Goblin Squad Member
|
If you want to sell the info, or pass it to a fellow miner, lumberjack or whomever, don't tap it. Sell the info. Show them where it is, and take your chances. They will be taking their chances you are telling the truth, or not selling then info on a tapped out node. If you want to mine it, mine it.
If you have a large party scouring the countryside for resources and you hit one, call for backup. The system they described is fine. Let the noob miner stake the claim.
I have clarification question about salvage.
1.) When goblin armor get scrapped can it be turned into a.) either iron or leather pick only one, or b.) iron and leather (if you have sufficient skill in both refines?) a la refining EVE mods?
I think you should really re-read the Blog entry on that subject, explaining that topic was exactly what it was talking about.
It explains that they are abandoning their previous plan: That allowed Salvage of ALL components of items, either via pre-made Salvage Kits usable 'in the field' (which saves encumbrance) not using the immediate finder's own Skill, or taking the whole item back to a Crafting center in a Settlement and using an actual Skill to dis-assemble it. (I don't believe that was ever specified whether it was a specific Salvage skill or just the same Skill used to craft the item you want to dis-assemble).
Now (after the latest Blog) there is no Salvage Kit, no Skill, you can just directly use the entire piece of looted Armor/whatever as a 'replacement' material, but only for one of it's component materials (metal, leather, etc), effectively losing whatever other materials it was composed of. They didn't give any info on the whether the conversion efficiency (of the chosen material type) was 100% or less than that. You also lose the opportunity to Salvage/Dis-Assemble an item "in the field" to save encumbrance, so you must carry the whole item back to wherever you want to use it for Crafting.
They indicated that at some point in the future they may be intereted in going back towards something like the originally mooted system, but that the complications inherent in that just aren't seen as worthwhile at this point, and the simpler more direct approach will be used for the foreseeable future.
If you're interested, it's easy to find where they described the previously mooted system by seaching the Blog for "salvage", the next entry under (older than) the latest Blog is describing the previous system.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Now (after the latest Blog) there is no Salvage Kit, no Skill, you can just directly use the entire piece of looted Armor/whatever as a 'replacement' material, but only for one of it's component materials (metal, leather, etc), effectively losing whatever other materials it was composed of. They didn't give any info on the whether the conversion efficiency (of the chosen material type) was 100% or less than that. You also lose the opportunity to Salvage/Dis-Assemble an item "in the field" to save encumbrance, so you must carry the whole item back to wherever you want to use it for Crafting.
I think I'll like this new method. In Darkfall, a character grinding mobs will collect a large number of armor bits. Then when you get back to town, all of those bits need to salvaged for the materials, which takes a long time that could be spent having fun.
The system they proposed in the blog skips that salvage step. Which is fine; prying the studs off armor for a pittance of iron is exactly the sort of tasks we should leave to the commoners.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@Proxima, However, the thing that I think's missing from your formula is the amount of time saved in buying a gusher node as opposed to finding it. Another thing is the change in gain from buying the gusher. Because both situations have the same X in their costs, that can be put aside for the moment. If the extra cost Y of buying the rights to the gusher is equal to or less than the total increase in gains as a result of the purchase, then it is worth it.
This really comes down to how rare these nodes will be. If they are rare enough that a mid-sized group will only find one or two (or maybe none) during an average "workday", then buying a node during a day in which they haven't found one themselves could mean a sizable increase in total resources collected that day, and could mean the extra profits cover the extra cost and the resources can be priced competitively. I don't think it's fair to boil down such a complex market interaction into just the gold costs; a lot more than that will go into the price of your goods.
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
The market clearing price isn't a direct function of cost; it's a function of the supply curve and demand curve.
In other words, the source of a given amount of iron in a given market should make zero difference in the price, even if the cost varies significantly. However, when the costs is measured partly in coin and partly in time, it is already not comparable.
|
Goblinworks Game Designer
|
I have clarification question about salvage.
1.) When goblin armor get scrapped can it be turned into a.) either iron or leather pick only one, or b.) iron and leather (if you have sufficient skill in both refines?) a la refining EVE mods?
Would a dedicated salvaging skillset be a viable personal income and useful link in the production chain.
Quandary's reply is a good explanation.
And now about gathering.
2.) When you identify a resource node, before you extract from it, how much can you tell about the quality level of what it will produce? i.e. "This is QL 100 and requires skill level 6" or "This is QL 80-120-ish you need 6 levels of skill to find out"
3.) When that node turns into a mothernode can we infer from the quality level of first materials what the next batch will be? i.e. QL 230 = 72% etc. or at least a predictable range to help decide if it's worth setting up a camp?
Quality in general has been largely abstracted. For raw materials, in particular, it's irrelevant. See this post. What matters for raw materials is "concentration," "purity," or whatever synonym makes sense. Each unit of a raw material is identically useful in refining (and ultimately crafting), but some are lighter than others so it's easier to carry them home.
You'll see something on mouseover of a node like "Adamantine (Profession: Miner 14 Required)" (or just the name in red to show you don't have high enough skill, if we want to keep the tooltip even more concise) and that will be the entirety of your information. If you begin interacting with the node and start to get heavier pieces than you usually get at your skill total, you can take that as a given that that resource in the hex as a whole is getting down to the dregs, and if you do happen to get a gusher, it will probably also be heavier pieces (and likely have less total that you'd get out of it vs. a fresh hex). You can also generally gauge how good of a concentration you're likely to get by how easy it was to find a node in the first place: if the hex is getting low, the nodes should spawn less frequently.
You'll see something on mouseover of a node like "Adamantine (Profession: Miner 14 Required)" (or just the name in red to show you don't have high enough skill, if we want to keep the tooltip even more concise) and that will be the entirety of your information.
I somehow like the idea that if you don't have high enough skill, you just don't get the detailed info at all. I don't know if that's too harsh though, perhaps if you are within 1/2/etc rank then it will tell you how many Ranks you need, otherwise you don't get any detailed info (albeit you can infer it's at least that amount of Ranks above you). At minimum, I would say that character with NO Profession:Miner trained (or whatever is relevant to the resource) would just never see these Nodes and their tags at all. (beyond whatever manifestation takes place when another character activates a Node)
I approve of the simplification of Salvaging, I just don't think that adding that detailed of a sub-system would really improve the game that much... This game will already be complicated and deep enough without worrying about every nickel and dime, so to speak. Also, it seems like the 'loss' of the component material type(s) not utilized can be a good thing for the economy, especially since I haven't seen anything suggesting how the Item Decay rating will carry over from the 'Salvaged' material into the 'new' Item. Salvageability of all component materials without a Decay carry-over would significantly sabotage the Item Decay system.
But even with just single-resource type Salvaging, the Decay economy seems a relevant issue for whatever resource/item types that tend to be most valued. Some way to 'carry over' the Decay rating should be simple enough though, just multiplying the Salvaged Item's Decay by the proportion of it's total resources that the selected resource type comprises, round up or down (or to the nearest whole figure, either direction), and that is the amount of Decay that carries over. Rounding up, i.e. more Decay, makes sense just because this is 'second hand', and ultimately about convenience and bypassing scarcity of resources.
Salvage-derived items 'inheriting' some Decay would also probably mean that Crafters would 'prefer' the real resources since then they can sell said Item full-cost (no Decay), which means that said Salvage Items' minimum 'scrap value' will tend to be less than their largest/most valuable component's cost... But on the other hand, it's a convenient resource for players without easy access to a certain type of material, they can Salvage that material type just by killing/looting other PCs equipped with it, and that could make much more sense than trying to acquire rare resources in the middle of a war.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'll toss this out there again...
I just hope that they include the ability for the person who discovers the node/gusher to be able to sell/pass their rights of discovery to another party. It makes more sense to me that the people out discovering such nodes (especially the more precious nodes in more dangerous locales) would be individuals and groups skilled at exploration, not necessarily the people skilled at digging/chopping/reaping. Groups like the newly formed Path Forgers, or TEO's Explorer's League or the scouting side of Pax's The Watch, would all have far more to do, as well as another means of making money if this type of information sales were available in the game.
I agree at the very least they need to be trade able.
@Stephen Cheney
Having anything bound to a character is a throw back from a Themepark game.
REMOVE BOUND ANYTHING!!!!!!!!!!!!
Sandbox games to not have bound items or bound gathering points.
If new players are having problems with their company pushing them aside from their harvesting point, then its time to find a new company.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Isn't the point of bound finders-keepers so that gathering is always a cottage industry and can't be industrialized but is dependent on number of newbie gatherers happy with that station in the settlement? As well as new characters getting a foot into gathering up the gathering ladder/probably being the best suited for the job of being put to "gathering" ie cheap immigrant labor not being replaced with idk bot-gatherer mechanisation or drone-alts that find and pass and move on hoovering up nodes maximally efficiently?
Whether it is bind/bound really derives from achieving those results or not is what I'm thinking? If comparing to EVE I presume that world's immense size makes it moot? But if PFO has so many hexes per player and so many nodes per hex per resource it sounds like it's a lot more finite and tying up players when they find a node is part of the way to extend it out for longer cycles?
To note (should have said: "To node"): I'm asking questions > giving answers to see the reasons behind why the devs choose this. It's seems if those questions are valid then that could lead towards the answer being clearer? Or maybe otherwise?
I mean we know threading is involved to balance the penalty of death with encouraging actually getting into a situation where death may occur, right? I do like the idea of a nasty death penalty to other people however... some sort of being banished to a plane that simultaneously sits on the hexes but is sort of twilight soul world where a harsher penalty COULD occur as your soul speeds greased-lighting back to it's bind point.
Binding gathering points, while I see the point that you don't want newbies pushed out, does also have some unintended consequences.
Example : I am pootling around the aeternum lands doing some solo gathering when I unexpectedly come across a mother lode. The machine swings into action and an extraction team races to support me and we spend twenty minutes getting ready. However sadly I need to log off because its time to sleep/have dinner/go out. Now I am being put under pressure to change my plans because without me nothing can happen.
@Jazzlvraz
Item threading is not the same as soul bound
as far as I know if I use a thread to bind my sword all that does is prevent it being looted from my corpse. I am still perfectly able to give you that sword and you are able to use it
I didn't know any of us objected to item-threading. We live and learn.
I think item-threading is a mistake. I'm still torn about 100% looting: from a realism perspective, it makes sense but from a game-economy sense it's less ideal.
People losing equipment will ensure there's always ample work for crafters. It should also reduce the number of folks running around with Weapons of Ultrabaddassery (tm) which means a narrower degree of difference between new players and veterans.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
REMOVE BOUND ANYTHING!!!!!!!!!!!!I didn't know any of us objected to item-threading. We live and learn.
threading and binding are two different things. Threading an item saves it from being lost or looted when you die, binding the item stops anyone else from using it, or from it being sold. Several people on this thread WANT to be able to sell/trade these "deeds" instead of having them bound to the finder character. Threading is completely different. My understanding (not to get off topic) is that gear you thread, can be unthread and then traded or sold. If a item was bound (weather BOP or BOE) then it can't be traded or sold. in the case of BOE (bind on equip) once you use it, or equip it, it is bound to you. BOP is simply picking it up binds it.
Maybe all and every item should be auto destroyed after a week to be sure that no one cheats crafters out of their work by things like say, not logging in for a while.
Seems extreme. Have you played a game where this happens?
(See, I can be sarcastic too. I don't know for certain that my position is right but at least it's based on information gathered playing games with PvP, looting, no "threading," and fully-functioning economies.)
My statement was not meant to be sarcastic.
Then you have my sincere apologies. How do you see your proposal playing out then?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Haven't really thought it out and I don't really see it working at all as this would be, as you said, quite extreme. I just had this idea flash into my mind of a sandbox game where the man how makes the sword is king as opposed to the man who wields it. So yeah, this post was more of an impulse post, so in turn my apology if this ad extremum was perceived as a sarcastic comment toward you.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I also think that this idea wouldn't work unless we have a vast majority of the community crafters and harvesters. The reason why is because the originally posted crafting system will more closely relate to the crafting system in Eve, vs WoW. What I mean is this (in a nut shell) Crafting takes time. IN Eve, after you have gathered the materials, to put a work order in and "craft" and item. Depending on the item this could take a few mins (like ammo) to days or weeks (for a ship) put this into expected PFO terms, crafting a sword will prolly take an hour or so. A suit of armor, 3-5 hours. A full set of gear for 1 person, week or so. (All numbers are guesses and not based on anything other than my personal view of this crafting system)
The point is, in WoW style crafting, once you have large qualities of materials, crafting takes 5 secs each item, so 1 person could craft gear for a whole kingdom in an hour or two. Eve style will take weeks or months depending on the size of the kingdom and the "quality" of its forges and crafting buildings.
Again, just my thoughts and I could be off. But I think I am not based on blogs and my limited knowledge of Eve crafting.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
With the wear and tear of equipment, crafters will be called on to repair items as well. Not just create them.
That is a good thing to note. And, I could be misremembering, but I believe the durability on a piece of gear is decreased as it's repaired, so eventually you'll need to replace that particular piece, so crafters will be constantly doing both crafting and repairing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm curious what the "sweet spot" is for repairs. In DAoC, I found repairs to be an annoyance rather than a meaningful money-sink or excuse to skill up a crafter. Repairs do make a LOT of sense, though. In real combat, weapons break all the time, armor gets dinged up, and the like. Prohibitively expensive (in terms of coin, time, or both) weapons make weapon breakage an emotional event for fantasy heroes, however. Imagine the blade snapping on your Vorpal Longsword +4 in a random encounter with Orcs; you might lose your mind.
This is another reason why I prefer a system that promotes equipment turnover. The sting of weapon breakage would presumably be less painful when you're more accustomed to that and losing your weapons under other circumstances.
I do acknowledge that something has to give. It's Pathfinder, after all. Players have every right to seek extremely high-end equipment and have a reasonable expectation that they can use it regularly and keep it in their possession and intact. In my personal experience, though, I preferred relatively easy-to-replace ships and fittings in EVE than grinding out templates in DAoC or LOTRO.
Isn't the point of bound finders-keepers so that gathering is always a cottage industry and can't be industrialized but is dependent on number of newbie gatherers happy with that station in the settlement? As well as new characters getting a foot into gathering up the gathering ladder/probably being the best suited for the job of being put to "gathering" ie cheap immigrant labor not being replaced with idk bot-gatherer mechanisation or drone-alts that find and pass and move on hoovering up nodes maximally efficiently?
Something like that seems to be the stated justification, but the question is whether those aims can be fulfilled without this limitation, not to mention what the actual dynamic would be if this situation did play out to some extent.
The crux here is the scaling of the skill:speed, unlimited linear scaling may very well tend to a scenario as you and others seem to fear, but last I checked they never announced this as unlimited linear scaling. Non-linear scaling with asymptotes, etc, is likely to push 'optimal' harvester skill:resource tier a certain amount away from skill equality with tier, but still leave a viable role at all parts of the harvesting labor market.
People seem to be reacting like if there is ANY tendency for harvesters of skill equal to the resource tier to be worse (less efficient) than higher rank harvesters extracting the same material then that totally marginalizes 'lower rank harvesters'. Well, no it doesn't. It probably means that there will be some tendency for Gushers to be Harvested by higher Rank PCs than normal Nodes of the same resource rating, but so what? Normal Nodes with much less volume and less investment cost in terms of Kit and of guards/transport appropriate to resource volume would tend to be wholly viable for equal-Rank harvesters, certainly every Harvester will have SOME tier of normal Nodes for which they are market-optimal producers, and SOME tier of Gusher Nodes for which they are market-optimal producers. Why does the game break for anybody just because there is a dichotomy there? Why do both of those figure need to be the same, and identical to the Skill Rank, i.e. what you can hypothetically harvest independent of the market-optimal Skill:Resource combination? If everybody has a market-optimal niche that scales with their Skill, what is the problem?
How is this any different to e.g. Combat skills, where a Combatant of X level COULD probably defeat Monster X but when facing 20 different Monster X's at the same time (a 'Gusher' encounter) most would probably defer to a Combatant of X+10 level... At the same time, a Combatant of X+30 level would be even better at defeating all the Monsters easily but probably has much better things to do with their time. Nobody complains about such things there.
With a well designed scaling curve (not unlimited linear scaling) and a functioning economy in the larger world/for other resources (e.g. higher tier resources that higher rank harvesters could potentially be harvesting with their time, and for which there is demand for) it just means that all harvesters will have different market-optimal tasks with differentiation between regular/Gusher nodes. Absolute beginner harvesters in a mature game may not have tiers of resources where they are the market-optimal harvester for the task of harvesting Gushers, but they soon enough WILL be at a rank where there will be Gushers they are market-optimal for, and in the mean time they don't have to worry about gathering capital to cover Kit costs. Of course, they CAN choose to manage any Gushers they find, and they will still make money that way, there will just be market incentive to use a more efficient Harvester... which will leave the beginner Harvester with MORE money/time than they could make on their own. Meanwhile, that is introducing the beginner players to more complicated player-player economic interactions, which should be an important aspect of playing this game. What's the problem?
Of course, what is 'market optimal' can change for a variety of reasons, price of the resource in question may directly shift, availability of labor may shift the relative value of low/high labor operations, distance to market (e.g. an allied market is sacked or war disrupts the transport route) may shift the relative labor costs for the operation, etc. All that means that the 'market optimal' Harvester Skill for a given resource will shift, it won't be static, but all Harvesters should be paying attention to the market situations to organize themself most effectively. Having some BoP lock out just removes this level of variability, while the market will just boringly map to Harvesters tending to harvest the max level Resource they are capable of... (A tendency which will always exist to some extent, just compounded with other reverse tendencies in a BoP-less, Skill-scaling system) In either case, the labor market is stratified, so I'm not sure what great horror is really being avoided by imposing BoP systems.
btw, is there a reason that it would be hard/impossible to tweak the skill:harvesting speed curve to adequate/ideal form? i assumed there isn't, it seemed on par with any number of other stats which you have said you will tweak/adjust in an ongoing manner to keep things balanced, but maybe i'm missing something? or is just that 'one more thing to tweak' is overload at this stage of the game, so you want to remove that issue from the equation at least at first (thus-> Bind on Pickup)?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As much as people know I'm usually looking out for the single player, the lower level/skill people, etc., after further thought, I don't think I agree with any "locking down" of ownership for nodes - mother or otherwise. That you found it, and might be able to exploit it, seems open to anyone who can manage the deed. That you somehow "own" it and can keep anyone else from wresting it from you and exploiting it seems oddly anti-PvP and anti-competition.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
As much as people know I'm usually looking out for the single player, the lower level/skill people, etc., after further thought, I don't think I agree with any "locking down" of ownership for nodes - mother or otherwise. That you found it, and might be able to exploit it, seems open to anyone who can manage the deed. That you somehow "own" it and can keep anyone else from wresting it from you and exploiting it seems oddly anti-PvP and anti-competition.
Good 'ol simple and accurate way to state it.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I still say that if there were a mentor/assistant system available, then both high and low skill resource collectors would have reason to call in an ally to help work the node. That should solve the potential issue of low-skill people getting cut out of the process without resorting to an artificial lock on the node.
It's 'carrot' rather than 'stick', and it makes sense within the context for the master to delegate simpler stuff to the apprentice, allowing the more experienced one more time to work on the more challenging stuff.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
That you somehow "own" it and can keep anyone else from wresting it from you and exploiting it seems oddly anti-PvP and anti-competition.
That's not an accurate description of the system as described.
You "own" it in the sense that you're the only one who can place a kit. Once that kit is placed, all bets are off, and anyone with the power and the twisted desire to wrest it away from you can do so.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I didn't know any of us objected to item-threading. We live and learn.I think item-threading is a mistake. I'm still torn about 100% looting: from a realism perspective, it makes sense but from a game-economy sense it's less ideal.
People losing equipment will ensure there's always ample work for crafters. It should also reduce the number of folks running around with Weapons of Ultrabaddassery (tm) which means a narrower degree of difference between new players and veterans.
The threading mechanic is designed at this time (and may change) so that at low gear levels practically everything could be threaded. But the gear is not valuable. As your character progresses and your gear improves the threads get "more expensive". (I'm not sure what the currency is, but iirc it is a sort of spiritual currency that converts to threads...as your gear gets more awesome it takes more or thicker threads to bind the items to you.) the best gear requires more of a rope than a thread and it is likely only one item may be threaded at that quality.
So, low level gear, almost all of it but it is already largely worthless. At the highest level of gear, choose carefully because if you die you can only save the single item.
Also note, upon death a large portion of your gear is destroyed instantly (50 or 75%, I can't remember). That leaves only 25-50% of your unthreaded gear for looters to pick through, and that will help keep the crafters busy.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Urman,
And I'm good with that. Especially the durability loss. Gear that was found/won, even rightly earned through PvP reward or an elite dungeon drop, should wear out eventually, even if it is repairable. It always bugged me in games where awesome top tier gear was the Best in Slot (BiS), so every player grinded out dungeons and/or raids to get THAT ONE piece of gear, and they wore it forever. Forever being until it was no longer BiS.
How about unique gear drops that lose durability faster? That may not be an issue at all in PFO since almost every item aside from noob starter town gear will be player crafted (and we want our elite crafters happy, happy, happy, do we not?). But if there IS BiS gear available from a drop, it'd be nice to see it as a unique drop with durability loss or day timer [say, 90 or 120 days ingame time (22.5-30 real days)] so that it will drop again relatively soon for another lucky or persistent player.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
That you somehow "own" it and can keep anyone else from wresting it from you and exploiting it seems oddly anti-PvP and anti-competition.That's not an accurate description of the system as described.
You "own" it in the sense that you're the only one who can place a kit. Once that kit is placed, all bets are off, and anyone with the power and the twisted desire to wrest it away from you can do so.
What we are saying is.. no one should own it period.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
What we are saying is.. no one should own it period.That you somehow "own" it and can keep anyone else from wresting it from you and exploiting it seems oddly anti-PvP and anti-competition.That's not an accurate description of the system as described.
You "own" it in the sense that you're the only one who can place a kit. Once that kit is placed, all bets are off, and anyone with the power and the twisted desire to wrest it away from you can do so.
You and everyone else are welcome to whatever opinions you have. I don't make a habit of telling anyone their opinion is wrong. I was merely clarifying what I saw as a factual misrepresentation.
It's very detrimental when folks consistently misrepresent something to the extent that the community begins to think it's the truth...
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Some of the comments have at least cleared up my own confusion.
The question of the Kit being required stuck with the finder, is that a motivation aspect to this? So most small nodes will be searched and used. But occassionally a mother-node is found. That fact is motivating for gathering which could be a bit grindy. Yet finding a big a pay-day and having to organize defence (mob waves and bandits) and support (hauling and more gatherers) is a big pay off for all those small slow but steady nodes. So maybe that's part of the reasoning of the devs as well as the "all players have an equal chance to strike it big"?
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
Not all players have a chance to strike it big; I think the expected result is that most players never train the skills required to even begin to exploit most resources.
Only people who are actually involved in resource collection have any chance to get any, and that involvement has significant opportunity cost.
That you somehow "own" it and can keep anyone else from wresting it from you and exploiting it seems oddly anti-PvP and anti-competition.That's not an accurate description of the system as described.
You "own" it in the sense that you're the only one who can place a kit. Once that kit is placed, all bets are off, and anyone with the power and the twisted desire to wrest it away from you can do so.
Sorry Nihimon it is you getting it wrong here. The blog says
"Once you've activated the gathering kit, all bets are off. The speed of the gathering operation is pegged to your own Profession rating, but the output goes into a nearby storage object. Not only will monsters attack in waves while you're gathering, enemy players will be able to take the items from the storage if you don't fight them off as well. Your allies won't want to force you off your find, but you'll certainly want them to help stand guard."
So while its true others can steal what you harvest what they can't do is drive you off and start harvesting it themselves. The mother lode belongs to the one that found it and they are the only one that can exploit it. If once a kit was set up we could drive you off and take it over then you would be correct. This is however not the case
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If once a kit was set up we could drive you off and take it over then you would be correct. This is however not the case
... enemy players will be able to take the items from the storage if you don't fight them off...
I fail to understand why you don't see this quote from the blog as clearly stating that other players will be able to drive you off of your claim and take all the output from it.
Are you making an assumption that the character who places the kit will be able to deactivate it if they choose? That doesn't seem warranted.
Once you've activated the gathering kit, all bets are off.
Perhaps one of the devs could step in and clarify, although it seems obvious to me.
If once a kit was set up we could drive you off and take it over then you would be correct. This is however not the case... enemy players will be able to take the items from the storage if you don't fight them off...I fail to understand why you don't see this quote from the blog as clearly stating that other players will be able to drive you off of your claim and take all the output from it.
Are you making an assumption that the character who places the kit will be able to deactivate it if they choose? That doesn't seem warranted.
Once you've activated the gathering kit, all bets are off.Perhaps one of the devs could step in and clarify, although it seems obvious to me.
Nihimon it is clear from the blog
You cannot drive someone off the claim and continue extraction from it. The claim is locked to the finder. Whether you can steal what they have extracted it is neither here nor there. If you cannot take over the claim and continue extraction then the mother lode is bound to and owned by the discoverer.
If we find you extracting and you have only got 10% of the possible output from the other lode and we kill you we will not be able to access the 90% of the lode yet to be extracted.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
You cannot drive someone off the claim and continue extraction from it. The claim is locked to the finder. Whether you can steal what they have extracted it is neither here nor there. If you cannot take over the claim and continue extraction then the mother lode is bound to and owned by the discoverer.
If we find you extracting and you have only got 10% of the possible output from the other lode and we kill you we will not be able to access the 90% of the lode yet to be extracted.
Care to make a friendly bet?
Nihimon it is in black and white...from the quote I put up from the blog
"enemy players will be able to take the items from the storage"
note that the materials in storage are what you have already extracted, it does not say enemy players can take over and continue harvesting. If you believe this can be achieved show me the quote
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
For what it's worth...
Your interpretation is correct, so far as the blog is concerned. That said, we're internally batting around some adjustments based on forum feedback. :)
I have a feeling the "adjustments" they're talking about are more in the direction of allowing those exclusive rights to be sold, rather than making them apply even after the Kit is placed...
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I don't know what the devs intend at the moment but I think once the kit is placed, if it remains undestroyed and connected to storage, it should keep going regardless of the location/being alive status of the owner. Yes I just voted in favor of if bandits kill you 5% after you place the kit the other 95% still goes.
The kit represents a physical structure with generic people doing the work. If someone new comes in at any point in an operation the unarmed non-combatant manual laborers would logically keep working if that's their best chance of staying alive and unhurt. It's a micro-example of the millions of villages through history who paid the taxes/tribute to whoever was in charge this week as long as they got left alone otherwise.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I'm definitely digging the finder-keeper nature of mothernodes. What's getting described is a system where you have some lower quality gathering and lower purity harvesting in areas more accessible to the settlements that use those resources. But if you want the best quality material and highest purity you're going to have to first manage a hex from being mined much at all for a while and then take highly skilled specialists and some protection out to that area to look for the QL 300 materials. Sounds like an adventure in the making. Or a fun cat-and-mouse way to deprive a future enemy of the best materials before an attack.
As far as the idea that bound ownership and sandbox are exclusive ideas is an error in definitions. EVE has several features that are bound to the character and other defined limitations that provide the sandboxy structure for players to operate in. This is just the crafting equivalent of PvE caverns and dungeons being bound to the person that discovered them for a certain time afterwards. And I haven't heard a peep of protest about that.