Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Crafting is of secondary importance, that doesn't mean it's not important.
This is an opinion. If someone is a crafter, does he think it's secondary. I don't think so. Why would someone be a crafter if he thinks it's secondary? If you craft for your settlement but think it's secondary and play a main that is soldier, what's up with that? So what is that time spent on crafting, if there is always something other more relevant things to do to help the settlement than crafting? That's just hocus pocus or bad design...
Crafting is of secondary importance, that doesn't mean it's not important.This is an opinion. If someone is a crafter, does he think it's secondary. I don't think so.
No, you're right, he'd probably like to think he's more important than he actually is, but that would be purely for egoic reasons.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
This is an opinion. If someone is a crafter, does he think it's secondary. I don't think so. Why would someone be a crafter if he thinks it's secondary? If you craft for your settlement but think it's secondary and play a main that is soldier, what's up with that? So what is that time spent on crafting, if there is always something other more relevant things to do to help the settlement than crafting? That's just hocus pocus or bad design...
As a point of clarification, the only reason I think crafting is secondary (and only marginally) to a combat oriented character is due to human nature.
You will need to defend yourself at some point, because humans are violent and expansionist, and to do that you need combat oriented characters. With that in mind, a settlement will need to hire a CC or attract citizens that can and will defend it as soon as possible.
While crafters are also mandatory, settlements are useless without some grunts to hold the line.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No, you're right, he'd probably like to think he's more important than he actually is, but that would be purely for egoic reasons.Crafting is of secondary importance, that doesn't mean it's not important.This is an opinion. If someone is a crafter, does he think it's secondary. I don't think so.
Maybe I'm just saying that I don't think crafting weapons and armor for warriors to defend or expand the settlement or it's territory is secondary. I must be very egoistic. :P
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Might I add a little to that statement?
Yes crafters will be of limited use for direct combat PvP. PvP consists of far more then combat.
Yes, of course. "direct" was implied.
While I think it's silly to assume that anything works in one way or another in isolation it's usesul to observe it as an isolated part without discounting it's interactions with the rest of the system.
Maybe I'm just saying that I don't think crafting weapons and armor for warriors to defend or expand the settlement or it's territory is secondary. I must be very egoistic. :PNo, you're right, he'd probably like to think he's more important than he actually is, but that would be purely for egoic reasons.Crafting is of secondary importance, that doesn't mean it's not important.This is an opinion. If someone is a crafter, does he think it's secondary. I don't think so.
It's OK. Admitting you have a problem is the first step to recovery.
Love Always,
Qallz
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Making good quality equipment wasn't secondary when Marines were up-armoring their own vehicles. Woodcutting and shipbuilding weren't of secondary importance to why the USS Constitution trounced the HMS Guerriere.
Nope; having nearly double the broadside weight of your opponent will sort of put a hole in their day.
I'm all in favour of these people who want to co-opt crafters into their formations doing so - they will only weaken themselves. As Bluddwolf pointed out, a team is only as good as its weakest link. I'd rather a smaller formation that works well because everyone in it knows what they are doing than a larger unwieldy one into which every available body has been pressed.
Bodies do not automatically mean victory. I'd rather let the crafters do what they do best and stand shoulder to shoulder with those who want to fight. And for those who think they can take what I have through sheer force of numbers, I have 2 words:
μολὼν λαβέ
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
OMG how off the mark, from the comment I initially made has this gone. You have taken it from calling it a draft, to accusations that crafters are useless, all the time.
I will give an example of the point I was making:
Your settlement is about to fall. You have 10 people left, the invader has 4. Only 2 of your people are PvP / Combat trained and all 4 of the invaders are as well. Your 8 crafters can help turn the tide if they pick up arms and fight. They could at least put in the effort and try. They could show some loyalty and take one for the team. Maybe the delay they cause will allow for help to get to your settlement, or for your two remaining warriors to catch their breath.
All of your crafting skill is useless from the smoldering hole that used to be your settlement. You will be homeless and quite frankly your lack of dedication will follow you by word of mouth, and any new settlement would be fooling to welcome you in. That is all I was saying!
I'm with Xeen, if that were my settlement that was lost and there were 8 crafters that could have helped but didn't.... I'd hunt them down and slaughter them like the selfish and disloyal rats they are.
The UNC will have its own gatherers and crafters, but you will find no weakness in their moral character, their survival skills or their combat readiness. Sure, they will be focused on harvesting or crafting. They will never be allowed to say "I won't fight for the cause".
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Your 8 crafters can help turn the tide if they pick up arms and fight. They could at least put in the effort and try.
I think it's a misguided assumption that 8 dedicated crafters with no combat skills stand a chance against 4 combat trained characters.
So in your described scenario you are punishing your own people for your failure to defend the settlement and their success to not waste resources and non-combat oriented equipment.
Also it's still false that combat is the only viable way to contribute to a settlement defense.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Which is a fair point, Bludd, but given the size we have been led to believe that settlements will be, also an extreme example. I would suggest that if your settlement can only muster 2 or 10 defenders then you are royally screwed. Once we start talking about hundreds on each side, your point loses its validity. Though it is, of course, pertinent when discussing raiding outposts and such like.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If the only thing saving your settlement from being a hole in the ground is crafters you have to force onto the battlefield you probably wouldn't have held long anyway. If you have 2 PvPers and 8 members who won't fight without being forced, it's probably the strength of your leadership which should be called into question more than the loyalty of those eight members.
I've never been dissatisfied with the amount of members who I've gotten to follow me into battle simply by asking. Victory isn't hard to sell.
I've never been dissatisfied with the amount of members who I've gotten to follow me into battle simply by asking. Victory isn't hard to sell.
Especially in a video game when nothing real is at risk. lol
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Fruben generally that seems so but how do you apportion rep/alignment without recourse to in this case or context a SAD?Alignment: I do not see any real difference between declaring your intent to maim and rob someone beforehand and letting your victim know this is your intent by committing the deed. In my opinion the laws of the land should dictate whether there is any hit on the law-chaotic axle. GW needs to decide whether attacking/killing/robbing someone merits a shift in the good-evil axle. Of course, no alignment hit if you get what you wanted without spilling blood.
Reputation: Until it is clearly defined what reputation should measure, I cannot really comment on this. Ryan's latest comments once again suggest that reputation could simply be a "non-aggression" measurement (in which case it would be difficult to see why imposing your will with the threat of immediate bodily harm should increase you “non-aggression” rating). If reputation is supposed to measure something completely different (such as active "meaningful player interaction" participation), this would of course be a different story (but in this scenario the bandits should have reputation in abundance and should be able to afford to miss a little by not beating their surrendering victim to a pulp).
In general I am very skeptical of creating any game mechanic that would by a press of a couple of buttons turn otherwise "not encouraged" action into "encouraged" (I am assuming here that seemingly random killing of strangers would be "not encouraged"). Does not seem to make much sense to me (but then again, I am not the sharpest knife in the drawer).
Sorry for late response. I just got bogged down between then and now.
The way I see a SAD, is a specialist skill for a bandit. The idea is that a bandit has an incentive to rob not kill. This intent needs to be broadcast before hand I think. Hence broadcasting would then lead to honesty of signal and a case of "win-win" vs win-lose, lose-win, lose-lose when dealing with a merchant. It would be a good outcome if "lose" for the bandit affects rep/alignment and for the merchant "lose" affects goods/guards cost.
So if broadcasting the bandit could expect perhaps a fee:
X = No effect on next bandit SAD
2X = If in conflict with next merchant during SAD then whack to alignment/rep x2 X
and so on.
So the merchant does not know that the bandit may have been greedy before or not but can chance it knowing the next encounter might deter the bandit or just cough up. Sorta a bidding war/poker game??
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Lhan
I said "Your settlement is about to fall, you have 10 people left". Doesn't matter how many you started with, the scenario is not predicated on that.
@Papaver
Read what I wrote, not what you want me to have written or think I wrote.
Your crafting is useful up and until you are one if the last few standing. At that point you either try to do what you can or you surrender your settlement.
Someone the other night said something that was true, and I don't think it has been said here. Many if the companies that end up with a settlement, particularly those from the EE land rush, will actually have the wherewithal to actually maintain it, let alone hold it.
I had written, because the EE settlements were being "handed out" and not fought for, there is a built in weakness for those companies. If they lose their settlement they have no
Idea of how to take it back, and their only siege experience was a loss.
I had also said that the loss of a settlement is epic. The organization that lost it will fracture, because the finger pointing will begin. I have seen many a leader deposed or have nearly entire guilds abandon a leadership and move on to other, potentially more competent organizations.
Hmmm,... I just had a sinister thought.... Would a non combatant crafter ever depose an incompetent martial leader? Maybe that us the angle I wasn't considering.
*note to self, keep sharp objects away from The Goodfellow
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Papaver
Read what I wrote, not what you want me to have written or think I wrote.
Your crafting is useful up and until you are one if the last few standing. At that point you either try to do what you can or you surrender your settlement.
I completely understand what you are trying to say and I'm disagreeing with it. It it's clear that there will be no difference as a result of a crafters death, dying just so you have tried is a waste of resources( time equipment and morale) and should never be considered a good human resources choice.
I already said earlier in this thread that if your assumption that a crafter fighting would be a useful activity then I would completely agree with you. But it's a false assumption. So I can't agree with your following argument.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Papaver
Read what I wrote, not what you want me to have written or think I wrote.
Your crafting is useful up and until you are one if the last few standing. At that point you either try to do what you can or you surrender your settlement.
I completely understand what you are trying to say and I'm disagreeing with it. It it's clear that there will be no difference as a result of a crafters death, dying just so you have tried is a waste of resources( time equipment and morale) and should never be considered a good human resources choice.
I already said earlier in this thread that if your assumption that a crafter fighting would be a useful activity then I would completely agree with you. But it's a false assumption. So I can't agree with your following argument.
Your making the assumption that it is a false assumption. Kinda funny.
1 days worth of xp into combat skills for a crafter is a good idea, and thats just for PVE since they will be gathering in the wilds. Those skills will be just as useful in PVP.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
There is nothing slippery about it.
Ryan said that in Eve Manufacturers and PVE'ers are second class citizens.
I tried to explain to everyone why this is the case, in the hopes that they can keep themselves our of that trend.
Most refuse to listen.
Here are the facts:
The 2nd class citizens are Manufacturers and PVE'ers that refuse to support the Alliances PVP efforts. (that is attacking or defending, I used defense to try to get people to think)
Manufacturing of most things in Eve takes place in High Sec which is vast.
PFO will not have vast safe areas, you will be in the thick of it.
If you want to own your settlement for long, you need people to PVP.
Take from that what you wish.
OKOK.
That isn't a real horse. That's a guy in a horse mask.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I mistyped my statement above, so I'll restate and rephrase it here:
"Not many of the companies that end up with a settlement, particularly those from the EE land rush, will actually have the wherewithal to maintain it, let alone hold it."
When one of those chosen few lose their settlement, it will be then that they realize they have no means of regaining one of their own, unless they spend months training and organizing and conduct a successful counter strike. Which as I said earlier is something they already have proven they can't do.
They will argue, and some have, that they will hire others to recapture their settlement for them. That may very well happen. Then once their hired muscle moves off, the jackals laying in wait, will take their settlement from them again.
There former sheep dogs will laugh at the sheep, and offer to recapture the settlement again... for a fee (again). The jackals will wait again also.
Maybe the sheep dogs and the jackals are working together, slowly bleeding the sheep of their coin.
For all of Ryan's warnings to build OtherBigTowns, to not concern yourself with (personal) reputation or alignment, that PFO is a game that at its core is PVP and that Settlement vs. Settlement conflict is the center of that core.... The sheep still want to believe that the River Kingdoms (PFO) will be their Shangri-La.
Here is a question... You will obviously hope to have a large enough military force to maintain your Shangri-La. Will your warriors hold the seats of power, or will those being protected hold those seats?
I would imagine your warriors will demand the seat, or majority of the seats.
Isn't that putting crafters or non combatants in general, into a second class position as Ryan had suggested?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Your 8 crafters can help turn the tide if they pick up arms and fight. They could at least put in the effort and try.I think it's a misguided assumption that 8 dedicated crafters with no combat skills stand a chance against 4 combat trained characters.
Is it an assumption when the design described represents a flat power curve? That the difference between a veteran character and a new character is more in the breadth of trained skills than the depth of effective power?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Is it an assumption when the design described represents a flat power curve? That the difference between a veteran character and a new character is more in the breadth of trained skills than the depth of effective power?
I'm not sure the power curve as described is all that flat. It's a lot flatter than the TT range of power between a Level 1 and Level 20 of any class, but isn't everything in comparison? PFO Tier 1 weapons do ~40 damage, Tier 2 do ~80, Tier 3 do ~120. Expect armor protection to ramp up in a similar fashion. But those advances in damage are available based on the users' skills. Without the skills to use the higher tier keywords, the character is effectively using a lower tier weapon.
So 4 veterans doing ~120 points, and 8 green characters doing ~40, and equivalent armors on all?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I remember in one of several presentations crunching the numerical combat information we have, it was indicated that one 4th "level" fighter (that is, in the 4th milestone out of 20) with appropriate gear for himself could take on a dozen or so 1st level fighters in back to back combat (not all at once, one at a time). I'm not gonna draw assumptions based on the numbers yet until I make sure those were the right numbers.
EDIT: It was this thread by Nightdrifter that analyzed the numbers. As you can see at the top of the second page, Nightdrifter comes to the conclusion that one level 4 character is a good match for five level 1 characters who use good tactics and such. I think people are overestimating the flatness of the curve; the first few levels people are seriously weak compared to later. The flatness comes in more so in comparing mid levels to late levels, I believe.
Granted, this conclusion was made a while ago before we had more information than we have now, but I still think it's a good indicator to put things into context: if you use crafters on the frontline instead of warriors, you'd have to field about 5x the number of men to be as effective (and that's being conservative; remember that the numbers were for an example level 4 fighter, whereas the enemy military will most definitely be stronger than that). I think the point made upthread about putting the money the crafters make toward hiring mercenaries instead of fielding crafters is a very valid point.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No, you're right, he'd probably like to think he's more important than he actually is, but that would be purely for egoic reasons.Crafting is of secondary importance, that doesn't mean it's not important.This is an opinion. If someone is a crafter, does he think it's secondary. I don't think so.
Just wanted to point out an observation...who here is arguing what, and what is their game play focus?
Then, take that in light of the above.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Is it an assumption when the design described represents a flat power curve? That the difference between a veteran character and a new character is more in the breadth of trained skills than the depth of effective power?Your 8 crafters can help turn the tide if they pick up arms and fight. They could at least put in the effort and try.I think it's a misguided assumption that 8 dedicated crafters with no combat skills stand a chance against 4 combat trained characters.
@Being,
Papaver also wants to keep on misquoting my scenario, so as to support his incorrect thesis.
Settlement force remaining: 2 x Warriors + 8 crafters
Invading forces remaining: 4 x warriors
If the crafters have even a smidgen of survival / combat training, they could turn the tide and save the day.
But I'm done with trying to make that simple point. If they want to surround themselves with selfish, care bears, so be it.
[ICC]
I'll be laughing my a$$ off as I raid their caravans of refugees escaping their captured settlement, and steal every last copper in their pockets.
I look forward for the settlement wars, and the carnage of the battlefield. That is where you will likely find the UnNamed Company swarming, like jackals, to prey upon those that were too proud and left broken.
In glory to "The Day of Lost Coins" and sworn "On Coin, Blade and Pain of Blood".[/ICC]
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Let me be clear as to my stance in light of my last post: I think when a settlement is being taken, all hands should come to battle. I'm just saying that, if it's gotten to that point, there won't be much that the crafters can do. If your settlement is on the brink of destruction it seems highly unlikely that crafters could save it through combat, but I agree that they should at least try, as there's a chance they will.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Let me be clear as to my stance in light of my last post: I think when a settlement is being taken, all hands should come to battle. I'm just saying that, if it's gotten to that point, there won't be much that the crafters can do. If your settlement is on the brink of destruction it seems highly unlikely that crafters could save it through combat, but I agree that they should at least try, as there's a chance they will.
yes, even if they fail, they show loyalty to ur settlement and ideals, this is important for the group as whole.
if they come with " i wont lose my stuff in vain", well ,make ur judgement.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Let me be clear as to my stance in light of my last post: I think when a settlement is being taken, all hands should come to battle. I'm just saying that, if it's gotten to that point, there won't be much that the crafters can do. If your settlement is on the brink of destruction it seems highly unlikely that crafters could save it through combat, but I agree that they should at least try, as there's a chance they will.
That is all that can be or should be expected.
I had acknowledged the worth of crafters before the battle. I hope there is a role for them, unique to crafters, during the battle.
But, in the end when the battle is on the brink of a disaster, pick up that hammer, shovel, pair of shears, or frying pan and draw some blood for the cause of your settlement.
For those who think they may be quick of wit, and ask me, "What would your pacifist, LG Monk do?"
He would evade injury, interpose his body between attacker and citizen, he will all keep up a steady stream of annoying sayings like "Find it in your being to follow the path of moral perfection." TL;DR, He'll probably be a meat shield, but a really tough one to kill.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If the crafters have even a smidgen of survival / combat training, they could turn the tide and save the day.
If that's the only point that you are trying to make, then I misunderstood you and you are right and I was wrong. The point I was trying to make is that relying on crafters to do that as a form of defence is short sighted, especially if they can contribute better by crafting better.
I also wonder about the effectiveness of sticking said crafters in formations. If formation combat is supposed to be about better trained individuals being able to fight off far greater numbers of untrained throwaway alts (a la Goonswarm) because of their cohesion, aren't you throwing away the advantage of the formation by sticking the essentially untrained crafter players in said formations? As I am sure you will agree, it's one thing training the skills, it's quite another being a skilled enough player to use them.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
You guys won't have to worry about me shirking my duty to defend the homeland (if I'm on your side of the conflict). :)
That being said, I don't really think crafters should be expected to participate in direct combat PvP beyond defending from settlement assaults. As I said before, I think their time is better spent making the equipment for PvPers (or building the defenses for the settlement, or doing whatever their role is) and making money to hire someone more competent in arms (I could imagine some symbiotic contracts being drawn between freelance mercenaries and settlements who have too many crafters in the crafters:warriors ratio; I understand that mercs can be a risky business, but I could see this as being a viable option).
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Let me be clear as to my stance in light of my last post: I think when a settlement is being taken, all hands should come to battle. I'm just saying that, if it's gotten to that point, there won't be much that the crafters can do. If your settlement is on the brink of destruction it seems highly unlikely that crafters could save it through combat, but I agree that they should at least try, as there's a chance they will.
If PFO comes close to achieving something like this: Non-combat players saving the day in a close fight, then I already think it has succeeded in something a lot of games have tried but failed...
But kicking people out because they won't take part in combat even in such scenario, that's bad leadership I think. But to everyone to their tastes...
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
That being said, I don't really think crafters should be expected to participate in direct combat PvP beyond defending from settlement assaults. As I said before, I think their time is better spent making the equipment for PvPers (or building the defenses for the settlement, or doing whatever their role is) and making money to hire someone more competent in arms ...
Bolder that one bit for emphasis. One thing we've been told about crafting (and building construction) is that they will be based on queues. The forge-master queues up 10 jobs and monitors them, maybe needing to get involved to solve a logjam. But the majority of the scut work is done by the commoner scuts.
If a settlement has 3 separate forges and 6 or 9 or whatever queues going, how many master and journey men are really needed to run it? Will there be an effective upper limit on crafters that can be gainfully employed by a settlement? Producing stuff for export while the ram is smashing at the settlement gate seems... optimistic.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I remember in one of several presentations crunching the numerical combat information we have, it was indicated that one 4th "level" fighter (that is, in the 4th milestone out of 20) with appropriate gear for himself could take on a dozen or so 1st level fighters in back to back combat (not all at once, one at a time). I'm not gonna draw assumptions based on the numbers yet until I make sure those were the right numbers.
EDIT: It was this thread by Nightdrifter that analyzed the numbers. As you can see at the top of the second page, Nightdrifter comes to the conclusion that one level 4 character is a good match for five level 1 characters who use good tactics and such. I think people are overestimating the flatness of the curve; the first few levels people are seriously weak compared to later. The flatness comes in more so in comparing mid levels to late levels, I believe.
Granted, this conclusion was made a while ago before we had more information than we have now, but I still think it's a good indicator to put things into context: if you use crafters on the frontline instead of warriors, you'd have to field about 5x the number of men to be as effective (and that's being conservative; remember that the numbers were for an example level 4 fighter, whereas the enemy military will most definitely be stronger than that). I think the point made upthread about putting the money the crafters make toward hiring mercenaries instead of fielding crafters is a very valid point.
Addition of expendables really has the potential to mess up those numbers. However, they are roughly correct.
I do agree that the power curve isn't as flat as people are assuming. I've been playing with simplistic combat simulation. N fighters with certain equipment vs. 1 fighter with otherwise identical combat stats and better equipment. Obviously no maneuvers/expendables. There are a few other factors left out (eg. combos + movement), but nothing that would dramatically affect the results. The results tend to be along the line of the better geared fighter being able to take 2-3 clones out at a time (not just sequentially, but at the same time) just based on upgrading the tier of their armor and weapon while retaining the same number of minor keywords.
Also,
Urman:
Tier 1 base dmg is ~40-60
Tier 2 base dmg is ~60-80
Tier 3 base dmg is ~80-100 (at least as far as I understand).
Those numbers can be boosted slightly by having weapon specialization. The example level 4 fighter has it and it adds +1 base damage. We don't yet know what it adds at higher level skills.
However, one thing to note is that max keyword T3 heavy armor has 63 resistance. That means that the wearer is basically immune to damage from physical T1 weapons. They likely aren't immune to any energy damage sources though.
Now, consider the fact that the number of weapons you can have equipped at a time is now 2. A typical fighter type character is likely to go with a melee weapon and a bow. It's likely a safe assumption that the damage factors on bows are lower than they are on melee weapons, but have comparable base damage. So should that fighter cheap out and use T1 weapons then he will be unable to damage a T3 heavy armor opponent.
(However, T3 equipment is something I wouldn't expect to be made until at least 2 years into the game. It might end up being PFO's equivalent of EVE Titans, ie. something expensive and powerful enough that only big groups can afford to make it.)
Edit: minor changes in wording
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
That being said, I don't really think crafters should be expected to participate in direct combat PvP beyond defending from settlement assaults. As I said before, I think their time is better spent making the equipment for PvPers (or building the defenses for the settlement, or doing whatever their role is) and making money to hire someone more competent in arms ...Bolder that one bit for emphasis. One thing we've been told about crafting (and building construction) is that they will be based on queues. The forge-master queues up 10 jobs and monitors them, maybe needing to get involved to solve a logjam. But the majority of the scut work is done by the commoner scuts.
If a settlement has 3 separate forges and 6 or 9 or whatever queues going, how many master and journey men are really needed to run it? Will there be an effective upper limit on crafters that can be gainfully employed by a settlement? Producing stuff for export while the ram is smashing at the settlement gate seems... optimistic.
Yeah, if crafting is nothing more than putting things in a queue and waiting for an output then my opinion would swing radically; that's something that could definitely be relegated to an alt or DT, as was suggested elsewhere. I hope that it is more involved than that.
As for the last sentence, I agree with you there; notice I added the clause "beyond defending from settlement assaults". If the ram's knocking on the gate, he should be either on the walls or repairing/crafting war gear, depending on what is most needed at the moment (if the ramming is just starting, he can probably stick to crafting more arrows/alchemist's fire/whatever other comsumables are being consumed during a siege unless and until the ram seems likely to breach).
EDIT: What I was getting at is that crafters shouldn't be required to PvP unless it's necessary; I don't want leaders going "If we don't hold this totally-critical-and-not-just-gravy outpost on the outskirts of our holdings, then all is lost! Crafters, get your butts over there to be meatshields!" An extreme example of course, but you get what I mean.
No, you're right, he'd probably like to think he's more important than he actually is, but that would be purely for egoic reasons.Crafting is of secondary importance, that doesn't mean it's not important.This is an opinion. If someone is a crafter, does he think it's secondary. I don't think so.Just wanted to point out an observation...who here is arguing what, and what is their game play focus?
Then, take that in light of the above.
I was arguing that PvP is more important than crafting, and my gameplay focus will be PvP. And despite my obviously bias opinion, PvP is STILL more important to the PvP war effort than crafting... at least in any game I've ever played.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I was arguing that PvP is more important than crafting, and my gameplay focus will be PvP. And despite my obviously bias opinion, PvP is STILL more important to the PvP war effort than crafting... at least in any game I've ever played.No, you're right, he'd probably like to think he's more important than he actually is, but that would be purely for egoic reasons.Crafting is of secondary importance, that doesn't mean it's not important.This is an opinion. If someone is a crafter, does he think it's secondary. I don't think so.Just wanted to point out an observation...who here is arguing what, and what is their game play focus?
Then, take that in light of the above.
Out of curiosity, who is more important, the soldier on the battlefield, the person holding the whip driving those soldiers, or the person crafting the tools making war wage-able?
Would soldiers war if it was not so easy to do so? Considering how the purpose of weapons is to decrease the difficulty of killing, if we incrementally decrease the efficiency of those weapons, at which point does fighting the whip-wielder become as easy for the soldier as fighting those at the other end of the battlefield?
Of course, I realize there are many situations in which "the whip-holder" is not a person, but an environmental effect or force of nature, something that cannot be fought. The question, in these cases, becomes moot, but so then does the premise that war is the only, best, or even a viable solution.
Still think the soldier is most important?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I was arguing that PvP is more important than crafting, and my gameplay focus will be PvP. And despite my obviously bias opinion, PvP is STILL more important to the PvP war effort than crafting... at least in any game I've ever played.No, you're right, he'd probably like to think he's more important than he actually is, but that would be purely for egoic reasons.Crafting is of secondary importance, that doesn't mean it's not important.This is an opinion. If someone is a crafter, does he think it's secondary. I don't think so.Just wanted to point out an observation...who here is arguing what, and what is their game play focus?
Then, take that in light of the above.
"Amateurs Talk Tactics, Professionals Talk Logistics" :)
That being said, I doubt realism will be a high priority in the game design--maybe they'll minimize the importance of production, logistics, transportation, etc so that's it's very important. Or maybe not--maybe they'll actually get warfare into the game, not just mass combat. From the original design statement (2011):
Warfare
Occasionally matters will escalate to a state of declared war between Settlements and/or Player Nations. Once war is declared, NPC Factions will cease enforcing the peace and allow the combatants to have at one another without restriction.
Territorial Control
Ultimately, characters will struggle to take and hold territory from other Settlements and Player Nations. Control of rich resources, military strongpoints, trade routes, and other sources of value will drive the players into conflict. The battles for control of territory will feature the largest possible armies using sophisticated tactics, maneuvers, logistics and support to achieve their objectives.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I doubt realism will be a high priority in the game design--maybe they'll minimize the importance of production, logistics, transportation, etc so that's it's very important. Or maybe not--maybe they'll actually get warfare into the game, not just mass combat. From the original design statement (2011):
Warfare
Occasionally matters will escalate to a state of declared war between Settlements and/or Player Nations. Once war is declared, NPC Factions will cease enforcing the peace and allow the combatants to have at one another without restriction.
Territorial Control
Ultimately, characters will struggle to take and hold territory from other Settlements and Player Nations. Control of rich resources, military strongpoints, trade routes, and other sources of value will drive the players into conflict. The battles for control of territory will feature the largest possible armies using sophisticated tactics, maneuvers, logistics and support to achieve their objectives.
We can only hope.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Still think the soldier is most important?
Yeah
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Still think the soldier is most important?Yeah
*laugh* okay. Don't I feel like the guy in black...
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Bluddwolf and @Qallz
How many roles badges should crafters devote to combat? How many level should fighters devote to harvesting because the harvesters are least protected?
By splitting roles between other skills is that best for the community? Crafters will be producing less advanced equipment, but they will be better prepared to defend the community( Bluddwolf and Qallz argue that is important so community, should be happy with the lower skills). Though one can argue how skilled is the community that allows attackers to get to pint that crafters needing to die against seasoned fighters, fighters 7 or 8 merit badges better.
Yes, the crafters have fight to the end (they do not lose much doing that). But, really, does anyone think it will be anything other than symbolic. The choice is to die fighting or to die in the overrun. But to really think as level 2 or 3 fighting level against 8 or 9 level fighters will make much different.
I would almost argue that they take no levels as fighter, but maybe some militia training (minor soldiering levels) is part of crafting role.
lam
@Lam In a sandbox, it should be up to the player, and not the devs. It should be essentially like multi-classing vs. non multi-classing. If someone wants to dedicate themselves JUST to being a harvester, or JUST to being a crafter, they should be able to do this, and progress faster at it than if they split it up between a fighting role.
Of course, over time, someone could max out a fighter role, and a crafting role, but that would take a while. It would be all about supply and demand. Typically, not as many people will dedicate themselves fully to crafting as would be ideal, so these people tend to be very valuable in my experience.
Though, the more fun the crafting system is, the less valuable the crafters (because there's more of them). That's really the one way it can be handled in a sandbox, and that's (I'm pretty sure) how it will be dealt with in PFO.