Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Nihimon, could you provide a pointer to any information we have about the other types of POI beyond taverns?
It could be that one of the other POI types is a better point of comparison to a smallholding than a tavern is. It could also be the case that smallholdings will justify their price tags by duplicating two types of player-made POIs in the footprint of one.
Your casting of Summon Nihimon fizzles. Guurzak appears!
The total list of available PoIs is not complete, but a few of them include:
Inn: A welcoming tavern that provides lodgings, player power regeneration, limited trade goods, some training for social classes, and a space for social interaction
Manor: A sturdy country house with a surrounding estate that provides some skill training, some resource gathering potential, and some trade and aristocrat skill related functions
Watchtower: A secure hold that provides perception bonuses and some martial training
Shrine: A place of worship that provides some healing, some curse and affliction removal, and some religious training
The Window's a Wound, the Road Is a Knife
Of the known POIs, the Inn is the only one that explicitly mentions power regen, so it's the closest known analogue for the Smallholding.
Edit to add: If purchasing a smallholding is the only way to get two POI's effects in a single hex, that looks an awful lot like mechanical advantage for cash shop purchases to me.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Could Audacity, belonging to the settlement Dagedai, purchase a Smallhold and with the permission of Phaeros, attach it to said settlement?
Would this essentially give us bind points at both Dagedai and Phaeros, and access to both settlements' storage?
Would Phaeros have the option of revoking permission, thus destroying our smallhold? Would there instead be a sort of eviction notice?
Yes, the eviction notice is it despawning back in your inventory and your 30 day cool down starts.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Thank you, Guurzak. I found that one, too. I suspect there must be another source where siege camps were introduced, since they aren't in the list we found.
To your point about crowding and lack of wildness in the wilderness, GW could always add a couple of rows of hexes whenever we overcrowd the current map.
Also, filling all the available spaces on the current map should take a while. Just because sites can be filled, that doesn't guarantee that they will be filled quickly.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Nihimon, could you provide a pointer to any information we have about the other types of POI beyond taverns?
Edit: Some amateur sleuthing uncovered this partial list...
See? It's not that hard, anyone (looks sidelong at the Orc) can do it :)
And as far as I recall, that's only a "partial" list in the sense that the rest haven't been designed or announced yet.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Could Audacity, belonging to the settlement Dagedai, purchase a Smallhold and with the permission of Phaeros, attach it to said settlement?
Would this essentially give us bind points at both Dagedai and Phaeros, and access to both settlements' storage?
Would Phaeros have the option of revoking permission, thus destroying our smallhold? Would there instead be a sort of eviction notice?
Good questions. I'm anxious to learn more about how these will work, but it wouldn't surprise me if the design on them isn't fully fleshed out yet, and I'm a patient man :)
|
CEO, Goblinworks
|
We have not done more than discuss various options for how soulbinding points will be established and allocated. We're aware of the risk of people using them as suicide transport gates and we'll have some thoughts on how to limit that capability.
It is too soon for us to name specific ways that bind points will be created. That work remains "in progress" at this time.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Also, filling all the available spaces on the current map should take a while. Just because sites can be filled, that doesn't guarantee that they will be filled quickly.
Agreed. If the world is sized/designed so that a settlement of 500 characters will use most of 8 hexes, then it's probably a good bet that settlements far under that number will have a lot of wilderness and few structures. If the settlement/companies can't fully utilize the structures they already have, it might not be worth it to build more structures. And if every structure (POI, Outpost, Smallhold, Basecamp) has an upkeep cost, then there is an additional downside to placing more structures - why place a structure that will cost resources just to exist when you don't have the people to provide the resources?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
My only concern is when game design's primary goal is to get people to spend money. Players identify with brands and want to believe in them. They want to feel that the company that they're spending money on can be trusted. They don't want to feel like they are being taken advantaged of.
I have seen this from other companies and it gives everyone involved a bad name and risks damaging said IP. I would hope and think that GW is aware of this and so I remain cautiously optimistic.
It is supposed to be a profit-oriented business or they wouldn't have poured money and effort into it. The objective has to be to make money.
Ask yourself whether you really think, at a rational level, that any business' objective should be otherwise? Seriously?
Do you like to donate all of your work for free? Such a magnificent, short-lived artist you must be.
Other hand, If GW did do it in a way that takes advantage of people THEN they should be castigated, but not before. And further you would still have someone like me taking issue whether it was them taking advantage of you or you having buyer's remorse.
They said they wouldn't scalp us. If they scalp us make a big deal. Until they do all these rabble-rousers attempting to get something for nothing AGAIN need to donate their work to charity for two years. THEN they can gripe and I'll listen to them with a serious ear, but not a second sooner.
|
Nihimon, could you provide a pointer to any information we have about the other types of POI beyond taverns?
This is from a spreadsheet used for kingdom building in the TTop. It enumerates various resources improvements, and structures one can make outside settlement walls.
It's just source material but we know it's source material they are drawing on so...
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
My only concern is when game design's primary goal is to get people to spend money. Players identify with brands and want to believe in them. They want to feel that the company that they're spending money on can be trusted. They don't want to feel like they are being taken advantaged of.
I have seen this from other companies and it gives everyone involved a bad name and risks damaging said IP. I would hope and think that GW is aware of this and so I remain cautiously optimistic.
It is supposed to be a profit-oriented business or they wouldn't have poured money and effort into it. The objective has to be to make money.
Ask yourself whether you really think, at a rational level, that any business' objective should be otherwise? Seriously?
The business objective should be to make money. The game design objective should be to make an amazing game that people will want to invest in. Therefore the business model should be to have an amazing game that people will want to spend money on.
You can make a great game that makes a crap ton of money, but doesn't milk the players like League Of Legends.
Or you can make a game that entices you to get invested and then push for that massive cash grab like every Perfect World game they've actually made themselves. They are like carney games. The sole purpose of the game isn't to make an engaging, entertaining product that people will want to spend cash on. It's to milk the player base dry for as much and for as long as they can. In the process it destroys that company's rep and the IP of the game associated with it.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Quietus: Right. So what about game designs that aren't themepark? All that there is, is us. And whatever we manage to craft. The company has said they won't sell anything in the store that players can't make, or at least make its functional equivalent. They said all the best weapons and gear will be crafted. Now they offer a little cabin in the woods we can theorycraft strategies over and suddenly there's this huge hue and cry about pay to win.
It is BS.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Quietus: Right. So what about game designs that aren't themepark? All it is there is us and whatever we manage to craft. The company has said they won't sell anything in the store that players can't make, or at least make its functional equivalent. They said all the best weapons and gear will be crafted. Now they offer a little cabin in the woods we can theorycraft strategies over and suddenly there's this huge hue and cry about pay to win.
It is BS.
I think you need to go back and reread what I wrote.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@Quietus: Right. So what about game designs that aren't themepark? All that there is, is us. And whatever we manage to craft. The company has said they won't sell anything in the store that players can't make, or at least make its functional equivalent. They said all the best weapons and gear will be crafted. Now they offer a little cabin in the woods we can theorycraft strategies over and suddenly there's this huge hue and cry about pay to win.
It is BS.
I don't think there is a huge cry but rather a wariness of pay to win, or perhaps, "pay to have an advantage." And there will always be issues with a cash shop that has anything other than cosmetic items. I'm a fan of Goblinworks, obviously, and I do hope my hesitance is proven entirely wrong. But what can I say? My heart is jaded from other games that have ruined my gaming experience by adding items to a cash shop that are frankly unneeded; blame the MMO industry for our reluctance.
If anyone can make this work though, it's these guys.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Great news, thx for announcing all of this !
Certainly we will sell some things that are useful, and great to own. We want to make valuable items available for sale to those players with the interest and ability to buy them. Our commitment is and has been that such things won't provide a meaningful mechanical advantage that you cannot get just by playing the game.
I hope on the other hand that this kind of premium item could craftable one way or another. I strongly dislike having to pay real money for in-game items, and if through skills, ressource gathering, crafting and time if were possible to get the same items, that would be great.
From the blog post:
Future Upgrades
We have lots of ideas of how to expand this basic system over time. We can offer several varieties of Smallhold structures. We can offer various decorations. It may be possible that player-character crafted objects can interact with a purchased building (like buying a paint kit from another character, for example).
We have ideas on ways you can improve a basic structure to expand its capabilities and add new capabilities. Maybe you will be able to hire an NPC Thornguard to keep watch, for example.
Of course we'd like to have interior spaces you can decorate, with furniture, display cases, trophies, etc. Allowing players to enter the Smallholds, interact within them, and customize them extensively is a part of our road map for developing this feature.
@Ryan, any reaction to my idea about player built fortresses for siege warfare ? Is this in your future plans by any chance ?
Thx for all that amazing amount of great work !
Moonbird
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Quietus: Right. So what about game designs that aren't themepark? All that there is, is us. And whatever we manage to craft. The company has said they won't sell anything in the store that players can't make, or at least make its functional equivalent. They said all the best weapons and gear will be crafted. Now they offer a little cabin in the woods we can theorycraft strategies over and suddenly there's this huge hue and cry about pay to win.
It is BS.
I don't think there is a huge cry but rather a wariness of pay to win, or perhaps, "pay to have an advantage." And there will always be issues with a cash shop that has anything other than cosmetic items. I'm a fan of Goblinworks, obviously, and I do hope my hesitance is proven entirely wrong. But what can I say? My heart is jaded from other games that have ruined my gaming experience by adding items to a cash shop that are frankly unneeded; blame the MMO industry for our reluctance.
If anyone can make this work though, it's these guys.
I certainly agree with this. There is nothing worse than to see a game you love slowly devolve into a blatant cash grab. New, heavily hyped features arrive, and you find out the only way to make real use of them is through the cash shop or a grind is made so onerous that your only option to to pay to reduce it.
My gut says GW will find the right balance with the cash shop, but it is a very slippery slope on which to balance.
|
CEO, Goblinworks
|
@Moonbird - that's a really big and complex system. The tradeoffs with other design priorities would be enormous. Would need to have a huge wave of community support get behind something like that to make it happen in the 2-3 year timeframe (couldn't be done any earlier regardless of interest...)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Pay to win Examples(not sure if these are still happening):
World of Tanks - Best ammo in game obtainable only through shop
Star Trek Online - Best ships only purchasable through shop.
Pathfinder Online - Item combines use of... some other.... items, and provides...no mechanical advantage.... wait, this doesn't belong on the list!
Unless GW is selling T3+6 items, PFO is not pay to win.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The business objective should be to make money. The game design objective should be to make an amazing game that people will want to invest in. Therefore the business model should be to have an amazing game that people will want to spend money on.
You can make a great game that makes a crap ton of money, but doesn't milk the players like League Of Legends.
Or you can make a game that entices you to get invested and then push for that massive cash grab like every Perfect World game they've actually made themselves. They are like carney games. The sole purpose of the game isn't to make an engaging, entertaining product that people will want to spend cash on. It's to milk the player base dry for as much and for as long as they can. In the process it destroys that company's rep and the IP of the game associated with it.
Having bought my fair share of rule books, errata, version updates, monster manuals, etc, etc, I'd venture to say that AD&D and Pathfinder (and a whole lot of other TT games) are based upon providing a fun game that people want to play and selling all the various extras bits that people might be willing to spend money on. I hope it doesn't offend people, but imo, it's practically part of the IP.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
This might have been brought up, I've only skimmed the past posts since my last one. I had thought I posted it earlier however... anyways:
"further, with a finite space, that being 3,150 spots, what happens when 3,151+ people buy these smallholdings?
Will we, essentially be buying our way into a war if we wish to actually use our smallholdings? While I am fine with the war-smallholding relationship, I'm not sure how I feel about the real money-war implications. Is it really... fair (and by this I mean good business, because you know how people like to complain about "fairness") to make people pay for the opportunity to use something, an opportunity that others are sure to try to thwart? Like what if they belong to a small group and the big groups keep buying up smallholdings and slowly just take all the spots, killing anyone in the way."
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I think the current plan is that Taverns will be in the game on the first day of Early Enrollment. I just did a quick confirm on that with Lee. About half the owners have chosen their spots and about half have not. I think one of the people has asked for a spot on the map that isn't planned for Early Enrollment (not sure - that's just something I remember hearing in a briefing meeting).
Not all the Tavern functionality will be in at the start like the NPC but the power recovery will be working!
We apparently have not received an email about our tavern placement. We have actually been waiting on it. How long ago was this information sent out? I am having Jak, the account holder, send Lee an email for details.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Nihimon, could you provide a pointer to any information we have about the other types of POI beyond taverns?
This is from a spreadsheet used for kingdom building in the TTop. It enumerates various resources improvements, and structures one can make outside settlement walls.
It's just source material but we know it's source material they are drawing on so...
Thank you.
Hmmm, apiary. Bees. Honey. MEAD!!
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
"further, with a finite space, that being 3,150 spots, what happens when 3,151+ people buy these smallholdings?
Will we, essentially be buying our way into a war if we wish to actually use our smallholdings?
I'm pretty sure if players manage to spend over $600,000 on smallholdings alone, that GW will find a way to make the map bigger.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Having bought my fair share of rule books, errata, version updates, monster manuals, etc, etc, I'd venture to say that AD&D and Pathfinder (and a whole lot of other TT games) are based upon providing a fun game that people want to play and selling all the various extras bits that people might be willing to spend money on. I hope it doesn't offend people, but imo, it's practically part of the IP.The business objective should be to make money. The game design objective should be to make an amazing game that people will want to invest in. Therefore the business model should be to have an amazing game that people will want to spend money on.
You can make a great game that makes a crap ton of money, but doesn't milk the players like League Of Legends.
Or you can make a game that entices you to get invested and then push for that massive cash grab like every Perfect World game they've actually made themselves. They are like carney games. The sole purpose of the game isn't to make an engaging, entertaining product that people will want to spend cash on. It's to milk the player base dry for as much and for as long as they can. In the process it destroys that company's rep and the IP of the game associated with it.
Not quite sure what you've said that invalidates anything I've said.
Here's a specific example from another game. Neverwinter sells a random loot bag that will give you a higher grade professional for some certain craft things. You need to buy it with real money and not only that, but buy it at a random chance to get it. Also crafting time is insanely long, but can be sped up with real money. Inventory is limited, so game design relies on you collecting many things to advance your character. This fills up your inventory to 'encourage' you to buy more bags. These hinderances don't become immediately noticeable at first, but the longer you play the more the noose will tighten.Neverwinter is F2P, so it's not surprising to see this stuff. My point is that they have game design set up to push you into spending more money. Constantly. It punishes those that get invested in the game. This is the problem I think people are concerned about. As I said, I don't think GW will go down that road.
Edit- coincidently I'm getting the new PHB 5e tonight! :D
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm pretty sure if players manage to spend over $600,000 on smallholdings alone, that GW will find a way to make the map bigger."further, with a finite space, that being 3,150 spots, what happens when 3,151+ people buy these smallholdings?
Will we, essentially be buying our way into a war if we wish to actually use our smallholdings?
I think if we spent that much on smallholdings alone before the first planned map expansion, they'd throw the party of the century!
Something tells me they don't expect to sell out every space and spark wars over building spaces anytime soon.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Fiery_Dervish - I am running the game on my mid-2012 Mac Mini which is the lowest powered machine in the office. I can run it comfortably (not at 30+ FPS, but good enough to play). My video system is an AMD6600M.
Are you still running it through Boot Camp? I'm wondering whether the Mac client will be operational for Sept, or if I have to find a way to sneak off with the PC laptop my wife uses for business...
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I am still boot camping. The status of the Mac client is something I'm pretty interested in. I will try to get some color on that question next week.
ty i'll keep my eyes open
gotta say I'm getting pretty excited :Don topic, I think these items seem reasonably balanced, and my 2 possible concerns were settled by the delay till Oct, and the fact that individuals can at least increase the resource cost of the smallholds if they don't have siege weapons. I can see some interesting choices to be considered on the relative worth of destroying, vs. damaging as drain on enemy's resources during a war.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
So if these items can be purchased in the store and crafted in game and the places where those items can be plunked down are a limited resource aka. The time someone need to acquire is important in the equation of what the win conditions or at least the milestones success are. And we are talking about a game where crafting takes hours not seconds.
How is this definition of pay to win useful at all to describe the problem that may arise from those items?
I also absolutely do not like this definition of pay to win in a competitive environment. It the cash shop version is a shortcut that reduces the time to acquire it by X. The guy who bought it is "winning" over the guy who did not for X amount of time.
|
Goblinworks
|
| 19 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'd just like to pipe in and say something. I've been in the game industry for around 16 years now. I've seen a lot of companies come and go, and worked for like 8 I think. In all that time, I haven't seen, or heard of, a game company as dedicated to making a game with a focus on building a true community (with the possible exception of Cyan, who I loved working for as a result). I've worked for good companies, and worked with people who cared about the games, but never for a company whose focus is so clearly on the quality of the game features and experience, or which has such a connection to the community and interest in making them (you) happy.
We are a TINY company for the scale of game we are trying to make. Our budget is a pittance compared to other games of this scale and complexity, even though it may seem like a lot of money. We are infinitely grateful for the money each of you has spent and your support, and doing everything we can to eek every iota out of that funding (as I sit here on hour 80 or so of working this week). All of that is so we can be sustainable and make this work for Pathfinder fans and a relatively focused online game community that we see as 'where it's at'.
Yes, I realize that none of you know me really, and that I work for Goblinworks, but seeing comments suggesting this team is trying to milk people for money hits a bit hard considering the reality I experience daily. I hope you will take it to heart that we are doing everything we can to make a company and game that can live on for many years and be a living and vibrant community. As part of that, we will do everything humanly possible to make sure the experience is balanced and not 'pay to win', because we believe that has a huge bearing on building on the quality of the community, and that is utterly key to us. However, as with any business, revenue is life blood, and gives us the ability to keep growing and building the world and features for all of you.
Thank you all for the support and input. Sorry I don't prepare more cool screenshots and videos... SO MUCH TO DO.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Disappointing to see anything duplicating the powers of a Tavern.
Base Camp $100
Small holding $250
Assuming the bypassing of game mechanics with cash was limited to backers who helped get the game going... priceless.
I'm too invested to wish GW anything but Good Luck at this point, but I will play the game before I spend another cent.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Mike, thank you very much I appreciate your words, and I totally understand where you are coming from.
@ Pino, your prices are off a bit they are 50$ and 200$.
First, Taverns can never be destroyed as long as you pay your up keep, this is not so for Camps or Holdings. Second, they are persistent structures, no despawning.
Beyond this, they have more and better options than the above two combined, as well as interiors, back story, and a name. Also there are features of the Tavern that haven't been explained yet.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I hope you will take it to heart that we are doing everything we can to make a company and game that can live on for many years and be a living and vibrant community.
Thanks for saying that, Mike. It's nice to hear a human reaction from the inside, that so clearly matches what I've seen at every turn. You guys are awesome, and I really hope I get the chance to keep contributing towards your paycheck for many years to come :)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Mike, yours and your colleagues efforts are greatly appreciated. Remember that it will be primarily only negative comments that bother to post, most of those who find the items acceptable or a positive won't bother. I don't understand the idea that this is a "cash grab", when these sorts of items have been a clearly stated part of the plan from the beginning.
And really, 80 hours? Bah, you can do better than that! Back to work! you can still squeeze in another 36 at least. Doesn't Mountain Dew in the states still have mega-caffeine in it? ;)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Moonbird - that's a really big and complex system. The tradeoffs with other design priorities would be enormous. Would need to have a huge wave of community support get behind something like that to make it happen in the 2-3 year timeframe (couldn't be done any earlier regardless of interest...)
Thanks a lot for your answer, I understand.
Need to go build a community around that (or a Minecraft plugin for PFO) :-) to get it done sooner.
Moonbird
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
We are a TINY company for the scale of game we are trying to make. Our budget is a pittance compared to other games of this scale and complexity, even though it may seem like a lot of money.
Thank you all for the support and input.
I'm always more impressed with what people achieve using a little to achieve a relative lot!
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Pay to win Examples(not sure if these are still happening):
World of Tanks - Best ammo in game obtainable only through shop...
Spoken like a pro... NOT.
"Gold ammo" in WoT is actually obtainable through ingame silver. In fact it is not even that expensive AND while it offers an advantage in penetration it also has disadvantages (spaced armor / less normalisation) that make using 24/7 a stupid thing to do in most cases.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Pay to win Examples(not sure if these are still happening):
World of Tanks - Best ammo in game obtainable only through shop...
Spoken like a pro... NOT.
"Gold ammo" in WoT is actually obtainable through ingame silver. In fact it is not even that expensive AND while it offers an advantage in penetration it also has disadvantages (spaced armor / less normalisation) that make using 24/7 a stupid thing to do in most cases.
They changed it about a year ago. Before that golden ammo or whatever the cash ammo name was as described above.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Mechanically superior? No, I don't think so, between player made camps/chests you can do the same thing as Base Camps, what you are paying for is convenience.
In fact, I think player made items might be better, because you are limited in placing Base Camps in claimable hexes. I think you can place regular camps/chests anywhere, including a Monster, Home, Ruins, and Crater Hex.
Goblinworks, can we can an answer to this?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
This might have been brought up, I've only skimmed the past posts since my last one. I had thought I posted it earlier however... anyways:
"further, with a finite space, that being 3,150 spots, what happens when 3,151+ people buy these smallholdings?
Will we, essentially be buying our way into a war if we wish to actually use our smallholdings? While I am fine with the war-smallholding relationship, I'm not sure how I feel about the real money-war implications. Is it really... fair (and by this I mean good business, because you know how people like to complain about "fairness") to make people pay for the opportunity to use something, an opportunity that others are sure to try to thwart? Like what if they belong to a small group and the big groups keep buying up smallholdings and slowly just take all the spots, killing anyone in the way."
Brother, I doubt it will take that long before players are fighting over smallholding space. But the playable area will be expanding while we are going about our business. We are unlikely to run out of room any time soon.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Thank you all for the support and input. Sorry I don't...
You're most welcome, Mike, and in turn thank you for putting so much heart into your work. We are many, and we each approach life differently, but I believe that almost all of us have the good of the game in mind when we offer our thoughts, even the needy among us.