Goblin Squad Member
|
I think it would be wrong to say there is "toxic PvP" in EVE... The PvP is not the problem.I understand what you're saying.
There is some griefing in EVE that is driven by PvP, specifically pointless ganking of underpowered or rookie pilots where the loss of the attackers are not offset by any meaningful in-game effect except pissing off the targets.This was what turned me off to EVE. I take a lot of responsibility for not adequately preparing myself, but my experiences made me realize EVE just wasn't the game for me.
I think it is important to note that while some aspects of Eve could be defined as toxic, the game as a whole is not.
It has achieved a level of success for many reasons. I don't want PFO to be a carbon copy of CCP, but discounting the game wholesale would be discounting areas where the game is a clear success.
I expect PFO is aiming to improve the model. I think what the developers have given us is an indication that is an intent.
|
CEO, Goblinworks
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Just curious, but what would your advice be for players who were interested in minimizing their exposure to PvP without really gimping themselves by being stuck in NPC Settlements?
I think that it will be very hard to do this for a very long time. By design, we are going to try and avoid the concept of a large blob of contiguous highly secure territory that EVE has. That means that you will likely find yourself in the position of having to exit secure territory to harvest resources or move goods to profitable markets. Since it's unlikely there will be much social cohesion in the NPC settlements, that means you'll either have to take a risk in hiring mercenaries to help guard you, run those routes alone and hope you can avoid danger, or have a large enough circle of friends that you can ad hoc a group large enough to be a credible deterrent on an occasional basis.
At some point there will be PC settlements that are strong enough to have reasonably secure nearby territory, and within that territory people who want to avoid PvP will probably be able to work in relative peace. If things develop as I expect, the PvE people will be 2nd class citizens (much as they are in EVE, for the same reasons they are in EVE) who will be told what to make and where to work and expected to forgo most profits to keep feeding the military forces of the host Settlement.
It is possible that some group may decide to try and create secure territory without too many strings attached to PvE players. This happened in EVE in an area controlled by an Alliance called Curatores Veritatis who operated their territory in NRDS mode. They have suffered from a lot of internal chaos over the past year or so and I'm not sure what the current state of their territory is.
Over the very long term I expect that the initial territory in the game will become peaceful and quiet. It may be peaceful and quiet because the Settlements have reached some kind of accord, or it may be a frigid cold war. Hard to say. The edge of the map will be where most territorial conflict occurs and where the most dangerous places to PvE will be located. It remains to be seen wether it makes sense to create several "islands" of territory and link them with some kind of gate, or if we just keep growing the contiguous map to the south and east into the River Kingdoms. The former option would likely mean that instead of a stable core surrounded by a warring perimeter we might end up with stable islands and chaotic islands. There are pros and cons to both approaches and 5 years or more from launch we'll have to figure out which are the best options.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Ryan, thanks for the reply. I guess I was trying to ask another, unspoken question. You've talked about Reputation & Alignment serving to segregate play styles, and you've talked about Paladins being mostly PvE-focused. I'm curious how you see those segregated camps varying in Early Enrollment, and whether you think that segregation will serve to protect Lawful Good characters from the worst ravages of the Chaotic Evil & Low Reputation crowd.
Over the very long term I expect that the initial territory in the game will become peaceful and quiet.
Does that mean you also expect the wilderness areas to be tamed and no longer provide good resources and Escalation threats?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Nihimon:
I would assume he means that the PC settlements are in a state of 'peace' with eachother. Maybe due to a cold war, maybe due to one nation conquering the rest, or genuine peace. I don't think we'll ever tame the wilderness hexes (I seem to recall a quote on something along those lines, but that's your niche ;) ).
Personally I'd expect a major trade hub to sprout up in one of the early settlements or the original NPC starter town. Whichever it is, as the available territory expands people will be used to it being the place to trade. Inertia will take over and it'll become PFO's Jita. More trade hubs will appear, but that inertia will count for a lot.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I don't think we'll ever tame the wilderness hexes (I seem to recall a quote on something along those lines, but that's your niche ;) ).
*grins*
I think you're right that we'll never be able to tame Monster Hexes (I should have said Monster Hexes, not Wilderness Hexes) to the point where we can build Settlements or POI there. But I also understand that the Resources and Escalations will be based on the "civilization level" of nearby Settlements, even though there hasn't been a lot written about that.
I guess a better way to frame the question is:
Once the initial territory is "peaceful and quiet", does that mean it's "civilized" with respect to Monster Hexes and Resource concentration? Or is Ryan only saying it will be peaceful and quiet with respect to PvP warfare.
Or, will powerful Settlements be able to turn that "peaceful and quiet" area into a haven for PvE content and resource extraction by carefully managing the "civilization level" that impacts the Monster Hexes and Wilderness Hexes in their sphere of influence?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Personally I'd expect a major trade hub to sprout up in one of the early settlements or the original NPC starter town. Whichever it is, as the available territory expands people will be used to it being the place to trade. Inertia will take over and it'll become PFO's Jita. More trade hubs will appear, but that inertia will count for a lot.
The empire has already plans to make that trade hub Callambea and we have many projects underway to make this happen ranging from getting UNC and the bloody hand on board to ensure that our lands are as safe for merchants and travellers as possible to the Aeternum Parcel Service to add convenience to your shopping needs. Will we succeed? Only time will tell all we can say is we are taking steps to make it happen
|
CEO, Goblinworks
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
'm curious how you see those segregated camps varying in Early Enrollment, and whether you think that segregation will serve to protect Lawful Good characters from the worst ravages of the Chaotic Evil & Low Reputation crowd.
I think that Early Enrollment is going to be very unstable. I think that people are going to find that what they thought would be fun isn't fun and what they thought would not be fun is fun.
Especially in the beginning the space we will have is very limited. People are going to feel crowded. There will be a natural tendency for people to fight rather than negotiate. The initial PvE content will be extraordinarily limited. You'll find camps of monsters, you'll fight them, you'll get some economic value from winning the fight, and you'll use that to get better gear to fight more monsters. Most people will do that for a few hours (maybe) then realize that the other players are way more interesting to fight than the monsters.
I expect there will be wandering bands of players focused on attacking and killing other characters. The penalties for being a ganker will be hard to make meaningful in a game without player Settlements. I hope that instead of a swirling chaos of everyone for themselves we end up with groups who fight with some cohesion.
I think that it will be very common for the first thing people to try is fighting one another. We may find that we need to create some kind of "Red vs Blue" structure very quickly to accommodate this kind of thing even if other game systems are not mature enough to let it emerge naturally. Otherwise I think we'll end up with meaningless reputation and meaningless alignment systems (everyone will be low rep chaotic evil).
I don't know and can't predict the kinds of things we'll try to mold the community towards something more productive than just endless meaningless PvP. Partly it will rely on a consensus by the players that there needs to be more to the game than meaningless PvP or it won't grow and become interesting to a wider and more diverse audience.
The core game loop needs to make PvP a negative feedback loop. In other words if all you do is engage in PvP you should find that you become noncompetitive due to a lack of gear. The only way to get new gear is to have some economic value, which means you need to kill some monsters or do some crafting to sell gear to people who do kill monsters. We will have to learn as we go how to twist the knobs in the system to inject coin and harvestable resources, and how quickly to degrade and break gear.
Early Enrollment is really an experiment in community building as much as it is in game building. We will clearly make mistakes and have to roll back features and restart systems even fundamental systems like the economy. Everyone who plays in Early Enrollment will know what they're signing on for before they start, and I'm comfortable that some people will want to wait a long while for things to become more settled rather than "waste their time" playing in ways that might be rolled back.
Over the very long term I expect that the initial territory in the game will become peaceful and quiet.Does that mean you also expect the wilderness areas to be tamed and no longer provide good resources and Escalation threats?
In a centralized region controlled by a well organized, cohesive, effective Settlement, I think the Escalation system may rapidly break down and cease being perceived as a danger.
There are (at least) two degenerate conditions:
The first is that Escalations never Escalate because the Settlement simply is too good at detecting and eliminating the Escalation cycle as it begins. Escalations cease being a game system and just turn into a harvestable resource node suitable for even rookie characters (and probably ONLY accessed by rookie characters because it won't be worth the time of more advanced characters to bother).
The second is that Escalations are "farmed" by the Settlement, allowed to Escalate, but in a controlled manner. Value is extracted from the Escalation at each phase in its evolution by teams who are dedicated to getting maximum value from the Escalation while continuing to allow it to get "worse". You don't let the rookie characters anywhere near these Escalations because they might accidentally ruin the value progression by killing the wrong mobs or killing too many mobs or whatever. I'm sure people will find a "sweet spot" where they're getting more value out of killing the mobs than they're expending to farm them, and then they're just managing another resource faucet.
How we deal with either of those conditions is anyone's guess at this point. We'll cross that bridge when we get to it.
These degenerate conditions both happen because there is little risk of outsiders coming in an upsetting the local economic ecosystem. If the area is generally at peace and if outsiders are generally absent, the Settlements will become masters of extracting tiny slivers of advantage from every resource faucet within their domains.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
hey Ryan i have question for you:
will monsters have alingment too?
can i befriend with goblins and help them in the escalations?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Early Enrollment is really an experiment in community building as much as it is in game building. We will clearly make mistakes and have to roll back features and restart systems even fundamental systems like the economy. Everyone who plays in Early Enrollment will know what they're signing on for before they start, and I'm comfortable that some people will want to wait a long while for things to become more settled rather than "waste their time" playing in ways that might be rolled back.
I really wanted to highlight this, and thank you again for always being upfront with us :)
|
CEO, Goblinworks
|
can i befriend with goblins and help them in the escalations?
In the beginning, no. They're just mobs. You kill them or you get no value from them.
I suspect that we'll be spending a lot of time Crowdforging Escalations. And I suspect the general consensus will be to ask for more complex monsters to fight with more interesting AI rather than to have some kind of social interaction with them. Because most people will see them as faucets, not as content.
can i befriend with goblins and help them in the escalations?In the beginning, no. They're just mobs. You kill them or you get no value from them.
I suspect that we'll be spending a lot of time Crowdforging Escalations. And I suspect the general consensus will be to ask for more complex monsters to fight with more interesting AI rather than to have some kind of social interaction with them. Because most people will see them as faucets, not as content.
ok, thanks.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I was hoping that players would some day be able to create escalations in unsuspecting places. TO help their organizations or to distract rivals.
I can more redily see players farming escalations once they get a hang of the mechanics then letting new players run them to the ground. Its how we ran sleeper sites in eve. We knew all the triggers and would leave them alive to let the mobs that dropped the better loot respawn.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I had a sneaking suspicion that developed content would be low, space limited, and things a bit disorganized and bloody to start. Those that do opt in will surely have a good grasp of the combat system by the time things "settle" down. I see that as a good thing.
I may just have to rob some bandits for fun. :)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...little risk of outsiders coming in an upsetting the local economic ecosystem.
Tying in Kabal's question and part of Phyllain's comments from later posts, and your answer to Kabal, perhaps there'd be a way for "enemy" settlements to screw up your management of the Escalation cycle in your territory, while not actually being "friends" with the monsters in it.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I expect that those who choose to be Chaotic Evil & Low Reputation during this "Wild West" phase of Early Enrollment will face significant social consequences even after they clean up their act in order to get in good with a successful Settlement.
If you guys decide to "opt out" in the early phases of the game, you will regret it once you decide its time to "opt in" as the successful settlements will be run by those that "opt in."
If the early successful settlements are created by those that "opt out" they will likely be conquered by those that "opt in."
Is that enough quotes for ya? HA
|
CEO, Goblinworks
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
When you think about PvE content like Escalations, you have to think about something that could be running a hundred times in parallel, and tens of thousands of times (or more) over the lifetime of the game. It's easy to author a "story", but it's hard to author content that survives that kind of repetition without becoming dull.
It's also virtually impossible to make an event that responds to unique player interaction in surprising ways without simply being just random outcomes. For example, once the process to get a mob to alter its behavior via social factors like negotiation is known, that knowledge will spread and everyone else will treat it like a recipe. You won't actually "engage" with that content, you'll just click the buttons to get the response you know the content will generate. Interesting once, then dull for everyone else forever.
You have to assume that either there's pure randomness, or that the maximum outcome will be exploited by scripted approaches to the content.
In an MMO nothing the players experience is "unique" or truly "interactive" except for the content they provide each other.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I expect that those who choose to be Chaotic Evil & Low Reputation during this "Wild West" phase of Early Enrollment will face significant social consequences even after they clean up their act in order to get in good with a successful Settlement.
Eh, we'll see. Come OE I think people will take assessment of themselves and find it in their own interests to work with those whom they have had animosity towards in the past... maybe not something as significant as CE Low Rep, but the skrimishes of EE will likely be water under the bridge, especially if the red scare actually materializes.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
... the skrimishes of EE will likely be water under the bridge...
I carefully chose my wording to make it clear I was specifically referring to "those who choose to be Chaotic Evil & Low Reputation during this 'Wild West' phase of Early Enrollment". I expect I'll fail to be magnanimous to folks I remember running around in murder groups randomly killing my friends. I doubt I'm alone in that.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
... the skrimishes of EE will likely be water under the bridge...I carefully chose my wording to make it clear I was specifically referring to "those who choose to be Chaotic Evil & Low Reputation during this 'Wild West' phase of Early Enrollment". I expect I'll fail to be magnanimous to folks I remember running around in murder groups randomly killing my friends. I doubt I'm alone in that.
Unless of course the Red vs Blue element is introduced as suspected before settlements can take root and begin conflict. To stop useless reputation and alignment. In other words CE and Low Rep being essentially meaningless.
As to holding grudges, I don't suspect I will based on pvp alone (random or not). I look for a certain level of sportsmanship, and generally hold grudges based on the level of jerky behavior. By jerky I almost specifically mean things related to slander.
I know in the cases I have had my face ripped off by a superior opponent, it has been followed by good instruction on how I could improve my game.
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
When you think about PvE content like Escalations, you have to think about something that could be running a hundred times in parallel, and tens of thousands of times (or more) over the lifetime of the game. It's easy to author a "story", but it's hard to author content that survives that kind of repetition without becoming dull.
It's also virtually impossible to make an event that responds to unique player interaction in surprising ways without simply being just random outcomes. For example, once the process to get a mob to alter its behavior via social factors like negotiation is known, that knowledge will spread and everyone else will treat it like a recipe. You won't actually "engage" with that content, you'll just click the buttons to get the response you know the content will generate. Interesting once, then dull for everyone else forever.
You have to assume that either there's pure randomness, or that the maximum outcome will be exploited by scripted approaches to the content.
In an MMO nothing the players experience is "unique" or truly "interactive" except for the content they provide each other.
Rather than make the negotiations PvE content, they could be selections of risk/reward; a choice of which solution set to use, rather than a solution set of itself.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I know in the cases I have had my face ripped off by a superior opponent...
I have long resigned myself to the reality that those most likely to take pleasure in killing me in-game are also the least likely to do so under the same pseudonyms they use on these forums. In a way, that's liberating; if someone chooses to brag that they've succeeded in killing me using an alt, then I can feel justified in assuming they've failed numerous times on other alts.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Part of the fun will be in having you wonder, was that Bluddwolf and the Unnamed Company?
I mean, I didn't plan on having "UnNamed" floating over our heads, that would kind of defeat the purpose and the joke.
"Bluddwolf" is a nickname and so it depends on the naming conventions of the game, what I'll run with.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Ryan
If we enter in on day one of EE, I understand that our characters will begin accumulating skill points, to either spend or bank.
I'm assuming we will also be building up reputation points, which we may or may not have cause to burn during much of EE.
We will also be building up influence, and much like reputation we may have little to spend that on as well.
We will be building up wealth, resources and network in various contacts (social wealth).
So my question is, Do you see early EE characters and or settlements really blasting out of the gate come OE?
|
CEO, Goblinworks
|
So my question is, Do you see early EE characters and or settlements really blasting out of the gate come OE?
I think EE players will have significant advantages as we transition to OE. Those advantages will be counterbalanced by the fact that the design of the game has inherent "catch up" mechanics so that new players are not permanently disadvantaged vs. older players.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
One serious disadvantage those of us in EE may face come OE is complacency. We may get too used to a lack of serious settlement conflict - recall that full blown settlement conflict is supposed to be a key element in the transition from EE to OE.
We bandits will do our part in keeping you on your toes, that may be part of their plan. Settlements might not be up for grabs, but I would imagine outposts and perhaps POIs will be too.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
We bandits will do our part in keeping you on your toes, that may be part of their plan. Settlements might not be up for grabs, but I would imagine outposts and perhaps POIs will be too.One serious disadvantage those of us in EE may face come OE is complacency. We may get too used to a lack of serious settlement conflict - recall that full blown settlement conflict is supposed to be a key element in the transition from EE to OE.
I'm not saying there won't be pvp in EE. Heck I'd be surprised if there weren't huge brawls in the first week just for kicks.
However, having to worry about getting jumped by bandits out in the wild when travelling/harvesting/etc. is one thing. Having to worry about spies and assassins before the onslaught of an invading army who will burn your settlement to the ground is another.
It's like playing a 4X game vs the computer's weak AI and comparing that to playing against other players. In the first case you can sit back and do as you want. In the latter the invasion is coming and the only question is when.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
When you think about PvE content like Escalations, you have to think about something that could be running a hundred times in parallel, and tens of thousands of times (or more) over the lifetime of the game. It's easy to author a "story", but it's hard to author content that survives that kind of repetition without becoming dull.
It's also virtually impossible to make an event that responds to unique player interaction in surprising ways without simply being just random outcomes. For example, once the process to get a mob to alter its behavior via social factors like negotiation is known, that knowledge will spread and everyone else will treat it like a recipe. You won't actually "engage" with that content, you'll just click the buttons to get the response you know the content will generate. Interesting once, then dull for everyone else forever.
You have to assume that either there's pure randomness, or that the maximum outcome will be exploited by scripted approaches to the content.
In an MMO nothing the players experience is "unique" or truly "interactive" except for the content they provide each other.
I agree that attempting to fashion a story will only go so far, and be repeated so often before it becomes boring as all get-out.
It would, however, be a serious achievement to craft an comprehensive AI to reliably manage an escalation's response to player interaction interestingly, or alternatively respond to a lack of player interaction impressively, but it looks at least approachable.
I still like the idea small things lead to bigger things in an ecosystemic model. Once the process arrived at a Boss, relatively simple AI decision points could cascade simply, from tier to tier to tier, from unique, to rare, to common, to plague.
With adequate assets it might grow monumental. Fractal. The most serious caution would be containment. You could build a system players could not realistically survive. Given that is not a desirable outcome, and given there are necessary limitations on processing power... unless we house the AI routines for all these critters in their own box. Then the limit is in the hands of the network engineers.
But lets say we built the AI routines in their own processing space and the pipes are deemed adequate to the main server farm handling the players. All the AI decisions happen outside and are handed off to each escalation as it spawns a beginning... let's say goblins. If a party of characters comes along it is a simple matter: the goblin escalation is quashed before it gets going.
If those characters don't show up the Goblins begin to reproduce and build fortifications. The AI spawns goblin hunting parties to go hunt food and resources. The goblin hunting party has simple rules, like don't walk off the cliff. 10% chance to change direction. If stopped by obstacle turn around and go back.
Player characters nearby should notice the reduction in game and resources. They might spot a goblin hunting party and arrive to quash it. They need help and get others. But if they do not then we escalate a tier. Hobgoblins. Hobgoblins start cohabitating with the goblins. Fortifications gain a tier. Greater diversity of mob roles, each with their own routine come into play. The goblin hunting parties roam farther and are supported by their new allies. If there is no player response move up to bugbears, or ogres, or giants. Rampaging warbands all guided by a boss type with very simple rules.
Fractal.
|
CEO, Goblinworks
|
If those characters don't show up the Goblins begin to reproduce and build fortifications. The AI spawns goblin hunting parties to go hunt food and resources. The goblin hunting party has simple rules, like don't walk off the cliff. 10% chance to change direction. If stopped by obstacle turn around and go back.
Player characters nearby should notice the reduction in game and resources. They might spot a goblin hunting party and arrive to quash it. They need help and get others. But if they do not then we escalate a tier. Hobgoblins. Hobgoblins start cohabitating with the goblins. Fortifications gain a tier. Greater diversity of mob roles, each with their own routine come into play. The goblin hunting parties roam farther and are supported by their new allies. If there is no player response move up to bugbears, or ogres, or giants. Rampaging warbands all guided by a boss type with very simple rules.
This is pretty much where I think we can get the system to within the constraints of our resources and time. What you're describing is several years of work though; not something you'll see in Early Enrollment or even the beginning of Open Enrollment.
|
CEO, Goblinworks
|
I will caution that the history of MMOs is littered with the idea of AI controlled mobs that do things when players are not directly interacting with them. So far, all such efforts have run into server capacity limits; as more and more mobs are added the load of running the AI scales up really fast and exceeds any reasonable server expense. We'll see to what extent things like cloud computing allow us to do things like this at a rational cost but there's no telling where we'll find artificial ceilings.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One serious disadvantage those of us in EE may face come OE is complacency. We may get too used to a lack of serious settlement conflict - recall that full blown settlement conflict is supposed to be a key element in the transition from EE to OE.
I suspect the opposite may be true. With rep and alignment apparently not planned to be implemented until late EE or early OE I suspect there will be a market for "I Survived The EE" t-shirts.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Would an out of control escalation start effecting DI in nearby cities to show the effect of those hunting parties?
I would expect that an out of control escalation on the scale of a boss-led warband would certainly detect an outpost as a target. That would affect the development index surely. In fact that might be a good measure of how strong a warband should be: If they can take out an NPC-defended outpost, then it should be strong enough to challenge a company, at least for the first little while.
@Ryan recommend architecting the separate box to process the AI. It should not have to be all that serious a chunk of hardware, but would remove the bulk of the AI resource usage on the primary system. Designed so from the start should simplify greatly the issues those other outfits had to wrestle with. The mobs could respond to automated controls that essentially mirror your regular player client without all the graphics/audio overhead.
Also consider setting up a system where you can record what some of the player companies will do when attacking /defending. Feed those tactics into the array of routines an escalatory warband has access to.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I suspect the opposite may be true. With rep and alignment apparently not planned to be implemented until late EE or early OE I suspect there will be a market for "I Survived The EE" t-shirts.One serious disadvantage those of us in EE may face come OE is complacency. We may get too used to a lack of serious settlement conflict - recall that full blown settlement conflict is supposed to be a key element in the transition from EE to OE.
Even if EE is nothing but a bloodbath outside of settlements, the settlement itself is safe. As in when you log in tomorrow the settlement is still there and maybe even has a new building. Come OE you might find it has reduced DI (assassins) that is crippling it in a critical way or that you're under seige and in danger of it being burned to the ground in a matter of days.
(Hopefully my meaning is clear. I'm not saying that players as individuals are safe in EE, but rather that the early settlements will be. When you don't have to worry about your settlement being sacked you can get complacent about it. Especially if you think "Well the bloodbath of EE is over, so now things will be safer" while ignoring the fact that a fundamental change occurs in the nature of the game going from EE to OE with settlement conflict being introduced.)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
A way to deal with the server load might be that the escalation impacts DIs instead of the mobs actually doing anything. There are very minimal triggers in the area until players come along and kill them then more AI spawn that is appropriate for the escalation level.
Until players are close enough to actually detect an escalation the escalation doesn't even have to be rendered. Its all math. They have to be ready to render at the drop of a hat.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Found a point Ryan made a while back to illustrate what I'm saying about complacency:
Some tougher news to hear:
You're probably going to build up some awesome stuff in Early Enrollment, and lose it in Open Enrollment. The first couple of years of this game are going to be like learning to ride a bicycle with training wheels. You may feel like you've mastered things and are operating effectively, but then one day the Big Guilds From Other Games will show up and you'll learn all the things you're doing wrong. The hard way.
Groups that have a strong sense of purpose, and are resilient and able to admit mistakes and move forward without tearing themselves apart at the seams can recover from losses. Some of the largest Alliances in EVE have lost EVERYTHING, and have been able to boostrap with whatever individual members were able to salvage, and return to be a force fairly quickly because they had that kind of resilience.
You're going to get your asses kicked. Your stuff is going to get torn down. People are going to say mean things about you. Even some of your characters may become unplayable. If your group has the ability to pick itself up, dust itself off, and get back in the fight, you'll be stronger for overcoming your setbacks. But if you think you can engineer perfect safety today, and you become brittle behind the belief that you have, you'll risk catastrophic disintegration when you face major setbacks.
So you should be talking about those setbacks in the context of "when", not "if".
(link)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Another idea to provide interesting escalations might be to set up a backchannel for players identified as skilled in formation combat to occasionally play as the rampaging boss mobs. Just as you provide player characters with skills, give boss mobs similar controls.
Just a thought.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I wonder also if escalations will have alignment so that there might be good, neutral and evil escalations.
I'm also hoping that we will get the ability to advance escalations, using them as a weapon against rival settlements. Sort of like making a deal with the monster mobs, by supplying them with resources that they might need to build siege engines or other disruptive actions.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I wonder also if escalations will have alignment so that there might be good, neutral and evil escalations.
I'm also hoping that we will get the ability to advance escalations, using them as a weapon against rival settlements. Sort of like making a deal with the monster mobs, by supplying them with resources that they might need to build siege engines or other disruptive actions.
Hopefully, eventually. That'd be something neat and a bit different. Ryan already stated in the beginning we won't be able to do anything other than kill the mobs, though.
http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qbq8&page=31?Could-PFO-Thrive-with-No-Unsa nctioned-PvP#1513
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
How did I miss this nugget?
If things develop as I expect, the PvE people will be 2nd class citizens (much as they are in EVE, for the same reasons they are in EVE) who will be told what to make and where to work and expected to forgo most profits to keep feeding the military forces of the host Settlement.
Feed the greed, and the bloodshed will soon follow!
All kidding aside, I hope raiding outposts and POIs has a really good system built around it. More so then making profits from the raiding, I'd almost rather see that raiding does far more in diminishing the DI of its owning settlements or the influence of its owning company.
We still have not received any confirmation of what we actually do loot from Outposts, POIs or Caravans. How does the SAD actually work? Whether or not bandit / raiders need to bring their own means of transporting the loot away, or can we also steal the means of transportation from the caravan that we just sacked?