Actually, you can fine them, it is called a SAD. But that us besides the point. We have been given some near Dev Blog quality information here in this thread.
Now that we know that Red List / White List is not in their design plans, let's get into the Marshal mechanics or at least the potential that it might hold.
By all means do so. Not of any interest to me frankly though as it is only a short term thing so we will stick to our sadders and monsters to enforce NBSI whatever alignment we select
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Actually, you can fine them, it is called a SAD. But that us besides the point. We have been given some near Dev Blog quality information here in this thread.An inherently chaotic act by design. SAD is highly inappropriate to the levying of fines.
You are too hung up on the name
mechanically there is no difference between
stop and give us a ransom of a percentage of your goods (chaotic banditry)
and
stop and pay us excise duty of a percentage of your goods (lawful taxation)
The same mechanic can be used for both it is the intent and authority that make one chaotic and one lawful.
Goblin Squad Member
|
I am not sure boy scouts are either fictional or lawful good.
This is irrelevant though. You are executing them for breaking a law. This is an mmo there is no lesser penalty available so the fact you are killing them is irrelevant you cannot fine them, imprison them or force them out of your territory. Your two choices are let them go or kill them.
Your argument is actually that we shouldnt be allowed to dictate who is allowed on our land. Our land is like our house and no different to that. Why should we let you traipse where you like?
Round and round we go. Yes this is an MMMO. And no, there are no lesser penalties so often violence is the penalty. But once again...I am saying that a LG character especially, or any good character/settlement and even some neutral should not be able to kill someone on sight for a minor trespassing.
They should be given a warning, told to leave, or fined....or any combination of the three. Again...if they refuse...then the good guys should be able to attack. I am not telling you how to run your community...I am telling you that it sounds like you want to have a LG character who behaves in an evil way...all of which could be averted if you just played the alignment that suits your play style.
Sorry, but if we are going to have alignments, Paladins and good clerics killing people or groups of people on sight for no other reason than they were put on some stupid list is retarded. There is no reasoning to it. There is no reason for alignment. This just becomes Eve with swords. And I am fine with that. Just get rid of the alignments because it would make no sense and that is just plain annoying.
But come on, there is no rationalization that any good character would behave in such a way. It might not be considered an exploit in the game, but let's drop all the examples and call it like it is. People want to play LG characters and have the LG perks but not actually play LG...which I think ruins it for all the people who are going to put in the work of doing the right things.
I am not sure boy scouts are either fictional or lawful good.
This is irrelevant though. You are executing them for breaking a law. This is an mmo there is no lesser penalty available so the fact you are killing them is irrelevant you cannot fine them, imprison them or force them out of your territory. Your two choices are let them go or kill them.
Your argument is actually that we shouldnt be allowed to dictate who is allowed on our land. Our land is like our house and no different to that. Why should we let you traipse where you like?
Round and round we go. Yes this is an MMMO. And no, there are no lesser penalties so often violence is the penalty. But once again...I am saying that a LG character especially, or any good character/settlement and even some neutral should not be able to kill someone on sight for a minor trespassing.
They should be given a warning, told to leave, or fined....or any combination of the three. Again...if they refuse...then the good guys should be able to attack. I am not telling you how to run your community...I am telling you that it sounds like you want to have a LG character who behaves in an evil way...all of which could be averted if you just played the alignment that suits your play style.
Sorry, but if we are going to have alignments, Paladins can good clerics killing people or groups of people on sight for no other reason than they were put on some stupid list is retarded. There is no reasoning to it. There is no reason for alignment. This just becomes Eve with swords. And I am fine with that. Just get rid of the alignments because it would make no sense and that is just plain annoying.
But come on, there is no rationalization that any good character would behave in such a way. It might not be considered an exploit in the game, but let's drop all the examples and call it like it is. People want to play LG characters and have the LG perks but not actually play LG...which I think ruins it for all the people who...
Round and round we go its true but that is because you seem not to be able to accept that I really don't care. Strip alignment out and I would not blink for a moment it is totally irrelevant and unimportant to me.
It is important to you I acknowledge and you are perfectly free to play your character within the bounds of whatever you perceive that alignment to be. Please feel free to do so I am not stopping you. All I am doing is refusing to bow down to your definition of how I should play. Feel free to picture us in your minds eye as an evil group if it makes you happier.
People who care about alignment in the way you do will be a small percentage most people who end up playing this game will be min maxers not table toppers or D&D fans or role players. Just as in Eve very few care about the lore behind the game.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
By all means do so. Not of any interest to me frankly though as it is only a short term thing so we will stick to our sadders and monsters to enforce NBSI whatever alignment we selectActually, you can fine them, it is called a SAD. But that us besides the point. We have been given some near Dev Blog quality information here in this thread.
Now that we know that Red List / White List is not in their design plans, let's get into the Marshal mechanics or at least the potential that it might hold.
And your community should have a huge unrest penalty for allowing rampant murder within the borders if that settlement is good.
And your community should have a huge unrest penalty for allowing rampant murder within the borders if that settlement is good.By all means do so. Not of any interest to me frankly though as it is only a short term thing so we will stick to our sadders and monsters to enforce NBSI whatever alignment we selectActually, you can fine them, it is called a SAD. But that us besides the point. We have been given some near Dev Blog quality information here in this thread.
Now that we know that Red List / White List is not in their design plans, let's get into the Marshal mechanics or at least the potential that it might hold.
Only if we make murder a criminal offence
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Only if we make murder a criminal offenceAnd your community should have a huge unrest penalty for allowing rampant murder within the borders if that settlement is good.By all means do so. Not of any interest to me frankly though as it is only a short term thing so we will stick to our sadders and monsters to enforce NBSI whatever alignment we selectActually, you can fine them, it is called a SAD. But that us besides the point. We have been given some near Dev Blog quality information here in this thread.
Now that we know that Red List / White List is not in their design plans, let's get into the Marshal mechanics or at least the potential that it might hold.
Nope. If you are a good community. I am not telling you how to play...the alignment system is already a guide line of how you should play your character. And no reasonable person could justify that behavior and no good community would allow it or like it...thus the unrest. All of which could be circumvented if you made a LN or LE community.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...I am not sure boy scouts are either fictional or lawful good.
This is irrelevant though. You are executing them for breaking a law. This is an mmo there is no lesser penalty available so the fact you are killing them is irrelevant you cannot fine them, imprison them or force them out of your territory. Your two choices are let them go or kill them.
Your argument is actually that we shouldnt be allowed to dictate who is allowed on our land. Our land is like our house and no different to that. Why should we let you traipse where you like?
Round and round we go. Yes this is an MMMO. And no, there are no lesser penalties so often violence is the penalty. But once again...I am saying that a LG character especially, or any good character/settlement and even some neutral should not be able to kill someone on sight for a minor trespassing.
They should be given a warning, told to leave, or fined....or any combination of the three. Again...if they refuse...then the good guys should be able to attack. I am not telling you how to run your community...I am telling you that it sounds like you want to have a LG character who behaves in an evil way...all of which could be averted if you just played the alignment that suits your play style.
Sorry, but if we are going to have alignments, Paladins can good clerics killing people or groups of people on sight for no other reason than they were put on some stupid list is retarded. There is no reasoning to it. There is no reason for alignment. This just becomes Eve with swords. And I am fine with that. Just get rid of the alignments because it would make no sense and that is just plain annoying.
But come on, there is no rationalization that any good character would behave in such a way. It might not be considered an exploit in the game, but let's drop all the examples and call it like it is. People want to play LG characters and have the LG perks but not actually play LG...which I think
Well if you don't care about alignment....then what is the big deal. Make your character LN or LE or CE or whatever fits your play style. Your character is your character...but once you take ownership of a hex and declared what that settlements alignment is...it should have guide lines of what that alignment should entail. I'm with you....if we got rid of alignments and based character on character interaction solely on rep...I'm fine with that. But if we have alignments it should make sense.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
SADing is not a mechanic you want to use to defend your territory for a NBSI policy.
The result is that people will mine your resources, wait until you SAD then, give you a cut, then mine until their immunity is over and leave your area.
It just means that they take home a little less, and it shows that you are not prepared to defend your settlement.
You are still fixated on looking at it from an alignment point of view. Good and evil or law and chaos are totally irrelevant to me. I do not care about anything except building a successful settlement then empire. That is all that matters at the end of the day. I do not know how much clearer that I can state it. Alignment is just a mechanic it is no more relevant than hitpoints to how we behave.
SADing is not a mechanic you want to use to defend your territory for a NBSI policy.
The result is that people will mine your resources, wait until you SAD then, give you a cut, then mine until their immunity is over and leave your area.
It just means that they take home a little less, and it shows that you are not prepared to defend your settlement.
SAD will be used with an excessive amount so they refuse. If they do not refuse we say thank you for the money then let our monsters deal with them
The problem with that is that does not discourage people from farming your area, it just means that once in a while, one of my runs, i have to give some of it up. Ill just come back and try again.
All i have to do is keep a lookout so i can stay ahead of the patrols.
No you won't you obviously didnt understand what I meant I think
If we catch you (and we believe we will 90% of the time :) ) we will sad you for as much as we can
if you refuse we will kill you and loot you
if you do not refuse we will take your money then the low rep alts will kill you and loot you
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
You are still fixated on looking at it from an alignment point of view. Good and evil or law and chaos are totally irrelevant to me. I do not care about anything except building a successful settlement then empire. That is all that matters at the end of the day. I do not know how much clearer that I can state it. Alignment is just a mechanic it is no more relevant than hitpoints to how we behave.
I know what you want....and that is fine. You want to be Atilla the Hun, more power to you. And if the game has no aligments...fine kill kill kill. Eve with swords. Fine with it. I understand you don't care about that and you want to power game. Awesome. But if the game has alignments...and things like NBSI are implemented...and settlements have alignments...and those alignments give perks over other alignments...then those alignments should be enforced...or it just becomes really really really, stupid.
Like I said...play however YOU want...and if you want to try and circumvent alignment rules by using psycho alts...ok too...but lets be honest that this is about power gaming and not balance. And let's not dance around and kid ourselves that people of good alignments would behave in this way. That's the part that is setting my brain on fire. You want to power game and conquest...cool, but don't insult everyones intelligence by giving bad examples of how LG Paladins just might murder a vagrant without warning or giving them the option to leave.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
No you won't you obviously didnt understand what I meant I think
If we catch you (and we believe we will 90% of the time :) ) we will sad you for as much as we can
if you refuse we will kill you and loot you
if you do not refuse we will take your money then the low rep alts will kill you and loot you
That still gives the target no incentive for the SAD, there is no reason to use it. Skip straight to the killing them and taking their stuff. No need to waste time bothering with a SAD. Not only that but that opens you up to counter attacks as SAD flags you, avoid the possibility of getting setup and just use your low rep monsters to kill the people and accomplish the goal without all the wasted time and dilly dallying.
Like I said...play however YOU want...and if you want to try and circumvent alignment rules by using psycho alts...ok too...but lets be honest that this is about power gaming and not balance. And let's not dance around and kid ourselves that people of good alignments would behave in this way. That's the part that is setting my brain on fire. You want to power game and conquest...cool, but don't insult everyones intelligence by giving bad examples of how LG Paladins just might murder a vagrant without warning or giving them the option to leave.
I have never denied it is about power gaming. I indeed used the term min max several times.
The examples I gave were to try and make you feel there may be a reason behind it nothing more. Terribly sorry for trying to give you some reason you could tell yourself.
Nothing I plan to do is either unexpected by the devs nor condemned by them indeed Dancey posted about the use of unaffiliated alts today. As I said don't like it then go complain to Dancey. I am just playing by the rules I am given.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Leperkhaun, I don't think we know enough about the currently envisioned SAD to say whether or not Steelwing's technique would work.
It does sort of suggest that one of the SAD demand presets might as well be "drop all of your unthreaded items and return to your respawn point, just as if you had been killed." It would save ever so many steps.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Like I said...play however YOU want...and if you want to try and circumvent alignment rules by using psycho alts...ok too...but lets be honest that this is about power gaming and not balance. And let's not dance around and kid ourselves that people of good alignments would behave in this way. That's the part that is setting my brain on fire. You want to power game and conquest...cool, but don't insult everyones intelligence by giving bad examples of how LG Paladins just might murder a vagrant without warning or giving them the option to leave.
I have never denied it is about power gaming. I indeed used the term min max several times.
The examples I gave were to try and make you feel there may be a reason behind it nothing more. Terribly sorry for trying to give you some reason you could tell yourself.
Nothing I plan to do is either unexpected by the devs nor condemned by them indeed Dancey posted about the use of unaffiliated alts today. As I said don't like it then go complain to Dancey. I am just playing by the rules I am given.
Is a Paladin killing a NG trespasser dumb or not. All he has done is trespass.
No you won't you obviously didnt understand what I meant I think
If we catch you (and we believe we will 90% of the time :) ) we will sad you for as much as we can
if you refuse we will kill you and loot you
if you do not refuse we will take your money then the low rep alts will kill you and loot you
That still gives the target no incentive for the SAD, there is no reason to use it. Skip straight to the killing them and taking their stuff. No need to waste time bothering with a SAD. Not only that but that opens you up to counter attacks as SAD flags you, avoid the possibility of getting setup and just use your low rep monsters to kill the people and accomplish the goal without all the wasted time and dilly dallying.
The reason to use the sad is a) we can use high rep and therefore better trained characters, b) when we get someone accept the sad and then use monsters to kill them we actually get more loot and finally c) because a refused sad is a rep free kill we save our low rep alts from falling further.
If it was more efficient to go purely for the kill with low rep alts then that is what we would do.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I dont see the point, The reason is that lets take your settlement.
Everyone knows you SAD then kill people. However thus far for SAD you only gain rep when its successful. If im taking a chance in your area, im not going to stop for you to SAD me then kill me. Im going to deny your SAD so that you dont get anything extra, and i suspect that after a very short amount of time everyone else will do the same. By SADing then killing you remove any incentive for the person to accept your SAD, and thus they can at least deny you part of the goods and the rep increase.
This ends up where you are wasting man power by requiring your better trained characters to baby sit an area instead of having 1-2 low rep alts roam and notify folks to log in the monsters to deal with an issue. So the better trained characters can go out and do other things.
If you want to SAD with a higher rep character, SAD better targets and give them the chance to do better, dont tie them down to a patrol on a what if chance.
I dont see the point, The reason is that lets take your settlement.
Everyone knows you SAD then kill people. However thus far for SAD you only gain rep when its successful. If im taking a chance in your area, im not going to stop for you to SAD me then kill me. Im going to deny your SAD so that you dont get anything extra, and i suspect that after a very short amount of time everyone else will do the same.
This ends up where you are wasting man power by requiring your better trained characters to baby sit an area instead of having 1-2 low rep alts roam and notify folks to log in the monsters to deal with an issue. So the better trained characters can go out and do other things.
If you want to SAD with a higher rep character, SAD better targets and give them the chance to do better, dont tie them down to a patrol on a what if chance.
Because refusing is exactly what we want people to do. This means are low rep alts aren't all that low rep because we rarely have to use them. Our sadders and low rep alts will not be patrolling we will use normal characters for that and because they do not fight the intruders themselves they can patrol singly then alert the sad and monster band where to converge on.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Thats the point of having low rep characters. Have the low reps to do that, and just those kinds of things, if you care about their alignment/rep then there is no point in having low rep characters.
Kill someone after they accept a SAD penalties increase which drives your monsters even lower, like I said as a person ill deny the SAD, if only to ensure that you dont get the benefits of more loot and rep gain.
At the point where im going, to SAD or not to SAD, my interest is not in trying to keep things, its in making sure the person SADing me gets as little as possible, and if that means getting killed so loot gets destroyed, then so be it.
heck at that point my interest is to set up characters you obviously dont want to be targeted, if i know I can force yourself to be flagged....everytime I do a specific action..... better believe im going to use that.
Edit: Basically I dont see the point of opening yourself by getting flagged through SAD vs the small gains of SADing then killing.
Thats the point of having low rep characters. Have the low reps to do that, and just those kinds of things, if you care about their alignment/rep then there is no point in having low rep characters.
Kill someone after they accept a SAD penalties increase which drives your monsters even lower, like I said as a person ill deny the SAD, if only to ensure that you dont get the benefits of more loot and rep gain.
At the point where im going, to SAD or not to SAD, my interest is not in trying to keep things, its in making sure the person SADing me gets as little as possible, and if that means getting killed so loot gets destroyed, then so be it.
heck at that point my interest is to set up characters you obviously dont want to be targeted, if i know I can force yourself to be flagged....everytime I do a specific action..... better believe im going to use that.
We do not want to use our low rep monsters to kill you though if we can avoid it. We wish to keep their rep as high as possible so they can use better gear and equipment. If we never have to use them that is fine by us. We would much rather have our high rep sad people kill you and we arent looking for rep gains by it so again no problem. Refuse the SAD it is what we want you to do. The SAD people and the low rep people will be the same anyway if for example there are 5 of you there may be 10 sad characters and 10 low rep characters turn up. People will just switch which alt they are playing depending on how the sad goes.
We are not tying up extra people and the accounts will be available anyway so no loss whatsoever to us
We are doing it to kill you for trespass we do not care about loot or rep
Thats the point of having low rep characters. Have the low reps to do that, and just those kinds of things, if you care about their alignment/rep then there is no point in having low rep characters.
Kill someone after they accept a SAD penalties increase which drives your monsters even lower, like I said as a person ill deny the SAD, if only to ensure that you dont get the benefits of more loot and rep gain.
At the point where im going, to SAD or not to SAD, my interest is not in trying to keep things, its in making sure the person SADing me gets as little as possible, and if that means getting killed so loot gets destroyed, then so be it.
heck at that point my interest is to set up characters you obviously dont want to be targeted, if i know I can force yourself to be flagged....everytime I do a specific action..... better believe im going to use that.
Edit: Basically I dont see the point of opening yourself by getting flagged through SAD vs the small gains of SADing then killing.
I dont think you understand him really.
They do not care if they get anything from you or not.
They only want to use the system to kill you, preferably with a high rep character, sonce it would be easier.
If you deny the SAD, you will die faster, and they wont loose anything.
If you accept the SAD, you will die a little later, to their low rep characters.
Either way, they intent for you to die as their prime objective.
Only thing important to them, is if they can do it without a rep cost.
This man gets it
objective 1 kill you
objective 2 dont lose rep on our monsters
objective 3 ensure we fulfil objective 1 often enough that it deters people
|
CEO, Goblinworks
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Important point of order to note.
NBSI doesn't mean "they want to kill you". It means they don't want you on their territory. They're not roaming the map looking for ganks. They're taking the stance that your mere presence on territory they want to control/exploit is a security risk to them which requires you to be removed.
This is why NBSI is meaningful human interaction not meaningless ganking for the lulz. And it's the reason I describe the gap in the alignment/reputation system that requires the so-called "monsters in the basement" as a problem to be solved rather than either a fatal flaw or a meaningless corner case.
The NBSI people are only a threat to you if you go where they live. Stay away from them and they won't bother you.
Important point of order to note.
NBSI doesn't mean "they want to kill you". It means they don't want you on their territory. They're not roaming the map looking for ganks. They're taking the stance that your mere presence on territory they want to control/exploit is a security risk to them which requires you to be removed.
This is why NBSI is meaningful human interaction not meaningless ganking for the lulz. And it's the reason I describe the gap in the alignment/reputation system that requires the so-called "monsters in the basement" as a problem to be solved rather than either a fatal flaw or a meaningless corner case.
The NBSI people are only a threat to you if you go where they live. Stay away from them and they won't bother you.
What this man said.
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
Thats the point of having low rep characters. Have the low reps to do that, and just those kinds of things, if you care about their alignment/rep then there is no point in having low rep characters.
Kill someone after they accept a SAD penalties increase which drives your monsters even lower, like I said as a person ill deny the SAD, if only to ensure that you dont get the benefits of more loot and rep gain.
At the point where im going, to SAD or not to SAD, my interest is not in trying to keep things, its in making sure the person SADing me gets as little as possible, and if that means getting killed so loot gets destroyed, then so be it.
heck at that point my interest is to set up characters you obviously dont want to be targeted, if i know I can force yourself to be flagged....everytime I do a specific action..... better believe im going to use that.
We do not want to use our low rep monsters to kill you though if we can avoid it. We wish to keep their rep as high as possible so they can use better gear and equipment. If we never have to use them that is fine by us. We would much rather have our high rep sad people kill you and we arent looking for rep gains by it so again no problem. Refuse the SAD it is what we want you to do. The SAD people and the low rep people will be the same anyway if for example there are 5 of you there may be 10 sad characters and 10 low rep characters turn up. People will just switch which alt they are playing depending on how the sad goes.
We are not tying up extra people and the accounts will be available anyway so no loss whatsoever to us
We are doing it to kill you for trespass we do not care about loot or rep
It strikes me as a blatant failure if the system if you can do what you say. In the first sense, it's a blatant failure if the effect of issuing a SAD is primarily to eliminate a reputation hit from an action that deserves a reputation hit.
In a second sense, it's a blatant failure of the SAD system if there's a way to avoid the Reputation consequences of taking the payoff and still killing the target. Yes, even if you use alts. No, I don't have a simple solution, but that doesn't mean that such a large exploit will remain open.
Thats the point of having low rep characters. Have the low reps to do that, and just those kinds of things, if you care about their alignment/rep then there is no point in having low rep characters.
Kill someone after they accept a SAD penalties increase which drives your monsters even lower, like I said as a person ill deny the SAD, if only to ensure that you dont get the benefits of more loot and rep gain.
At the point where im going, to SAD or not to SAD, my interest is not in trying to keep things, its in making sure the person SADing me gets as little as possible, and if that means getting killed so loot gets destroyed, then so be it.
heck at that point my interest is to set up characters you obviously dont want to be targeted, if i know I can force yourself to be flagged....everytime I do a specific action..... better believe im going to use that.
We do not want to use our low rep monsters to kill you though if we can avoid it. We wish to keep their rep as high as possible so they can use better gear and equipment. If we never have to use them that is fine by us. We would much rather have our high rep sad people kill you and we arent looking for rep gains by it so again no problem. Refuse the SAD it is what we want you to do. The SAD people and the low rep people will be the same anyway if for example there are 5 of you there may be 10 sad characters and 10 low rep characters turn up. People will just switch which alt they are playing depending on how the sad goes.
We are not tying up extra people and the accounts will be available anyway so no loss whatsoever to us
We are doing it to kill you for trespass we do not care about loot or rep
It strikes me as a blatant failure if the system if you can do what you say. In the first sense, it's a blatant failure if the effect of issuing a SAD is primarily to eliminate a reputation hit from an action that deserves a reputation hit.
In a second sense, it's a blatant failure of...
If you look at what Dancey is saying it amounts to this ( I believe and I am sure he will tell me if I am wrong)
There is a hole in the system that does not allow settlements to protect their territory. Due to that we expect people to use things such as sads and monsters in the basement to fill that hole until we can come up with something better
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
3) Redlisting individual players makes it too cheap and too easy for people to abuse that system to pick on players at a moments notice. If you are a settlement administrator and you fancy killing some peeps for a laugh you could just pop them on the red-list and go at it. In addition it is a much larger quantity of data to store and indicate to the player.
Were you working for AV back during the original Darkfall where they had the war system that made all your opponents free of consequence kills?
They had a 10 minute grace period after a declaration of war before it took effect.
That's something you really need for the War/Feud system anyway since it works nearly the same as the original Darkfall's. You can also apply it to red listing.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I dont think you understand him really.
They do not care if they get anything from you or not.
They only want to use the system to kill you, preferably with a high rep character, sonce it would be easier.
If you deny the SAD, you will die faster, and they wont loose anything.
If you accept the SAD, you will die a little later, to their low rep characters.
Either way, they intent for you to die as their prime objective.
Only thing important to them, is if they can do it without a rep cost.
No i get it. here is the thing.
They want to use the system to get rep and items from the SAD, then kill you, loot you to make sure you dont come back.
The issue is that Between accepting or not accepting SAD in that situation I have no reason to accept it, sure they dong lose anything, BUT they dont gain anything either.
what I am saying is that by that point my objective is to ensure they dont gain anything EXTRA. Once they SAD me, I can make sure they dont gain as much goods, since more is destroyed when I die due to having it on me, and they dont gain rep. Its not about costing them anything, its about making so they dont gain above and beyond on doing it.
Secondly, and this is the important thing, By using SAD they are flagging themselves. That means that they now are able to be attacked by anyone without suffering consequence. They are now putting their better characters on the line. All I have to do is ensure that the second I get SAD'd i stall for a second while I have my buddies log in and kill the people who are now flagged. The low rep folks get flagged if they try to help, so now I can kill them too. Their other valuable SADing characters now have to back off, because they are NOT going to initiate SADs and flag themselves.
I can ONLY do this if i know you are going to SAD me, heck ill send my gatherer into your territory and let you think im an idiot and let you SAD me until all of a sudden 50 folks pop out, take a swing at you then run away. I will force you to run a bunch of low rep alts, because I can kill the low rep alts without worrying about my rep.
If you run your good high level characters thats fine, because if you SAD me I have a means to exploit your using SAD. The thing is that I can test the waters, I can see if you come with 40 people and just have more waiting. I can make it so that if you are SADing in defense of your territory I can make you pay for doing so, and ALL it costs me is a brand spanking new character. It doesnt even cost me a low rep one.
I can make it so that on command your group drops 100 players to take care of me, because you dont know if I have any people waiting for you to SAD.
I dont see the reason to not just use a bunch of monsters and avoid getting exploited.
But if folks want to do that thats fine, Ill have a means of pulling your troops out of position on my command.
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
If you look at what Dancey is saying it amounts to this ( I believe and I am sure he will tell me if I am wrong)
There is a hole in the system that does not allow settlements to protect their territory. Due to that we expect people to use things such as sads and monsters in the basement to fill that hole until we can come up with something better
What I read is "Monsters in the basement and SADs which are intended to be prohibitively expensive are problems that we will have to put somewhere into a priority list once we see how bad it actually is."
I suspect that the best way to solve problems like that is to address the root causes; but basement monsters for settlement defense aren't significantly different from basement monsters for random killing in any sense I can tell.
@Cirolle
Why stop at protecting?
Personally because we are not here to ruin the game we are here to play the settlement warfare game and declaring war is better for us outside of protecting our territory
Could it be used ? yes definitely no arguments there
If you look at what Dancey is saying it amounts to this ( I believe and I am sure he will tell me if I am wrong)
There is a hole in the system that does not allow settlements to protect their territory. Due to that we expect people to use things such as sads and monsters in the basement to fill that hole until we can come up with something better
What I read is "Monsters in the basement and SADs which are intended to be prohibitively expensive are problems that we will have to put somewhere into a priority list once we see how bad it actually is."
I suspect that the best way to solve problems like that is to address the root causes; but basement monsters for settlement defense aren't significantly different from basement monsters for random killing in any sense I can tell.
Settlement defense is meaningful pvp....random killing isnt.
Danceys point I believe is he thinks the both parts of my statement are correct but a mechanical system cannot distinguish easily
I dont think you understand him really.
They do not care if they get anything from you or not.
They only want to use the system to kill you, preferably with a high rep character, sonce it would be easier.
If you deny the SAD, you will die faster, and they wont loose anything.
If you accept the SAD, you will die a little later, to their low rep characters.
Either way, they intent for you to die as their prime objective.
Only thing important to them, is if they can do it without a rep cost.No i get it. here is the thing.
They want to use the system to get rep and items from the SAD, then kill you, loot you to make sure you dont come back.
The issue is that Between accepting or not accepting SAD in that situation I have no reason to accept it, sure they dong lose anything, BUT they dont gain anything either.
what I am saying is that by that point my objective is to ensure they dont gain anything EXTRA. Once they SAD me, I can make sure they dont gain as much goods, since more is destroyed when I die due to having it on me, and they dont gain rep. Its not about costing them anything, its about making so they dont gain above and beyond on doing it.
Secondly, and this is the important thing, By using SAD they are flagging themselves. That means that they now are able to be attacked by anyone without suffering consequence. They are now putting their better characters on the line. All I have to do is ensure that the second I get SAD'd i stall for a second while I have my buddies log in and kill the people who are now flagged. The low rep folks get flagged if they try to help, so now I can kill them too. Their other valuable SADing characters now have to back off, because they are NOT going to initiate SADs and flag themselves.
I can ONLY do this if i know you are going to SAD me, heck ill send my gatherer into your territory and let you think im an idiot and let you SAD me until all of a sudden 50 folks pop out, take a swing at you then run...
If you are in my settlement area you believe you can muster more people to the fight than me?....we may only send a certain amount after you but we will have others on alert in case you have more in the wings. The more you try and bring in the earlier we will detect you and the more likely we are to know your numbers
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If you look at what Dancey is saying it amounts to this ( I believe and I am sure he will tell me if I am wrong)
There is a hole in the system that does not allow settlements to protect their territory. Due to that we expect people to use things such as sads and monsters in the basement to fill that hole until we can come up with something better
What I read is "Monsters in the basement and SADs which are intended to be prohibitively expensive are problems that we will have to put somewhere into a priority list once we see how bad it actually is."
I suspect that the best way to solve problems like that is to address the root causes; but basement monsters for settlement defense aren't significantly different from basement monsters for random killing in any sense I can tell.
I think there's room for crowdforging here, actually. I don't like the obviously twisted use of SAD, but as I've written for a long time the entire SAD mechanic (as it is understood) is destined to be widely abused.
But Steelwings's use here is a somewhat more tolerable case - when it is used on territory that is officially his. So how do we make it possible for settlements to protect their territory without reverting to basement monsters; a system that works on their territory but not off of it?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Actually, you can fine them, it is called a SAD. But that us besides the point. We have been given some near Dev Blog quality information here in this thread.An inherently chaotic act by design. SAD is highly inappropriate to the levying of fines.
Why? Isnt that exactly what Stand and Deliver is?
You go to them, demand they pay a fine, if they pay they go about their business, if they do not they pay another way.
Not really a difficult concept.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What this man said.Important point of order to note.
NBSI doesn't mean "they want to kill you". It means they don't want you on their territory. They're not roaming the map looking for ganks. They're taking the stance that your mere presence on territory they want to control/exploit is a security risk to them which requires you to be removed.
This is why NBSI is meaningful human interaction not meaningless ganking for the lulz. And it's the reason I describe the gap in the alignment/reputation system that requires the so-called "monsters in the basement" as a problem to be solved rather than either a fatal flaw or a meaningless corner case.
The NBSI people are only a threat to you if you go where they live. Stay away from them and they won't bother you.
Yes, what this man said... that your play style is a problem to be solved.
Not going to be solved though through mechanical systems. Not sure why you are objecting in any case I suspect UNC are not on our radar so no worries surely
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Sure you can bring in more, but it depends on what my goal is. if my goal is to make you pay for defending your territory, to make you move your troops, then iv done what iv needed to do.
ensuring my people are in place is easy. I can do that by arranging where I get caught. I can do that by having you guys respond and SAD on one side your settlement while I have a bunch of folks hop in and log off somewhere on your territory thats on the other side. I can test how many people respond and how fast your reaction times are, I can test if I send in a couple of people how quick you get the secondary folks out to the area and how many of them there are.
I dont need to fight your entire settlement, I just need to fight for a short time and go away. I dont need to win the fights, I need to make you pay for defending your territory.
All I need to do is ensure that the second you see someone on your territory that you must have a large amount of your members ready to drop what they are doing and be ready to engage in the settlement defense. That by virtue of you flagging yourself and making yourself vulnerable you have to expend more effort and you have to do it every time.
Remember this isnt like eve, if one of my guys sneaks in you dont get a name that is going to pop into chat to alert you and there wont be places like a jump gate where you can create choke points and just have your people sit there. All i have to do is run in a couple of alts to make sure you are not in that area and see where your patrols are, once its clear, i can move my people in.
best case, I make you spend more and more resources on defense until you declare war/feud and I make it so that you have to spend more effort defending than you otherwise would like and cause more drain on you.
Worst case, I lose some random gatherer who is unimportant.
I dont think that flagging yourself is worth the risk when talking about settlement defense. Have a bunch of monsters and have them run wild, augment those folks as need by high rep more valuable characters, but dont send out the more valuable folks into situations where they get flagged for no reason.
Sure you can bring in more, but it depends on what my goal is. if my goal is to make you pay for defending your territory, to make you move your troops, then iv done what iv needed to do.
ensuring my people are in place is easy. I can do that by arranging where I get caught. I can do that by having you guys respond and SAD on one side your settlement while I have a bunch of folks hop in and log off somewhere on your territory thats on the other side. I can test how many people respond and how fast your reaction times are, I can test if I send in a couple of people how quick you get the secondary folks out to the area and how many of them there are.
I dont need to fight your entire settlement, I just need to fight for a short time and go away. I dont need to win the fights, I need to make you pay for defending your territory.
All I need to do is ensure that the second you see someone on your territory that you must have a large amount of your members ready to drop what they are doing and be ready to engage in the settlement defense. That by virtue of you flagging yourself and making yourself vulnerable you have to expend more effort and you have to do it every time.
Remember this isnt like eve, if one of my guys sneaks in you dont get a name that is going to pop into chat to alert you and there wont be places like a jump gate where you can create choke points and just have your people sit there. All i have to do is run in a couple of alts to make sure you are not in that area and see where your patrols are, once its clear, i can move my people in.
best case, I make you spend more and more resources on defense until you declare war/feud and I make it so that you have to spend more effort defending than you otherwise would like and cause more drain on you.
Worst case, I lose some random gatherer who is unimportant.
I dont think that flagging yourself is worth the risk when talking about settlement defense. Have a bunch of monsters and have them run wild, augment those folks as...
Not going to argue further....feel free to test our defenses
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Not going to be solved though through mechanical systems. Not sure why you are objecting in any case I suspect UNC are not on our radar so no worries surely
No...I wouldn't think so. As a matter of fact, the way you would want to play...it sounds as if you might want to employ us from time to time.
I guess the what I am trying to get it is this. Alignment and rep have yet to be given a definitive set of rules when dealing with settlements. Instead of celebrating the use of the "monsters in the basement" scenario...we should address if for the problem that it is and seek a better scenario. I really don't think the alignment base requirements for settlements is extreme in any sense.
I just want to make sure that if rules are implemented, if restrictions are made, that they make sense. That's it and that's all. If this is nothing more than a land domination game with D&D elements thrown in...get rid of alignment, stick to an eve format of reputation and we can all be the conqueror we want to be. Honor, goodness, evil then becomes a perception held by the community. And, as I said....if that is the way the game is played....and being a paladin is nothing more than a set of skills and play style is completely dependent on the player, that is great.
But if alignments are a component of the game and those alignments have value whether in the form of a character or settlement...then I would prefer that those perks and restrictions make sense which I would also be fine with.
But only half heartedly implementing some vague alignment rules simply because this is a D&D spin off, I think, diminish the experience of the gamer since everyone will just be using loopholes, or "monsters in the basement" tactics to circumvent rules...and then what is the point?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
@Valtorious: The 'monsters in the basement' approach isn't the long-term goal. It's an interim stop-gap during EE while emergent behavior shakes out so that the devs can get a handle on what those 'monsters' are being used for and accommodate that play-style with game mechanics.
@ Everyone in the Stand & Deliver circle-jerk: The mechanic that was presented ages ago was based on a system that has changed substantially. Furthermore, no such mechanic will be present in EE (and maybe not 'till late OE) and what it might look like will depend highly upon, again, emergent gameplay. If you want to fantasize about how you might exploit an imaginary mechanic, knock yourself out, but, please, stop polluting otherwise meaningful discussions with your masturbatory drivel.
I think a solid approach to dealing with 'under the table' alts and non-transparent relationships bypassing Rep/etc consequences is just making 'over the table' relationships important and valuable enough so that the exploits are structurally disadvantaged. Because any alt or secret ally is play time that could be dedicated to a main character or 'over the table' ally instead.
I thing a warning system for entering hexes where you would be trespasser is a good idea, BEFORE you enter said hexes... 100 feet (~30m) in-game distance seems reasonable, and if you happen to walk straight towards a hex corner, visual cues could work like an airplane "HUD" to indicate the boundary path, each side of which will lead to a different hex (with their own legal regime) if you continue.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Is it evil of me to swell up with pride that "Monsters in the a Basement" has become the phrase if the week?
The next step is to get Goblin Works to code that all "Monsters in the Basement" wear Greet Hats when they are released to do their dirty deeds.
BTW, the idea for the phrase came from the Jet Li movie "Unleashed". If you haven't seen that, I highly recommend it.
I disagree that "Monsters in the Basement" represents a break or hole in the system. I think it represents a probable reality for any government, but particularly those found in the River Kingdoms. They represent the deep and dark secrets and the will or desire to dominate their situation. They are the ultimate, necessary evil of ruling a settlement.