrated wherein he turns to Evil due to the failings of those he thought "Good"; that would be a lot of fun...). But if the world suddenly found itself without a bad guy at all I've been GMing long enough to readily step into that role. I'm uncertain you folks would like Evil Erian. He's nowhere near as hospitable or controlled as Phyllain.


I've said it before... if this game lasts long enough to succeed and attract the millions of players Ryan would like to attract, a lot of veteran players will look back and realize just how reasonable Phyllain was.

It's nice that a few do already.

Goblin Squad Member

Hey, guys, I think Tyncale has an exclamation point over his head. Which is great content creation.

Goblin Squad Member

Erian does as well, but his is the long-winded, multi-screen monologue you have to click through until you get to the "Hey, can you go break some barrels over there and bring me the Queen's shoelace that got stuck in there? Yeah, I know I should be able to walk across the street and get it, and I'm not sure why you have to break the barrel instead of just reaching in there and grabbing it. Come on, do you want this 500 xp or not?"

Goblin Squad Member

Skip. Skip. Skip. Minimap?

Goblin Squad Member

Queen's Shoelaces? I don't need those. Trash

Goblin Squad Member

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Savage Grace wrote:


Frankly, there are days that I feel the community doesn't *deserve* our content.

You're giving off a dominatrix vibe right now.

*wubba wubba*

Goblin Squad Member

Two years ago I stated on these forums there is never a lack of evil intended players (gankers, random PvP attackers, conquest oriented players). I thought it odd there was so much complaining by the "evil" intended players that evil was at a disadvantage. Hot news! Evil is never at a disadvantage! Evil always has the advantage as there are no rules for a player to behave in an evil manner.

It seemed redundant, and even moreso now, that Pax decided to take on the role of an evil empire since there was not enough evil. It tipped the scales in that direction, and now with so many players in that stable, but few mechanics to support directed PvP Xeilias and company are complaining they are bored. What did you expect when you tipped the balance?

Goblin Squad Member

Lets not cry for Golgotha. They are the 2nd most successful group and have cornered what will be a very popular play style in this game.

Wipe your bloody nose with your bloody hand. You're just losing this round.

Goblin Squad Member

I think we will be seeing more conflict in a couple of months, if the Tower Wars are still going on then. By then, a lot of folks will be up around level 11-13+ and that means that they need more towers to hold to be able to support those levels. Tier 3 stuff will be in reach for many and many almost able to use it.

That's when the real pinch of towers is going to be felt, forcing many to decide whether to expand so they can continue on to those levels or stay at the level that they are at or fighting like crazy just to hold what they have while those who want to go up in levels will be attacking those towers. That's when trade agreements and alliances will become very shaky and might even disappear.

Now if GW raises the minimum threshold so NPC village go from supporting level 8 to supporting level 11 when tier 3 becomes more commonly available and useable by most, then that conflict won't happen.

Goblin Squad Member

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Claiming territory in a game based on claiming territory is not being a "bad guy". And this "their share" talk? Really? Please link the location where it establishes how much a group can hold as "their share".

If there is any enmity to be had I highly doubt it is from your PvP attention. I think it's more from how some of you present yourselves on forums such as this and the manner in which you communicate with/at others. The incessant need to paint anything and everything anyone from the EBA says or does has done way more to that end than any in-game PvP.

Frankly, there are days that I feel the community doesn't *deserve* our content.

This is an example of what I meant above. It is also very presumptive in thinking "your content" is the reason keeping people in game. It's not though I'm sure your opinion differs.

I like PvP (as much as I like crafting and PvE). I like killing Golgothans. If you guys left, I'd like killing the next guys that step in to fill that role. 18 plus years of playing MMOs has shone me there will always be a "next guy" that wants to be evil and murder some carebear noobs, lol!

Goblin Squad Member

T7V Avari wrote:

Lets not cry for Golgotha. They are the 2nd most successful group and have cornered what will be a very popular play style in this game.

Wipe your bloody nose with your bloody hand. You're just losing this round.

I hope that gol isn't the 2nd most successful group because we barely have the population to do t2 escalations most nights even in prime time.

Goblin Squad Member

4 people marked this as a favorite.

* Would you be satisfied with a PFO where everyone just farmed escalations, gathered tansy, and crafted increasingly pretty suits of armor, with no significant quantity of PVP content?

No, but I have no expectation that will be the case. There will, in time, be more competition for resources, just like there is currently some limited competition for towers. There will be PvP.

* Do you feel comfortable that if everyone on the map were playing the same way you do, there would be enough content to keep the game interesting and afloat?

Hmm. I explore, I gather, I participate in clearing escalations, I participate in 'sanctioned' PvP: taking and defending towers and defending allies from flagged bandits. I wait for the implementation of the Freeholder role, Outposts, and Holdings - and with holdings, raiding and eventually feuds and war. Yes, I'd be comfortable if everyone restricted themselves to sanctioned PvP, but I don't imagine that everybody will.

* Have you seriously considered engaging in content creation? Have you done so? If not why not?

If by "engaging in content creation" you mean attacking unflagged characters, no I haven't considered it. Why not? Because, as a member of The Empyrean Order and Brighthaven I'm sort of committed to the NG alignment. Because as soon as members of Brighthaven attack unflagged characters, we'll get criticized here in the forums.

On the other hand, if by "engaging in content creation" you mean venturing out into the world, accepting risk and potentially being a target for bandits, I do that every day.

* Have you ever seriously considered initiating hostilities with anyone who isn't NC? Have you done so? If not why not?

No. I'm a member of Brighthaven. If you look at the map, we don't share a border with anyone except our allies. That's deliberate. We don't hardly share a border with the NC. Why would I go more than half-way across the map to cause problems for my settlement?

* If the NC is the sole target of all non-NC content creators, how long do you think that dynamic can realistically be expected to survive?

That's a pretty big if, there. Even if we just assume away all of the potential for conflict over resources and territory, PFO is attached to the internet. I have no doubt there is a good supply of players out there who will come to the game and create whatever justification they need to attack their fellow players' characters.

--

As an observation - I think the NC's biggest problem is that they are in a self-inflicted alliance between the two groups that are the most obvious aggressors. By deciding on a course of non-aggression between the LE groups (led by Golgotha?) and the CN bandit groups (led by Aragon?), they effectively shut down their best potential source of PvP - each other.

Goblin Squad Member

* Would you be satisfied with a PFO where everyone just farmed escalations, gathered tansy, and crafted increasingly pretty suits of armor, with no significant quantity of PVP content?

Yes. In fact, I almost never PvP in any game. I've spent years in WoW on an RP server and have also spent significant time playing Minecraft with no desire at all to attack another player. Heck, I rarely even seek a military victory in Civilization, favoring science, diplomatic, or cultural victories.

* Do you feel comfortable that if everyone on the map were playing the same way you do, there would be enough content to keep the game interesting and afloat?

The game would need to be designed that way.

* Have you seriously considered engaging in content creation? Have you done so? If not why not?

Not seriously. I am not very good with PvP and never have been.

* Have you ever seriously considered initiating hostilities with anyone who isn't NC? Have you done so? If not why not?

Nope. Not my thing.

* If the NC is the sole target of all non-NC content creators, how long do you think that dynamic can realistically be expected to survive?

I believe when resource needs come into play and conflicts start becoming more meaningful that we will see more skirmishes beyond what NC is providing.

Goblin Squad Member

Yrme wrote:
As an observation - I think the NC's biggest problem is that they are in a self-inflicted alliance between the two groups that are the most obvious aggressors. By deciding on a course of non-aggression between the LE groups (led by Golgotha?) and the CN bandit groups (led by Aragon?), they effectively shut down their best potential source of PvP - each other.

This says it all. While EoX was planning and expecting to PvP against others but wanting to shore up their own defenses they formed an alliance that would eliminate what they claim to most enjoy. Without a way to cause harm to another settlement there is no good reason why EoX and NoK aren't having wonderful battles with each other every day. Both nations seem to love that kind of thing. I guess the thought of fighting someone so close to home is too scary for them.

Liberty's Edge Goblin Squad Member

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Gol Guurzak wrote:
Would you be satisfied with a PFO where everyone just farmed escalations, gathered tansy, and crafted increasingly pretty suits of armor, with no significant quantity of PVP content?

Setting aside the nonsensical nature of the question - that's not how the game was marketed or designed, and it's not the game the developers want to make - yes. I would. I had a blast in City of Heroes from beta til they shut the servers down, and its PvE content consisted basically of smashing NPC evildoers on the street, or going to a warehouse/office/cave and smashing NPC evildoers there, without even a crfting system. Fantastic community, lots of roleplay, and a generally positive experience. Unfortunately, they went the multi-server route, and the instanced door missions further isolated people.

Quote:
Do you feel comfortable that if everyone on the map were playing the same way you do, there would be enough content to keep the game interesting and afloat?

Again, not the game the developers have marketed or developed. I expect you'll see things pick up once factions, resource scarcity, and penalty-free forms of PvP become more prevalent.

Quote:
Have you seriously considered engaging in content creation? Have you done so? If not why not?

NOT my thing. I'm not good at PvP, never have been.

Does running away with my Flailing Kermit Arms of Panic count as content creation?

Quote:
Have you seriously considered initiating hostilities with anyone who isn't NC? Have you done so? If not why not?

I haven't considered initiating hostilities, full stop. Aside from my non-PvPness, doing so would put a serious crimp in Thod's work, and that would be bad. Hell, I check with him if I'm going to post something I think would undermine his efforts.

Quote:
If the NC is the sole target of all non-NC content creators, how long do you think that dynamic can realistically be expected to survive?

I don't think you need to worry about that one. Scarce resources will drive hostilities. Penalty-free faction warfare (see the new blog) will let people get their murder fix, and I'm sure other groups will come in ready to do battle for their own place in the sun. I suspect this is a temporary lull, and may simply represent:

a large number of PvE-focused players among the EE population;

a desire to learn the game, train, and craft gear before turning to PvP;

no scarcity to fight over;

most PvPers seem to be grouped together, and that limits the number of people looking to fight you.


V'rel Vusoryn wrote:


This is an example of what I meant above. It is also very presumptive in thinking "your content" is the reason keeping people in game. It's not though I'm sure your opinion differs.

I never suggested my content keeps people in the game. In fact I have been BEGGING others to step up and share the burden of crowdforging non-consensual PvP in both this forum and the GW forums. But (as a whole) this community won't even try.

Let me phrase it slightly differently... There are days I feel the community deserve someone else's content.

This community deserves far more content than my limited skills can provide. I have intimate experience with content providers in other realms and I have purposely resisted the urge to engage in the dark rites that would summon more skilled content providers, in the hopes I could encourage grass-roots participation from the current community, instead.

But we can always just twiddle our thumbs and hope that some patch and combination of game mechanics down the road inspires the content creation needed to keep this game from floundering. THAT is where I see the current community's consensus based on previous threads. They're singing "Tomorrow, Tomorrow, I love ya Tomorrow, you're only a patch away".

Let's hope they're right.

Scarab Sages Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I envisioned my main character as a caravan guard, accompanying wagon trains through the wilderness and fighting off bandits. So far, that kind of gameplay just hasn't materialized, so I've mostly participated in PVE.

I have no intention of being a bandit, but once the faction system is introduced, I plan to fight for my faction under the Rep-neutral system.

Right now, what's keeping me away from PVP is the fact that my settlement is surrounded by friends and allies, we have all the towers we need, and I'm in this game to protect travelers, not rob them. Maybe I need to move my character to the combat zone and start advertising my guard services on the General channel.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Gol Guurzak wrote:
Tyncale, there's no question in anyone's mind that predators need prey. My question is, how many of those who are currently playing primarily as prey are prepared to step into the role of predator?

I don't consider myself to be "currently playing primarily as prey", but I will raise my hand and say I'd be willing to step into the role of predator should the game be lacking. That's not to say I would replicate Xeilias' methods, though.


<kabal> Bunibuni wrote:

I think we will be seeing more conflict in a couple of months, if the Tower Wars are still going on then. By then, a lot of folks will be up around level 11-13+ and that means that they need more towers to hold to be able to support those levels. Tier 3 stuff will be in reach for many and many almost able to use it.

That's when the real pinch of towers is going to be felt, forcing many to decide whether to expand so they can continue on to those levels or stay at the level that they are at or fighting like crazy just to hold what they have while those who want to go up in levels will be attacking those towers. That's when trade agreements and alliances will become very shaky and might even disappear.

Now if GW raises the minimum threshold so NPC village go from supporting level 8 to supporting level 11 when tier 3 becomes more commonly available and useable by most, then that conflict won't happen.

They have said they'd keep it so that PC settlements with ZERO towers could train one level less than a max xp character can train. That means it will always take merely 3 towers to train to max.

Given the fact that this community has thwarted dev intentions in the past with peacenik agreements (e.g. the core 6 NAP), I see no reason to think they won't simply trade towers around and agree that you guys get to train on Monday, us on Tuesday, them on Wednesday, etc. as long as there are even enough towers to accomplish such a scheme.

tldr: if there were only 3 towers on the map, we'd all arrange to each have one day a month where we get to train to max rather than fight it out.

Goblin Squad Member

Savage Grace wrote:


tldr: if there were only 3 towers on the map, we'd all arrange to each have one day a month where we get to train to max rather than fight it out.

Oh, now I highly doubt that would be the case....

;)

Scarab Sages Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Since losing towers has been seen to mean losing access to trained feats, in addition to inability to train more feats, I doubt things will be so friendly for much longer.

Until the crafting queue is changed to check the crafter's level at the beginning of the crafting process, rather than the end, even the crafting settlements might get a little touchy about losing towers. Starting a T2 recipe and receiving a T1 product because your settlement lost a tower overnight should be enough to rile up even the most pacifist crafters.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
ZomoZ wrote:
I demand a we love Golgotha month

This is basically what I took away from the OP. It seems to me what Guurzak is saying is that Golgotha (NC) cannot sustain its status as everybody's favorite bad guy and it doesn't have to try to keep sustaining the status given the level of ungratefulness that gets tossed around for them at times (yes, I know, I know, that was me 3 or 4 days ago).

One of the reasons I want EoX at the number 2 spot in the settlement list of my guide is because they need more people- right now they are outnumbered 3 to 1 by TEO and TSV alone (not always on the battle field, mind you; but off-the-field numbers matter more in many respects). If the "bad guys" are going to remain a viable "bad guy" group for the game, they need to be at least at 3/4:1 of EBA+Northern Alliance- preferably 1:1. Another reason I want EoX at the number 2 spot is to help destigmatize playing an "evil" character in the game.

Yes, Golgotha is going to have the highest concentration of hyper-aggressive, a-hole players in the game due to their "evil" alignment- that's just the sort of folk they are going to attract and everybody knows that. Yes, they are going to, as a settlement, do things that piss us all off- and no they should not be allowed to do such things without in-game repercussions. But I agree with the general premise that a "We love Golgotha Month" is needed- partly because I would like to see Golgotha keep trying to take TSV's towers so we can mop the floor with them some more have some more good throwdowns. ;)

Goblin Squad Member

you could start by spelling GolGOtha. ;)


Gol Tabomo wrote:
you could start by spelling GolGOtha. ;)

lol edited just in time :)


The biggest issue the game has at this point, is resource saturation. There really isn't a glaring reason to PvP at this point, other than for fun. I commend Golgotha and Aragon for playing the evil/bandit role, tho. It will be much appreciated by others as the game develops.

There aren't enough big shiny's for people to hold as status symbols which can also be destroyed or lost for people to attack and defend. I don't have to worry about losing my t2 equipped items when I'm out adventuring. Worst case scenario, I lose a few minutes of my time because my harvested items are lost.

ALL items should be dropped and destroyable. Durability should be something that is lost through use and need repairs. PvE types should have to make a real risk assessment on what they are going to bring for harvesting or adventuring. And this is coming from someone who isn't looking to do PvP anytime soon.

This isn't EVE, however, the old adage of "Only fly what you can afford to lose" should apply in this game as well. "Only equip and carry what you can afford to lose" should be the very first thing all /vets/ should be preaching to new players. Right now, it's more like, "Only carry what you are willing to lose and gather again or have your settlement craft."

I'm a firm believer that it will continue to get better over time and that one day I may have to really defend myself and my mates from attackers and loss. I'll stick with it until I can't still believe in the vision of the developers.

Goblin Squad Member

Savage Grace wrote:
They have said they'd keep it so that PC settlements with ZERO towers could train one level less than a max xp character can train. That means it will always take merely 3 towers to train to max.

I don't think they said that. They said they'll occasionally increase the base level you can train at PC settlements. They did not say how occasionally that will be done.

Goblin Squad Member

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Escalations? Pff, no. Pathfinder has always been a dungeon crawling game, so the dungeons are where the content's at. Control and right to farm of said dungeon will lead to PVP. Obtaining the boss spoils will be a contested thing for all players and only the best equipped and best trained armies will be permitted access.

There's a whole lot missing from the game currently. The burden of content creation is presently on the developers.

Let's not forget that THIS is what we were promised when be backed the Kickstarter:

http://images.mmorpg.com/features/7033/images/PFO_TechDemo_Screen01_t.jpg

Goblin Squad Member

V'rel Vusoryn wrote:
Gol Guurzak wrote:
Tyncale, there's no question in anyone's mind that predators need prey. My question is, how many of those who are currently playing primarily as prey are prepared to step into the role of predator?

If, by predator, you mean going into the sovereign areas of other groups and killing random gatherers/crafters, from my experience...none.

If, by predator, you mean those who prefer the non-PvP play style yet in the past few weeks have gained interest in it to defend their groups interests...more than a few.

You said if perfectly V'rel. It's as is for the last week(s) everyone has been discussing apples whilst Golgotha keeps referring to spaceships. We want bandits to be a part of PFO, I want the wilderness to be a scary place. What the community doesn't want is for you all to solely hunt those that cannot protect themselves (all the while receiving minimal punishment for your murderous ways); it's really not a difficult concept. And also please calm down on the thread making it's honestly getting a little extreme don't you think?

Goblin Squad Member

7 people marked this as a favorite.

My only issue with this whole discussion is that it seems to equate content with PvP. The devs did promise other people would be our content, they also said there would be PvP, I see nothing in either of those positions that suggests that content must be PvP.

Personally, I see all interactions as content. Have I created content? Yes...I think I was pretty instrumental in creating one of the most successful social groups in game...and I must admit, I am not done creating them. That is a big part of my content.

I keep seeing mentioned the fact that it is an open PvP world as evidence that we must all be prepared and that it is justified everywhere and anywhere and anytime. Well, it is also an open dialog world, open RP world, open emote world...and most importantly, open story world.

I am all for PvP. What I am most looking forward to is tactical battles, strategic choices, and meaningful events. I am looking forward to PvP for a purpose, PvP as a tool to achieve or progress that story.

Goblin Squad Member

3 people marked this as a favorite.

D&D and Pathfinder are built on the foundation of random encounters. In PFO NC provides the rest of us with those random encounters.

Personally, the issue I see here is that the NC exists in its current form. If you would have separated out a little further, then you could have cushioned each other with needed PvP. As it stands you are now seen as one entity. If you were seen as two, that makes things more interesting, and Aragon/Freevale have enough actives to been seen as a threat for smaller settlements and banditry.

Do we need the NC? ABSOLUTELY, whether you all want to admit it or not. We will survive without them, maybe, for awhile, but the world would begin a downward spiral into stagnation that would have to course corrected by the developers making it even harder for those that live right beside each other to get along and form relations.

We need more PvP Content besides just small group combat, the issue here is that we aren't getting that for months, not till after Settlements have been establish post GC. What we will be getting, and what will be key to the games survival, and tied directly to the survival of the NC are Holdings.

Personally, I ask for the leadership of NC to strive to keep your members in game, creating content for the next 3 months, even if some of you feel its not worth it right now. As the population increases with more coming from sandboxed MMOs I believe the server will begin to start heading towards a more balanced look at PvP Content in general, although to be honest, I have no idea if we might not already be there, because all we see is forumfall warriors.

Some of you might not agree with me, and some of you might oppose me heavy handedly on this subject, but the truth of the matter is that a Sandbox is a beautifully fragile miniature ecosystem in which we have to nurture every single little detail to keep balance. For those that follow Yellowstone Nation Park, a perfect example would be when they removed the main predators from the park, the wolves, and over the course of decades it destroyed the park to the brink of not being able to fix the situation. Eventually they brought the wolves back, do you know what happened?

The wolves killed off the deer that were over eating grains/grass that turned the creeks into swamp areas/small rivers, because the root system was being destroyed. As the deer died, the grass grew back, bringing in new and interesting fish, as well as a larger migration of bears. The higher grass with stronger roots brought in rodents, which brought in more birds, which helped to fertilize the over eaten parts of the Park, and so on, and so forth. This analogy is the way I see us, it might not be perfect, but it is very apt. If we removed the predators its bad for our ecosystem, but if there is too much predatory behavior, then the opposite can happen, which I don't think we are anywhere near yet.

Whether we like it or not, we are one thriving community, a community that needs to support the good side of itself, as well as the bad side of itself and everything in between. We have one priority we should be facing, and that is the prosperity of this game, within the defined intentions of the designers.

So, with that in mind, EBA has entered into negotiations with EoX, whether these talks are fruitful or not is to be remained seen, but there has been some openness and solidarity seen, which makes me hopefully for an interesting conclusion.


Quote:
As an observation - I think the NC's biggest problem is that they are in a self-inflicted alliance between the two groups that are the most obvious aggressors. By deciding on a course of non-aggression between the LE groups (led by Golgotha?) and the CN bandit groups (led by Aragon?), they effectively shut down their best potential source of PvP - each other.

Near as I can tell from forum posts about settlement populations, and comments on other threads from various specific companies or settlement leaders, this doesn't seem to be the case.

It looks like Freevale is apparently defunct or their owner person stopped playing the game? And from all of the forum posts it sounds like the original company owning or currently owning Aragon the unnamed ones never showed up or didn't figure out how to compete in PvP. That gemstone group, who doesn't sound like they really follow Aragon anyway, they seem to be the real significant numbers puffing up Aragon's size, but it also sounds like they stopped doing banditry a while back and are mainly just doing crafting and escalation stuff now.

So, it seems to me the NC that's northern coalition right? It seems it isn't even really a thing. It sounds more like its just the Golgotha players on their own with a few decent sized companies agreeing to some kind of non-aggression thing for practicality (because of proximity).

Grand Lodge Goblin Squad Member

What do you mean - my chronicles are void of content.

I'm above the opinions that barbarians have of me - the likelyhood is they are illiterate anyhow. Surely for them any book or written treatise is meaningless - unless they find someone who reads it to them.

Webstore Gninja Minion

A reminder to keep it civil, please and thank you.


V'rel Vusoryn wrote:
Claiming territory in a game based on claiming territory is not being a "bad guy". And this "their share" talk? Really? Please link the location where it establishes how much a group can hold as "their share".

'You have what you hold'

Goblin Squad Member

Golgotha (and the rest of the Empire) are my favourite villains by far!

Essentially my responses to the questions would be identical to Yrme's above, with the added emphasis that:

Playing as 'prey' is most fun when there is just enough risk.

Being robbed/attempted robbed on, say, 5% of my gathering runs I see as a good thing, but around 20% it becomes a bad thing for me. Even for RP, it's a lot more exciting when friendship/emnity actually matters (and you can if you want -force- people to notice you), but it breaks down if PvP paranoia sets in.

I'm very happy to have the NC as our resident forces of evil. On-stage i'll keep fighting (or fleeing) you but behind the scenes i'd be very sad to see the Evil Empire (TM) fail. Good luck and catch me if you can.

Silver Crusade Goblin Squad Member

Kyutaru wrote:

Escalations? Pff, no. Pathfinder has always been a dungeon crawling game, so the dungeons are where the content's at. Control and right to farm of said dungeon will lead to PVP. Obtaining the boss spoils will be a contested thing for all players and only the best equipped and best trained armies will be permitted access.

There's a whole lot missing from the game currently. The burden of content creation is presently on the developers.

Let's not forget that THIS is what we were promised when be backed the Kickstarter:

http://images.mmorpg.com/features/7033/images/PFO_TechDemo_Screen01_t.jpg

man those iconics graphics are nice, i hope we can eventually approach that

Silver Crusade Goblin Squad Member

TEO Cheatle wrote:


Some of you might not agree with me, and some of you might oppose me heavy handedly on this subject, but the truth of the matter is that a Sandbox is a beautifully fragile miniature ecosystem in which we have to nurture every single little detail to keep balance. For those that follow Yellowstone Nation Park, a perfect example would be when they removed the main predators from the park, the wolves, and over the course of decades it destroyed the park to the brink of not being able to fix the situation. Eventually they brought the wolves back, do you know what happened?

The wolves killed off the deer that were over eating grains/grass that turned the creeks into swamp areas/small rivers, because the root system was being destroyed. As the deer died, the grass grew back, bringing in new and interesting fish, as well as a larger migration of bears. The higher grass with stronger roots brought in rodents, which brought in more birds, which helped to fertilize the over eaten parts of the Park, and so on, and so forth. This analogy is the way I see us, it might not be perfect, but it is very apt. If we removed the predators its bad for our ecosystem, but if there is too much predatory behavior, then the opposite can happen, which I don't think we are anywhere near yet.

as an Ecology teacher IRL, i appreciate the analogies

the best thing about PFO's "ecosystem" is unlike YNP, the predators and prey can actually change roles as the game needs

I can even see temporary good and evil settlements/alliances making short term truces to combat a bigger good or evil

it all should be so interesting

Goblin Squad Member

Tyncale wrote:

Truth is, it's us shiny-loving, homedwelling, crafter-loving, safety-seeking, PvE mongering Carebears that, in the end, are the reason that conflict will exist in this world, since it is you competitive and action loving players that will want to try to take it away from us and make our homes unsafe, take our lands and "ruin" our PvE(make dangerous).

You need the civilians who want peace and quiet and shiny and lewtz, so that you can kick down our Lego-dreams(or want it for your own Carebears), so that we can get mad and rally to our cause by employing more of you!

You need Beauty and Stability so that Chaos and Destruction can follow.

Everytime one of us sighs "I wish we could PvE in peace for once", another seed has been planted for strife. Everytime you take away a shiny, we will cry foul and want revenge.

This is one of the reasons that I believe so much work is going into Escalations. You need PvE players in this game and GW knows it: you just need those that can see the bigger picture.

"If it wasn't for war, you would not know what peace is!"

-Col. Flagg

Community / Forums / Paizo / Licensed Products / Digital Games / Pathfinder Online / The burden of content creation All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Pathfinder Online