Goblinworks Blog: The War of the Towers


Pathfinder Online

301 to 350 of 622 << first < prev | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | next > last >>
Goblin Squad Member

Cal B wrote:


Any "nice" settlement that uses their forces to help others instead of accumulating towers will also be putting themselves at a starting disadvantage.

Only if you think extra buildings are worth more than extra allies. This game is more about player interaction than number crunching.

Is the dark side stronger?
master Yoda wrote:
No, no, no! Quicker, easier, more seductive.

[disclaimer: purely personal opinion, not discussed anywhere yet]:

Since every settlement will focus on only 2 of 5+ classes, I would very much prefer two allied settlements with different training. Also in the OE game, having good allies and trading partners may be more important than a short head start on settlement upgrading.

also, once pvp windows of the largest groups go past 10 hours or so, then we can always form Aussie or EU based partisan groups to steal land while you sleep/work (and we'll obviously not ally with a settlement so we can set the 1hr pvp window to our lunchbreak). I don't think anyone is interested in having 2-3 megaguilds control most of the map.

Goblin Squad Member

<Magistry> Athansor wrote:
TEO Alexander Damocles wrote:
Doh, and the Keepers and Ozem's Vigil. Sorry guys, migraine slows down the old thinker. I owe you guys both a cookie once the game goes live.

Talnoguard would like a cookie.

White Chocolate Chip Macadamia Please.

::sigh:: I'm going to end up being the Starbucks of PFO at this rate......wait, what am I saying, I'll be fabulously wealthy!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Virgil Firecask wrote:
Lee Hammock wrote:
Honestly we don't really care at this stage what they look like. If we wanted to we could make this "War of the Taverns" but that doesn't sound as cool.
Maybe to you it doesn't sound cool, but I would love a "War of the Taverns" game.

Daaang!

I want a War of the Taverns so badly now!

"Give me a ale that requires a Constitution check!"

Goblin Squad Member

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Brutus Bellator wrote:


Daaang!
I want a War of the Taverns so badly now!

..and that's how threads turn into tavern brawls.

marketing PFO as a Tavern Defense MMO might be better than Tower Defense MMO though.

Goblin Squad Member

Crash_00 wrote:

The key point to remember is that each additional tower gives you less than the tower before it did. If you've got you six surrounding towers, a couple more towers, and are taking the starting towers from an "ally", you're gaining far less than they would from it. It's the opposite of a neighborly thing.

It's, it's almost as if towers have margin utility! Who'd a thunk it?

"The thief, Black Leaf, did not find the poison trap, and I declare her dead."

Goblin Squad Member

14 people marked this as a favorite.

To the Devs:
1) Thanks or doing this. I know there is a lot of sky-is-falling negativity from some people here, but contrary to Summersnow's dumb/spiteful claim, I know your motivation is to make EE a richer experience and more useful to long term development.

2) I particularly appreciate that you've given us a chance to practice. I see this as a training wheels (scaffolded) way to practice territory acquisition, alliance building, diplomacy, and the political arithmetic of making constrained choices.

3) One question that came up last night in TSV's chat was whether your score could be free-spent: do we get X points to spend as we please, or does our score qualify us for some sort of template of initial buildings?

4) Have you thought about upkeep costs at the start of OE? If a settlement is successful in the TW, could they be put in the position of being unable to maintain their initial suite of buildings?

To My Fellow Players:
1) Chill, please. Even if you don't like this, please try asking questions and thinking this through. Civilly and constructively engaging in dialogue is the best way to increase understanding and effect change, and offers the possibility of clearing up misunderstandings AND possibly prompting the Devs to think through something. Toombstone's response on page 6 is a great model for sharing concerns constructively.

2) Also maybe have a tiny bit of faith? I don't mean just accept everything that falls from the mouths of Devs--our job here is to constructively push back and engage. But for those of you freaking out, do you think that overnight Ryan, Lee etc. just went mental? These are pretty sharp people who have thought through very carefully how to solve the MMO problem and give us a long-term gaming solution, and they've engaged in dialogue with us in a way that I have never experienced before.

They've earned some trust.

"NO, NOT BLACK LEAF! NO, NO! I'M GOING TO DIE! Please don't make me quit the game! Somebody save me! You can't do this!"

Goblin Squad Member

+1 to the War of the Towers from me too. I think it is great that there is something to focus on, apart from the usual game-mechanics. This from someone who intends to craft, trade and harvest mostly but loves to witness all the political hustle and bustle (and at some point contribute to it in my own way).

Goblin Squad Member

Mbando wrote:


"The thief, Black Leaf, did not find the poison trap, and I declare her dead."

Soon, On a computerscreen near you

Also, +1 to your second post

Goblin Squad Member

Virgil Firecask wrote:
Lee Hammock wrote:
Honestly we don't really care at this stage what they look like. If we wanted to we could make this "War of the Taverns" but that doesn't sound as cool.
Maybe to you it doesn't sound cool, but I would love a "War of the Taverns" game.

Quite a few of Golgotha, Aeternum, and Freevale had a conversation and the consensus was that "War of the Taverns" is indeed MUCH cooler, both in concept and name.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The members of the UNC have expressed near universal approval for the War of Towers Blog. Those left out of that "universal" have not had the chance to speak with us on it yet.

Personally I give the blog +10!

I'm looking forward to those expansive settlements throwing their PvP window wider open than the smaller ones. This will open up more territory, of the potentially wealthier settlements, for FFA consequence free PvP.

My hope is that the system works do well that it extends into OE

Goblin Squad Member

You know, I had this idea back in the day when I was talking to the Crimson Commander of the Crimson Guard. Let's work together, we said to each other. If we both get a settlement, its better because a single generalized settlement isn't as good as two specialized settlements. Some months later, Aeternum and Golgotha founded the Empire of Xeilias. In those months, there were some bumpy dirt roads and some serious pathfinding going on.

UnNamed Company was a part of that as well. Would it work mechanically or not? No, okay, now what? They didn't want to run a settlement but we couldn't mechanically meet their needs. But they stuck by us, and we are grateful for that.

While we parted ways with Fidelis out of necessity, our friends over in Ozem's Vigil took them in without batting an eyelash. We wish them much success and hope they leave some for us... after all, we are neighbors at the moment.

And Freevale, you gentlemen (and I use that term loosely =P ) are my kinda folks. I look forward to tasting that "rocketfuel" mead of yours Gpunk.

It puts a smile on my face to know Golgotha and Aeternum made the right call and our allies and friends have done and are doing the same.

If you need allies... Come talk to Xeilias and the other Northern Coalition members. Freevale and Aragon. We've got several different walks of life in the Coalition. You can find one you like, or plant your own along side us knowing we won't stab you in the back. All we ask is you give us the same courtesy.

-Areks of Callambea

Goblin Squad Member

randomwalker wrote:
Cal B wrote:


Any "nice" settlement that uses their forces to help others instead of accumulating towers will also be putting themselves at a starting disadvantage.

Only if you think extra buildings are worth more than extra allies. This game is more about player interaction than number crunching.

Well said. I this is a really important point, and it gets missed in all of the number crunching.


This tower proposal is completely idiotic. Not only are they destroying the plans for anyone but the top 10 settlements, they are relegating gathering and crafting to alts only and low skill ones at that. With PvP determining training only, the only trainging will go to PvP. Then the economy fails because no one can gather resources, no one can train gathering / crafting because its not available, and the people who were interested in primary gather / crafter choose not to play. So then it will go the route of the MMO and switch to monster drop equipment or purchased with PvP "Points". I was really looking forward to EE launch even with the limitations of prebeta "minimal viable product". Planning on my gatherer with some future ranger aspirations has just died.

I am fine with open world PvP. Its a basic of a good economy and the cheapest time/money investment for a small company. BUT it must be balanced by equivalent rewards for the gatherer / crafter types. Even before this I could have been regularry ganked while gathering resources, but would still have been able to progress up my skills and helped to build up a company / settlement. Now it sounds like a suck fest and the mentality created will just continue after the fact.

Liberty's Edge Goblin Squad Member

Malphris wrote:
With PvP determining training only, the only trainging will go to PvP. Then the economy fails because no one can gather resources, no one can train gathering / crafting because its not available, and the people who were interested in primary gather / crafter choose not to play.

Yep... because the groups going into battle with rocks and sticks will do so very well against those who have fine crafted armor and weapons.

Or... maybe you need to take a step back and rethink this a bit?

Goblin Squad Member

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Yep. If you don't think crafting is an important part of successful PVP, you're going to be badly surprised when a gang half your size beats you with gear three times as good as yours.

"Amateurs talk about tactics, but professionals study logistics."

Goblin Squad Member

Not to mention you can still train from NPC settlements if you want.


To Craft fine armor and weapons will take training the respective skills and acquiring the materials. By making PvP the only input into advancing the available training, it selects for PvP. Your example of 1/2 party with 3 times as good gear, it does not match the parameters. To get the skills to make the better gear would require already being significantly larger than the opponent.
Its a king of the hill reward system, the process protects those on top and ensures they stay on top. Obviously, the large group wants better equipment sure. But, if the system ensures the smaller challenger can not get even equivalent equipment, then better equipment is not really necessary. "Rocks and sticks" WILL work if the opponent does not have them. (Not that it will be that bad, but the concept is valid)

Goblin Squad Member

My favorite two parts about this wrinkle:

-It removes the illusion you could have a settlement with your 6 buddies. You must cluster with other companies and function within something on the order of 36+ people

-You have to make a really interesting choice in what training you want to support: Any two roles + the associated crafts, or full craft support. Talk about political arithmetic and meaningful choices.

"Debbie, your cleric has been raised to the 8th level. I think it's time that you learn how to really cast spells."

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Malphris wrote:

To Craft fine armor and weapons will take training the respective skills and acquiring the materials. By making PvP the only input into advancing the available training, it selects for PvP. Your example of 1/2 party with 3 times as good gear, it does not match the parameters. To get the skills to make the better gear would require already being significantly larger than the opponent.

Its a king of the hill reward system, the process protects those on top and ensures they stay on top. Obviously, the large group wants better equipment sure. But, if the system ensures the smaller challenger can not get even equivalent equipment, then better equipment is not really necessary. "Rocks and sticks" WILL work if the opponent does not have them. (Not that it will be that bad, but the concept is valid)

So spot on. We at Ozem's Vigil are fully planning on taking over the world with buck-nekked clerics and fighters. Yep, that's our plan.

"You mean you're going to teach me how to have the real power?"

Goblin Squad Member

If you could GW please clarify the reasons behind the "SUPPORT" aspect of the settlement. My previous understanding was that if my settlement did not have training I wanted I could search other friendly towns and pay to get it there, and that was that. Now with this support element it seem even if I am trained I can not use my new powers, from the discussions I have read. This seems weird. A SETTLEMENT stops you from losing YOUR powers????

Goblin Squad Member

Saint Caleth wrote:
...send all the characters of a certain class packing from their home at a certian level because the settlement cannot support their skill use.

By the time people have earned enough experience-over time to reach high levels of skill, we'll be done with the Tower War. At that point, Settlements will be able to build support buildings as needed by their populations.

No, Settlements won't be able to support every Role in the game to the highest reaches of that Role's Abilities, but that's what friends and allies are for. Your Mage may live at, train in, and be supported by Elkhaven, but your Paladin friend might live at and receive his services from Ozem's Vigil; nothing keeps the two of you from adventuring together, and you may even belong to the same secondary or tertiary Companies.

Goblin Squad Member

Grelf wrote:
...clarify the reasons behind the "SUPPORT" aspect of the settlement.

My understanding is that support's intended to keep us anchored to Settlements...any Settlement. Your abilities won't degrade immediately upon leaving a Settlement that used to support you, or upon training if your current Settlement can't support you; the timing's more like 30 days to losing the benefits of that unsupported Ability.

Those 30 days are deliberately to allow you--and to encourage you--to take action. You might find a new Settlement that can support you, you might persuade your Settlement to build the appropriate building, or you might persuade others to train the same Ability to increase the likelihood your Settlement will see the utility of supporting you; I'm sure there'll be other ideas as well, but those are the first that came to mind.

There's also the possibility that, with proper planning, one could Kwai Chang Caine across the world, from Settlement to Settlement, doing what's needed in exchange for support.

Goblin Squad Member

Grelf wrote:
A SETTLEMENT stops you from losing YOUR powers????

Yes- this is not a new mechanic. In order to maintain use of any advanced training, you will have to be in a settlement which either offers that training (medium to large building), or at least supports that training (small building). The idea is that support buildings let you practice what you already know so it doesn't get rusty.

If you leave your settlement or your settlement is destroyed, you will have a time period- they suggested a month- to find a new settlement which supports your skills, before they become inactive.

The purpose of this mechanic is to make sure that belonging to a high quality settlement is important in an ongoing sense. Without something along these lines, someone could train up some advanced skills and then be immune to the consequences of low reputation play. Murderhoboville would fill up with highly trained characters who had happily destroyed all their reputation once they had all the training they wanted, and the only consequence would be an inability to train *new* skills. But by requiring support structures to maintain skills, someone who follows that path will see their skills decay because Murderhoboville cannot build advanced support.

Goblin Squad Member

I plan on being aligned with a settlement. But If I am understanding this, a settlement that doesn't train a class can still support a class up to whatever level, if they have the, probably cheaper, support structure upgraded to the appropriate lv?

Goblin Squad Member

@Grelf

Yep. You might offer training for 2 or 3 roles but you can support 6.

Goblin Squad Member

Ok, thanks for the insight.

Goblin Squad Member

Exactly. And the info we've been given about the Towers phase is that settlements will choose to specialize in either 2 of the 4 combat roles, or in crafting, but that they will have Support for all 7 available roles at a slightly lower level than their specialized roles.

Once we get past Towers into the real settlement design game, city planners will have to make hard choices about what roles they will be able to build support for, and which roles they'll have to triage due to needing the footprint for something else.

Goblin Squad Member

This system of support worries me (The comment that you could train lvl 7 but only support lvl 5 of the other classes). I understand the need to focus settlements, but in the long term a settlement will want a good mix of classes. Not being able to have high levels of every class living there can be a issue. And the support system seems to force people of certain classes to want to leave their cities to places that can hold them. Potentially breaking apart groups logistically, in the worse case it can push people to jump settlement to settlement as the support may not hold them.

My understanding is that nations will solve this. So it becomes a matter of will the support levels be tame enough to avoid driving people to that in EE.

This is what I see happening:
Morphius the wizard travels to learn scorching ray.
Morphius gets the Ray!
Morphius gets home and loses ray cause his settlement is crafting based...
Morphius quits company and moves so he can keep his ray.
The other combat classes get this as well and leave, now the crafters are open to attack.
Supporting all the roles is a good start. But maintaining at a level or 2 lower promotes segregation of classes by settlement.

Goblin Squad Member

Marlagram wrote:

Well after getting some sleep I can think more coherently. Here are my observations – please correct me where I'm wrong.

At the day One in EE we will have some prefab settlements tuned to 2 roles out of 6 (Fighter, Cleric, Wizard, Rogue, Expert, Commoner).

Well that increases to 2 roles out of 14. It has been explained that there is not a generic cleric training center, but rater a separate temple and training for each(9) god. If a settlement chooses to have a cleric training center, it has to decide which one god that will be. I know of only one settlement which has made that choice (for Desna). For the other settlements, clerics need to find out NOW, if they will be supported by their settlement or if they need to find another settlement for their training.

It is not even clear how support for clerics will work. If cleric of a god is trained at a settlement, which gods are supported?

Clerics seem really %*&)ed by this.

Goblin Squad Member

Rift Nasika wrote:
Morphius quits company and moves so he can keep his ray.

I think of it as "Morphius can join the Settlement next door that's besties with his former craft-home, but that has a shiny new Wizard Tower to blow things up in without upsetting the wood-carvers. It's only a few minutes down the road, and he can stop by to pick up his new staff as soon as it's ready.

He then tests his new staff, with some friends, on that group of bandits that approached the Mayor about a payoff. New and old Settlements both benefit."

Goblin Squad Member

Lam, I think the God part is about domains, not general clerical skills.

Goblin Squad Member

Note: all of this commentary refers to post-cataclysm city planning, not Towers phase settlement templates.

Quote:
...large-plot cathedrals are intended to support multiple deities."

-Stephen Cheney

City planners will be able to choose to build a smaller church dedicated to a single god, or a larger footprint clerical center with pantheistic support. It's reasonable to think that a single-deity church will be able to train and support all generic cleric abilities; it would just be deity-specific (and possibly alignment or domain specific) powers that would be unsupported by a church of the wrong god.

Also, take a look at this post where we're given some sample city plans for a max DI settlement:

Quote:

Crafting Focused: This settlement focuses on crafting, refining, harvesting, and trade, almost to the exclusion of everything else.

It trains 3 classes and supports 4 more (for a total of 7 supported).
It supports 2 feat schools.
It trains 12 craft skills.
It trains 7 trade skills.
It trains 12 Skills.

Class Training Focused: This settlement focuses on class training only.

It trains 9 classes and supports 3 more (for a total of 12 supported).
It supports 5 feat schools.
It trains 1 craft skill.
It trains 5 trade skills.
It trains 15 Skills.

Balanced Settlement: This is what I imagine a settlement who is trying to cover their bases will do. Its what I'd do, basically ;)

It trains 7 classes and supports 3 more (for a total of 10 supported).
It supports 4 feat schools.
It trains 6 craft skill.
It trains 5 trade skills.
It trains 12 Skills.

So even that crafting focused town will be able to support 7 different combat roles. Convince your leadership that wizards should be one of them.

Goblin Squad Member

It seems to me that most of the people freaking out about this blog are folks that don't really have a grasp of the game mechanics that GW has been planning on implementing into PFO all along.

I don't really see how the Towers are all the different from Points of Interest. They allow control of a hex, only one per company, they have a vulnerability window, they improve the settlement that their owning company is affiliated with.

Most importantly they provide meaningful PvP.

They worked hard to implement this for us way earlier than was expected. Do you know what the beginning of EE would be like without the war of towers? Lots of random PvP. Every where. If you think you might have problems gathering resources and exploring now, think about what it would be like if the PvPers didn't have any source of meaningful PvP. I am one of those dreaded PvPers, I revel in the challenge of trying to outmatch another human being instead of a scripted creature. The Towers are going to provide a way for me to sake my thirst for that challenge. This is a good thing, trust me.

As far as small companies not being able to run a successful settlement on their own... they were never supposed to be able to do that. The intended goal from the beginning was to have multiple good sized, 30~50 players, companies supporting a settlement. Yes it sucks that at the moment it is difficult to communicate with anyone and get them to join your settlement, that is a challenge we are all facing. Once EE starts it will be a lot easier since we will actually be in the game.

I am very happy about this development. Thank you GW.

Goblin Squad Member

Cal B wrote:
Lee Hammock wrote:
Settlements will basically get a "Score" based on their progress and will get an adjusted starting position based on their average tower holdings over the course of the War of Towers and will get starting buildings in their settlement based on this. This won't be a one to one conversion, like we controlled 8 hexes so now we control 8 hexes. It will be more like we controlled 8 hexes so now we have a keep, a bank, a level 1 wizard facility, a level fighter facility, a level 1 war wizard facility, a level 1 dreadnaught facility, etc, instead of just a keep.

So this does, in fact, mean real, enduring, consequences to settlements for PvP results beginning on Day 1 of EE.

More towers = more starting buildings after the great destruction and denying your opponents towers will put them at a disadvantage after the the great destruction.

Any "nice" settlement that uses their forces to help others instead of accumulating towers will also be putting themselves at a starting disadvantage.

I know I am catching up on this thread but I wanted to ask directly to this post here.

If you are "nice" and helping other, good for you, but why not secure a tower or two for yourself? After all, how can you be if you are weak and powerless?

Also, if I am correct, each company can only hold 1 tower each, which means in order to hold multiple towers, you will need multiple companies. So small settlements of only 1 or 2 companies could only hold 1 or 2 towers anyway. Even TEO and other big settlements are being forced to break up into smaller ones to grab several towers.

The main point that is being said here is NOT that PVP is being rewarded and those not wanting to engage in PVP from day 1 will be gimped, but instead rewards are being given to those who support multiple companies in their settlements by giving the most Starting buildings to the larger of the settlements. Larger settlement means more people means there should be more buildings and more powerful of a settlement.

Think about it in RL. New York is larger than Groton, CT and therefore it is considered more powerful. More powerful in that there are more buildings, more specialized buildings, more people, more to do, ect. The same applies in PFO. Why would a settlement of 10 people be able to be more powerful and offer better training than a settlement of 100?

Again, the point of all of this is to grow your settlement and be one of the "big towns." If you don't want to do that, then accept that you will be less powerful.

Goblin Squad Member

Grelf wrote:
A SETTLEMENT stops you from losing YOUR powers????
Your character sheet is a combination of your character and your character's Settlement. Lose the Settlement, and the character becomes less powerful.

__________________________________________________________________ _____

Rift Nasika wrote:

This is what I see happening:

Morphius the wizard travels to learn scorching ray.
Morphius gets the Ray!
Morphius gets home and loses ray cause his settlement is crafting based...
Morphius quits company and moves so he can keep his ray.

Remember that your Company can build a POI that supports your Role. So, even if your Settlement doesn't support Scorching Ray, if you're a Member of a Company that does, you can stay in your Settlement.

Goblin Squad Member

3 people marked this as a favorite.

First off, THIS IS TEMPORARY!

If you look at what the devs have said, REAL settlement will be in the game at six months after EE launches. They said 1-2 months before hand we will have PoIs to help build the infrastructure and supply lines for settlements. With all of this in hand, most likely the Towers game will only be up 4-5 months, if that.

The towers game allows for you all to cement lasting alliances, friendships, and working partnerships. A lot of you are complaining that you will be trampled by the larger groups taking towers and pushing everyone else out of the way. I don't think this is the case, let us look at some MATH.

There are 320 Towers on the EE Map, and 33 Settlements, that is enough, evenly for 23 settlements to have 10, and 10 settlements to have 9. Alright, so lets say that the top 10, as have been mentioned so many times "take over the map" and push everyone away:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------

Going with 20 as the max, from what they have said. That is EXACTLY 16 groups that could hold 20 towers, not 10, roughly half of the starting settlements. Now, mind you, you are probably looking at a 24 hour PvP window for 20th level Training, that you can't use for 2.5 years, and the towers game will be over in 3-5 months. Even if you add in the bonus you will get once the real Settlements come into play, do you really think rolling over potential allies to get a SMALL head start is worth it? I mean Lee Mentioned having several Level I buildings for having held 8 towers....there are 5-6 levels to some buildings, each costing more and more resources.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------

Now for you complaining about crafting, they said that 2 of 4 classes will be supported, because there is only 4 classes in the game right now. The 3 classes that deal with crafting, refining, administration, gathering, building, etc aren't finished yet. They said that each settlement would have some of those skill available, so everyone will be even on that front.

Also, I want to mention that it is in the BEST interest of everyone to keep their crafters not only safe, but well supplied. The Devs have gone out of their way in making mechanics that support the long term viability of crafters and crafting in this game, and to that end, gear and gear upkeep is extremely important.

A lot of the worries I see here, I don't think have as much merit as is being claimed. The intent of the game was to make us work together in large groups for meaningful interaction with saying that, I don't think it is too much to ask for groups to band together towards making these settlements. Small niche groups aren't going to find a home of their own, until everyone can take settlements outside of the top 33.

Furthermore, there will ONLY be 33 settlements for the first 6 months of the game! That means if you make yourself stand out enough in your ideals, personality, and what you offer, the incoming 8-10k people over the course of the first 6 months should end up choosing you. Training, Taxes, and Trade aren't the end all be all of why we choose where we choose. As a matter of fact this community has a HUGE roleplaying population, due to the TT, and for that alone, I think some of these smaller groups will grow.

If you feel like you are too small, and you need support, I suggest you make friends with those around you. This game is moving towards alliance and nations, and the Tower game is just facilitating that faster. The Northern Coalition and the Roseblood Accord are two groups you can join for friendship and support, both have internal alliances separate from the NC and RA that you might be able to join, and there are plenty in both groups looking to lay the ground work for something larger and more permanent. If neither one of those groups, or any members in those groups look appealing to deal with, then start your own independent group, much like Ozem's Vigil is attempting. If you instead want to stay extremely neutral, you could do what Thod's Friends are doing.

Most importantly, everyone has options, and there are so many settlements out there to support so many different styles of play, with a MAJORITY of them being non-hostile, that people are going to find what they are looking for. Hell, even the Hostile groups have said they only plan to expand so far...

Goblin Squad Member

TEO Cheatle wrote:
...even the Hostile groups have said they only plan to expand so far...

...and if they plan to expand beyond so far, they'll have logistical hurdles to deal with that non-hostile Settlements can avoid by keeping their interests closer to home. In the real world, defence is often "easier" than offence; perhaps GW's thinking about that for us as well.

I'm sure defenders won't be allowed overwhelming advantages, but, with proper planning, training, morale, and friends, even small advantages can win the day.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

There's a catchup effect in play already; every company that is associated with a settlement that has lots of towers has a big vulnerability window, and they need to keep anyone from taking their tower during the entire window. A company that is associated with a settlement that only supports low-level skills only need defend their tower for a short time.

Goblin Squad Member

I'm catching up on 338 posts...

"Guurzak"But all of those alts are completely untrained. If a character with a couple of weeks of training isn't powerful enough to hold off dozens of day-0 noobs, then Ryan has failed to learn the lesson taught by Professor A Thousand Goons In Rifters. [/QUOTE wrote:

I HOPE this happens during the WoT (my bet is on Aragon and "testing", complete with airquotes). To find out what the effective goon ratio is in the mechanics and adjust it to something reasonable (unreasonable as a main strategy).

teribithia9 wrote:
I was actually looking forward to having a couple of months to tool around and learn the game and the lay of the land/resources of whatever settlement we end up in. Having to suddenly defend several towers on a daily basis from capture or lose the ability to train anything in our settlement is pretty much exactly what I didn't want to do. I just hope those of us who wanted to be pve and crafting focused don't have to spend all of our time in defense of these towers and end up having no time to accomplish what we actually want to in game.

You're still going to be gathering and crafting just like the OE game but without free-roaming bored pvp'ers now. As for spending all your time defending towers, only during the windows. Also with no combat skills there won't be a high demand for crafters during the pvp windows; POSSIBLY just bodies to recap a tower as the combatants chase hostiles out of the hex.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Malphris wrote:

To Craft fine armor and weapons will take training the respective skills and acquiring the materials. By making PvP the only input into advancing the available training, it selects for PvP. Your example of 1/2 party with 3 times as good gear, it does not match the parameters. To get the skills to make the better gear would require already being significantly larger than the opponent.

Its a king of the hill reward system, the process protects those on top and ensures they stay on top. Obviously, the large group wants better equipment sure. But, if the system ensures the smaller challenger can not get even equivalent equipment, then better equipment is not really necessary. "Rocks and sticks" WILL work if the opponent does not have them. (Not that it will be that bad, but the concept is valid)

It can not be said enough. You don't want to PVP, fine. Focus on crafting and make an alliance, or at least some agreement, with a PVP focused group where they protect you while you cap some towers, and you provide them with gear to make them better. Win Win for everyone.

Why is that so hard to see??

Goblin Squad Member

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Because themepark MMO customs don't cover such things, and it never even comes up in tabletop.

Those new to the environment shouldn't be faulted for everything feeling unfamiliar. At the same time, I ask those same people to trust more experienced sandboxers' explanations of why the world is not crumbling helplessly into a vast pit of lava at each new development.

Goblinworks Game Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Yebng wrote:

I asked this once but it got buried.

What if you belong to multiple companies?

Will you always count as your primary or once your primary has a tower under control if you stand in another capture circle are you gaining points for your secondary?

Can a group be in 3 companies all tied to the same settlement, thus having 1 group (if its large enough) pull 3 towers (one for the primary company, one for the secondary company, and one for their third company)?

edit-great minds warstein...

For the duration of the War of the Towers characters will only be able to be members of ONE company.

In the long run players can be members of 3 companies, but the War of the Towers will be over by then.

Goblin Squad Member

Tork Shaw wrote:

For the duration of the War of the Towers characters will only be able to be members of ONE company.

In the long run players can be members of 3 companies, but the War of the Towers will be over by then.

Makes sense, thank you for clearing that up.

Goblinworks Game Designer

TEO Pino wrote:
If a company controls a tower, can they 'release' it, and make it uncontrolled ( with all the fun that entails ) until it is claimed anew ?

Yupyup. They can indeed. There is a 'cooldown' on when a released tower becomes eligible for recapture.

Goblin Squad Member

Tork Shaw wrote:

For the duration of the War of the Towers characters will only be able to be members of ONE company.

In the long run players can be members of 3 companies, but the War of the Towers will be over by then.

Well, that was unexpected and changes quite a bit of planning.

You may want to put that in the blog, because that is a very significant change to how things were set up.

Goblin Squad Member

Tork Shaw wrote:
TEO Pino wrote:
If a company controls a tower, can they 'release' it, and make it uncontrolled ( with all the fun that entails ) until it is claimed anew ?
Yupyup. They can indeed. There is a 'cooldown' on when a released tower becomes eligible for recapture.

What is to keep the company controlling the tower from releasing control of it, which makes the hex a rep free kill zone, then taking control of it again as soon as the cool down is finished?

Seems like the pvp rep free kill zone (which in my mind is the most disturbing part about these towers) can basically be kept up indefinitely as long as the company wants simply by cycling control of the tower as often as they want.

Goblin Squad Member

TEO Alexander Damocles wrote:
You may want to put that in the blog...

The difficulty I see with that is people have already read the blog, and, unfortunately, changes aren't likely to be well-noticed. I'm uncertain how best to get this apparent news out, so we perhaps all need to circulate it as well as we each can.

Goblinworks Game Designer

Tuffon wrote:
Tork Shaw wrote:
TEO Pino wrote:
If a company controls a tower, can they 'release' it, and make it uncontrolled ( with all the fun that entails ) until it is claimed anew ?
Yupyup. They can indeed. There is a 'cooldown' on when a released tower becomes eligible for recapture.

What is to keep the company controlling the tower from releasing control of it, which makes the hex a rep free kill zone, then taking control of it again as soon as the cool down is finished?

Seems like the pvp rep free kill zone (which in my mind is the most disturbing part about these towers) can basically be kept up indefinitely as long as the company wants simply by cycling control of the tower as often as they want.

I could have been clearer there - while a tower is not eligible for capture (because its PvP window is closed or because it is on 'cooldown') its parent hex is NOT PvP permitted.

Goblin Squad Member

I would imagine that once released the settlement no longer receives support for the tower and all are notified that the tower will be open for capture at a certain time(not unlike a window) giving free companies time to get to it. This also allows unwilling participates time to vacate the area. Its like a war zone, Innocents will die if around it.

Goblin Squad Member

How frequently is the "PVP window is open based on how many towers you have" factor recalculated? If it's immediately upon taking or losing a tower, we need to react one way; if it's each day at midnight (or the beginning of Redmond office-hours), another.

301 to 350 of 622 << first < prev | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Paizo / Licensed Products / Digital Games / Pathfinder Online / Goblinworks Blog: The War of the Towers All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.