So Pax absorbed Golgotha to win the first land rush and now they are funneling votes to set Golgotha up as a Pax settlement? Is that the result of a secret deal Golgotha made when they joined Pax , that Pax would help you later to get your own settlement , it sure looks that way because that is what you are doing. Good thing you are left to police your own ethics , so you can get away with it.
What can you possibly be thinking there? You are ignoring everything that has been written in this thread and some others... How would Golgotha allying with Aeternum increase the number of votes available? No one that voted for Aeternum in the first draft is voting for Golgotha in this one.
<Magistry> Toombstone wrote:
And just to be clear, I don't mean my question as an attack in any way whatsoever. I just find the dynamic interesting, and wonder what your own opinion is on those situations where it might be required to "look the other way" at the evil activities of your close allies. I asked basically the same thing in a Pax thread. I think some groups will just make excuses for it and hardly care, and others might actually have some interesting intra-settlement dynamics.
A legitimate question and worthy of a straight answer (if you didn't get one already). I suppose that it can only be answered on an individual level until we are in game and it becomes necessary to set some policies about it.
I won't be doing anything that damages my Rep or drags my alignment toward Chaos and Evil. Except in rare cases where I have to for some important and immediate goal/need for my Company, settlement, or Empire. I will gladly take one for the team, at that point.
You won't see any from Fidelis participating in banditry. You will see us Avenging unprovoked attacks made against us, our Family and Allies.
What will happen if I see other Allies or Xeilians doing things like banditry? I am not sure. It could easily be part of a feud or war. It could easily be part of them defending their "turf". wherever that is at the moment. Not excuses or deflection, just not answerable without context and time, in game.
I have serious doubts that Golgotha (my wayward family) will have an easy time doing "really evil" things and keeping a viable rep up. I have a feeling that almost all of their activity will be legitimate game play. If it is not "evil", is legitimate, and non rep damaging I may join them (assuming they want a useless tag along).
Best wishes for The Vigilant.
I am well aware of the difficulties in overcoming idealistic views of alignment conflict (and expected actions) in relation to larger groups and alliances. I suffered from it for many moons. Not that I am suggesting any of your group has similar issues.
There are meta and real alliances/friendships all over this early political stage that include everything from assassins to goodly mages.
It seems hard for people to think of living in a city or a nation, and not all having the same outlook as all other members of it.
KotC Carbon D. Metric wrote:
Those are indeed concerns, whether the giant meta-nations/Alliances are well defined or not. From everything that I have seen, of all Organizations in this Landrush, it all seems to be going along as GW wants it, except maybe numbers. :)
Awaken, You EE Sleepers!
KotC - Erian El'ranelen wrote:
A (hopefully) quick question, as I haven't followed the developments of Pax over the last several months...How does Pax Golgotha relate to Pax Aeternum with regard to the previous Land Rush, i.e. are they part of that as having voted in the past action, or a wholly separate group of folks that did not vote in the previous rush?
Pax Golgotha and Pax Aeternum are separate Organizations within the "Empire" of Xelias. They are both part of the Pax Gaming Community. No one that voted for Pax Aeternum is allowed to vote for Golgotha. That has been made clear to all of us on our site, a few times now. That hampers Pax Golgotha (for votes) a bit as some Aeternum members have since moved to Golgtha, but can't bring their votes along. That is ok, though, as Pax Golgotha is getting recruits steadily. :)
Other than that, All of Pax is following the rules and the Spirit of them as we understand them. We are all about that in our Pax Gaming Charter AND the Charters of our sub Divisions.
I have always thought that it will be the POIs and outposts vulnerability that most closely equate to "asset damaging" as a comparison to what I saw in DFUW. Player cities that were not protected were pretty much useless if they had enemies. In some cases, the owners just gave up trying to keep things repaired. Too expensive.
It doesn't take more than a few player enemies there (doing that) to really hurt you if you aren't tending to your "vulnerable spots".
Edit: Perhaps I had better qualify my statement so that it better fits in a UNC policy thread. From what I have read, it will be the policy of the UNC to do these kinds of things. They are in the game's spirit of conflict. They are legitimate and effective tactics. I hope that if they do execute them, the UNC will do it more in the spirit of the game and even some of this (and future backstory) here so that it can be more fun for all. I think that they will, after people cool down a bit.
Especially at first. (Meaning at least early EE) Never give up though! :)
Stephen Cheney wrote:
I've always hated when games don't give you group credit for quests/achievements or whatever. It makes grouping and playing with friends feel so tedious. There's no faster way to make people say "Ugh, lets play something else" than when the 10 boar tongues you need to collect suddenly turn into 20, or 50, because you have friends who need it too.
That is a great way to put it. Definitely what I would like to see GW avoid if they are able.
If I read you right, I agree that it is not really a thing that can be abused.
Some games have a "round robin" system for party members and kills, or whatever. Some even let you help and exclude yourself from the "round robin" credit.
I doubt powerleveling will be a concern in this game. The XP system alone makes it largely a non-issue. If they really wanted to, they could make some achievements require being solo or attach whatever limits they want on any particular achievement.
I am trying to illustrate "power leveling" in the context of achievements. Not in the traditional way that we think of it as "actions=exp".
I am leaning somewhat along those lines, though would not mind seeing special cases.
For example: Two people in a "party". One is watching for bandits or mobs, while one is prospecting skymetal. Both should probably not get "Achievement Earned: Gather 10 skymetal". But maybe, "Achievement Earned: Slayer of Renegade Ogres" if that prospector gets a blow in on the ogre.
That may be too code involved?
Urman TEO wrote:
It would be pretty interesting to see the effects resulting from a large test of such a mechanic. The trading affect on Rep thing...
"Relative" Homogeny or Pariah culture?
We know that Pathfinder Online will have a time based experience system similar to some other games out there, such as Eve Online. We know that there will also be some interesting differences: 1. Your earned experience points do not need to be "pre assigned" to anything while you are earning them. 2. You need "achievements" pared with your accumulated experience points to qualify for some things that you may want to buy with exp pts. (skills, feats, etc...).
Other things, such as ability score requirements and requisite "skills" are similar and typical in most games.
We know that we can always mentor new (incoming) players with our knowledge of what skills, feats, etc... work well together. What, where, when, and how to do the things that they need to do. Even down to who is friendly, who is not, and how to muck about "the world" in the safest or general way that they will find the fun they are seeking.
What I am wondering is, how the "achievement" recognition system will work? If I party with players newer than I am, and go after their wanted achievements, will that hamper their gain? Will my actions, while grouped with them, count toward their gain? Assume that I already have these "achievements" and just want to help.
Is it right or wrong to "power level" new players this way?
Still gotta ask, why not have fake wagons work the way assassin disguises work? Illusionary goods will be pro though, as will the detection of such illusions.
Well, I can see some possibilities in it as a decoy deal, i.e. sending out two + caravans in different directions, possibly misleading when and where "goods/supplies" are being concentrated, etc...
So I can see it working in some way similar to the assassin disguise mechanic and having some value for some strategies. Making something look different than what it "is". Being a "faction" skill gained when the right "hoops" are jumped.
One thing to consider about all of it... A bandit only knows what may be in/on the caravan/traveler after they "inspect" it. Which is after they stop it. (at least as far as I know of current info) The jig "is up" at that point, beyond a minute or two more of delay: Seeing "false goods", making a S&D, getting boxes of "rocks" in the exchange.
This would all have more impact (for misleading and disguise) if you had an idea what a caravan has by viewing at a distance. If they go back to robbers having some clue at distance. Maybe they will...
Apologies Xeen and UNC. It is really boring around here (this forum)
There is certainly an excellent story possible behind all of this... I am certain (at least I would hope) that the people involved will not object to some awesome RP built around a story that started here in the politics of this pre game forum and led to interesting (and legitimately executed) content inside the game.
Actually sounds fun. If you like story and stuff, it certainly qualifies as meaningful (IMO).
If not taken "beyond the pale", or done for personal reasons. <---The tricky part.
Harad Navar wrote:
There are certainly many possibilities to use a "Blind" mechanic defensively. A lot of your suggestions will depend on the details of where it can be used.
Stephen Cheney wrote:
•Clicking it lets you turn off or on an aura that knocks people out of fast travel. This aura is basically big enough that you can put the blind near a road and catch people on the road. You can turn it on or off so you can let scarier groups through without stopping them. (Hopefully we can spawn a log model across the road when you've got it turned on.)
That suggests that it's first function is to drop people from fast travel. It may get expanded to stop you during "regular" travel also. That would be pure speculation at this point.
Still, affecting your opponents movements is useful in all kinds of ways...
P.S. I didn't just "favorite" Stephen's first post about it because I thought it was great for banditry kind. :)
Errr... an unfortunately misleading verb Sir! Uhm, uh...
I enjoyed "cast off" collecting as a safe way to get some gold when starting a new character in UO. If I remember correctly (not positive here), they didn't have timers on loose items. The items persisted until the daily "server down" maintenance. Maybe the timers for thousands of junk items is most of the problem? Then again, detailed rendering was not a "requirement" then, as it is now.
Didn't someone mention "little brown bags" further up?
The Blind (an idea):
Stephen Cheney wrote:
For the record, I am not opposed to such a mechanic as Nihimon proposes. I am certain that I would need a pretty good reason to use it, is all. My time is preferred spent in profitable endeavor, but I begrudge no one the chance to screw with bandits. :)
Can you detail a situation/reason that I might go to that expense? The cost to create the sham being the same as the items portrayed, is where you lose me...
I ask community forgiveness for always referring to DFUW for stories. They are just the freshest.
In the Elven lands, there is a plateau that is accessible only by diving down a waterfall into a hole on the lower edge outside. Then you move up a tunnel, partway swimming and partway walking. Always empty of others, or so I had thought.
This is humorous to me, yet also a good lesson leading back to an earlier comment in another thread about PVP: "Don't be a piggy".
So anyway, in Darkfall, there is no limit to the weight that you can carry and still move very slowly or even "port" home. The spot (described above) seemed perfect to me to hang out and gather all day during work (bad boy). Gathering is pretty much set-and-forget at each node. Waddle (way over weight) to the next, ad infinitum.
Well, I check back (to go to the next node) and there is a guy bearing down on me pretty fast. We clash and he is being hurt real bad, so he pulls back. I try to pursue... waddle, waddle.... Crap! He realizes my problem and switches to bow. I frantically (crying inside) try to dump the various heavy stacks of stuff so I can charge him, but I didn't do it in time. Looking like a pincushion, I perish....
1)Don't be a piggy
2)Make sure you aren't a one-trick-pony with combat skills (cover a cpl or a few styles)
BTW: Good call Hobs. There are fewer threads that I am interested in getting involved in than normal right now.... ;)
Relatively tiny budget. Absolutely smaller than normal staff.... Plus the fact that it is not in any way billed as a finished product at the Early Enrollment stage, which was Nihimon's hint there... :)
Much of the stonework, wood, buildings, etc... are already pretty good.
Graphics are of low importance to me, compared to the frustration of mechanics that fail or time out.
I can wait and work with what I have for the chance to help shape it all to readiness for the "wide open" market.
I both like the idea of "system mail" to inform players of the probable "whys" and would like the option to turn it off or "mass delete" such messages, if I like. There would be a real sense of being spammed, as I expect to be a casualty (my fair share of times) during a war.
That said, it would be a great option because the game is looking to be complex. The reasons for getting "sent to respawn" may be obscure until you have some goodly time and experience in-game.
It could also be a nice chance to "data mine" under what circumstances players are getting attacked and "killed".
Perhaps I need to find and read that tab targeting post? My logic is that there must be a target selected. It could be that a formation leader could provide a /assist function for an area target that everybody fires on? Even better a visible ring to fire through that must be positioned by a spotter. To be clear I am thinking about a formation inside the walls that doesn't have line of site on the attackers.
Sounds reasonable. Maybe an AOE/indirect mode for missiles of some type?