Should starfall hexes be FFA?


Pathfinder Online

51 to 100 of 623 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Goblin Squad Member

Easy guys. Just throwing out a compromise. Since you are unwilling, I will put my opinion as: No thanks. There are numerous opportunities for penalty free PVP. All others should involve the system working as designed.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Bluddwolf wrote:
I can say the same about choosing not to invest in survival, combat or PVP skills and then trying to harvest the most valuable resources in the game. It is a meaningful choice when a player accepts comparative weakness in exchange for access to greater wealth.

Here's a quote from Ryan responding to someone complaining about having to have a lot of guards to gather in the wild (Blog thread "Screaming for Vengeance"):

Flexie wrote:
-for each crafter going out of the settlement hex to gather resources you would need several people protecting the crafter and mining expedition
Ryan Dancey wrote:
We absolutely want this to happen.
Flexie wrote:
-still be overwhelmed by the evil players.
Ryan Dancey wrote:
Your guards suck, your logistics suck, your command & control sucks, and you need to rethink your operational plan if this keeps happening. The harvesters always have the biggest advantage: They can simply go somewhere else if a particular area becomes too dangerous.

It is a huge entry with Ryan responding to several points brought up by player Flexie. Damn funny stuff though. I guess we can expect it, cause Ryan is sure advocating for that sort of harvesting arrangement. (If you ever mined one unit of Veldspar in EVE, you get it.)

Goblin Squad Member

My take on innocence in Open World PVP MMOs:

Tool "Intolerance wrote:

I don't wanna' be hostile.
I don't wanna' be dismal.
And I don't wanna' rot in an apathetic existence.
See I wanna' believe you,
And I wanted to trust you,
And I wanna' have faith to put away the dagger.

But you lie, cheat, and steal.
And yet I tolerate you?

Veil of virtue hung to hide your method
While I smile and laugh and dance and sing your praise and glory.
Shroud of virtue hung to mask your stigma as I smile and laugh and dance
and sing your glory,

while you lie, cheat, and steal.
How can I tolerate you?

Our guilt, our blame, I've been far too sympathetic.
Our blood, our fault, I've been far too sympathetic.

I am not innocent.
You are not innocent.
No one is innocent.

You lie, cheat, and steal.
How can I tolerate you?

I will not tolerate you.
I will go down beside you
I must go down beside you
No one is innocent.


Hardin, can you format those quotes? I'm having trouble telling who's saying what. :P

Goblin Squad Member

Hardin Steele wrote:


Here's a quote from Ryan responding to someone complaining about having to have a lot of guards to gather in the wild (Blog thread "Screaming for Vengeance"):

Quote:

-for each crafter going out of the settlement hex to gather resources you would need several people protecting the crafter and mining expedition

Ryan-We absolutely want this to happen.

Quote:

still be overwhelmed by the evil players.

Ryan-Your guards suck, your logistics suck, your command & control sucks, and you need to rethink your operational plan if this keeps happening. The harvesters always have the biggest advantage: They can simply go somewhere else if a particular area becomes too dangerous.

Exactly this. If FFA PvP is too dangerous, go somewhere else or find folks who make it safe enough for you to exploit. Harvesters can always go somewhere else, where they don't need guards.

But they should need guards! And those guards shouldn't suck! And if they do, they should lose! And then they should get better! We should be using contracts! Rare stuff should be rare! =)

Goblin Squad Member

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Hahahahaah someone seriously quoted Tool.

I'm dying here :)

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Personally, I feel that these lyrics really capture my thoughts on PvP;

Quote:

I'm the scatman

Ski bi di bi di do bap do
Do bam do

Bada bwi ba ba bada bo
Baba ba da bo
Bwi ba ba ba do [x2]

Some deep stuff there, man.


Bringslite of Fidelis wrote:
Easy guys.

I refuse to take it easy.

*Rips phone book in two*

Quote:
Just throwing out a compromise.

It's not really a compromise. You're saying, "Scrap the Brokenlands and make a PvP-only minigame." :P

Goblin Squad Member

I had a thread awhile back where I stated my belief that prior postings seemed to assert that there will be FFA, consequence-free pvp hexes in the game at some point. The answer, from Mr. Dancey himself, was that was not the case. 'Screaming for Vengeance' is a relatively old blog, in PFO terms. What he meant was that there would be something like 'far from settlements and the npc marshalls' hexes where peeps will be willing to take rep hits for valuable stuff.

Goblin Squad Member

Sepherum wrote:
I had a thread awhile back where I stated my belief that prior postings seemed to assert that there will be FFA, consequence-free pvp hexes in the game at some point. The answer, from Mr. Dancey himself, was that was not the case. 'Screaming for Vengeance' is a relatively old blog, in PFO terms. What he meant was that there would be something like 'far from settlements and the npc marshalls' hexes where peeps will be willing to take rep hits for valuable stuff.

Sounds like Ryan contradicted himself, not the first time and won't be the last. He may have also been throwing up a trial balloon, to gauge reactions on the forums.

At this early, and yes it is actually very early, I would rule nothing in or out at this time.

Goblin Squad Member

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Gol Phyllain wrote:
All that's going to come out of this thread is all the PVE people will go " I wan't you to be nerfed into the ground for looking at me funny, let alone killing me." and the PVP groups will go " This sounds like a decent idea."

Exaggerating the opposing viewpoint into absurdity while minimizing your own is a cheap tactic.

How about the PvE people will say "we believe the existing reputation/alignment system is adequate to retain meaningful interaction"? That's certainly closer to my opinion.

Is yours "How dare you suggest I should be penalized for killing whomever I wish wherever I can"? Because while that is how some PvP folks come across, I wouldn't suggest the average PvP proponent is that vehement.

Kobold Cleaver wrote:
Second, there is going to be slaughter in the hex no matter what. People want that starmetal. Entire feuds and even wars will be fought over a Brokenlands hex. Bandits will camp the area within and nearby. Monsters will be everywhere.
Kobold Cleaver wrote:

My point is that you and your PvP-detesting brethren are not going to be safe in the hex no matter what. There are only about five Brokenlands hexes in the entire world—if you hate PvP, you'll avoid them and trade with PvPers for the precious resource.

That will be true regardless of whether Guurzak's ambitious idea somehow takes root.

Exactly. Without changing anything at all, PvP players are able to kill anywhere they want. They just need to determine whether the stuff they're stealing is worth the price. PvE players will either hire guards or get killed because fruit that hangs too low will get picked by somebody.

Aet Areks Kel'Goran wrote:
People with this whole concept of "Everyone should just leave me alone and let me craft and harvest and trade and do my own thing" need to wake up. You are going to have to interact with people, some you like, some you might not. Not all of those experiences will be pleasant for everyone.

People with this whole concept of "People who don't like PvP want to keep decent folk like us from doing what we want" need to wake up. you are going to have to interact with people, some you'll kill, some you might not. Not all of those experiences will be fatal for anyone.

I haven't seen anybody in this thread suggest PvP should be eliminated from anywhere on the map. If you're absolutely determined to go murder miners and farmers, by all means, play the game your way. But if the only way that will give you meaning or value is if the consequences are removed, I suggest it's a crap way to play.

Goblin Squad Member

Sepherum wrote:
I had a thread awhile back where I stated my belief that prior postings seemed to assert that there will be FFA, consequence-free pvp hexes in the game at some point. The answer, from Mr. Dancey himself, was that was not the case. 'Screaming for Vengeance' is a relatively old blog, in PFO terms. What he meant was that there would be something like 'far from settlements and the npc marshalls' hexes where peeps will be willing to take rep hits for valuable stuff.

I found this thread where Ryan said "there has been no discussion as a group" about this option, which is a far cry from "we will have no such thing."

Goblin Squad Member

First, I'm not a PvPer. For some reason I always feel the need to stress that when jumping into PvP threads, likely because I'm more than ready to hear that my position is flawed because of a lack of knowledge about the subject. Having stated such...

My question - how can FFA zones where there is nothing worthwhile to fight over be all that meaningful? Isn't having a space for no other purpose but reputation free PvP, especially way out in the wilderness, rather less meaningful than fighting over something valuable?

Personally, I would love something similar to what Hardin mentions - some way to have consensual, rep-free PvP, but not in an out-of-the-way place. I know Ryan is not thrilled with dueling (partly because of people constantly spamming you to duel), but what if in a particular location, such as a gladiator arena, fighting pit, or even a practice yard? Then the consensual, rep-free PvP could be used for sport, for practice, entertainment, weekly competitions, etc. I seem to recall some issue with betting in MMOs. even with in-game gold, but the idea of having some seedy spokesman covering wagers on who can best his champion would be great fun.

Goblin Squad Member

EoX Hobs wrote:
My question - how can FFA zones where there is nothing worthwhile to fight over be all that meaningful? Isn't having a space for no other purpose but reputation free PvP, especially way out in the wilderness, rather less meaningful than fighting over something valuable?

Why did the Jets and the Sharks always fight in an empty parking lot?

Goblin Squad Member

Cheaper to stage?

Goblin Squad Member

I've started a coalition to work toward controlling monster escalations in our region. Now a group wants to make it so that if I enter the hex where the escalations are most likely to start, whether or not I am harvesting resources, I am a free target for them, simply for being in that hex. It would put me in the position where if I choose to avoid PvP, I can no longer exercise a primary role-playing goal I've set for my character.

Goblin Squad Member

<Flask> Ulf Stonepate wrote:

People with this whole concept of "People who don't like PvP want to keep decent folk like us from doing what we want" need to wake up. you are going to have to interact with people, some you'll kill, some you might not. Not all of those experiences will be fatal for anyone.

I haven't seen anybody in this thread suggest PvP should be eliminated from anywhere on the map. If you're absolutely determined to go murder miners and farmers, by all means, play the game your way. But if the only way that will give you meaning or value is if the consequences are removed, I suggest it's a crap way to play.

No, but what we have seen suggested is that the most valuable resources in the game be just as easy to get, though less common, than common materials. Not meaningful.

Or we could say it is just as meaningful as raid gear vs non-raid gear... which in the end, is controlled all by chance... like sky metal.

How do you make an area in a PvP sandbox game more dangerous thus increasing the difficulty of acquiring the most precious of materials? Lesson the penalties for PvP, so PvP happens more frequently. More people dying, more guards getting hired, less rare material getting harvested.

Making rare resources, truly rare. That is what this is truly about. Making the acquisition of rare materials a significant challenge requiring substantial expenditure and personnel power. Maybe FFA isn't the way to go, maybe its with penalties marginalized.

And as you haven't seen anyone say that PvP should be removed, I haven't seen anyone suggesting every hex should be FFA.

You can spin this as people wanting to kill harvesters all you want. That's not what this is about. Its about making it substantially more difficult to acquire the rarest of resources.

I would be open to hear other ideas that make it more difficult that lend themselves to meaningful interaction.

Goblin Squad Member

EoX Hobs wrote:
My question - how can FFA zones where there is nothing worthwhile to fight over be all that meaningful? Isn't having a space for no other purpose but reputation free PvP, especially way out in the wilderness, rather less meaningful than fighting over something valuable?

They can fight over whatever they want to fight over. If they find it worthwhile to fight for nothing, then clearly the act of fighting is meaningful for them.

I stopped complaining about the fact that people are going to kill me to take my stuff, but now some want to be able to kill me whether or not they actually take any stuff or I even have any stuff to take and without suffering any reputation loss for doing it just because they found me in a particular spot that was already dangerous.

Why and how exactly does removing the reputation loss in scarce resource hexes make the decision to kill me anything but less meaningful? It seems to me that it does, in fact, exactly the opposite, because there is no longer any meaning in their killing me. They can kill me because I am there, without any concern for whether they will get any compensation for doing it, because there is no longer any risk to them for killing me.

Goblin Squad Member

My point is, I think there are benefits to having some forms of consensual, rep-free PvP. However, they don't really focus exclusively on the Orc's topic, so I'll stop sidetracking the conversation.

And as to West Side Story...that parking lot could have been one of the groups' turf, which would make it a territorial battle and thus, more meaningful. Sorry, not up on my musicals - haven't seen that flik since the last time my x-wife made me sit through it. :)

Goblin Squad Member

Aet Areks Kel'Goran wrote:
No, but what we have seen suggested is that the most valuable resources in the game be just as easy to get, though less common, than common materials. Not meaningful.

That's a complete falsehood. There will already be enormous risk in those hexes from players for whom it is worth their while to kill in exchange for scarce resources. If that risk isn't worth their while, they wouldn't do it.

What the OP asks is that bandits be able to kill anyone in that hex without risking reputation loss, so that they can try to get those scarce resources without having to take that particular risk.

This is exactly about reducing the risk for the bandit, while increasing the risk for the harvester with no payoff of any kind for the harvester in exchange.

Goblin Squad Member

Caldeathe Baequiannia wrote:
I've started a coalition to work toward controlling monster escalations in our region. Now a group wants to make it so that if I enter the hex where the escalations are most likely to start, whether or not I am harvesting resources, I am a free target for them, simply for being in that hex. It would put me in the position where if I choose to avoid PvP, I can no longer exercise a primary role-playing goal I've set for my character.

I am not speaking of Monster Hexs. I am speaking of Sky metal hexes, where the most valuable resources are. Do monsters spawn there? Sure. But there are other hexes for monsters.

It puts you in a position where you have to hire guards. That is meaningful interaction. All it does is add difficulty to what you are trying to accomplish, it doesn't make it impossible.

For the record, I am NOT saying monster hexes should be FFA. I am saying making skymetal hexes FFA would increase the difficulty of acquiring those resources. Nothing more, nothing less.

Goblin Squad Member

Aet Areks Kel'Goran wrote:
No, but what we have seen suggested is that the most valuable resources in the game be just as easy to get, though less common, than common materials. Not meaningful.

But they won't be just as easy to get. With them being more valuable, there will be fiercer competition, more fights over them, etc. That makes it inherently more difficult to get them. No need to change the game mechanics there. Murdering someone over valuable metal is just as disreputable as murdering him for any other reason.

Goblin Squad Member

It seems to me that, since there are fewer Skymetal hexes than any other type, and the resource(s) there is/are the most valuable in the game, those hexes already will have a higher risk than any other type. Why is even more risk needed, and need it be discussed even before Skymetal hexes exist?

It might be better to see whether the game lacks whatever-it-is PVP and challenge fans desire before making explicit plans to increase difficulty and risk.

Goblin Squad Member

This is to be the most challenging PvE hex. There will be more challenging sites relative to events or dungeons; but as far as hexes, this will be top end. This will produce some of the more lucrative PvP TARGETS. Why make attacking them EASIER for PvP?

There are lots of reasons for PvP. Why are those reasons inadequate for these hexes? What about these hexes makes it harder for a PvP player that he/ she needs help in attacking?

Are they (PvP players) really that incompetent? Are they scared of badlands? Do they really need aids in badlands because they are less competent in badlands?

Really? I mean REALLY?

Why should anyone be afraid of such wimps that can not fight in badlands without special aids?

<sigh>


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The crazy thing about that is we already have a rep-free killing system for that type of PvP. It's called a Feud. It is literally the term used in the work that West Side Story is based on.

"Brokenlands minus rewards is completely redundant and not what anyone here was asking for.

Goblin Squad Member

Kobold Cleaver wrote:

The crazy thing about that is we already have a rep-free killing system for that type of PvP. It's called a Feud. It is literally the term used in the work that West Side Story is based on.

"Brokenlands minus rewards is completely redundant and not what anyone here was asking for.

One one at least three reasons for PvP. Why is that not enough? Why do PvP players need special help and support? I mean are they that ...?

Goblin Squad Member

Kobold Cleaver wrote:
The crazy thing about that is we already have a rep-free killing system for that type of PvP. It's called a Feud.

Have there been any details published on how that is going to work? Specifically, will it be like a small scale war, i.e. a bandit group unilaterally declares a feud on the merchant caravan they are about to rob and can then go ahead free of consequences, or will it rather be like a large scale duel which has to be agreed upon by both sides?

Real life feuds are rather like the second, if without formal declarations, while the first seems to lend itself to circumventing the rep loss from random killing, unless there is some other significant cost involved.

Goblin Squad Member

Aet Areks Kel'Goran wrote:
I am not speaking of Monster Hexs. I am speaking of Sky metal hexes, where the most valuable resources are. Do monsters spawn there? Sure. But there are other hexes for monsters.

But all skymetal hexes are monster spawn zones, including the ones that are border settlement areas. (Which includes mine)

Do you, then, propose selecting a valuable resource hex right on the edge of every one of the thirty-three settlement areas and turning them into a 24 hour PvP zone? Or will this only apply to the borders of the the 9 out of 33 hexes that have starmetal right beside them? Otherwise it appears to put those nine into a disadvantaged state versus the other 24 settlements. A state that none of the leaders were expecting when we made our choice of where to settle six weeks ago.

And, again, by turning that one particular type of hex into a PvP Free-for-all, you turn my meaningful choice of avoiding PvP into a completely different choice between giving up on that, or being unable to enter the nearest monster spawn hex. You force on me the choice of risking a 24 hours PvP zone, or not making any effort to control the single most dangerous threat to my home settlement.

Goblin Squad Member

Honestly my only problem with this idea is we have no way of knowing how difficult it will already be to acquire the rarest of rare resources. It strikes me as rather premature to think that we need to add more pressure to make the rare things difficult to acquire when we have no idea how difficult the PvE portion of the experience will be.

Suppose that your Master Harvester needs a small army (8 to 10 experienced combatants, perhaps) just to have a reasonably safe chance of reaching Starmetal nodes. Is that really too easy? Just the logistics of getting enough people together would be more work to ensure the rare things are truly rare. And unlike PvP, if things are too easy and there is just too much of something, GW can simply scale up the difficulty of navigating PvE in that hex. I certainly believe that this could keep things difficult enough even for those settlements who field veritable armies and will certainly increase meaningful interaction - a lot of the cooperative kind, at the least. (And the battles get bigger naturally because you know if you find rivals they will certainly be prepared for you.)

Since you mentioned other ideas, let me try. These are things that I believe would increase the difficulty of acquiring the rarest of materials and would either increase meaningful human reaction or (at worst) would not lessen the amount/quality of it.

- Fewer 'rare' nodes spawn. (Obviously already true, but it can be tweaked if necessary.)
- Harvesting tools/outposts don't go as far when harvesting rare materials as they do collecting less rare materials. (They degrade faster, perhaps.)
- Rare nodes simply don't have very much in them.
- Rare nodes increase the strength of mobs and cause escalations to grow faster.
- Rare nodes are entirely finite, and only appear when the GW team actively triggers an event. (For example, a new meteorite strikes the earth, giving us a new hex with Starmetal months after the last node went dry.)

In general, I support the idea of rare things being rare because they will literally BE rare - if there isn't much of it, it's rare. Rarity is not artificially created by difficulty of acquisition.

Goblin Squad Member

Ideascale: Should Starfall/Starmetal/Crater hexes be 24 hour PvP?

Goblin Squad Member

The point isn't to help PvPers. It is to encourage conflict over rare resources. Already there is 9 skymetal hexes. Most common distance to the nearest skymetal hex? 1 Hex. Unless you are Forgeholm or Agents of Erastil. They're like 13 hexes away.

Already, skymetal resources are fairly accessible. Rare resources should be at least a few hexes away, but with the layout, that's hard / impossible to do now. I just hate to see T3 stuff getting farmed and with skymetal hexes being so common place, that's what I see happening.

Maybe I'm wrong. We'll see.

Goblin Squad Member

You have a lot of ways to PvP. Why is that not enough? Are you scared that you will lose a feud or SAD?

Are you that weak?

EDIT: Make the point that FFA is the only fair way to allow you access to this product. I understand that harvesting is beneath you and feud may lead to others attacking you (which you might lose). I understand your fear of loosing, but is that not fair? Why do you need unfair special advantage you do not have elsewhere?

Goblin Squad Member

Aet Areks Kel'Goran wrote:

The point isn't to help PvPers. It is to encourage conflict over rare resources. Already there is 9 skymetal hexes. Most common distance to the nearest skymetal hex? 1 Hex. Unless you are Forgeholm or Agents of Erastil. They're like 13 hexes away.

Already, skymetal resources are fairly accessible. Rare resources should be at least a few hexes away, but with the layout, that's hard / impossible to do now. I just hate to see T3 stuff getting farmed and with skymetal hexes being so common place, that's what I see happening.

Maybe I'm wrong. We'll see.

The rareness of the resources should be plenty to encourage conflict, it certainly is in our world, without saying "It's no longer illegal to kill anyone in an area where diamonds are mined"

We have no idea how accessible they are. We won't until we know how many people it takes to suppress the environment long enough to harvest, and how much will be available when harvesting. Saying they are already "fairly accessible" is claiming to know something that I'm betting even the developers haven't fixed yet.

Goblin Squad Member

Caldeathe Baequiannia wrote:
Aet Areks Kel'Goran wrote:
I am not speaking of Monster Hexs. I am speaking of Sky metal hexes, where the most valuable resources are. Do monsters spawn there? Sure. But there are other hexes for monsters.

But all skymetal hexes are monster spawn zones, including the ones that are border settlement areas. (Which includes mine)

Do you, then, propose selecting a valuable resource hex right on the edge of every one of the thirty-three settlement areas and turning them into a 24 hour PvP zone? Or will this only apply to the borders of the the 9 out of 33 hexes that have starmetal right beside them? Otherwise it appears to put those nine into a disadvantaged state versus the other 24 settlements. A state that none of the leaders were expecting when we made our choice of where to settle six weeks ago.

And, again, by turning that one particular type of hex into a PvP Free-for-all, you turn my meaningful choice of avoiding PvP into a completely different choice between giving up on that, or being unable to enter the nearest monster spawn hex. You force on me the choice of risking a 24 hours PvP zone, or not making any effort to control the single most dangerous threat to my home settlement.

I can't help algorithmically placed hexes. If those hexes gave equal valued material in the same frequency as skymetal hexes, sure. I don't want any one person or organization at a disadvantage.

How are you avoiding PvP? Is it by interacting with people? Or not? If its not by interacting with people then it is not "meaningful human interaction". Hire guards. Problem solved. And you meaningfully interacted with other players instead of asking to be left alone.

I understand the fact that you cannot help the fact that you have to enter the hex to quell the escalation. What I am saying is those Tavernhold guys probably have an interest in keeping that escalation down as well. How about you broker a deal that you should make anyway, and have Golden Flask watch your back for players while you handle the mobs? That service could be extended to your harvesters for a cut of the profits.

How about that be the answer instead of "what do you mean might get PvPed in the most valuable hex in the game"?

Please understand we are not even on the same topic, you and I. I want rare resources to truly be rare. I think a way of doing that is making PvP more likely. It just so happens that your settlement has a hex next to it with your content and is the same type of hex.

I am not trying to say it should be harder for you or anyone neighboring a skymetal hex to defend against escalations.

If I were to say that FFA or LP only applies to harvesters, they'd get upset. Since it applies to the whole hex, you and others get upset.

I just hope that rare materials truly are rare and require substantial effort to obtain. However it happens, I don't care, as long as it requires meaningful human interaction.

Goblin Squad Member

Caldeathe Baequiannia wrote:
Aet Areks Kel'Goran wrote:

The point isn't to help PvPers. It is to encourage conflict over rare resources. Already there is 9 skymetal hexes. Most common distance to the nearest skymetal hex? 1 Hex. Unless you are Forgeholm or Agents of Erastil. They're like 13 hexes away.

Already, skymetal resources are fairly accessible. Rare resources should be at least a few hexes away, but with the layout, that's hard / impossible to do now. I just hate to see T3 stuff getting farmed and with skymetal hexes being so common place, that's what I see happening.

Maybe I'm wrong. We'll see.

The rareness of the resources should be plenty to encourage conflict, it certainly is in our world, without saying "It's no longer illegal to kill anyone in an area where diamonds are mined"

We have no idea how accessible they are. We won't until we know how many people it takes to suppress the environment long enough to harvest, and how much will be available when harvesting. Saying they are already "fairly accessible" is claiming to know something that I'm betting even the developers haven't fixed yet.

Having them fairly accessible doesn't mean the hex itself is difficult to cultivate. It means getting a logistical supply line to the hex is not difficult... unless you are AoE or Forgeholm.

Goblin Squad Member

Aet Areks Kel'Goran wrote:
I can't help algorithmically placed hexes. If those hexes gave equal valued material in the same frequency as skymetal hexes, sure. I don't want any one person or organization at a disadvantage.

No, you can't, but you're asking to change one particular small group of hexes after-the-fact. We entered the land-rush under a set of rules and expectations, and now a group has decided that the risk to killing people in a particular group of hexes ought to be lower, without any idea of how dangerous those hexes will already be. It looks very pretty on the surface as a way to make things more "fun and interesting" but I have to tell you, it feels like "I want more ways to fight people without having to risk reputation to do it."

It doesn't help the appearance that none of Xeilias's settlement zones have a skymetal hex bordering them. (excepting Golgotha, with an impassible cliff in the way) it feels an awful lot like "Wouldn't it be cool to be able to kill people freely in these hexes that aren't too close to us so won't damage our ability to control escalation cycles in our settlements?"

Goblin Squad Member

Whether the developers design it or not, there will be consequences to every action in the game.

Goblin Squad Member

Aet Areks Kel'Goran wrote:
Having them fairly accessible doesn't mean the hex itself is difficult to cultivate. It means getting a logistical supply line to the hex is not difficult... unless you are AoE or Forgeholm.

Again, you are wrong. Accessibility is a package, not a single thing. I have spent a decade fighting the thinking the disabled face every day because someone thinks that putting a ramp in their store makes it accessible, but all of the taps and paper towel dispensers and door handles are out of reach.

How hard it is to harvest is absolutely part of accessibility to resources. Ask anyone who's had to dig 2.6 kilometers into rock to get the gold that's only a few hundred meters from a railroad and superhighway.

Goblin Squad Member

I think I should be more inflammatory in my posts. People rarely respond to me directly.

Goblin Squad Member

3 people marked this as a favorite.

It's not like there are going to be piles and piles of star metal where you lightly skip into the hex carrying a basket on your arm and scooping adamantium up with your hat.

They can concentrate the node spawns in the dead center of the hex. They can make the node spawns fairly rare even within the hex which means you'll have to search for quite some time to find it. They can do a dozen different things which mean that you'll have to spend a lot of time in the hex to find what you're looking for. During that time, people might presume you've already found some and kill you for it.

People might get to the point that they decide the bandits have gotten too bad in that hex and will choose to gather elsewhere. The bandits then decide that there aren't enough gatherers to rob and move to where there's a lot of targets. The gatherers come back and the bandits follow.

However, if the bandits have chased off all of the gatherers... why don't the bandits just mine the stupid crater and just make their living completely occupying that hex? Well, because the settlement will start sending an army to knock the bandits' operation off the map. Well, now that there's an army involved, the bandits go back to their settlement and gather an army of their own. After all, that whole gathering thing ended up being pretty profitable. The bandits then declare war on the gatherer settlement and the armies square off on the field of battle.

The former-bandits-now-gatherers somehow win the war and beat back the gatherer settlement. This means that the former-bandits-now-gatherers can start harvesting again and making that fat profit, increasing their settlement reputation, and getting larger DI buildings. Then a new set of bandits move in and start harassing the former-bandits-now-gatherers which have to start hiring guards...

Tada, Ryan Dancey sits back with a cold one and watches everything working as planned.

Goblin Squad Member

Aet Areks Kel'Goran wrote:
Most common distance to the nearest skymetal hex?

So we'd know for sure, I created a table, and added it as the last tab of Caldeathe's Excellent Spreadsheet, because I couldn't get it to format well enough here.

The upshot, for Early Enrollment:
- distance to Skymetal, as the crow flies (hexes): mean 4.2, min 2, max 14, mode 2, median 4
- distance to Skymetal, travel (hexes): mean 5.0, min 2, max 14, mode 2, median 5

EDIT: if anyone catches errors, it's a publicly-editable file; please fix my figures.

Goblin Squad Member

Am I led to believe that because harvesters may have guarded along in sky metal hexes, FFA. Should be allowed. When harvesters bring guards along to harvest in regular resources, will PvP players also need FFA?

As before, do PvP expect to need to prey on weak (except for Bluddwolf who will attack groups more powerful than his team)?

Goblin Squad Member

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Aet Areks Kel'Goran wrote:
What I am saying is those Tavernhold guys probably have an interest in keeping that escalation down as well. How about you broker a deal that you should make anyway, and have Golden Flask watch your back for players while you handle the mobs? That service could be extended to your harvesters for a cut of the profits.

Why do you assume we're not doing that already? But the hex doesn't need to be FFA to make that a wise, and probably necessary, tactic.

Aet Areks Kel'Goran wrote:

How about that be the answer instead of "what do you mean might get PvPed in the most valuable hex in the game"?

How about you realize that we already realize we might get PvPed in any hex on the map, and the scarcity of these hexes already makes them more dangerous without needing to actively encourage you? Are you really suggesting that you will not engage in PvP in these hexes if the reputation system is in effect there?

Aet Areks Kel'Goran wrote:
I want rare resources to truly be rare. I think a way of doing that is making PvP more likely.

Again, why do you assume anything needs to be changed for this? It's been stated that monsters in alpha are little challenge. I can't speak to that because I'm not in alpha. But I have also seen the devs state the AI is still very basic, there are still limited types of mobs, escalations are not fully developed, etc.... Saying PvE is negligible based on current observation is absurd. You seem to assume that without active patrolling by civic-minded gank squads, people will be stubbing their toes on starmetal laying around unguarded in huge piles, when there is zero basis for guessing the rarity of that resource within the designated hexes.

Aet Areks Kel'Goran wrote:
Having them fairly accessible doesn't mean the hex itself is difficult to cultivate. It means getting a logistical supply line to the hex is not difficult... unless you are AoE or Forgeholm.

If only there were some kind of 10-week long process by which people could choose where their settlements would be located based on their own goals and styles of game play. Forgeholm must be devastated that no starmetal has appeared near the hex they selected on week 1 and have not budged from since. I wonder if they've realized they will need to trade for that? And protect their caravans from bandits? And possibly sponsor some guards for harvesting runs?

Keign wrote:
I think I should be more inflammatory in my posts. People rarely respond to me directly.

Try shaking your fist a bit higher. I just don't feel threatened yet.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

My post? No, mine was arguing about leaving the game as it is since it doesn't need FFA PvP. Because the game is much more interesting when there _isn't_ FFA PvP.

Goblin Squad Member

Common, not mean ;) 11 settlements are distanced at 1 hex away. I count only 3 at 2 hexes away. Averaged, yes, you are correct, but the most common distance to a skymetal hex is 1 hex.

Goblin Squad Member

The mode I calculated is 2, and I found no Site only one hex from Skymetal; please tell me which Sites I missed. I must be counting incorrectly somehow.

Goblin Squad Member

<Flask> Ulf Stonepate wrote:
Lots of stuff that danced around the point....

More PvP will make the resources more difficult to acquire. With 11 settlements bordering skymetal hexes, they are already not rare.

Quote:

rare1

re(ə)r/
adjective
adjective: rare; comparative adjective: rarer; superlative adjective: rarest

(of an event, situation, or condition) not occurring very often.
"a rare genetic disorder"
synonyms: infrequent, scarce, sparse, few and far between, thin on the ground, like gold dust, as scarce as hen's teeth; More
occasional, limited, odd, isolated, unaccustomed, unwonted
"rare moments of privacy"
antonyms: common, frequent
(of a thing) not found in large numbers and consequently of interest or value.
"the jellyfish tree, one of the rarest plants on earth"
synonyms: unusual, recherché, uncommon, unfamiliar, atypical, singular More
"rare stamps"
antonyms: ordinary, commonplace
unusually good or remarkable.
"he plays with rare strength and sensitivity"
synonyms: exceptional, outstanding, unparalleled, peerless, matchless, unique, unrivaled, inimitable, beyond compare, without equal, second to none, unsurpassed; More
consummate, superior, superlative, first-class;
informalA1, top-notch
"a man of rare talent"
antonyms: common, everyday

Please continue saying things that are not addressing my point. Lessened restrictions on PvP will make PvP more prevalent thus making the acquisition of "rare" resources an actual rarity.

Goblin Squad Member

T7V Jazzlvraz wrote:
The mode I calculated is 2, and I found no Site only one hex from Skymetal; please tell me which Sites I missed. I must be counting incorrectly somehow.

Settlement / Perimeter Tower = the 1 hex / Skymetal Hex

Goblin Squad Member

Caldeathe Baequiannia wrote:
Aet Areks Kel'Goran wrote:
I can't help algorithmically placed hexes. If those hexes gave equal valued material in the same frequency as skymetal hexes, sure. I don't want any one person or organization at a disadvantage.

No, you can't, but you're asking to change one particular small group of hexes after-the-fact. We entered the land-rush under a set of rules and expectations, and now a group has decided that the risk to killing people in a particular group of hexes ought to be lower, without any idea of how dangerous those hexes will already be. It looks very pretty on the surface as a way to make things more "fun and interesting" but I have to tell you, it feels like "I want more ways to fight people without having to risk reputation to do it."

It doesn't help the appearance that none of Xeilias's settlement zones have a skymetal hex bordering them. (excepting Golgotha, with an impassible cliff in the way) it feels an awful lot like "Wouldn't it be cool to be able to kill people freely in these hexes that aren't too close to us so won't damage our ability to control escalation cycles in our settlements?"

Umm... we are going to have our own escalations to deal with. I'm sorry you feel that way. I cannot stress enough that my intent is to make rare resources truly rare. Why or how you came to have this other feeling is unfortunate and inaccurate of my actual intent.

Is there no motive behind this? Absolutely not. Callambea is all about trade. The more valuable the resource, the more profit we make!! Is that selfish of us? Maybe a little. But again, that is my only intent.

I want actual rare items. I don't want T3 items that dozens of folks have to be considered "rare". That's false advertisement.

***Please note the opinions I've expressed are mine alone and not an official stance of Callambea, Xeilias, or the Northern Coalition.****

51 to 100 of 623 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Paizo / Licensed Products / Digital Games / Pathfinder Online / Should starfall hexes be FFA? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.