Goblin Squad Member
|
If I were a merchant I would Opt Out
If I were a merchant I would set my Core Alignment to Lawful Good. I would not do this because that is what alignment I feel best represents my character’s belief systems, or it would be a true reflection of his actions. I would set his Core Alignment to Lawful Good because it has no downsides to do so; there is no way that being a merchant could shift my Active Alignment away from it; most importantly it will set my alignment to the one that places the greatest consequences upon any who would kill me, shifting them quicker than any other alignment towards Chaotic and Evil, which we have been told will “Suck”.
So I would Opt Out of a meaningful Alignment System, and use it simply as a tool to discourage unwanted attacks with the threat of maximum alignment shifts towards Chaotic Evil.
If I were a merchant I would not join a semi persistent player company. By not joining a player controlled company, I immunize myself from ever falling prey to an unwanted Feud. NPC Settlement Sponsored companies can not have feuds waged against them (as far as we can suspect).
So I would Opt Out of PC Companies, and instead meta game my persistent player grouping and avoid feuds.
If I were a merchant I would Opt Out of joining a Settlement as a citizen. I will avoid unwanted settlement vs settlement wars in this way. Not being in a player run settlement will have no significant downside for me. If you claim not having access to upper tier skills, I respond “Who says those training slots won’t be sold to the highest bidder? Why would training be denied to a LG, High Rep merchant?” More importantly, “What upper tier skills does a merchant really need? And are they worth the risks of unwanted feuds or wars to have them?”
For these reasons, I would Opt Out of the Settlement vs. Settlement conflict and avoid wars.
If I were a merchant, I would Opt Out of the Faction System. Why on Earth would I invite faction rivalries and wars? A faction gives me nothing that I can not arrange in meta game.
I will Opt Out of Factions for those reasons.
If I were a merchant I will Opt Out of the Reputation System. By having no connections to any in game player organization and by virtue that sticking strictly to PVE or Self Defense PVP, my reputation will naturally rise to maximum and none of my actions as a merchant will change that.
By virtue of my preferential position as a non PVP’er, I will Opt Out of the Reputation System because it is only geared to punishing PVP. I will also maximize penalties for those who would force PVP onto me, as a maximum reputation character.
If I were a merchant I would Opt Out of solo play, or grouping with characters that could be feuded, war upon or drawn into a faction conflict. Instead I would make sure that I travel in a group large enough to deliver the maximum reputation loss and alignment shifts for the attackers. Accounting on a new player starting Reputation of +1000, the group would need to generate at least -8500 reputation.
If I were a merchant I would have out group of travelers Opt Out of the SAD System. We would always reject SADs, and force the bandits to have to engage our group + NPC guards, without the bandits benefiting from Reputation gains. Since the bandits will learn that they can not SAD us, nor can they feud, war or faction us, this will also take ambush off the table. That is, unless they are willing to become Chaotic Evil and -7500 reputation in just one action. How many will sign on for instant "Now You Suck"?
So, I will Opt Out of the SAD system because that gives up something I don’t have to.
If I were a merchant, I would Opt Out of virtually every system Goblin Works has proposed so far. There is nothing that they give me that outweighs the advantages of Opting Out.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If I were a merchant I would Opt OutYou might wish to, but your wish is unlikely to be fulfilled.
If I were a merchant I would not join a semi persistent player company. By not joining a player controlled company, I immunize myself from ever falling prey to an unwanted Feud. NPC Settlement Sponsored companies can not have feuds waged against them (as far as we can suspect).
As a merchant the benefits of company and settlement membership should easily outweigh the risks.
I started to counter each of your points but the fact seems to be that you simply do not like rules in the game. You don't want a sandbox game, you just want the sandbox. You view even self regulation as a violation of your freedom, which suggests that your concept of freedom is what we call chaos, and politicians call anarchy.
The problem for the chaotic is that when people come together in common cause they agree to abide by rules of behavior. This is your misfortune. Constructing fictions to protest the rules will only make a loud noise in a public place, not change the rules.
Still, your point of view is needed. Your protests must be heard if we are to avoid overbalancing to the point where creativity and dynamism is stifled.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Your ceaseless angling for more latitude to kill/rob in this game--to make it a bandit-sim--is incredibly tiresome.Is there any point I made, inaccurate based on our current understanding of the proposed systems?
Obando: We caught you red-handed, Mugsy.
Mugsy: I'm innocent I tells ya! You got da wrong guy, copper!
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A merchant doesn't need crafting facilities. Only access to markets and transportation. Avaris point is a good one still.
OP seems in the Michael Moore vein to me. It exaggerates and dramatizes the sheer truth a little for the sake of focusing a spotlight: Merchants have an inherent incentive to not make associations that will get them flagged as hostiles but little to nothing has been presented for what incentives there are for non-combatants to risk it. And some systems have been presented in a way that implies they might be gamed by the unscrupulous.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@ Bluddwolf
1. I have a pretty good feeling that the crafting profession and the merchant professions will be tied to the same tree. I think that they will be less "separate professions" and more interdependent than we know. This feeling is from comments posted and interview comments without hard evidence yet, but since your whole post is formulated from lack of details it is fair.
2. Without directly challenging each individual point that you have made, I will ask you what is different here? Many of your posts have been about working or gaming the system from a bandit's point of view to get and do what you want to do in the game anyway. All of it based on a lack of released detail.
It is good if you think that you are serving the Devs with points that need addressing, but you consistently show very little faith in their powers of game design.
What is different here? Different, about this, from the way that you have continuously said that you will game the systems in your favor at every opportunity?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Note that he starts with "If I were a merchant...". Merchant-Bluddwolf might be the extreme corner-case of corner-cases.
I'll limit myself to addressing just one:
If I were a merchant I would have out group of travelers Opt Out of the SAD System. We would always reject SADs, and force the bandits to have to engage our group + NPC guards, without the bandits benefiting from Reputation gains. Since the bandits will learn that they can not SAD us, nor can they feud, war or faction us, this will also take ambush off the table. That is, unless they are willing to become Chaotic Evil and -7500 reputation in just one action. How many will sign on for instant "Now You Suck"?
1. So you reject a SAD demand. The bandits can still attack you. They get Attacker flags, they don't gain rep for this attack, and they take your stuff. Opting out worked great!
2. NPC guards? Where did you get those? You don't belong to a settlement. You don't belong to a faction. You don't have high merchant skills. You opted out of all of that! Why in the name of Pharasma would someone pony up guards for you?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Note that he starts with "If I were a merchant...". Merchant-Bluddwolf might be the extreme corner-case of corner-cases.
Exaggerations aside, and a know I use it to make a point, I assure you what I laid out won't be an "Extreme Corner-case of a corner-case".
@ Mbando,
You always have the option to not read opinions you don't agree with or anticipate you won't agree with. If your expecting that I won't stop expressing my concerns or throwing ideas out there that support the play style I hope to play, well.... Don't hold your breath.
You finding it tiresome is not even on my radar of caring. I'm sure that is mutual.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
“What upper tier skills does a merchant really need?”
When we have almost no knowledge, as yet, of the skills system, how can you know the answer--as you imply you do--to your question? EVE's skills seem to successfully cover a huge range of things, so it's reasonable to assume PFO's will as well; merchant-stuff could be included.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I would set his Core Alignment to Lawful Good because it has no downsides to do so; there is no way that being a merchant could shift my Active Alignment away from it; most importantly it will set my alignment to the one that places the greatest consequences upon any who would kill me, shifting them quicker than any other alignment towards Chaotic and Evil, which we have been told will “Suck”.
So I would Opt Out of a meaningful Alignment System, and use it simply as a tool to discourage unwanted attacks with the threat of maximum alignment shifts towards Chaotic Evil.
But killing LG people doesn't shift alignment quicker towards CE. The most recent information was: "Attacking players who are not Hostile reduces your Good vs. Evil by a small but fixed amount (essentially, if you lose Rep, you also become more Evil)".
If GW says one thing, and you say something that totally contradicts it, that's an exaggeration? Or simply a deliberate falsehood? (It could be ignorance, but if you have to insist that you're ignorant in this point, how much of the rest of the OP is based on ignorance?)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
“What upper tier skills does a merchant really need?”When we have almost no knowledge, as yet, of the skills system, how can you know the answer--as you imply you do--to your question? EVE's skills seem to successfully cover a huge range of things, so it's reasonable to assume PFO's will as well; merchant-stuff could be included.
You can max out Eve's trading skills in 6 months or so... maybe a year if you include hauling and max skills for that.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
For these reasons, I would Opt Out of the Settlement vs. Settlement conflict and avoid wars.
If I were a merchant, I would Opt Out of the Faction System. Why on Earth would I invite faction rivalries and wars? A faction gives me nothing that I...
I'm sure there are people who want to play, who want to be an unaligned merchant who don't want to always deal with bandits or having to hire bodyguards. Who want to play casually and not pick a faction.
Being able to opt out, to do what you describe, is a huge plus for them.For others, they might opt for a middle ground and be a LG merchant associated with a faction as the protection from the group lets them get better resources without fear of AI opponents.
Some might like the danger and go all in, or do some merchant activities between other adventuring (rather than having a merchant alt) and thus not being LG.
The choice is a plus.
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
The best merchants won't have to opt out using alignment. They will just outsource all of the dangerous work to contractors. Those contractors will be rich enough to buy immunity anywhere they operate, often by being the local maximum of force.
Effective bandits will of course become contractors for at least one such merchant.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
We also have no idea how markets work. What if a bazaar has a limited number of sales slots? That is a big what-if, but it could make a huge impact to the potential benefits of belonging to companies and settlements as a merchant.
Then lawful settlements may be able to impose higher tax rates than chaotics. Good settlements are likely to have more limitations on types of goods sold,such as no poisons.
We have so many unknowns still in the system.
We would certainly use Lawful good hauler alts and gatherer alts that are unaffiliated for exactly the reasons stated. Not sure we would need to do the same for merchants and crafters however as neither group needs to leave town really.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Boy oh boy, here we go again. I'm just going to skip factions, companies, and kingdoms; we don't know what types of training merchants will need to be successful or what bonuses to their merchant-type capabilities they'll recieve from these but you obviously think the answer is "none", and as neither of us can make an argument without something to point to they all become moot points. All I can say is, I don't know why you think a merchant who opts in to these systems will not be advantaged against a merchants who opts out, as previously outlined systems (the flag system, specifically) rewarded opt-in merchants and I see no reason to assume GW would want to do otherwise now.
If I were a merchant I would have out group of travelers Opt Out of the SAD System. We would always reject SADs, and force the bandits to have to engage our group + NPC guards, without the bandits benefiting from Reputation gains. Since the bandits will learn that they can not SAD us, nor can they feud, war or faction us, this will also take ambush off the table. That is, unless they are willing to become Chaotic Evil and -7500 reputation in just one action. How many will sign on for instant "Now You Suck"?
When the SAD was first proposed, you yourself were practically giddy at the thought of it. You offer a SAD and the merchants reject it, you get to kill them with no losses on your part, taking all their stuff instead of the small amount you demanded. There is no way to opt out of SAD's, short of staying inside bandit-free settlements for your entire career. What has changed since then which will stop you from SAD'ing merchants if they refuse SAD's?
|
CEO, Goblinworks
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
If I were a merchant I would set my Core Alignment to Lawful Good. I would not do this because that is what alignment I feel best represents my character’s belief systems, or it would be a true reflection of his actions.
Based on everything else you said in this post, it would absolutely reflect your character's actions. Working as intended.
If I were a merchant I would not join a semi persistent player company.
If I were a merchant I would Opt Out of joining a Settlement as a citizen.
If I were a merchant, I would Opt Out of the Faction System.
If I were a merchant I will Opt Out of the Reputation System.
If I were a merchant I would Opt Out of solo play, or grouping with characters that could be feuded, war upon or drawn into a faction conflict.
If I were a merchant I would have out group of travelers Opt Out of the SAD System.
If I were a merchant, I would Opt Out of virtually every system Goblin Works has proposed so far. There is nothing that they give me that outweighs the advantages of Opting Out.
A couple of clarifications to stuff you seem to have missed.
You have to be a member of a Settlement. So you may choose to be a member of an NPC Settlement, but you'll still be a member of a Settlement.
Why being a member of an NPC Settlement will make that a meaningful choice:
1: They will be filled with low level, new characters who will descend on all nearby resource nodes like locusts. The rate you can profitably harvest anything will be directly correlated to how many other people are trying to do the same thing in the same place. So your net intake per minute will be suppressed by competition so long as you stay in the areas around those Settlements. Those areas will also be seeded with the lowest level, most common harvestable resources, so you'll have to buy more complex or harder to obtain resources from the market, or take massive risks to go where they are to be found and try to harvest them yourself.
2: Not being a member of a PC Settlement means that there's no good reason for anyone to treat you as anything but hostile if you visit their territory. It would be foolish to have an open door policy for NPC Settlement members, so I expect most PC Settlements will NBSI them. I don't know when or if we'll have systems granular enough to let a Settlement set an individual character to NRDS but even after we do, I suspect you'll have problems negotiating one on one with very many locations. The map, for you, will be a small circle of green safe territory around your NPC Settlement, surrounded by an ocean of red where you'll risk being ganked if you venture forth, without allies, and without any means of meaningful self defense.
3: Those two factors combined mean that you'll be stuck doing business in NPC Settlements, which means you'll have a hard time finding a pricing arbitrage for your output. You'll face commoditization of prices which will gut your profits. Your coin per minute earning potential will be suppressed.
4: The amount of training a Settlement can offer will be limited. Being in an NPC Settlement means you'll have to compete for the available training with all the other characters attached to that Settlement. There will be a supply and demand problem so you won't necessarily be able to get all the training you want when you want it. Your rate of advancement will likely be slowed relative to your competitors who are in PC Settlements.
5: You will find yourself capped in how you can advance your character because NPC Settlements will not have advanced structures so you will not have access to advanced character abilities. That likely (but not for certain) means that your competitors in PC Settlements will be able to gain efficiency advantages which will let them undercut you on price, plus the ability to craft goods you simply can't craft which will cut you off from what is likely going to be the most profitable segments of the markets. Your coin per minute earning potential will be suppressed.
6: It is possible that storage in NPC Settlements will be limited. So you may face tough choices about how much raw materials, intermediate materials, and finished goods to keep on hand at any time. This will tend to reduce your flexibility to respond to changes in the market prices of those things, reduce your ability to hedge against price inflation, and potentially limit your revenue by not being able to keep up with demand for the goods you can supply due to lack of inventory.
But yes, you can do all these things and operate in relative tranquility, free from most concerns about being ganked, getting kicked out of as Settlement due to war or disintegration, and having to make complex decisions about what to make where to sell it and how to price it. In other words: game working as intended.
|
CEO, Goblinworks
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The intent of the design is to push people out of NPC Settlements. We want players to view them as the place they spent some time when they were learning the ropes, or as a sanctuary they can fall back to in the event of a massive disaster, but not someplace most of them will consistently maintain an affiliation with over the long term.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think Bluddwolf brings up very legitimate points here.
If you all believe that every single player will be pure RPers, and will avoid gamey tactics to keep things fair or balanced, then you are naive.
Bluddwolf is trying to do a service to this community by pointing out the problems he sees in the game. Insulting him accomplishes nothing but making you look like an ass.
I firmly believe that alignment needs to be looked at completely objectively from a mechanics standpoint. ALL 9 alignments should be COMPLETELY viable choices. Obviously the mechanical benefits/penalties for each alignment may dictate the style of play that works best (or rather, vice versa), but they should all be EQUALLY PLAYABLE.
Bluddwolf has spent (wasted) a lot of breath to explain to you('re deaf ears) that the current alignment system, and much of what we hear from the devs, is strongly favoring Lawful and Good.
The only 'alignment' the game should discourage is Low Reputation.
[EDIT]
My post is made partially irrelevant by Ryan's post, made while I was typing mine. I believe my alignment concerns are legitimate, so I'm not removing anything.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Bluddwolf has spent (wasted) a lot of breath to explain to you('re deaf ears) that the current alignment system, and much of what we hear from the devs, is strongly favoring Lawful and Good.
The only 'alignment' the game should discourage is Low Reputation.
Seemed more like he's pushing for merchants to be more vulnerable to me, as only one of his points had anything to do with alignment. That, and the title of the thread has nothing to do with LG being too strong, but instead with merchants being too able to avoid PvP.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Rants aside, Ryan has confirmed what most of us already knew. The developers have put a lot more thought into all of these systems than Bluddwolf has, and most of the disasters he perceives are confined to the realm of his imagination.
If he wants to be taken seriously maybe he should start asking more questions and giving thoughtful input to the answers, rather than creating his own answers and screaming about the dire consequences they imply. This applies not only to the developer's design plans, but his interactions with every member of this community.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Seemed more like he's pushing for merchants to be more vulnerable to me, as only one of his points had anything to do with alignment. That, and the title of the thread has nothing to do with LG being too strong, but instead with merchants being too able to avoid PvP.Bluddwolf has spent (wasted) a lot of breath to explain to you('re deaf ears) that the current alignment system, and much of what we hear from the devs, is strongly favoring Lawful and Good.
The only 'alignment' the game should discourage is Low Reputation.
Then you have completely misunderstood Bludd's motivation for much of his posting.
He clearly states that he sees obvious exploits in the game's systems, and he says this on a regular basis.
He has 'threatened' many, many times to exploit any design flaws he sees in the hopes they will be fixed.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@ Ryan
Just how many settlements are going to place newer or unaffiliated PCs on NBSI considering the reputation hits that would be associated with that?
That seems to me to be a fast ticket to CE + Low Rep, which is exactly the protection I had mentioned.
Is it going to be possible to feud NPC settlement based companies?
Doesn't NBSI run counter to what your systems are meant to achieve?
How is a merchant's skill training going to limit his or her access to the markets, particularly higher tier resources or crafted items?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It would be foolish to have an open door policy for NPC Settlement members, so I expect most PC Settlements will NBSI them.
My one and only concern about the response is this line. While I have no intention to remain an NPC settlement member for very long, I really dislike the thinking that it would be foolish to have an open door policy NPC Settlement members.
Is this game really meant to induce so much paranoia as to produce xenophobic, closed off settlements?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It would be foolish to have an open door policy for NPC Settlement members, so I expect most PC Settlements will NBSI them.My one and only concern about the response is this line. While I have no intention to remain an NPC settlement member for very long, I really dislike the thinking that it would be foolish to have an open door policy NPC Settlement members.
Is this game really meant to induce so much paranoia as to produce xenophobic, closed off settlements?
Agreed, that seems like a fast way to make your settlement irrelevant on the world stage.
Previous statements from Ryan indicated that he believed settlements would be in heavy competition recruiting the new characters.
"Join our Settlement/Company! But don't get too close or we'll have to shoot you. Can't trust just anyone, after all."
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Open door to uninvested unknowns with a flat power curve does seem to be inviting invasion. Sad, I know, but it isn't going to be Kaladim with superpowered NPC dwarven guards defending it 24/7. Get enough bad guys in newb bodies in there and when your vulnerable window opens you will be swarmed from within. The only real defenses you have against low level swarms is your walls, archers, casters, and supply stores.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It would be foolish to have an open door policy for NPC Settlement members, so I expect most PC Settlements will NBSI them.My one and only concern about the response is this line. While I have no intention to remain an NPC settlement member for very long, I really dislike the thinking that it would be foolish to have an open door policy NPC Settlement members.
Is this game really meant to induce so much paranoia as to produce xenophobic, closed off settlements?
Probably.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Lifedragn, the fact that NPC settlements are not exclusive means that all the worst people possible will have free access to your settlement. That would include your enemies, random griefers who get kicked out of their own settlement, and every other type of person you wouldn't want strolling your streets. Here's the way I see it; NBSI the NPC settlement as a whole, but then allow exceptions for individuals or companies who you believe deserving.
Don't get me wrong; I am opposed to NBSI policies due to the restrictions they put on individuals who just want to see the world or act as a neutral party, and I would love it if the majority of settlements were NRDS. But I think there would probably be too much risk involved to constantly open yourselves to entire NPC settlements.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
well a couple of things.
The below is what happens when stand and deliver is rejected.
If the victim was offered and rejected stand and deliver, the Outlaw loses no reputation for killing the target within five minutes of the rejection.
So if you reject a SAD, he can kill you, without rep loss, and then loot everything off your corpse. The blog doesnt make clear if you also have an alignment shift.
HOWEVER lets say as a merchant you go LG to protect yourself. Thats fine. Here is the difference. Im now going to hire an assassin and place a contract on you. If he kills you under contract he suffers no alignment shifts or rep loss associated with killing a person, although you have to be evil to be one, but not to hire one.
Then the assassin can loot your corpse. Depending on how we work things out, for creating contracts to inform an assassin about who it would be profitable to kill we split the loot. then remember that Ryan hinted that assassins might be able to break threading on items/respawn points.
Or, the bandits will be alts who will just kill a merchant if the merchant refuses SAD and not care about alignment hits, then they will transfer the goods to a non CE fence to sell for profit or to keep.
i dont see going strictly LG for merchants as being 100% required, as in general it doesnt stop the people you want to stop.
Refuse a SAD, get killed and looted or accept the SAD and just give up part of your goods.
There are only really two ways around this, the first is to move goods during times with the least amount of players on in areas you know probably dont have bandits the other is to have body guards available so that the bandit can SAD you and has to flag himself for attacking.
This is also part of having agreements with other organizations can help. An organization that is interested in trade and such will keep their hexes relatively free of bandits and make every effort to remove all bandits in their territory, so a merchant could make nice with them and have safer routes to travel.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
then remember that Ryan hinted that assassins might be able to break threading on items/respawn points.
Can someone point out this mention of breaking item threads? I recall no such statement ever made and find it amusing how folks think they might get a chance at threaded gear through assassins. I fully remember the breaking of threaded bind-points, which was designed to prevent a character from quickly being able to return to the scene.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Death curses and assassin's masks both 'break' threading in their own way. Masks only work on yourself and curses work on others who've killed you.
I suppose that putting a death curse on someone and then hiring an assassin is one way to potentially 'break' someone's item threading. But it only works if they've killed you and you are willing to pay the rep cost for the curse.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Can someone point out this mention of breaking item threads? I recall no such statement ever made and find it amusing how folks think they might get a chance at threaded gear through assassins. I fully remember the breaking of threaded bind-points, which was designed to prevent a character from quickly being able to return to the scene.then remember that Ryan hinted that assassins might be able to break threading on items/respawn points.
Assassins will should be able to break respawn points on chance when they assassinate a target per the blog, the item thing was in a post that they were thinking about possibly allowing them to sometimes break threads on items, however they never confirmed that was going to be in the game, just that it was discussed. It was something along the lines of having to infiltrate into a settlement and having to take out a highly guarded target with few escape routes possibly having a bonus reward besides the contract. Its not confirmed and in all possibility was just a one off comment.
Death curses and assassin's masks both 'break' threading in their own way. Masks only work on yourself and curses work on others who've killed you.
I suppose that putting a death curse on someone and then hiring an assassin is one way to potentially 'break' someone's item threading. But it only works if they've killed you and you are willing to pay the rep cost for the curse.
I believe a deathcurse is limited in who you can apply it to. I seem to recall that it was only those that appeared on your enemies list and that list was comprised purely of those who had got the attacker flag by attacking you within a certain time period (I have a feeling it was 24 hours but could well have misremembered that so don't take it as gospel).
If correct this would mean a death curse is not necessarily able to be used against a purely business rival
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Death curses and assassin's masks both 'break' threading in their own way. Masks only work on yourself and curses work on others who've killed you.
I suppose that putting a death curse on someone and then hiring an assassin is one way to potentially 'break' someone's item threading. But it only works if they've killed you and you are willing to pay the rep cost for the curse.
I believe a deathcurse is limited in who you can apply it to. I seem to recall that it was only those that appeared on your enemies list and that list was comprised purely of those who had got the attacker flag by attacking you within a certain time period (I have a feeling it was 24 hours but could well have misremembered that so don't take it as gospel).
If correct this would mean a death curse is not necessarily able to be used against a purely business rival
Yes, it's very limited in terms of its applicability. It was just meant to point out a case where it's possible to hire an assassin to break someone's item threading, provided certain specific conditions have been met and you're willing to pay all the costs.
Yes, it's very limited in terms of its applicability. It was just meant to point out a case where it's possible to hire an assassin to break someone's item threading, provided certain specific conditions have been met and you're willing to pay all the costs.Death curses and assassin's masks both 'break' threading in their own way. Masks only work on yourself and curses work on others who've killed you.
I suppose that putting a death curse on someone and then hiring an assassin is one way to potentially 'break' someone's item threading. But it only works if they've killed you and you are willing to pay the rep cost for the curse.
I believe a deathcurse is limited in who you can apply it to. I seem to recall that it was only those that appeared on your enemies list and that list was comprised purely of those who had got the attacker flag by attacking you within a certain time period (I have a feeling it was 24 hours but could well have misremembered that so don't take it as gospel).
If correct this would mean a death curse is not necessarily able to be used against a purely business rival
I believe a death curse does not have to be delivered by an assassin though. It merely activates on the next death while the curse is active (again a while since I read it so may be wrong)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If you spend the rep to curse someone and then the curse wears off before they die it's a bit of a waste, so while the assassin isn't part of the curse itself he's the one who makes it meaningful.
Edit: Re-reading that the death curse only ends on death, so that modifies what I said. Have the assassin wait until the target is wearing something valuable in order to make the curse meaningful.
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
My understanding was that the assassin's soul-rending ability would remove a bind point and leadership buff abilities from the victim, that the assassin's mask would remove identity and item threads from the assassin, and that the death curse would sever item threads from a murderer at a high cost to the victim.
None of those should apply to a random target. However, there's still the relatively easy method of declaring him a trespasser because no real character has that much stuff without being affiliated with at least a company.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Rants aside, Ryan has confirmed what most of us already knew. The developers have put a lot more thought into all of these systems than Bluddwolf has, and most of the disasters he perceives are confined to the realm of his imagination.
If he wants to be taken seriously maybe he should start asking more questions and giving thoughtful input to the answers, rather than creating his own answers and screaming about the dire consequences they imply. This applies not only to the developer's design plans, but his interactions with every member of this community.
Based on everything else you said in this post, it would absolutely reflect your character's actions. Working as intended.
No, as Ryan had said, most of what I wrote is accurate and "working as intended".
Interestingly enough Ryan also reiterated this point:
2: Not being a member of a PC Settlement means that there's no good reason for anyone to treat you as anything but hostile if you visit their territory. It would be foolish to have an open door policy for NPC Settlement members, so I expect most PC Settlements will NBSI them. I don't know when or if we'll have systems granular enough to let a Settlement set an individual character to NRDS but even after we do, I suspect you'll have problems negotiating one on one with very many locations. The map, for you, will be a small circle of green safe territory around your NPC Settlement, surrounded by an ocean of red where you'll risk being ganked if you venture forth, without allies, and without any means of meaningful self defense.
Now this is new in that he suggests that NPC Settlement toons be set to NBSI because they pose a threat.
What I had asked above, and it is quite important to know:
Can NPC Settlement sponsored companies be feuded?
Well, I have to disagree with the "no meaningful self defense". They will have the reputation hit they can deliver if we have no sanctioned means to NBSI them.
Is there some possibility the NPC settlement based toons will have reduced reputation hit protection, compared to PC settlement based characters?
Otherwise, how is the "rest of the map going to be an ocean of red"?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
What I had asked above, and it is quite important to know:
Can NPC Settlement sponsored companies be feuded?
Why wouldn't they be subject to feuds? I think that making them immune to feuds just causes more problems and solves none.
To my knowledge, GW has never said that settlement sponsored companies weren't subject to feuds, or given us any reason to suspect that that was the case.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
What I had asked above, and it is quite important to know:
Can NPC Settlement sponsored companies be feuded?
Why wouldn't they be subject to feuds? I think that making them immune to feuds just causes more problems and solves none.
To my knowledge, GW has never said that settlement sponsored companies weren't subject to feuds, or given us any reason to suspect that that was the case.
Well based on what I know of being attached to a NPC corporation in EVE, you can not be war decced. I was not going to assume that is or is not the case after Ryan's post, so I asked the question.
NPC corporations in Eve certainly cannot be wardecced. However in Eve you cannot be not part of a corporation. PfO may well be different. I can certainly imagine companies that are based in NPC settlements being feudable. Individual characters however that decide not to join a company I cannot imagine being feudable as it would become a little too much like griefing I would have thought. Big bold mercenary company numbering 30 people declares feud against an individual. Not sure thats what people want but hey who am I to judge being only the current forum troll and random toxic personality of the year
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
In the past they've said that you have to belong to a settlement. You either belong to a player-run settlement or an NPC settlement. I believe that in EVE you have to belong to a corporation, either player-run or an NPC corporation. In EVE NPC corporations cannot be war decced and GW has given us no reason to believe that players will be able to declare war on NPC settlements.
Players don't have to belong to companies; there aren't NPC companies. Companies can be sponsored by NPC settlements if they don't have a sponsoring PC settlement (edit: so companies are like individuals - they need to be a citizen someplace). Making such companies immune to feuds would be like making citizens of NPC towns immune to SADs.
In the past they've said that you have to belong to a settlement. You either belong to a player-run settlement or an NPC settlement. I believe that in EVE you have to belong to a corporation, either player-run or an NPC corporation. In EVE NPC corporations cannot be war decced and GW has given us no reason to believe that players will be able to declare war on NPC settlements.
Players don't have to belong to companies; there aren't NPC companies. Companies can be sponsored by NPC settlements if they don't have a sponsoring PC settlement (edit: so companies are like individuals - they need to be a citizen someplace). Making such companies immune to feuds would be like making citizens of NPC towns immune to SADs.
I think we are all agreeing that companies even ones based in NPC settlements are able to be feuded. The question being asked is what about non company affiliated characters.
As an example I said currently from what we know of the game I see no reason to have gatherer and hauler alts associated with and faction
, company or settlement they will need minimal training and once they have it we can just let them loose at which point they become immune to war and feud (this is currently what happens in eve btw). I am not convinced this is a good thing
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The way I read that the first time was NBSI was a trespassing law. Now I am not sure. As far as a NPC feud that sounds odd, wrong, I don't know? Now once you form CC it may change things, but your group would still be trespassers on someone elses settlement claimed land. Recruiting... One would need to visit the new bees in the NPC areas or meet them off line from the sound of it. Did I miss anything?
Edit: That's not to say you / they would be completely trapped. Just that walking up to a settlement gate might not work out well... Now go away or I will taunt you some more...