Goblin Squad Member
|
Does GW intend to have a group of volunteers or in-house employees specifically dedicated to running in-game RP events and progressing the storyline of the NPC nations? Or will those kingdoms/settlements be fairly static?
Well at least in the case of thornkeep, it sounds like no team is needed for a drastic political change.
"Thornkeep to this day: If you control the castle, you can call yourself the Baron, and you get to rule Thornkeep until the next adventurer, gang leader, or bandit prince ousts you and takes your place. The current ruler is Baron Tervin Blackshield, a mercenary captain who seized the castle from the previous baron just two years ago and is now rarely seen outside its walls
It could also be fully plausible that the other kingdoms, while not likely having a change in leadership (the risk of no LG starter towns existing would be very problematic for new players), I could see the starter towns as appropriate to be fairly static, only reacting to the things going on outside of their walls.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Does GW intend to have a group of volunteers or in-house employees specifically dedicated to running in-game RP events and progressing the storyline of the NPC nations? Or will those kingdoms/settlements be fairly static?
An actual in-game "Goblin Squad" is a fantastic idea. This could be a great mechanism to introduce and progress epic story arcs without having to do the massive content patch.
The problem with volunteers is the lack of ability to give measurable quality assurance. I think if they were to have something along these lines, it would need to be Goblinworks employees. However, being on one server farm would make things much easier.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I would say the larger problem with volunteers, is the possibility or even probability of bias and favoritism, the risks of intentionally leaking information to specific subsets of people etc... IE one group knowing to start manufacturing the weapon that is best for the "supprise" event that is occurring next week. The hellknights territory expanding to take up a specific resource plot that was originally held by group B.
Happens all the time in games, and there is little to no way to actually keep it in check. You can try to keep it in line, but there is no way to truely determine a chance event that happens to effect certain groups, with a person who wants certain groups to succeed and certain groups to fail.
Personally I would prefer for more elaborate random events, tornados, dragon attacks, orc assualts, droughts, plagues etc... Occasionally hitting player cities and NPC towns. In the examples of droughts/plagues, those could be non-combat type events, that involve importing or crafting water/medicines to prevent the NPC population from dwindling.
Though I do admit any real event on an NPC town that involves combat would struggle with believability, due to the marshals/town guard that are designed to be strong enough to instantly squish any player or group of players attempting to PK, yet somehow being unable to deal with, well anything that the players have a chance in heck of dealing with.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I think that the need to do this correlates directly with the failure to make meaningful human interaction work as a part of the core game. You shouldn't need our help to feel like cool stuff is happening in Pathfinder Online.
+1 to this, awesome answer, who needs a potentially corruptable omnipotent being creating evils to attack the town, when the already existing controlled and fairly earned evil powers are plotting to attack anyway.
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
It would be nice for some things to happen that can't be initiated by players, like dragon raids. It shouldn't be clear to the players if the dragon raids are determined by some computer algorithm or by a GW employee. It is also unnecessary for the dragon to be controlled in combat by a GW employee, unless there is a need for strategic decisions that haven't been programmed.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It would be nice for some things to happen that can't be initiated by players, like dragon raids. It shouldn't be clear to the players if the dragon raids are determined by some computer algorithm or by a GW employee. It is also unnecessary for the dragon to be controlled in combat by a GW employee, unless there is a need for strategic decisions that haven't been programmed.
Absolutely agreed, to some extent this has been at least partially confirmed by encampments, what would be coolest is if certain dungeons, lairs etc... could create dragons, that would come out of lairs and attack settlements, but not fight to the death. IE the dragon exits the lair, kills destroys, takes from any settlements it finds, but at about half health or less retreats back to a lair.
Changing clearing a dragon's lair from a "Yaay dragons lair, fat loot rewards", into... oh crap there's a dragons lair, if we don't deal with this soon, it could cost us big time. Possibly enough to the extent that to near by settlements, getting rid of the dragon is actually a higher concern than being the ones to get rid of the dragon. IE they actually want to grant passage to outsiders looking to hunt the dragon, or even hire outside help to deal with the dragon problem.
Personally I'd be a huge fan of powerful dangerous foes actually being a bad thing, and not just a cash cow for those who hunt them.