Goblin Squad Member
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
With the land rush up and running and EE just around the corner, PFO has just receive a new lease of life and, I suspect, made us all start thinking a little more concretely about plans in the future. One of the things I'd like to have cleared up is whether we'll be able to train at others' settlements, or allow visitors to train at ours. I had taken this as a given, but then I remember Ryan saying something along the lines of "Why on earth would we allow that?" and all was chaos and confusion :P Seeing as I don't have Nihimon's powers of total recall, I haven't been able to find the source for that.
Has this ever been decided definitively? It seems to me that if it is not possible, two groups of people are going to be severely disadvantaged. The first are groups like the UNC, who have stated that they are not particularly interested in running their own settlement; if they are stuck training only at NPC settlements it will lead to them being unable to train higher level skills, or force them into settlement management, which may be a path they are not interested in going down. The second group are those who are splitting off from a "parent" CC in order to form a "colony"; if they then cannot go back to their original settlement to train it may be a long time before they are able to advance their skills.
Allowing settlements to train outsiders also has upsides apart from avoiding these problems. First, it promotes more meaningful player interaction in the form of pricing (not necessarily financial) for said training; second, it allows settlements near each other to develop synergies in training with all the advantages, and risks, that this brings; and third, those with a certain type of training facility may have both a carrot and stick with which to keep the bandits (or others) in line: play nice and you get to train, behave badly and we withhold that training.
So, what's the current state of play on this one?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
There are other upsides for allowing the open market sale of training slots.
1. Reputation will be more meaningful, because if chaotics or criminals (they are not mutually inclusive) are limited to training in NPC settlements and therefore capped at Tier 2 training, then reputation does not matter. Might as well go as low as you find the need to go.
2. Another source of income for a small but hopefully growing settlement.
I do take some encouragement that faction based skills may be our access to the skills related to banditry, and that the only limitation to their upper tiers will be the amount of dedication to that faction (standing) one chooses to achieve.
Ideally, for the free spirited or unwanted, outlaw groups will find that being a member of an NPC settlement (Thornkeep, most likely) and high standing in a Faction, will allow for FULL character development.
Will we have access to upper tier crafting, directly? No, probably not. But that is the trade off. It won't mean that we can't buy or steal upper tier items.
We may also have to align with or create an alt support company to achieve the access to markets and crafting.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
1. Reputation will be more meaningful, because if chaotics or criminals (they are not mutually inclusive) are limited to training in NPC settlements and therefore capped at Tier 2 training, then reputation does not matter. Might as well go as low as you find the need to go.
I'd like to point out that NPC cities are said to reject players who get too low on reputation, so I'd imagine if you ignore reputation because you aren't part of a player settlement you'll find yourself deprived of even the lesser NPC training.
Also note that Ryan has hinted that people training at NPC settlements may have to share their training facilities with all the other people at the NPC settlements, as someone training in a player settlement would have to do (due to limited training slots available). So training at the NPC settlements could wind up being even more inferior. (Sorry, I can't find the post I'm thinking of when making this statement)
In the end, I'd caution against the line of thought that NPC settlements won't restrict your actions, so you can play whatever kind of character you want there.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
1. Reputation will be more meaningful, because if chaotics or criminals (they are not mutually inclusive) are limited to training in NPC settlements and therefore capped at Tier 2 training, then reputation does not matter. Might as well go as low as you find the need to go.I'd like to point out that NPC cities are said to reject players who get too low on reputation, so I'd imagine if you ignore reputation because you aren't part of a player settlement you'll find yourself deprived of even the lesser NPC training.
Also note that Ryan has hinted that people training at NPC settlements may have to share their training facilities with all the other people at the NPC settlements, as someone training in a player settlement would have to do (due to limited training slots available). So training at the NPC settlements could wind up being even more inferior. (Sorry, I can't find the post I'm thinking of when making this statement)
In the end, I'd caution against the line of thought that NPC settlements won't restrict your actions, so you can play whatever kind of character you want there.
I was hopeful that the reader would see that I'm against low reputation being a default for those stuck in NPC settlements.
If training slots were open (for sale) to a more open customer base, than it would be in the best interest for all players to maintain a decent reputation level, to not close off that opportunity.
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
If selling training is permitted, then I think there will be more Meaningful Human Interaction, as the price of training and list allowable buyers is discussed. The most expensive training buildings can also be made so expensive that only a few settlements choose to build them, adding more dimensions to the market for training.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I'd like to point out that NPC cities are said to reject players who get too low on reputation, so I'd imagine if you ignore reputation because you aren't part of a player settlement you'll find yourself deprived of even the lesser NPC training.
Gah! I was just about to re-link something I've linked a few times recently and I just realized I've been totally misreading it.
sighs
Time to go and correct a few posts...
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
IIRC, no settlement will be able to offer training in all roles at top tier. There are 7 roles, currently (fighter, wizard, rogue, cleric, aristocrat, export, commoner). I expect that most settlements will need a variety of these to be viable. I do not even know if a settlement could have these all at Tier 2. If it does what other buildings must it forego.
It seems essential for settlements to support each other, training friendly visitors.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I hope one can get training anywhere they are authorized by the settlement to do so. I also hope training is a resource in itself, settlements should only be able to have x number of training y going at any one time (like production in Eve) and should be able to invest in better/bigger training facilities.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I thought that was already the case...
I know it has been talked about since I found the game. That settlements can allow non members to use their training facilities... I would have assumed it as just that, whether you were a part of another settlement shouldnt matter if the owner grants you access.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'd like to point out that NPC cities are said to reject players who get too low on reputation, so I'd imagine if you ignore reputation because you aren't part of a player settlement you'll find yourself deprived of even the lesser NPC training.
Its not lesser training. You just dont get the Top tier of training. Which is the equivalent to the level 20 stuff. (maybe 18-20 but whatever)
If you are multiclassed, it will not matter till you run out of things to train. They say 2.5 years to max out a class, so there is plenty of time before it matters to anyone.
|
Goblinworks Game Designer
|
| 13 people marked this as a favorite. |
Alright, here's the short(ish) overview. None of this is actually implemented yet, so the details or even larger parts of it may change closer to the time it becomes available.
There are two types of buildings related to training: actual training structures and training support buildings.
The training structure accrues training as previously described. You go to it, select a feat that's available to train and that you meet the prereqs for, and pay XP to learn it (plus any cash price the building owner has set on it). These training structures are either large buildings that train multiple roles worth of feats, or medium buildings that are more focused on one role or set of general feats. They also count as a training support building for everything they can potentially train (which increases as you upgrade the building).
Training support buildings are small buildings that replicate the training of a larger building, but only for purposes of maintaining that training. Since they're small, they're much cheaper to build and easier to fit into your settlement. Like the big buildings, what they can support increases as you upgrade them. Think of them as refresher annexes, without the staff to actually train you but with reference materials to keep your skills sharp (though I don't know what form the buildings will actually take... might be something more abstract like a statue). Certain PoIs can also be upgraded to count as support buildings for certain types of training (and to train skills outright).
If you are a member of a settlement, you gain training support for all the buildings the settlement has. If you are a member of a company, you gain training support for anything supported by their PoI. If you are not a member of either, you are supported by whichever NPC city you default to (which will support all Tier 1 and some Tier 2).
Whenever your membership situation changes (you change membership, leave a settlement, major change in settlement buildings, settlement destroyed, etc.), you start a month timer. At the end of that timer, any traits not supported by your current settlement are temporarily downgraded to whatever is supported by your current membership (keep in mind that you can always default to Tier 1 training via NPC cities).
You don't lose these traits, they're just inaccessible/unslottable until you once again have membership somewhere that supports them, at which point they are immediately reactivated. And you're at full effect for a month after losing access to give you time to land somewhere that does support them.
So, long answer short, you can cross-train between settlements. One settlement builds the smaller and cheaper support buildings and then relies on the other settlement to actually build the full structures that add the traits in the first place. And even if your current settlement doesn't support the training you're buying somewhere, it might be a good way to sell yourself to a settlement that does (e.g., "I'm a Tier 3 Fighter and would like to join your settlement, because I hear you support that training.").
I believe that it's set up so a full size settlement that's devoted to it can support basically all training (but only train certain pieces of it), but I'd need to check with Tork when he's back in the office tomorrow.
|
Goblinworks Game Designer
|
Thanks Stephen!
While traits are inaccessible is it possible to train them further? Eg. my settlement doesn't support X, but I go and buy X to the next level at another settlement.
I believe so. As noted above, it would kind of become a way to guilt your current settlement into building a support structure for it or of planning to jump ship to a settlement that has it.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I believe so. As noted above, it would kind of become a way to guilt your current settlement into building a support structure for it or of planning to jump ship to a settlement that has it.Thanks Stephen!
While traits are inaccessible is it possible to train them further? Eg. my settlement doesn't support X, but I go and buy X to the next level at another settlement.
Ah, I was misinterpreting. Thanks for the clarification.
So that's a good way of predicting who is likely to jump ship: they have traits/skills/feats which keep going up and which aren't supported by your settlement. Basically if they keep training something they can't currently make use of and your settlement won't be supporting in the near future.
If there's any sort of API in the future (something like EVE has) then it should be relatively straight-forward to write scripts to watch your settlement members for this type of behaviour. Just make a list of your settlement's supported training. Keep a list of each player's trained skills and use a cron job to check the API each day. Have the script make a list of any skill level changes (ie. it'll see when someone trains something). Then see if this list of changes has something not in your list of supported training. One offs (training a non-supported skill once) can probably be ignored as some people may not realize the training rules and train something unsupported thinking they can use it. Repeated training of an unsupported skill on the other hand ...
Allow me to dub this script NSA: "Nightdrifter's Settlement Algorithm". Okay, I've been waiting for a while to use that acronym ...
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I believe so. As noted above, it would kind of become a way to guilt your current settlement into building a support structure for it or of planning to jump ship to a settlement that has it.Thanks Stephen!
While traits are inaccessible is it possible to train them further? Eg. my settlement doesn't support X, but I go and buy X to the next level at another settlement.
Ah, I was misinterpreting. Thanks for the clarification.
So that's a good way of predicting who is likely to jump ship: they have traits/skills/feats which keep going up and which aren't supported by your settlement. Basically if they keep training something they can't currently make use of and your settlement won't be supporting in the near future.
** spoiler omitted **
How would you track what your members train and where? I mean, everything trained at home IS supported.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
How would you track what your members train and where?
The where probably can't be done. The what just needs an API like EVE. For example, here is my trader in EVE:
(ignore the smattering of random skills - it took me a while to decide what I liked doing in game)
Edit: The algorithm would specifically look for unsupported skills by taking 'snapshots' of skills over time via the API.
Edit2: Apparently I forgot how to make links.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
How would you track what your members train and where?I believe so. As noted above, it would kind of become a way to guilt your current settlement into building a support structure for it or of planning to jump ship to a settlement that has it.Thanks Stephen!
While traits are inaccessible is it possible to train them further? Eg. my settlement doesn't support X, but I go and buy X to the next level at another settlement.
Ah, I was misinterpreting. Thanks for the clarification.
So that's a good way of predicting who is likely to jump ship: they have traits/skills/feats which keep going up and which aren't supported by your settlement. Basically if they keep training something they can't currently make use of and your settlement won't be supporting in the near future.
** spoiler omitted **
The where probably can't be done. The what just needs an API like EVE. For example, here is my trader in EVE:
http://eveboard.com/pilot/Jahnie_Ovaert
(ignore the smattering of random skills - it took me a while to decide what I liked doing in game)
Edit: The algorithm is specifically looking for unsupported skills by taking 'snapshots' of skills over time.
I can't see the page, but I think that I understand better. A data base of all characters that lists their trained skills?
I hope we don't have that. :(
Edit: I talk all sweet and nice, but if I am secretly an assassin, I wouldn't want that to be known. As an example.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If you are a member of a settlement, you gain training support for all the buildings the settlement has. If you are a member of a company, you gain training support for anything supported by their PoI.
Just to clarify:
You can go to any city and train using the facilities they have, at any point, regardless of which Settlement or Company you belong to (so long as you have the XP/money required).
In order to actually make use of the skills you have trained though, your Settlement/POI must support that training through support facilities of the proper tier.
Did I get that right?
Also, what will stop people from bouncing between Settlements to keep the clock ticking on multiple skillsets?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If you are a member of a settlement, you gain training support for all the buildings the settlement has. If you are a member of a company, you gain training support for anything supported by their PoI.Just to clarify, you can go to any city and train using the facilities they have, at any point, regardless of which Settlement or Company you belong to (so long as you have the XP/money required). In order to actually make use of the skills you have trained though, your Settlement/POI must support that training through support facilities of the proper tier.
Did I get that right?
That's how I've been interpreting it as well. Assuming of course that the settlement you train at allows outsiders to train at all.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Also, what will stop people from bouncing between Settlements to keep the clock ticking on multiple skillsets?Settlement recruiters.
"A guy who has a history of jumping ship once a month? That's just what we're looking for!"
Since this is desirable for a player, if there is a coalition of Settlements that each specialize on one or two archetypes, it is not inconceivable that these Settlements would allow members to hop as needed for training purposes. It would after all create a much stronger whole.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Since this is desirable for a player, if there is a coalition of Settlements that each specialize on one or two archetypes, it is not inconceivable that these Settlements would allow members to hop as needed for training purposes. It would after all create a much stronger whole.Also, what will stop people from bouncing between Settlements to keep the clock ticking on multiple skillsets?Settlement recruiters.
"A guy who has a history of jumping ship once a month? That's just what we're looking for!"
I was just answering with regards to hopping between arbitrary settlements.
If settlements were to coordinate training like this then players could exploit the hopping rules. Settlements which coordinate training in such a fashion will almost certainly be allied in some way (or even be part of the same nation) and at that point hopping is more of a formality compared to hopping between non-aligned settlements.
However, having the hopping may not be the most efficient way to do things. As an example, maybe the optimum for a nation is one central training settlement and all other settlements having only training support. Then everyone simply goes to that central settlement to train and no hopping is needed as they are supported. Training buildings take up a lot of space and a probably expensive, so an efficient nation will cut down on redundant training. (Obviously this is all speculation.)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...the settlement you train at allows outsiders to train at all.If we're given sufficient tools to distinguish "insider" from "outsider", we'll likely be fine.
I definitely hope that distinction is made. Would be kind of awful to have non-allies and even enemies using your resources against you.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If settlements were to coordinate training like this then players could exploit the hopping rules.
Right, I was wondering if such exploitation is to be allowed. If it was an undesired behavior they are trying to prevent, or simply a formality that players must observe.
However, having the hopping may not be the most efficient way to do things. As an example, maybe the optimum for a nation is one central training settlement and all other settlements having only training support.
It is my impression that one Settlement will not be able to support the DI necessary to accomplish such a thing.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Well that's certainly a pretty definitive answer to my question - thank you. And it looks like a great system to bring out synergies between settlements.
Next questions - can settlements set different prices for members, allies and non-members? Will the queue be gated in any way - or can anyone walk up and train at the site without needing any special permissions or approval? And (just for clarification's sake) will settlements only be able to build training and /or support structures that are within their alignment bounds - or will there be more leeway with the support structures?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If settlements were to coordinate training like this then players could exploit the hopping rules.Right, I was wondering if such exploitation is to be allowed. If it was an undesired behavior they are trying to prevent, or simply a formality that players must observe.
It is my impression that one Settlement will not be able to support the DI necessary to accomplish such a thing.
However, having the hopping may not be the most efficient way to do things. As an example, maybe the optimum for a nation is one central training settlement and all other settlements having only training support.
The hopping may not have something explicitly in place to prevent it. No rule set in any game will ever be perfect. But just because there's a loophole doesn't mean the loophole is worth using. Some settlements may not accept people who do it, various stigmas may be attached to it, it may be horribly inefficient, etc. (ie emergent behaviour may prevent it)
As for DI, make N training heavy settlements where N is determined by total training needs and DI limits. N could potentially be 1 if your settlement has doctrines like EVE. Instead of offering up everything throughout your nation find an efficient (but limited) set of skills needed for your army and support roles. Then instead of wasting the resources to supply training not needed, just supply what you specifically want in that doctrine. Eg. If your army is based on fighters and clerics while your non-combat residents are crafting only for the army's specific needs then you don't need to offer wizard training etc.
Or something else may be ideal for nations - without more info on DI, resource costs, and the amount of training provided it's hard to know the optimum. However, I expect that the optimum for many nations will be the minimum number of training buildings in order to minimize unnecessary expenses. Exceptions may occur for nations who sell training as a source of income.
|
Goblinworks Game Designer
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You can go to any city and train using the facilities they have, at any point, regardless of which Settlement or Company you belong to (so long as you have the XP/money required).
In order to actually make use of the skills you have trained though, your Settlement/POI must support that training through support facilities of the proper tier.
Did I get that right?
To the best of my knowledge, that's right.
Also, what will stop people from bouncing between Settlements to keep the clock ticking on multiple skillsets?
Part of the reason we've set it up this way is that programming would prefer to not have to run a bunch of long term timers on every player. So while a lot of the exact mechanics of how that timer works are a little unclear until we have some time to get it implemented, there will almost certainly be a limit to how many you can have running before earlier ones instantly complete (and that limit may be one). So it's conceivable that it may work to let you bounce between two settlements (that's not exactly intended, so we may look at that possibility more closely), but trying to bounce between three+ would probably not work.
Will POIs be able to support large training structures for class specific training? Or only the support structures.
PoIs I believe primarily train skills, rather than role-related feats. I'd try to remember to ask Tork tomorrow what else he has them set up to train and support.
Next questions - can settlements set different prices for members, allies and non-members?
TBD but probably yes.
Will the queue be gated in any way - or can anyone walk up and train at the site without needing any special permissions or approval?
TBD, probably with a lot of the decision based on how much we decide to trade ease of understanding settlement controls vs. fiddliness. I know Tork's dreading how complex the UI for settlement management may wind up :) .
And (just for clarification's sake) will settlements only be able to build training and /or support structures that are within their alignment bounds - or will there be more leeway with the support structures?
Dunno. I'll try to remember to ask Tork tomorrow.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The hopping may not have something explicitly in place to prevent it[...]
The question is simply if the point of not always having all of your training available, and those unsupported skills falling off after a month is meant to be a deterrent; if so, will hopping be mechanically discouraged further, or will using such a loophole simply be considered part of the emergent play.
As for DI, make N training heavy settlements where N is determined by total training needs [...]
A lot of that is a given for anyone planning settlements at this point. I was pointing out that a centralized (single settlement) training hub will not be feasible given the information we have so far. Yes, we will have to prioritize. Yes, we will have to rely on other settlements for training outside of our core classes. However, this also impacts how much DI will need to be spent supporting those lesser roles, as the multi-classing and other non-core class needs will still exist, even if they are not given priority.
The point of the hopping is that it would potentially eliminate the biggest concerns about allied settlements putting all of their eggs in one basket, so to speak. You would not need to even waste DI on more than a couple support structures, because you would be getting the benefit of up to four settlements' worth of training, all at once.
::Edit::
It sounds like this is undesired behavior, or at least undesired complexity though. So that is sort of an answer in itself.
Thanks Stephen for getting back to us on those clarifications.
Also, FWIW, I believe that a queue depth for skill grace period of one is more than adequate for what players would even need should hopping become a thing.
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
You can go to any city and train using the facilities they have, at any point, regardless of which Settlement or Company you belong to (so long as you have the XP/money required).
In order to actually make use of the skills you have trained though, your Settlement/POI must support that training through support facilities of the proper tier.
Did I get that right?
To the best of my knowledge, that's right.
I'm assuming that the owners of the facilities make the determination about whether or not you are allowed to use them, rather than anyone being able to use everyone's facilities.
|
CEO, Goblinworks
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
will using such a loophole simply be considered part of the emergent play.
I can answer this question because it's a general rule not a specific issue related to this system.
We're not a game where everything that is not forbidden is permitted. If you find a loophole, you shouldn't jump through it. Acceptable "Emergent play" is what happens when people use systems as intended to produce unexpected results. Figuring out how to neuter a planned limit is unacceptable.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
That is exactly what I would like to avoid. The reason I brought this particular issue up is to get clarification on whether it is anything more than a perceived loophole, or simply working around implemented mechanics.
What you said regarding the land rush, giving a clear 'spirit of the law' statement for us to abide by is exceedingly helpful for those who wish to see the game grow positively.
It is the kind of information we as a community could very much use when a new mechanic is put in place, or restrictions clarified.
To this end, should we simply assume that anything other than the reasons given along with the announcement are considered to be not as intended? (e.g. in this case 'give players a chance to find a new home before losing abilities' is intended and 'bouncing to keep skills alive' as not intended and therefor against the spirit of the idea)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I'm curious how the "spirit of intention" will impact mercenaries?
Won't mercenaries have to join settlements, for periods of war, in order to be considered part of the war party?
Would they not appear to be bouncing from settlement to settlement, and of course gaining access to skills / feats while they do so?
Yet this should not been seen as a loophole, or a corner case, it is standard mercenary practice.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It will still help us to be aware of when we are treading in a grey area. A quick self-check to make sure we believe we are not violating the spirit of the law.
I do not see temporarily moving among settlements during times of war as being against the spirit, because that still sounds like it is intended to happen, but for the right reasons.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The intention behind how I as a player direct my character may not be received as such. Sometimes the intention of the system is not self-evident. Intentions are irrelevant. Actions are not. If my character's actions go against system intentions as held by GW, even if these are not self-evident, then I may have discovered something about the game before anyone else. If that happens then I as a player will gladly pay the price, and then continue to play, hopefully wiser and with more skill.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Only one thing that bothers me in this system: If paying a monthly subscription to PFO practically means that one character gains xp, then in the case of an accident(settlement destroyed etc), we might not be able to use the skills we have payed for. Is this intended as part of the spirit of the game?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Only one thing that bothers me in this system: If paying a monthly subscription to PFO practically means that one character gains xp, then in the case of an accident(settlement destroyed etc), we might not be able to use the skills we have payed for. Is this intended as part of the spirit of the game?
You don't actually "lose" the skills and as of recent information, you have a month (30 days) to get into another supporting settlement or get back your own. It isn't totally crippling...
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
True true, but I'm doing some soul-searching with the help of a spirit guide...
It might be a feature that will put off some people, because even if the game becomes more important than real life, real life obligations cannot be left undone or unattended. This is why I am asking this question.
It's easy to see this feature as an implementation of a real life simulator, but does it achieve it's desired function, which might be getting new people interested and excited about Pathfinder Online.