Rochefort's page

Bluddwolf wrote:

I will reiterate my opinion, this is not a big enough issue for GW to dedicate any development time to. There are far more important systems and fixes that need to be done first.

There is no more important development issue than creating an environment where people can play without verbal abuse and harassment. I play the game almost every day and those of us who do actually play need it done.

I agree with Bluddwolf. I play very nearly every day, and I believe we already have an environment where people play without harassment. A troll pops up every now and then, but it is handled effectively by the system already in place. There are much more important things for the devs to be doing. Ryan has already stated that they are working on a mute function, and has also indicated it is not the top priority. Everything seems to be chugging along at a correct pace.

Not the first time somebody has mistaken earth for sky upon leaving Tavernhold. If anybody sees Locke by the side of the road, please just roll him home, and we'll take care of him.

We'll need original ideas that fit the status quo to make this work. We'll really have to think outside the box using a set of parameters determined by a veteran team of solo players.

"The United Anarchists Front" is a great start, though I think "The United Anarchists Sideboob" would garner more attention.

Every time something like this is proposed, somebody comes up with some new method of support. Generally, although these frameworks are effective in lifting the organization, there is a concurrent degree of separation between the major factions. As the factions are thus lifted and separated, attention is inevitably diverted away from the actual substance, toward the rift that divides each side.

The practical result, of course, is that B-List organizations end up receiving more publicity than might otherwise be the case, without substantially altering their actual effectiveness in their own right. Padding out the support framework has also been known to be effective in raising awareness.

Single, Dwarven, Guardian seeks new home. I'll miss you, Guardheim.

Tavernhold would be happy to have you.

I think I have a few of your arrows, anyway. Come by and trade back? By hand is fine - air mail postage is too high.

You may simply and humbly refer to me as The Goat King.

But no fauning.

If the AH insists on including all items whether present or not, it would be helpful to have additional search options, such as "raw:acidic" or "craft:leatherworker". If I have to sift through every grain of sand in the bucket, at least let me select a useful dune to scoop from.

So, having had a chance to play a bit with the new encumbrance levels, I would like to acknowledge that things are not as dire as I feared. With an empty inventory, heavy armor, and a single weapon, my encumbrance bar is lower than it was on the previous build. I am able to carry about 23 arbitrary encumbrance units worth of stuff before going into the next bar, which is easily enough to allow the adventuring goals I mentioned earlier.

Time to high-tail it back home to Tavernhold while I'm still able to move....

I hope there will be some ability for gatherers to jettison items in a lump while fleeing. The mechanic for reviewing inventory, selecting the right tabs, dragging the sheavier stuff out, etc... is too cumbersome to operate while fleeing for your life, as opposed to "drop the big bag of pine logs and run". And of course, that bag of pine logs should persist long enough for the pursuers to grab it.

KarlBob wrote:

Well, I'll be looking for some new gear soon. I took some risks last night, thinking this character might not exist by Friday. Other than being online when you are, how should we go about placing orders?

This is the issue. Even if you make out of game deals you still need to meet in game and be at the same place at the same time (or use a third party like TEO seem to with bankbot) to make the exchange.

I think medium/long term we need something like the EVE contract system. Not necessarily before EE but definitely before OE.

All they need to do is allow players to deposit items into other players' bank vaults. This will allow gatherers, refiners, and crafters to fill orders without coordinating online times.

One of these days, it would be very handy to have color coding, mouse over text, or any other in-game way to distinguish common crafting recipes from uncommon ones. After we receive them, it's hard to remember which ones we could use to fulfill a requirement to craft a +x uncommon recipe.

Not a new request, I'm sure.

What would be really outstanding is the ability to review your known recipes. You can review your feats and achievements, why not your crafting and refining abilities? I'm sifting through the really awful interface at the Auction House, and I finally find an entry that actually has an item for sale. But do I already know that one? Only way to tell is to try to learn it.

I can't recall in history a non-aggression pact with more than two parties.

Only because Switzerland is now a unified nation.

Wikipedia's entry (You don't get real research under field conditions. Sorry) on the Old Swiss Confederacy states:

The Eidgenossenschaft was initially united not by a single pact, but by overlapping pacts and bilateral treaties between members.[5] The parties generally agreed to preserve the peace, aid in military endeavours and arbitrate disputes. Slowly, the members began to see the federation as a unifying entity. In the Pfaffenbrief, a treaty of 1370 among six of the eight members (Glarus and Berne did not participate) forbidding feuds and denying clerical courts jurisdiction over the confederacy, the cantons for the first time used the term Eidgenossenschaft. The first treaty uniting the eight members of the confederacy was the Sempacherbrief of 1393, concluded after victories over the Habsburgs at Sempach in 1386 and Näfels in 1388, which forbade a member from unilaterally beginning a war without the consent of the other cantons.

(the citation in that text is: Würgler, A.: Eidgenossenschaft in German, French and Italian in the online Historical Dictionary of Switzerland, 8 September 2004)

I'd like the emergent nation we're building among Tavernhold, Talonguard, and Stoneroot Glade to borrow heavily from this model, but even this is a closer association than the NAP we're discussing here is, because the NAP doesn't have the "aid in military endeavors" clause at all.

There is kind of a sword. A very big one. If you attack any ones core 6 towers every one and their mother will murder you.

So your objection is "If I attack somebody's home, they and their allies may retaliate"? Do you really think the NAP is material to that argument at all?

I'd like to see a list of the status icons that appear at the ends of the health ribbons to indicate buffs/debuffs and other conditions.

I would like to see high escalations start diminishing the number of resource nodes (either the mobs themselves are using/spoiling the resources or they are simply making the area unsafe for gathering). To balance this, when you end an escalation by killing the boss, all of the escalation-related mobs disappear, leaving trash heaps that may contain the appropriate type of salvaged resources. (one heap per group of mobs, not individual, obviously).

Last night there was a group of about 4 players who just would not get the hints about switching over to the party channel. General was bogged down to uselessness by their chatter.

Can ad hoc channels be created? I'd like to have a settlement or company general channel, but I can see that it wouldn't be worth GW's time to add those permanently.

EDIT it response to Caldeathe's post:

I wonder what the difference between Hex and Local will be. I can live without General, but I would like to have the functionality of at least finding out which members of my company, settlement, or other friends are online.

I had a similar problem with Active Feats last night. I use a Battleaxe and a Heavy Shield. So, slots 1-3 are for axe feats, and slots 4-6 are for shield feats. Easy enough, although not actually indicated anywhere.

I was disappointed to find that I can't slot Carve. the tooltip states it's a 1-handed axe attack, but no matter where I try to slot it, I get a "wrong type" error message. So, I thought, maybe the red background on the icon was intended to tell me something that isn't documented anywhere. I'll buy Hew - another one-handed axe skill that is described pretty clearly as an attack. But it turns out that one also can't be slotted anywhere.

It would be really awesome if I could have the paperdoll on screen while browsing available feats, and have appropriate slots highlight when I select one so I can know before spending the XP that the feat can actually be used.

Also, the tooltips for weapon feats list keywords, which I can match to my equipment, but unlike armor, there is no indication of what is gained by extra matches. The descriptions for level 1 and level two in any given feat are identical - what is gained by upgrading them? Those are pretty expensive, and I've already got probably a week's worth of XP tied up in useless garbage.

It feels like people want a short explanation that covers everything. If that were possible, the system wouldn't have the depth to keep people engaged for a long time.

I would like the abundance of people stating they don't understand one of the fundamental concepts of the system to be recognized as a sign that the decidedly non-short answers that are available are not sufficient.

It absolutely needs to be presented better at some point, but for me it's not a high priority.

For some of us, it is.

There may be tons of information out there describing how everything works, but it is badly organized and cluttered with extraneous information. A simple answer to "What will this armor or feat actually do?" should not require looking up 3 different player-generated unofficial documents on different websites, and should not require recognizing that quite a bit of the official information presented in the actual game does not apply because the armor/feat/whatever is not +3.

I keep seeing people say they don't understand keywords, and the response is always "It's really easy - just match them!". But I think I'm fairly clever, and I can certainly read pretty well, and the keyword system is still very murky to me.

It would be helpful if the paperdoll used that middle space that currently has a silhouette to indicate which keywords are currently active. It would be great if the tooltips were written in a consistent format that allowed keywords to be easily understood. Is Organic a keyword? The tooltips seem to suggest it is. If a character is wearing leather armor and using a softwood club, they are both Organic - have they matched the keywords? What bonus do they get?

My new wool hat gives the keyword "Vehement", and my mittens give "Fleet". But what does that actually do? 'Cause my stumpy Dwarf legs are certainly not fleet - mobs run right past me to kill the mage I'm trying to protect, although when that happens I do utilize the Vehement keyword to no in-game effect.

I am quite concerned about the fact that it will be mathematically impossible to craft Wizard Weapons before the start of the real War of Towers if that starts as scheduled in the 2nd week of Early Enrollment.

• Hunger's Longbow +2 - 5 days
  
• Apprentice's Wand +2 - 10 days
  
• Apprentice's Staff +2 - 17 days

Magic-users are always underpowered at the start of the campaign. If the hunters pick on you during week one, fireball them in week 3, and chain-lightning their village in week 10. At least you've got more than d4 HP....

What are your needs? Tavernhold is looking for good folks up in our corner of the world.

*87% of statistics are made up on the spot

The other 21% are blatant exaggerations.

it was a long time ago, but didn´t i read someday the UNC will have a feedback forum were its "victims" can go to to talk abut their experiences?

Like the Ankh-Morpork Thieves' Guild? Thank you for choosing UNC for your highway robbery experience. Here's your receipt, would you like to complete a satisfaction survey for 5% off your next mugging?

It seems to me that if the settlements are sovereign, they should be able to determine what constitutes acceptable behavior within their own walls, and within a reasonable distance (bowshot?) of their holdings. I am entirely against FFA in the wilderness, but this is a different issue entirely. Why lose reputation for doing something in an area where that thing would not cause any alarm or scandal? Alignment, on the other hand, should remain in effect. That is based on the judgment of the gods, so location is unimportant.

What I am saying is those Tavernhold guys probably have an interest in keeping that escalation down as well. How about you broker a deal that you should make anyway, and have Golden Flask watch your back for players while you handle the mobs? That service could be extended to your harvesters for a cut of the profits.

Why do you assume we're not doing that already? But the hex doesn't need to be FFA to make that a wise, and probably necessary, tactic.

How about that be the answer instead of "what do you mean might get PvPed in the most valuable hex in the game"?

How about you realize that we already realize we might get PvPed in any hex on the map, and the scarcity of these hexes already makes them more dangerous without needing to actively encourage you? Are you really suggesting that you will not engage in PvP in these hexes if the reputation system is in effect there?

I want rare resources to truly be rare. I think a way of doing that is making PvP more likely.

Again, why do you assume anything needs to be changed for this? It's been stated that monsters in alpha are little challenge. I can't speak to that because I'm not in alpha. But I have also seen the devs state the AI is still very basic, there are still limited types of mobs, escalations are not fully developed, etc.... Saying PvE is negligible based on current observation is absurd. You seem to assume that without active patrolling by civic-minded gank squads, people will be stubbing their toes on starmetal laying around unguarded in huge piles, when there is zero basis for guessing the rarity of that resource within the designated hexes.

Having them fairly accessible doesn't mean the hex itself is difficult to cultivate. It means getting a logistical supply line to the hex is not difficult... unless you are AoE or Forgeholm.

If only there were some kind of 10-week long process by which people could choose where their settlements would be located based on their own goals and styles of game play. Forgeholm must be devastated that no starmetal has appeared near the hex they selected on week 1 and have not budged from since. I wonder if they've realized they will need to trade for that? And protect their caravans from bandits? And possibly sponsor some guards for harvesting runs?

I think I should be more inflammatory in my posts. People rarely respond to me directly.

Try shaking your fist a bit higher. I just don't feel threatened yet.

All that's going to come out of this thread is all the PVE people will go " I wan't you to be nerfed into the ground for looking at me funny, let alone killing me." and the PVP groups will go " This sounds like a decent idea."

Exaggerating the opposing viewpoint into absurdity while minimizing your own is a cheap tactic.

How about the PvE people will say "we believe the existing reputation/alignment system is adequate to retain meaningful interaction"? That's certainly closer to my opinion.

Is yours "How dare you suggest I should be penalized for killing whomever I wish wherever I can"? Because while that is how some PvP folks come across, I wouldn't suggest the average PvP proponent is that vehement.

Second, there is going to be slaughter in the hex no matter what. People want that starmetal. Entire feuds and even wars will be fought over a Brokenlands hex. Bandits will camp the area within and nearby. Monsters will be everywhere.

My point is that you and your PvP-detesting brethren are not going to be safe in the hex no matter what. There are only about five Brokenlands hexes in the entire world—if you hate PvP, you'll avoid them and trade with PvPers for the precious resource.

That will be true regardless of whether Guurzak's ambitious idea somehow takes root.

Exactly. Without changing anything at all, PvP players are able to kill anywhere they want. They just need to determine whether the stuff they're stealing is worth the price. PvE players will either hire guards or get killed because fruit that hangs too low will get picked by somebody.

People with this whole concept of "Everyone should just leave me alone and let me craft and harvest and trade and do my own thing" need to wake up. You are going to have to interact with people, some you like, some you might not. Not all of those experiences will be pleasant for everyone.

People with this whole concept of "People who don't like PvP want to keep decent folk like us from doing what we want" need to wake up. you are going to have to interact with people, some you'll kill, some you might not. Not all of those experiences will be fatal for anyone.

I haven't seen anybody in this thread suggest PvP should be eliminated from anywhere on the map. If you're absolutely determined to go murder miners and farmers, by all means, play the game your way. But if the only way that will give you meaning or value is if the consequences are removed, I suggest it's a crap way to play.

We expect Orchaven-special-tart hard cider to be produced under license by Callambea using traditional Elkhaven recipes and the finest apples from Freevale.

Tavernhold plans to produce a cider so hard it has to be forged. We'll be the only settlement on the map refining apples by smelting them.

Lots of settlements say they'll have a tavern. Our tavern will include a settlement! Get your priorities straight and
Join Tavernhold!

Need religion? We can help! All CG deities supported.*

Need work? Crafters, harvesters, guards, and waitstaff apply at the bar.

* CG deities other than Desna not available in all areas. Check local listings for details. (pending inclusion in the game)

We had a lot of ranking changes without any settlememt changes, like Hammerfall moving up. Kabal moved from F and Tavernhold from J, but not a lot of other movement in the top end. In the mid range Mystical Awakening moved from C ....

FTFY

... all stoic and loner like, sitting alone in the corner of the tavern.

and if that's your thing, why not Join Tavernhold?

I'm still not sure I'm making this clear...

You and your settlement will not be able to hold ANY towers (well, your company can). You will NEED to ally with OTHER companies to hold towers. Only companies can hold towers. Everyone will need allies. A small company will certainly be able to hold a tower - and if they are worried about defense they would be wise not to pledge it to a settlement with a huge PvP window unless that settlement can offer defensive support.

But, currently, the settlements are composed almost entirely of companies. Take Tavernhold, for example. Our population currently consists of Golden Flask, Dream Seekers, and some as-yet-unaligned players who plan to form a company. Will we only be able to hold 2 towers? Should we divide our population into smaller groups and call them all "companies"?

Should we set our PvP window to be as far from the time this goes live as possible, sprint out in all directions claiming every tower we come across, knowing we can't hold them once our window opens, but also that they can't be taken until then, so we get however much DI accrues during that time? (Yes, that would violate my understanding of Roseblood - I'm not advocating that tactic)

Can The Empyrean Order simply motivate their 182 players and roll across the map taking everything in their path?

The Gauntlet has 11 players. They are surrounded by four groups with 17, 18, 31, and 50. How realistic are their chances?

Golgotha, by blocking the Emerald Pass, seals off 4 towers they won't even have to defend, one of which is in Four Rivers' halo area.

Can the 7 members of Otium Explorator reasonably prevent the 45 members of Forgeholm from taking all 5 "neutral" towers in the Northeastern mountains? Will they even be able to hold their own 6?

We're going to need a lot more information about the mechanics of this in order to plan for it. I feel like this is forcing us to rush into political alliances based on a purely temporary tactical situation.

Then perhaps we shall build a Fawtly Tower. Just don't obstruct the Desnans' view.

IF the Northern Coalition would be allowed to join the Roseblood Accord, then the stance of positive gameplay would make sense and in our minds, valid.

I have seen nothing in the text for either agreement that precludes signing both. We've actually considered doing so. (We are aware that the unanimous consent of all NC members might be an issue in such a case, but we will not withhold information about interest in RA to join NC - that would violate the spirit of both agreements, and more importantly, our own adherence to Wheaton's Law)

EDIT: As for being "allowed" to join Roseblood? Who can stop anybody? Check this out:
I, Zweistern, hereby declare my intent to abide by the Roseblood Accord. My signature does not bind any other member of my Company or my Settlement.

We should ask Tavernhold about their feelings of a blindside when it was obvious certain members knew where they were headed. If Tavernhold would of been a part of the Accord and not neutral, I wonder if they would of lost F at all. Or at least perhaps they would of been clued in that it was going to happen. Maybe they already knew. I have no idea. I hope they were given a heads up. That would of been an example of positive gameplay if they had been notified.

Hi, I'm with Tavernhold. Zweistern's a holding name until I determine who I'll be in-game, which will be influenced by the final results of land rush - I'll not be posting often because I don't want to lose my ability to change names. As far as I know, we were not warned of our impending displacement, but nobody in our organization has expressed any hurt feelings over that. As we formulate our own plans moving forward, we have some people we're thinking of approaching for alliance purposes ("Alliance" here means sharing a settlement). If we decide to try to retake F, we are more likely to discuss possibilities with Kabal than start an escalation which would lead to a settlement full of people we recruited solely for their vote without consideration of whether they share our actual goals. I'd rather be relegated to T (NTTATWWT - I'm sure it's lovely) than end up with a huge unruly mob, all wanting to go different directions.

We all have all 30 spots listed on our draft lists. We all have the possibility of displacing and being displaced. We don't take Kabal's intrusion as a personal affront or declaration of feud, and we will not intend to offend whoever we push if we don't stick with J. We just want a plot of land to build a tavern on. Someplace with a good view of the sky. And not too expensive.

You are also welcome to join Tavernhold independently. That's the settlement. The sponsored companies within Tavernhold are Golden Flask and Dream Seekers. We are open to adding more companies if you've got a group with compatible alignment and goals.

Cayden teaches us there is always a seat at the Bar.

For settlement names, I still like Wort. A solid brewing reference that just sounds like the sort of place you would find in the middle of the badlands.