It is odd to have a kickstarter account and it to NOT have a Destiny Twin reward. That would be an extra character on the account that earns xp at the same rate as your first character, from the moment it is created. It would add to the account's value. Even if it isn't created yet. More so if it was back in the day.
Has there ever been a company that had the time and money to develop an MMORPG product with both really great non theme park PVE and also balanced and fun PVP?
This is coming from an absolute(originally) opponent of wide open non consensual PVP. Why didn't I like PVP combat much?
Let's see: Ultima Online was open PVP. I always played as a loner and the experience was always an outnumbered one and a surprise as well. Almost always when gathering or when doing some solo PVE. It was always a ganking experience with myself on the bad end of the deal.
Now playing in a group, having way more PVP interactions that are for reasons greater than "gank to loot", has greatly changed my perspective. It is actually fun! Win or lose something about it being a "group experience" makes it much more fun. This is not an uncommon transformation. Many former PVP haters now feel that in certain doses(each to his own measure) it is actually VERY FUN. I still do not like being caught alone and overwhelmed so I try and always do things with at least another friend or 3.
It is a matter of perspective and positioning. It is fun to have the perspective of a war band going to pay back some great wrong. It stimulates me to try and balance risk vs reward by never getting myself into a vulnerable position. I'm not trying to convince anyone that PVP is ok and they are wrong to not like it. Just sharing one poor slob's experience.
Despite all of the above, I strongly feel that there are plenty of old avenues planned for the game to engage in PVP. Perhaps it should come down to a system where you can benefit in various ways by "opting in" but the appeal could be increased(for a wider audience) by the choice to simply "opt out" and not enjoy the exact same benefits.
From what I have seen, quest NPCs without indicators are one of the most common problems in the tutorial. It is more hard core to not have them, offer NPC names and vague directions, but it isn't proving to be a popular way to do it with a very LARGE % of new players.
Just an observation of a partial realization of "Let's do it this way" based on in game experience.
The speed with which these accounts sell is impressive. Either there are still MANY hopeful players, speculators, or a goodly number of high end disposable income MMO players that have faith in the future and the game's potential. 5 more great accounts just sold very fast without having to list out the details or reach out on many platforms to get noticed.
I find it encouraging.
There were many more that felt the exact same way which you describe than there were that felt it was adequate. No need to be sorry. We each have our levels of expectation and our own sense of what we will pay to experience/play. GW expected a small start. They may have gotten one a bit smaller than they wanted, but all of that is indeed water way past the bridge now.Hopefully enough samples were taken that they have a good idea(or NewCorp does) of what to focus on to struggle up to the spot desired+ in the market place.
My bolding. That is the key. The NPCs get affected and in turn things happen and other players get affected. Problem I see is that it would take one hell of an A.I. to make it random and with ongoing ripples and in no way static or "result 3b" out of 20 possible.
That is supposed to be exactly the story. Player/kingdom? conflict. A story for everyone involved and a story for everyone that watched or followed it. I suppose anything could be the story if looked at the right way. War is just one of the easiest canvases. Doesn't have to be RPed, but would be more neat if it was.
IF lisa can steer this project through these rocks to the other side or find an investor or both, I would not be surprised if she is now double, triple or more reluctant than before to get into any computerized product around PFRPG.
I don't know her personally and it seems like she is more rational than that, but I wouldn't blame her. ;)
Thanks for the links Amaziah. The ideas are interesting and I wish them success. Not too impressed with their income model but that can evolve. I will try it out when they get somewhere.
Just a little note: There are all types of gamers from all walks of life. One type (that I am not) is the "Dream Chaser". By that I mean that I don't chase after The Next "Perfect Game" that is in development and so really never play any.
There are many players around here that are like that, however. This is probably a good place to get Revival some exposure. :)
I admit I am not up to date on this thread. If you have some spare time could you elaborate on where the funnel of suck has failed? IMO it isn't a complete game and that funnel really needs lots of features to be realized.
I feel like the Funnel of Suck was destroyed with the implementation of "Universal Support to 20".
*Compounding the problem, we have a fairly swift regen rate on reputation.
Chuck Wright wrote:
Oops. Sorry Chuck Wright. There was no intent there to insult or belittle your posts. Reading that line you quoted, I can see that it could be easy to take that sentence badly. Not my intent.
I meant "now back to reality" in that I would stop using an allegory about "maps" and "clues" etc.... that I used above that line. :(
@ Chuck Wright
Thanks for sharing all this stuff here. As I have said before, GW has a "Map" that can lead them to a great treasure (success). This map is jumbled and full of many strange symbols that are indecipherable.
ALL feedback that they get are clues that if read properly will eventually let them decipher that "map" and get the reward that they (and we) want.
Now, back to reality. Pretty much everything that is considered opportunity for PVP is/was being planned to be in the game and NOT cause penalties. Between feuds, factions, wars everything is covered and if done right, will be "opt in". The incentives just have to be there for a majority of the player base to want to opt in through one or more of those avenues.
Now if that is true, i.e. the incentives are there and strong, the disincentives are VERY powerful, all "sides" of the issue should be placated.
Why should it even be possible to do RPKing at all? Feuds are not RPK. Factions are not RPK. Wars are not RPK.
Maybe it is a misjudgment to think that ALL of that stuff AND RPK can be mixed into a dough and baked to be edible.
There isn't anything really wrong with the original vision of the game. We all bought into that. Some of that is actually here now. Pkers are a bit reluctant to kill with abandon. The game is really heavily geared toward social cooperation. Most is not here.
It is obvious now that the pathway to get there was planned too tightly without leeway for many things not turning out as projected. Also that the balance between PVP and PVE focus was miscalculated. AND the priorities of implementation were badly misjudged.
Don't confuse the end result goals with the old planned road map. That is really what did not work.
The same original design that we read about is probably a very diluted or... summary look at the real Design Document.
I think that I grasp most of what you are pointing out here Avena, I really am not sure that it is the actual engine that you mean or the actual formula of the style/feel.
When I say that the original presentation is what I hope can be gotten back to, I mean it. That doesn't mean that more of the "Four Pillars" do not need to to be strengthened and developed. If they are trying for a blend, or a "meeting place" between the extremes, i.e. Hardcore PVP vs. Builders and PVE entusiasts, then they need:
*That PVE content drastically improved,
*the PVP tuned with real consequences (for the penalty parts) and with tighter limits [that still means lots of ways to PVP, but not 23/7/365 forced on anyone].
*Whatever is missing to hook and retain people that try the game.
I disagree that the old standard cycle (the sandbox ecosystem) is dead. It is the ever hungry cycle that is a perpetual motion machine.
A: When we first starting to think about making Pathfinder Online, Paizo hired Ryan to create a design document that would be used as a template for making the game. The Paizo team approved that document and that has been used as the marching orders for the team ever since. That won’t change now that Ryan is not with the company.
That is also the game that I still want. The marching orders need to be changed. Now they can be with the least fuss and muss.
I find this puzzling. The PVP thing comes up often. The plain truth is though, if you are not involved in a war, PVP is really really rare. Not like just rare, I mean like in over 8 months (not counting alpha) I have been attacked one time outside of a war/skirmish situation. I play all the time. My characters are All over the map and always moving to the next best guess at opportunity to gather what I want.
Politics reduces this even more.
Really sad to see you go Tyncale.
But if you have to go, you are doing it in a classy way.
I can see that I have not been nice. I can also see that the OP has some experience doing this, or at least is in multiple games doing a startup kinda thing.
Admittedly there could be an impression that it is wide open because of the sale of other things, in plain view.
Perhaps as a fanatic gatherer in almost every MMO I have played, previous encounters with "Farmers" has soured my point of view.
Really don't want to see that happen in PfO, but I do know it is difficult to stop 100%.
I respect your opinion, Saiph.
This is not a community positive move. Gaming companies almost universally frown (actually ban accounts) over this type of activity. It looks like you have been doing it for some time, so I am sure that you know this.
It damages any player driven economy when you incentivize these kinds of activities. If you are successful, you will be encouraging others to do the same thing. It leads to unbalanced inflation (or even deflation) of the work that players put into the game, not to mention account hacking and theft some of the neat things that come from the gold farming crowds that will follow. That might cause a few more accounts to be added which will cause a long term loss of regular players. You will be effectively wrecking the value of actual in-game, legit player efforts. It looks like you have been doing it for some tome, so I am sure that you know this.
GW has been planning to eventually sell game time in their shop that could be used by players as a sort of in-game item to trade for coin. They have also mentioned exploring sanctioned selling of player accounts. The bottom line is: these things are the purview and "virtual property" of the company that creates them. It works best when it is handled through the Game's real owners. It looks like you have been doing it for some tome, so I am sure that you know this.
I am not sure how or even if GW will respond to this, but I hope that it is swift and terrible. I hope it discourages anyone else considering doing it for a long, long time.
Holdings are here. <--- I know. Old news.
Where are all the people that want to run Holdings?
Many of our hexes are great for bonus proximity resources.
There is room to stretch your legs here and do your own thing.
There is a very good mix of raw crafting materials.
There are tons of mobs around, for PVE, slay to your heart's content. I know that I occasionally enjoy an hour or two of just smashing monsters.
We have (almost nightly) regular activities with Oz, Alderwag, and Forgeholm (like brothers and sisters) all mixed up and having fun.
Look at the post above this one if you would like to run or own a Holding.
If you are unattached to a settlement, are new and still looking around, or just want a change of scenery come up and spend a few days with us, around here. Get a good look at how we operate. No strings attached. We have great training, refining, and crafting.
PM me here with your character name(s) and we will make you very welcome.
Have some fun and have some laughs.
I hope that this shift in priorities will help your settlement pass through this EE phase that you feel is prohibitive to your desired play style. Also, that you might return to your original plan, in time. This world needs a little danger to add to the mix.
I have sent you a PM. No it is not a recruitment offer. :)
Could you please refrain from enlightening people with truth when they present opinions based on false information?
Could you please also not "ask" them politely to take their opinions based on false information elsewhere?
My goodness! I can hardly sit back while you bully people this way!
Totally see your discomfort with the EBA policy that is attempting to claim a portion of the map for their citizens.
I also see what your objections are and what they are built upon.
*Clearly it is beyond the pale that an alliance should define territory for it's members. Resources are infinite, will always be so, and certainly not valuable. It is ridiculous for anyone to try and preserve them for their members while trying to keep their land safer for those members.
*Remarkable and inconceivable that they would have the boldness to publically announce said territory. It seems much more reasonable to barely say anything themselves and just kill every non ally or innocent that operates within short range of their holdings.
*And they further compound this activity by questioning people they see within this publically declared territory and then letting those people proceed with their business if they appear to be harmless!
*Perhaps I should also point out that the game is underway (for us EE people) right now. It is a true sign of evil intent for the EBA to demonstrate their ability to back up their publically claimed territory with force if it is needed. THEN they have the nerve to withdraw and let enemies have their towers back.
Help Wanted: Holdings are just around the corner. Ozem's Vigil is entertaining the idea of sponsoring Companies of all sizes to run holdings in our general vicinity. If you are game and either new and unaffiliated yet, or an old hand and want new scenery, contact us and be surprised. Alignment is a far future mechanic. Still, no murderous groups or avowed evil groups will be considered. Anyone else will be considered and rewarded well for their time with us. This includes (but is not limited to) the incentives below.
1. Equal access to the top notch training and crafting that our Settlement and those which our close friends offer.
Step up and get your Company a spot in a group of really fun people.
AS always, we also have an open door policy for any individuals or small groups to come up and spend a night or two with us. We are pretty active in our area. You will have fun. You can choose to consider joining one of our fine Companies or leave if we are not a good fit for each other. Either way, I don't imagine that you will be sorry that you came. :)
There are a couple of things that I completely agree with here (unless I am mis-grokking your words).
1. There are too few people about to make banditry viable. If I were wanting to play a straight bandit (roam and rob, possibly roam and murder/loot), I would likely be disappointed in the number of available opportunities. The current level of danger and caution needed to play (so far and by pretty much anyone in the North) is adding up as a "FAIL" (I can only speak of my own opinion there).
2. I have no reports that the Aragonian Council Members were ever involved in any skirmishes with any from Ozem's Vigil. I am a bit disappointed. :( Most of Ozem's clashes (with others) have involved a current company (then) sponsored by Aragon or Freevale. That is evening out as time passes. We used to see one or two toons around. It has seemed empty for some time though.
We regularly (including myself) move through your area.
As time has passed, since EE started, the rep hit has been greatly reduced and the recovery rate greatly increased. This to the point that even good guys can afford some kills.
Having said all of that, I do not believe that, if you were ingame and saw a juicy target, you would ignore it. I firmly believe that (aside from AGC and Maugrimor) your members are not doing banditry because:
1. The political climate makes it too risky.
2. Your members are not interested enough in the game as it is right now. <-- Many reasons for that
3. The rewards are not worth the risk or their time, yet.
GW, please read.
In closing: I would not mind GW examining the core reasons why the game is so lopsided that there is not really any sense of danger or barely any caution is required to play outside of our (personal) general areas. As long as they do not fix that to the point that it is totally unbalanced in the other direction.
Very amusing, and deceptive, as usual. Two plus years of pontificating and espousing ganking, banditry, dirty tricks, and manipulation of mechanics to further advance your agenda. How was the philosophy and agenda of the UNC (and later Aragon) delivered for those two plus years? How about the policies and agenda of Golgotha?
I do wonder why the EBA came out ready to rumble. Probably has nothing to do with two plus years of forum fun in which they were assured that they would fail, be outclassed in PVP, and in general be unable to "survive" in this deadly game.
Please note that I (personally) have no problem with your endlessly pontificating your point of view or that it changes to suit the current events. Nor objection (personally) with your core stated goals of banditry. We have both evolved as the community has evolved. My own attitudes have most definitely changed. Strengthening in a "character" sense and loosening in an "OOC" sense.
It is far more honest to be forthright in publically expressing your policies than it is to deceive endlessly and repeatedly the newer people to these forums. Anyone that reads your post (above) and believes that they are safe from your members, in your area of Ops, has been mislead by you.
At least Golgotha is honest in that they will most likely go after any they see (in an area near them) that is not a known friend. Also that they go on "occasional murder walkabouts".
From what I have observed, the EBA (all member states within) are very open to new players visiting, trading, adventuring within their publically claimed territory. Most assuredly if those persons ask first. They do not attack people that are not known enemies. Their policy may be to attack any members of known enemy organizations that trespass. How would you deal with a similar situation? I mean if you had some members? Is there a better way to protect and preserve your local area for your members, considering that resources are not immediately infinite?
I would go so far as to state that any sizable group which does not try to protect it's members and preserve an area for them to play and harvest, will have problems. Endless problems.
Claims to territory do not have to be respected by everyone. They are, like all things here: "yours if you can hold them". Claims and perceived ownership is what this game is about. It is not EVIL to declare territory for your members. It is not wrong to enforce those claims.
So, New Players! Do not trust bandits that are inviting you to their area. The only reason they do so is because they know that they can't enforce their own territory regularly. If they see you, they will most likely come after you.
Phyllain, thanks for replying and giving some more info.
Direct question for you: Are they putting basecamps in your territory or just around the map in places that there are no grounds for objections? Please just answer straight up, without extra cream.
If the former than that is not a good thing, if the latter then.... what? Could you explain why you don't consider it different if it is the latter?
I am ready to voice my opinion that if EBA, Phaeros, or whoever does the former then they deserve to see a reaction.
It is all fine to be so huge that you draw recruits like a free beer special and keep doing so. It is not good if you use your weight to do the same things that you normally attack others for doing.
Unless you are a bad guy.
Your Hypothetical: We would fight you until the server was a simulation of the Stone Age.
Edit: This is a hot topic. Can't keep up....
I have yet to see anything worth the time to type that justifies putting a basecamp where EVERYONE knows will cause a reaction.
Just like it is not Golgotha's job to teach small groups that PVP is more fun with more even numbers, it is not the EBA's job to teach that to Xeillias.
Yes the game is lopsided in favor of the EBA and particularly TEO, at the moment. Why keep poking them or their allies? Find a way to get your towers, build your cities, make some friends. Pull it back a notch from "aggressive disregard."
Even Morgoth/Melkor had to build in secret and bide his time, gnashing his teeth and muttering under his breath.
We are acting like any of this needs special justification. It is content. It is lopsided content, to be sure. Again, why do you keep poking the biggest side?
There aren't enough towers for everyone now. If GW wants us to fight, the most foolish thing that they could do next would be to move 0 towers up from 9 ranks or change anything that they have in place right now. No more work should go into WoT. <--- unless it improves things that will be around after WoT
Have you considered compromise and bargaining to get what you need? It sucks to go that route when you wanna be the bad guy. Right now is just not a good time to be the bad guy.
Gol Tink wrote:
Here is some spin. There probably wasn't a specific line in any agreement about basecamps. There wasn't as far as I know any agreement about territorial boundaries at all.
There was a clear statement about territory, though. Very clear. That all comes down to: Do what you want, but expect reaction.
Gol Phyllain wrote:
Bringslite the south has been doing the same thing for weeks. How are we at fault?
I did not include Golgotha in what I wrote. Honestly, I really don't know much about what goes on down there.
Trying to grasp what you are saying. Are you saying that EBA or Phaeros has been putting down base camps or small holdings in Golgothan territory?
What is Xeillias' publically claimed territory? We should start with that.
Are you saying that they have been messaging you that they don't care what you do with "X's" towers and then coming in to take them?
Not trying to be dense or argumentative. There is information that I do not have. There is also (as usual) spin enough to cloud all the issues.
Just can't stay out...
Poachers are one thing. A base camp or small holding is a notch up. It is there, in your face, and it can't be removed in any way shape or form against the holder's will.
Anyone that places such a structure in anyone else's claimed territory, should be aware that it is offensive. Unless they are very, very challenged individuals.
I don't believe that AGC are anything short of pretty smart. I do believe that they do not respect EBA territory. I do believe that they have a grasp of politics in this game. I do believe that they like trouble.
Just last week AGC moved to Kreuz Bernstein. I received a PM or two stating that Ozem's could do what it wants with Aragon's towers. A day or two later they attacked that tower. They did take it away. There was no complaining. There was no forum barf. It seemed like a move totally in character for AGC.
If you twist agreements beyond what both parties expect from them and/or consider as the intent, that is called using loop holes. Great play for lawful evil. Any agreement with them should start with an accurate paragraph or two describing it's "intent". Then it should be looked over by evil minded people that are on your side.
Black Silver of The Veiled, T7V wrote:
It was about the only response possible (so far) in this game, if you value your mechanical reputation. There is communication... but that is hard. Both sides speak different languages.
Savage Grace wrote:
Great answer. I have a few cutting edge crafters and I haven't come across any materials that are exclusive to EBA lands, yet. What are they? If I can find them, have you considered trading for them?
If EBA comes north (out of their lands) and hassles you in Escalation hexes, how could there have been a cease fire? They have done it in the past? OK. Have Golgothans done the same? Have Golgothans gone south (in the past) and killed characters?
No cease fire can last if any party reverts to doing things that started conflict. No cease fire can last if any party does new things that cause friction.
Using past incidents as justification really doesn't help a cease fire either.
From reading further posts, it looks like there are a great deal of things that I don't know about the situation. If I started this explosion, I regret ever posting in this thread.
Savage Grace wrote:
I guess that I have lost you. A Me, Myself, and I attitude suggests that you only care about towers for yourself. I doubt that all of Golgotha is happy with less towers.
Other problems with it are that it leads to rogue elements doing things on their own that ruin agreements between states.
Maybe towers are still important to YOUR characters and their training plans, but they haven't affected MY training plans at all
You won't get far if more than a few players in your alliance play and act with that philosophy. It wrecks agreements that your leaders hammer out.
What good is having the towers for +2 gear, if keeping those towers means obeying some opposition settlements' edicts about harvesting in "their" territory that would keep you from building ANY gear of certain types due to geographic resource monopolies?
What resource does EBA have in their territory that Golgotha can't find elsewhere? Escalations? Here is a hot tip: If you quash nearby monster hex escalations every day, new random ones pop up. Sometimes they are great. Usually they are low end boring ones. That means that a group invests hours daily to have a chance at a good escalation. When an outsider comes in, not bothering to ask first, it pisses off those hard working people whose labor made it happen.
My combat character uses t2+0 gear and pretty much only dies fighting over towers; towers she doesn't need unless she wants to fight in better gear which she would only need for fighting over towers. Do you see how circular it gets? The +2 I could get from the towers is only important for fighting over those very towers that grant it. If I ignore towers, the t2+0 gear works great for everything else that I choose to do (gathering, doing escalations, killing poachers) and the things I can do (like banditry) but have avoided for the last 38 days.
What are poachers? People that come into your claimed lands and harvest without permission? Yeah, those are poachers.
I was attempting to be facetious. That would be a noble experiment but surely there are other ways to test such things.
I did not expect this from a Pax linked org. I have a feeling that Phyllain is being facetious, as well.
Alright. Act in an obtuse fashion if you like.
Large forces aren't a factor in 90% of the PvP that occurs.
Correct. Large forces should read "larger".
We have towers?
Correct. No one needs any towers. There are many settlements that want towers though. No one needs T2 gear or skills past rank 9. Lots seem to want them also.
In fact, by making towers not matter, peaceniks have completely EMPOWERED banditry.
Inconclusive. There is no evidence that banditry is empowered. If you mean murder and corpse looting is empowered, there is still not enough evidence. Settlements that engage in it to excess seem to attract all the wrong kind of attention. I will admit that players can murder other players and not feel too big a pinch. If they do it with some moderation and self control.
It would be interesting to see a large group try an experiment. No concern for reputation or available training for a month. That would be a good test to see before OE.
Golgotha raises some valid points about equal competition vs, winning.
Even so, I think that they are missing Mist's general meaning. I could be wrong and hope that if I am, Mist will see this and correct me.
Let's use Golgotha as an example. Not the only one. This applies along many professed alignment ranges and settlements.
So, while it is normal to want to bring more than the other guy to the rumble, losing a lot does not make it something that many really enjoy or are interested in starting.
Results: Groups that can't or won't (for some reason) organize large forces are not really interested in PVP at this time. Not where they are outnumbered in nearly every case.
Why else was there a cease fire for a time between Xeillias and EBA?