At the age of 17 I found myself telling my mom you know people are not dumb.... What?.... You can't tell them I am 17, and then tell them you are (still) 29 a few mins later....
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.
There will most certainly be math involved with hitting a target but it will include targeting, skill, range, AC, dodge, evasion, and other factors on both sides. I don't think it will include the kind of physics you are describing sure the arrows will have a nice appearance but if factors like wind speed are added that would be dropping the PF rule set to a degree.
It does bring up an interesting question. Will an archer on the settlement wall have to choose a single target from the hoard? Can a archery formation fire upon a opposing formation sight unseen? I thing yes to the former, but would like to be wrong allowing the latter.
I have to chime in on this one... This really has my wheels spinning... The potential of this settlement is quite interesting.
If a company that is attached to a neighboring settlement is in control of one of what would be your POI they might choose not to attack your settlement I'll give you that.
You would be in effect paying your neighbor protection but just how vested would they be in protecting your settlement to keep those extra resources. If they have to declare war on a different settlement, thus opening them selves and their lands to attack.
If someone wanted to attack UNC / Aragon why would that settlement feel obligated to join in common cause. The feud with UNC would not open their POI up for attack, only a feud directed at their POI / settlement. Would Aragon further expand one of these agreements to not practice your banditry, on that neighbor or his borrowed POI?
How will you walk that line of collecting protection vs paying it? Of your six possible neighbors? If you were renting or even just allowing your settlement neighbor to use your POI would that POI be protected from the residents of Aragon, and would that protection extend to the neighbors other POIs.
Are you thinking of it as renting out the POI for a % of the resources, and providing protection for it? I understand that it would have to depend on the type of POI but what kind of %s are you thinking about? Would you only rent to a local settlement or any party that could defend it? What obligation would your renters have to defend the settlement?
Are we talking about a sliding scale Aragon provides protection as well so the renters can specialize increasing base output of the POI and as a result would incur a much tax % to Aragon? If the renters are all in to protect the POI on their own would Aragon demand a smaller tax % of their output?
Will rented POIs still be open game as per your charter above? If you have an agreement to protect a POI would you compensate the renters or reduce the required tax? Should they be umm pillaged under your watch?
I have to wonder if other settlements have considered this possibility as they may well lack the people necessary to man all of their potential POIs.
Proper management of the agreements (diplomacy +20) could make many roads lead to Aragon but only if they go through one of your neighbors first. Insulating Aragon from the world like a back ally in the poor quarter, yet allowing you to practice your trade. Again that fine line between paying, and collecting protection. Of course never looking like the low hanging fruit, or the bully that needs to be taken out.
I wish you much success, just not too much success with this model.
Proxima Sin wrote:
This just a few posts up this page....
Ryan Dancey wrote:
There is nothing in stone, just a acknowledgement that it is something to be "examine"
Ryan said, Unaffiliated in a Settlement controlled Hex would be tress passers. (He did say considered, as a mechanic) Not all Unaffiliated are FFA.
A settlement like you describe would never survive the first considered attack as there would be nobody home to protect it. I believe it would be attacked sooner, rather than later IF its members were running a muck.
Rep losses do increase for low level / skilled characters.
Sounds like the perfect spy, free to act for 30 hours or 3.
I read "Guns, Germs, and Steel" twice. We I read it, watched a Discovery channel version, and read it again to wipe away the Discovery version. I'll have to look for this title. Thank you.
Unaffiliated PCs could be in the thousands. So whats your point.
How do you feud a NPC settlement?
You lost me here, one more time why should a settlement have laws and the wilderness not have laws, but if you attack someone in the wilderness it is not FFA. Well settlements would not be FFA is would be enforcing the law.
PC Settlements are not supposed to be as safe as the NPC Starter Towns. The wilderness hexes are not supposed to be as safe as the PC settlements.
Safer for who?
My biggest interest in NDRS is To prevent rep/algn griefing before invasion. Sending people that must be removed for no other reason than to force the settlement to remove them and take faction hits to do so. I am not a fan of the take a bit for the team or monster in the basement method. I would prefer to have a way to make trespassers yes consequence free kills. Not that they all have to die just those trying to use the games rule in ways not intended to bomb a settlement.
My job changes everyday. I get a new project and I start from scratch with the tools I am given and eventually write up the instructions for others to use. Then I am off to a new project and take phone calls when people don't understand my instructions or more often did not really read them completely.
Each set of tools is different for a different purpose, and every year of two the new tools are for the old job and I do a brain dump of that old data.
I think some people need to do that brain dump and accept the new tools. Sandbox has a definition in your brain that does not match PFO. If you have to call it the PFO Sandbox model, and move on.
I donated to the Kickstarter because they were talking about these tools you don't want from the beginning. People are asking for all sorts of things but the developers are only going to add those things if they feel like its a good idea, and then only after it is well thought out.
Perhaps when the rubber hits the road you will love the system?
If I kill a guy, who is not flagged hostile, but he is known for ganking people. Then I will lose rep, but my attack was not meaningless.
This started with if you see a guy marked as Hostile will you attack. I believe Steelwing asserted that most will not. Nihimon said he would if the Hostile was also Low Rep. There has a been a lot of byways but I support that "profiling" as expected, as well as Steelwings because if one harvesters is ganked, a different harvester will not expect he can defeat the ganker and will hope to simply not get involved.
It really does feel like you are pushing for your own desired play style here. I have been ignoring others assursions of that, you seem like a good guy but you already know the answer to that question.
The thing you want is to be a criminal with a 10 min flag and then be free and clear of the actions. You want settlements to have to take rep hits to hunt you down. If people do that within a hex that is controlled by a settlement the settlement is not going to sit back and say oh well we did not get to them within the timer I guess they are a good guy again now that the time is lapsed. They are going to create criminal lists. None of this back and forth is going to change that. Ryan said he expects NBSI, the OP is talking about a way to be NDRS. Which you seem to be opposed to because among other reasons he is the poster. You don't like each other we get it. He wants a way to flag criminals, you don't want a system that lets people hunt criminals in their own hex. You plan to be a criminal, he plans to hunt criminals. He wants a tool that would make your acting like a criminal harder, you don't. I don't even know why I am responding to be sure.
Here I go anyway...
Will you be able to act without consequences? Of course not but the reason to put someone on the list is because they are acting as if there are none in the first place, ie. raiding and robbing without a feud. The settlement leadership will find a way to enforce some consequences on those who are harassing their people, caravans, traders, outposts, POI, etc without the war / feud systems. The statute of limitations for a crimes are 10 mins (unless that changes) but if you operate in a area long enough that will have less and less meaning to those people you are exercising your chosen play style on. That is not unreasonable, if you were to establish a settlement you would do the same.
NDRS is the kinder genteel posture if the game does not allow for that then it will be NBSI and you will still be flagged for stepping over the border. So what possible difference can it make to your play style if there is a way to pick and choose who gets those flags vs. flagging everybody?
The Devs are going to do whatever they have planned for this aspect of the game. Hell they might make the criminal flag 10 mins for all, and 3 hours for the members of the same CC who knows. Not that I am making suggestions, but if you want to be a pirate then expect to be treated like a pirate, are pirates hard to find and punish yes, but the red list will make things harder for pirates. You want easy pickings, then the settlements are going to be looking to find you when it is also easy pickings as turn about.
That is all I have to say about that...
All he proposed was a NRDS system that can be changed on the fly. While I do agree there should be a time delay its not that much to ask for. I Wish he would have left out that particular bullet at this point but it did not say "Crimes committed by exiles" it say "crimes committed to exiles" which was really unnecessary.
I digress, forget the word exile and call it a red list. If you are on the list and are in the hex that controls the list/hex you are FFA to the members of that settlement. Settlements will have a way to flag criminals they don't want in there house. We are arguing about something that is going to be in game, without a cost to maintain. I expect there will be no direct cost to NBSI why would there be one to NRDS? Sure those policies will have costs to the settlement but not a "to add a member to this list will cost one DI" cost.
SAD can be done anywhere in the world you want to break it out, their red list will be confined to their hex(s).
I believe rep will be a pretty good measure for bad actors, but middle to high rep can could be grinded out. Then again high rep from low will take much effort perhaps I should do the same for both. Yeah it was me that got the thread off topic sorry. No wait it was Jayne, I like smack in em too...
I did not say it was not meaningful, I said it should carry a rep hit if people engage in murder for profit.
Perhaps I was not clear. "I assume that means if you are kicked by settlement A you will be defaulted to the NPC settlement..." I was at least partially agreeing with you. If the same people (harvesters) stay in the NPC settlements they will have to stay below level 4 or be open for faction PvP in any case. They are going to harvest the lowest quality whatever, so they will have to move up or be in a different funnel of suck. Any group can work out who (faction wise) is the right person is to attack the harvester without a rep or alignment hit, or I guess break out their CE alt.
Not all hits to rep will be the -2500. That -7500 low rep guy might just be a -500 or less vs the +7500 or newbee. Ryan did say that LE CC will actively seek out and kill CE players for the badges and advanced skill involved. As well as something to the effect that they would be quit powerful as a result.
Haulers that fulfill contracts more often than not will still have positive rep. Haulers that fail to fulfill contracts more often than not will get fewer contracts. Sounds like a good system to me even if it is meta only. The same can be said of any contracted service.
To that earlier example of a harvesting node? Attacking someone who took the time to find the node, and is extracting it should carry a rep hit. You are describing theft unless it is within your settlement hex. It is MEANINGFUL that your settlement needs that rare deposit, but it is still murder for profit.
Influence the way I read it is not a portable currency it is local? "Influence for clearing a hex would allow a CC to build...." comes to mind. What have I missed? If that it is true random companies will have to set up someplace to do their feuds each time they move they have to start again on the scale. If they stay put then settlements or other local CC with respond. It could even be the local bandits that push them out to preserve there milking cow(s).
Again Ryan said NPC settlements are designed to push players out into the world as they will max out training and trade skill faculties and will need to branch out join a CC or form one to advance. Not exact words but I am sure most of you read the same thing not that long ago. I have yet to see anything that said you would be prohibited from returning to the NPC settlements, but I did read all players will be part of some settlement meaning NPC or PC. I assume that means if you are kicked by settlement A you will be defaulted to the NPC settlement you came from.
Assuming 6 friends have two different accounts one that is High Rep, one that is completely Low Rep CE doesn't stand to reason that the High Rep accounts would be in a better position to get better gear in the first place?
The low rep 6 finding, and attacking players will end up only getting un-threaded gear and gear that has taken damage from that encounter as well as what ever damage that they took before the fight. It will more than likely NOT be a 6 on 6 fight as the low rep ambushes will be looking for easy wins, and as the training, and equipment of their targets out pace the low rep accounts it will be harder and harder for them to find profitable wins.
The premise is an easy answer but I don't think it will hold water for long. Sure they can stick to new players for easy picking, but that will just make it easier for Lawful players to intervene in their activities. New players will generally be in the same locations hence easy pickings. That will just give those lawful players content to get positive reputation as well as PvP badges.
Their are several people on these boards that have every intention to spend time supporting new players. That will include killing those low rep players that are looking for easy kills.
As far as other cheats, giving yourself PvP kills with alt accounts for badges what have you that is just ummm... well in the military they use a phrase "Stolen Valor" (which might be a bit stronger than I need) and if that is the only way you can advance the High Rep account then I don't expect those people will ever be any good at PvP for real. People will do what they will... I prefer to earn my trophies.
Anyway, I don't think the CE account is going to be some sort of cash cow for the High rep account. Joining an in game community and building something will be far more rewarding, and fun.
The advantage you are missing I think is that one person is tied to the task of holding down the El destructor button* so long as he is doing that then the timer is running. Everybody else is maintaining control of the hex that is the structure so he can keep his finger on the button. If someone gets close enough to attack him he will have to take his finger off the button to defend and the timer stops (resets?), as that would show a lose of control. There is only one button and one finger.
There could be several control points (buttons) that increase based on the level of development, and / or size of the structure.
The destruction of someones hard work should take some % of time related to what it took to build it in order to destroy it. I know you could throw some gas, a match, and run in real life but this blah blah blah.
I guess this could be connected to the swarm prevention line of thought. If a swarm has to stop, and stand still to destroy something it will lose momentum.
*I don't think you have to push a button, just making the metaphor. It could be standing on the button. I joke, I joke...
Ok one more thought, it would stand to reason that uncontested POI might be better suited to be contracted out to a CC given the right agreement. Defending that POI by the CC, or Settlement or both being part of the conditions of the agreement.
Of course other considerations would come in, but on the raiding line how that agreement was written would best be a closely guarded secret.
[EDIT] Will an unaffiliated CC be able to build on Contested hexes? That has interesting possibilities as well.
I think the more clear way to say that would be an "enforcement" version of SAD that did not require a rogue level to train, but a guard subclass. That is based on a judgment call by the patrol. Instead of a blanket "Trespassers will be shot" rule. Yes I just made that up. The enforcement would be leave or else, vs give me gold or else. Rejecting those terms allowing for the free kill. Not that I am a fan of either concept.
But back to this raiding thing....
I suppose a great deal will depend on how many of the POIs are outside the settlement hex as well what they produce. Raiders are going to want the POI that is of most value for their efforts. Settlements as well, but location will be as important as the possibility of denying your neighbor something by taking that POI even if you are already producing that resource yourself.
My first thought is that all the contested POI/Outposts will be outside the hex that the settlement can claim by virtue of building the settlement. Uncontested POIs being inside your hex.
I believe I read 6 to 11 POIs per settlement with at least 3 to 5 of them being contested between neighboring settlements. The question then is do those contested resources become the most well protected or least? Which of course also depends on what they are producing. Just one more lumber stand or something that cannot be produced inside the hex that is easier to defended? Raiders may find the Uncontested POIs easier pickings with the right timing, as such a lower return for lower risk.
Ok, I ran is a big circle there but...
All that said, my point is even a trespassing law might not cover all your POIs as you can only enforce laws in lands you can claim sovereignty over. I for one expect the "contested resources" to be the ones that are of more value to promote PvP. If the Devs choose a more random dispersal pattern it seems like a lost opportunity.
On the other hand perhaps the POI belonging to the settlement will automatically adopt its laws and aforementioned lists. I do love this type of brainstorming.