| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As someone who's been lurking on the forums, watching PFO evolve and come into reality as a game from the kick-starter, I'm kind of sad at what it's shaping into right now. I know it's still very early, and lots still need to be added, or changed. One thing that does have me happy is the new $50 second month entry into EE. $100 was a lot 2 years ago to invest into a game I really new nothing about, and that was subject to so much change. Now that I can actually see what the game is being shaped into, making a decision with only $50 is much more comforting
But what happened to the idea of the dangerous wilds? Where crafters and gatherers would have to hire guards? where one was not safe alone? I've planned on being a gatherer and crafter from the start. It's something that gives me a great feeling of accomplishment (although a little PvP is fun too). I was looking forward to the challenges of gathering the materials to craft my awesome wares, making the feeling of accomplishment even greater.
Right now it seems Gatherers (commoners?) are some of the safest people. The only real danger to them is the Monsters, but they're all AI, which is easy to beat once you understand their mechanics. I could be out gathering, and run across many who would not even think of touching me. Why? because the resources they gain (what I have gathered and what little gear I may have) is not worth their reputation. It seems to me reputation is the most valuable thing in the game right now, for without it, you cannot train. The amount of time it took me to gather those resources would be a fraction of the time it would take for their reputation to recover from the hit.
So now I ask, would it be possible to add some fear back into the wilds? One of the few things that WILL be dangerous to gatherers, (when implemented) is Stand and Deliver. But I don't believe their will be many bandits, and why use Stand and Deliver on the single gatherer running around, when they could be using that time to target the larger groups transporting Bulk Trade Goods, or the Larger groups of crafters who are running in packs? (maybe going solo is even more safe if this is the case). What else can we do to bring excitement back into the Wilds?
Bandits may not focus all their attention on lone merchants, but they sure as hell aren't gonna ignore them, either.
Solo gathering like you subscribe isn't gonna be a "die every trip" venture. More like a, "hope you don't run into anybody" venture. Unsurprisingly, it's just not a very good venture, period.
Make a caravan. Run in a pack.
Goblin Squad Member
|
Have you been reading the same forum I have? It is still in Alpha and there is plenty of stuff in there that wants to kill you....with more coming! Check out the next Gobbocast (being recorded Wednesday to be published on Friday, hopefully). Harad Navar will be interviewing Bob Settles the PvE designed. Give the team time to put stuff before you tear it apart. You might be pleasantly surprised (about your own untimely end!).
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I feel like now that alpha is moving along, the reality of the rep mechanic is swinging collective attitudes back the other direction. I am fairly confident that factions, feuds, and wars will help make the world dangerous enough. Especially factions, as they will open a signifigant percentage of players as "legit" targets to roving hunters.
The trick is going to be making the factions so attractive that joining is a "no brainer" and not joining is a serious handicap, comparatively.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I think it was Stephen Cheney who recently said that they expect that gushers/mother lodes will provide a significant fraction of all raw resources - so gatherers will *need* to group up to exploit those gushers. So a gatherer will likely belong to a settlement and/or company to take advantage of those gushers. Once they group up, they are subject to being attacked with feuds and war decs.*
On the other hand, if some gatherers don't want to group up, and want to avoid company ties, then they won't fully exploit the gushers they find. They'll be poor grubbers - and may not be worth attacking in that case.
If the gatherer is willing to stay poor to avoid 'excitement', *I* think he's not getting the full value of his subscription fee, but he's welcome to the lesser game.
* And frankly, the bandits might want to wait to declare feud/attack until after the gusher is found - the pickings will be richer and the gatherers are more likely to stick around when they have something to lose.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@Hardin Steele
Are their other forums then the Paizo ones with info from the devs for me to read? The stuff you mention are mainly PvE AI's. PvE does not scare me and does not really add much excitement for me. Once you learn the mechanics of AI, you should win every time. I don't just mean with fighting it, but learning how it leashes, when it aggros. A good example of this has already been shown on the streams, with ranged people pulling groups of mobs far enough where most leash back and they are able to pick them off.
@KC
I didn't even expect to run into people on every trip. And yes, Bandits wont ignore me, but the ratio of total players to bandits is huge. If all the bandits are clumped on the map, which right now they kind of are (mainly UNC's settlement, and then Freevale and it's barbarians)then it's easier to avoid. And if your out roaming the grounds, the chance you run into me is small.
And as for solo gathering, am I wrong in the fact only one person can gather a node? I know their was talk about being able to set up a "camp" at some nodes that where not point of Interests, and allowed multiple people to gather from them, also attracting monsters in the area. Also, would you be flagged for this operation? (if it was discussed I missed it and apologize)If not, then again, I doubt most people would take the even larger, due to more people, reputation hit attacking them.
So again back to my original point If the rare bandits are all I have to worry about, I have no problem dying every now and then paying my "taxes" to them. The fear I was talking about was EVERY other player out their not attached to the same settlement.
EDIT: so some posts came in while wring this up.
@Urman, ok so more talk has been discussed on "gushers"? I was not aware of that. Also it seems the Gusher wont auto flag you, but a company would have to Fued you? That seems a little better. I know from the beginning GW wanting this to be a group game, and I do prefer to gather in a group, don't get me wrong. It just seemed unnecessary from I've read (and admit to missing some stuff).
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If I recall correctly, it's been a while since we heard about anything other than single player, single collection nodes. I wonder if "gushers" will make the cut for MVP. Maybe not. If they're not in the game at EE, maybe they'll enter by OE.
If there are factions that provide benefits to gatherers, and have opposing factions, then that could put some spice back into the woods. If you're a gatherer in a company attached to a player-run settlement, there's two opportunities for people to have kill rights against you. Depending on how things shake out, sneaking into other people's hexes to gather might also be risky.
I think there's still fine-tuning to be done on the reputation system. If nobody is willing to risk the faction hit on a successful gatherer stumbling home under an encumbering load, that faction hit might get dialed back a little bit.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If the gatherer is willing to stay poor to avoid 'excitement', *I* think he's not getting the full value of his subscription fee, but he's welcome to the lesser game.
sigh...
Why do some people always assume that they and only they know the right and best way to play a game?
Why do some people assume that what they value in a game is the only thing to value in a game?
Such narrow mindedness means YOU sir will not get the full value because you will blind yourself to possibilities and alternatives you consider beneath you.
FYI - not everyone in this world considers pvp, ganking and griefing (sorry, argue as you might but you can NOT have the first without some of the other two) an actual enhancement to a game, many people consider it a detriment.
@Duffy
That is one of the things that excited me about the game. That at any moment someone walking by would decide that what I have is something they want, for themselves or their settlement. But as it looks now, that wont happen with the way reputation is looking
(I AM NOT ADVOCATING FOR RPKING! Seeing someone who has wares you want doesn't sound random to me. I DO LIKE THE REPUTATION IDEA!, I just think it's a little harsh in it's current state)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I think the intent is to ideally never *need* to take faction hits, but to do so you have to build your character certain ways to get access to certain activities via abilities that balance those activities; such as SAD for banditry.
Otherwise you suffer penalties for not staying in character :-)
@Vrelx
I've played that game, there's a reason I'm not playing it anymore, it devolves to everyone killing on sight because there is nothing to stop them. Even if the penalty eventually stops that individual for a time there are several thousand individuals that haven't hit that point yet. Many think and myself among them it's better to reverse the situation and make the lashing out a rare behavior.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Bringslite, do you mean "affiliated with an NPC company based in an NPC settlement"? Everyone will be affiliated with some company, attached to some settlement. It might not be possible to declare war on an NPC settlement, but it might be possible (though expensive) to call a feud against an NPC company. I dunno yet.
FYI - not everyone in this world considers pvp...an actual enhancement to a game, many people consider it a detriment.
Hm, well, that's good to know. Speaking as a detriment, I look forward to meeting you on the battlefield and showing you how much fun PvP can be!
;D
Anyways, the current map won't stay as it is. I think we all realize a lot of the current settlements will end up folding as they fail to gain members or keep up activity. The map will become more and more friendly to bandits as time goes on and the target audience--sandbox MMOers--starts showing up.
Also, doesn't the Seventh Veil house a bandit group?
[ooc]On this keyboard, I can't do m-dashes with "Alt-0151". :( /ooc]
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Bringslite, do you mean "affiliated with an NPC company based in an NPC settlement"? Everyone will be affiliated with some company, attached to some settlement. It might not be possible to declare war on an NPC settlement, but it might be possible (though expensive) to call a feud against an NPC company. I dunno yet.
I haven't heard mention of NPC Companies.
Yes, by unaffiated, I meant not factioned up and/or not a member of a player settlement. Not a proper definition, but....
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Bringslite, do you mean "affiliated with an NPC company based in an NPC settlement"? Everyone will be affiliated with some company, attached to some settlement. It might not be possible to declare war on an NPC settlement, but it might be possible (though expensive) to call a feud against an NPC company. I dunno yet.I haven't heard mention of NPC Companies.
Yes, by unaffiated, I meant not factioned up and/or not a member of a player settlement. Not a proper definition, but....
I'm assuming that, like EVE, every character is automatically a member of some company. If that's the case, then at least the starter companies will be NPC "controlled". If I'm wrong, and it's possible to belong to no company at all, then I guess there could be truly unaffiliated characters.
Edit: Can one of our Board Fu masters confirm or deny the existence of characters with no company at all?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If the gatherer is willing to stay poor to avoid 'excitement', *I* think he's not getting the full value of his subscription fee, but he's welcome to the lesser game.sigh...
Why do some people always assume that they and only they know the right and best way to play a game?
Why do some people assume that what they value in a game is the only thing to value in a game?
Such narrow mindedness means YOU sir will not get the full value because you will blind yourself to possibilities and alternatives you consider beneath you.
FYI - not everyone in this world considers pvp, ganking and griefing (sorry, argue as you might but you can NOT have the first without some of the other two) an actual enhancement to a game, many people consider it a detriment.
I was trying to be subtle, but apparently that failed, since you have no clue as to my actual view. My bad, I'll try to write more clearly.
I read the OP as an appeal to implement SAD. That would mean the player who is avoiding conflict by intentionally not joining a company is still very much at risk. In my view, someone who is poorer and likely weaker than average should not be a primary target. I think SAD paints a big target on those who choose to play the game in very small groups or solo, and I am not a big fan of SAD for that reason.
Well, there should be a big target on soloers. Why wouldn't there be? I think we can all agree they're kinda asking for it. I respect their being willing to play a more difficult playstyle, but, well, it's not the intended playstyle and it's gonna be harder.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Well, there should be a big target on soloers. Why wouldn't there be? I think we can all agree they're kinda asking for it. I respect their being willing to play a more difficult playstyle, but, well, it's not the intended playstyle and it's gonna be harder.
I dunno. If soloers can maintain a very high reputation, and reputation penalties remain as high as they are now, then solo characters may be hindered much more in terms of training opportunities than in terms of being attacked.
There's no reputation penalty for Stand and Deliver. But yeah, I agree that training will be the main hindrance. I was assuming we were discussing a guy who was in a settlement but never did anything with the group.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
There's no reputation penalty for Stand and Deliver. But yeah, I agree that training will be the main hindrance. I was assuming we were discussing a guy who was in a settlement but never did anything with the group.
There's a lot of speculation right now that Stand and Deliver might be a long time coming/not part of MVP/second or third tier on the priority list/etc.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
OP, there was a plan for those meteorite hexes to be highly contested. No idea what the latest scoopy on that is from the devs?
To go back to basics, there was 2 schools of thought:-
1. Some area for the wilds where people expect "anything goes"
2. Constant gearing of methods to add layers of disincentives to griefers so they find PFO is not rewarding enough for their commitment or investment and wander off to other games for that. Eg one idea is I think that tab-target is not a combat that's going to thrill hardcore pvp'ers who want FPS type of experience of murder simming. It's just a component of these layers.
So if 2. holds, then I guess it rubs up against 1. and making 1. ain't such a good idea afterall?
Ryan said a while ago, "killing in context" quote-unquote eg ritualized forms of interaction of who fights who for what reason (and how and where) > is superior to what you get in other games "murder" ie no reason other than a reward of having a toon who can freely do this against another player. That is don't get me wrong fun because it's another player and not dumb/inert AI; but it's piss-poor gameplay when it's frequency rises and is bad for the growth of the game.
I've garbled a lot of things hazy from memory there but hope it makes some sense by providing context to the decisions being made or taken.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
But what happened to the idea of the dangerous wilds? Where crafters and gatherers would have to hire guards? where one was not safe alone? I've planned on being a gatherer and crafter from the start. It's something that gives me a great feeling of accomplishment (although a little PvP is fun too). I was looking forward to the challenges of gathering the materials to craft my awesome wares, making the feeling of accomplishment even greater.
So now I ask, would it be possible to add some fear back into the wilds? One of the few things that WILL be dangerous to gatherers, (when implemented) is Stand and Deliver. But I don't believe their will be many bandits, and why use Stand and Deliver on the single gatherer running around, when they could be using that time to target the larger groups...
For someone not in alpha, your assessment is spot on. Coming from your perspective, as someone who wants to be a gatherer but also wants the risk to be there, your request carries even more credibility.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There's no reputation penalty for Stand and Deliver. But yeah, I agree that training will be the main hindrance. I was assuming we were discussing a guy who was in a settlement but never did anything with the group.There's a lot of speculation right now that Stand and Deliver might be a long time coming/not part of MVP/second or third tier on the priority list/etc.
Last I saw it was more of a... May not be put in the game at all.
But that is what happens when we go from a flagging system that gives tons of PVP possibilities with simple game code to a faction warfare system that takes way too much time to code...
The faction warfare system is fine, but use the flagging system till it is complete so we have stuff to use.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If you want more danger:
Join companies with active feuds,
Join an NPC faction and raise it above 2,
Gather on lands with trespassing laws,
Gather near POI's, they should attract monsters IIRC
Shout about how quickly you filled your bags and how surprised you are at the slowness of your travel back to town.
Encourage the creation of 'Bottomton' a town for bottomed out reputation players who can zerg lone crafters until they get banned.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I'm assuming that, like EVE, every character is automatically a member of some company. If that's the case, then at least the starter companies will be NPC "controlled". If I'm wrong, and it's possible to belong to no company at all, then I guess there could be truly unaffiliated characters.
Every character belongs to a settlement- you start belonging to an NPC settlement, and then may join player settlements by mutual consent.
There are some very old posts where Ryan indicates that companies would be entirely optional, but that's from before some apparent design updates to the company model so who knows at this point.
Even if you're not mechanically required to join a company, you probably should join one- there's gotta be some group you approve of enough to not just waste the influence you could be earning them.
Since a theoretical NPC-run company would never use influence nor claim holdings, I don't see a point to having any such- other than, as you mentioned, making them feud targets, which could just as easily be accomplished by feuding the NPC settlement.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If you want more danger:
Join companies with active feuds,
Join an NPC faction and raise it above 2,
Gather on lands with trespassing laws,
Gather near POI's, they should attract monsters IIRC
Shout about how quickly you filled your bags and how surprised you are at the slowness of your travel back to town.Encourage the creation of 'Bottomton' a town for bottomed out reputation players who can zerg lone crafters until they get banned.
@Pino
The OP said, as a harvester he hopes to have more risk, otherwise there is less a sense of achievement in his view.
You and I grouped up for at least 90 minutes doing the Ogre escalation. Seriously, when all four of us stayed together were we at any time at risk?
Harvesting solo is even less risky. You just need nominal stealth, bow skills and be aware of your surroundings and you can harvest with virtually no risk.
Only other players can deliver that risk, but they won't if the only way to do that is to trash your character or remain untrainable for weeks.
Now, WoT is supposed to be in very early on in EE, but that does nothing to bring risk to harvesters as the OP requests. SADs should be brought online sooner rather than later.
I think the intent is to ideally never *need* to take faction hits, but to do so you have to build your character certain ways to get access to certain activities via abilities that balance those activities; such as SAD for banditry.
Otherwise you suffer penalties for not staying in character :-)
@Vrelx
I've played that game, there's a reason I'm not playing it anymore, it devolves to everyone killing on sight because there is nothing to stop them. Even if the penalty eventually stops that individual for a time there are several thousand individuals that haven't hit that point yet. Many think and myself among them it's better to reverse the situation and make the lashing out a rare behavior.
I've played that game as well Duffy. I don't want to advocate for killing without penalty because then everyone becomes a murderer. I like the reputation system and I do believe it will actually curtail random killing significantly for MOST of the population. However, I still REALLY, REALLY want there to be evil PKers throughout the world. I just don't want them to be the majority, or even a significant percentage, because that over-runs the game and drives out everyone else. I think GW has done plenty with PFO to ensure that these players aren't numerous and are not the most powerful players. Those are good design features. However, I hope it doesn't quash all PK play as without a few vicious PKers spread throughout the land, the world becomes safe and boring. Without reasonable expectation of danger and significant risk (not that danger has to happen EVERY time, but there must be a reasonable expectation that it could happen) you can't have meaningful adventure and excitement. Additionally, I lead a "defense guild" that is VERY interested in this game that has, for many years, been an anti-PK defense-force committed to defending a pocket of civilization (a settlement here in PFO) against hostile forces. A real threat to citizens is what will interest us to come oppose that threat. Without it, the game will simply lack a huge element of excitement and adventure.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Leithlen, I think everybody's on the same page with wanting a certain level of red play in the game. I suspect GW would much rather start with too little PK and gradually loosen the reins, than the opposite: they're struggling to overcome the perception that all open-world PVP sandbox games are nonstop chainsaw massacres. But as they see what the activity levels actually are and how much bad behavior takes place, they can fine tune the controls until the danger level is "just right".
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I think I ultimately agree with you Leithlen, I just don't feel that a game is necessarily going to have an easy time doing that. If the option is effective and fun it will be used and it will be common. I honestly can't think of anything to keep that type of PKer rare that isn't some sort of massive penalty. And just because you can't randomly murder the person you find in the woods without a penalty doesn't mean the world is safe, there will be plenty of ways to get flagged as a viable target and even more coming down the line.
I think the big thing they want to try and do is eliminate murder as a first response and optimal path to achieving a goal against other players. If they can do that by making it your 2nd or later response option, I think they will have succeeded.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Why even think of solo gathering and harvesting as dangerous PVP activities, those are supposed to be the safest things you can do. People that want PVP don't want to go search the woods and chase after solo runners who are just harvesting, if a gatherer wanted PVP they would be doing it. This is a straw dog considering that this is the MVP and we are a long way from real settlement warfare and the territory control that goes with it, the territory control will make solo gathering dangerous .
I think I ultimately agree with you Leithlen, I just don't feel that a game is necessarily going to have an easy time doing that. If the option is effective and fun it will be used and it will be common. I honestly can't think of anything to keep that type of PKer rare that isn't some sort of massive penalty. And just because you can't randomly murder the person you find in the woods without a penalty doesn't mean the world is safe, there will be plenty of ways to get flagged as a viable target and even more coming down the line.
I think the big thing they want to try and do is eliminate murder as a first response and optimal path to achieving a goal against other players. If they can do that by making it your 2nd or later response option, I think they will have succeeded.
I think we want the same thing Duffy. And so far I agree that they want to heavily penalize it so that it's rare. It should be VERY difficult and not highly effective. This should work to make it very rare. It should be rare so that the game doesn't end up as a "chainsaw massacre" as someone else put it. I just don't want to see them over-do it so that everyone is "good" and the only fights are warfare. I do want to see bandits and thieves. The game would be quite boring without them.
Why even think of solo gathering and harvesting as dangerous PVP activities, those are supposed to be the safest things you can do. People that want PVP don't want to go search the woods and chase after solo runners who are just harvesting, if a gatherer wanted PVP they would be doing it. This is a straw dog considering that this is the MVP and we are a long way from real settlement warfare and the territory control that goes with it, the territory control will make solo gathering dangerous .
Sorry, I've been at work, and am only at lunch right now, I don't have time to respond to all the threads.
But to this, I hope this is not true. Solo gathering should be one of the most dangerous things... Your a GATHERER (not trained for combat), and an open world where their ARE people who are trained for combat, and may want your things.
Again, because I think some people are misunderstanding me. I do not want to just Solo Gather. I would rather do it in a group, and earn the higher payload, BUT I have not seen/read much on the group gathering activities, as was pointed out to me last night.
I also did not know that the SaD Mechanic was being delayed, I thought it was supposed to be in "soon-ish". This worries me even more now.
And for those saying this is just a MVP, yes, I understand that. but the longer it takes to add certain functions into the game, is longer time allowed for players to lose interest. A lot of players who do lose interest, who even say "I'll revisit this game later", never actually do. They gain interest in a new game, or go back to a older game they've already dedicated a lot of time too (wow/Eve are the big ones).
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I just don't want to see them over-do it so that everyone is "good" and the only fights are warfare. I do want to see bandits and thieves. The game would be quite boring without them.
'Good' differs from reputation. Reputation differs from evil. It is to be difficult to be effective with a low reputation for an extended period.
However differences in faction should open the doors to bring danger back to gathering. There is a whole constellation of measures that are to be in place to offset the now dominant influence of rep concerns.
It is much too early to project futures in this game, except to say we haven't yet seen the constellation of contexts that will affect the integral outcome.
Pardon my stargazing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Why even think of solo gathering and harvesting as dangerous PVP activities, those are supposed to be the safest things you can do. People that want PVP don't want to go search the woods and chase after solo runners who are just harvesting, if a gatherer wanted PVP they would be doing it. This is a straw dog considering that this is the MVP and we are a long way from real settlement warfare and the territory control that goes with it, the territory control will make solo gathering dangerous .Sorry, I've been at work, and am only at lunch right now, I don't have time to respond to all the threads.
But to this, I hope this is not true. Solo gathering should be one of the most dangerous things... Your a GATHERER (not trained for combat), and an open world where their ARE people who are trained for combat, and may want your things.
Again, because I think some people are misunderstanding me. I do not want to just Solo Gather. I would rather do it in a group, and earn the higher payload, BUT I have not seen/read much on the group gathering activities, as was pointed out to me last night.
I also did not know that the SaD Mechanic was being delayed, I thought it was supposed to be in "soon-ish". This worries me even more now.
And for those saying this is just a MVP, yes, I understand that. but the longer it takes to add certain functions into the game, is longer time allowed for players to lose interest. A lot of players who do lose interest, who even say "I'll revisit this game later", never actually do. They gain interest in a new game, or go back to a older game they've already dedicated a lot of time too (wow/Eve are the big ones).
Without the SaD mechanic, being a Bandit is impossible is it not? It was the only way to be able to take ones items/wares while remaining AVERAGE/HIGH reputation. Sure, anyone could be a low rep CE Bandit, but why? It would only last so long, or they would have to only target newer players who are equal in training/skill or just zerg smaller party targets.
And to those saying Fued's will add the Dangerous Wilds I was hopping for..Thanks for using your DI to fued my company of Gatherers/Crafters. The crafters who rarely leave settlments unless they're looking for a little action themselves, but will probably be in lower tiered items Or the gatherers, who (they're are some, who unlike me don't WANT any dangers in gathering) just take a break from gathering. Then they'res others like me, who do want the dangers, but where not stupid, and do want to keep our wares. I'm not going to stay in the area KNOWING your hunting me, I'll move out for a little bit (with a group or solo) and just gather farther from my Settlement. But hey, like Mr. Dancey said, meaningful choices.
The part of the game that has my highest hopes right now, are the Star Metal Hexes. They seem to be exactly what I want. Now I just have to hope that the value of the materials from said hex are worth at least SOME hits to reputation, so others are willing to fight for them.
However differences in faction should open the doors to bring danger back to gathering. There is a whole constellation of measures that are to be in place to offset the now dominant influence of rep concerns.It is much too early to project futures in this game, except to say we haven't yet seen the constellation of contexts that will affect the integral outcome.
Pardon my stargazing.
This is true, like I said in the OP, I'm fully aware this is Alpha, and many changes will still be made. But they cannot be made unless we voice the changes we would like to see.
Back to work, I'll check back in afterwords
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If the gatherer has taken advantages of joining a faction, then in my understanding members of that faction's enemies can attack without rep loss just as if they were in declared feud.
Example: Hellknights versus Seven Arches. You belong to one, I to the other. You come across me harvesting and even without either of us attacking we are red to one another. I think that is something like the way it will work. If the benefits of a faction are significant, everyone will join factions. Every faction joined entails opening ourselves to that faction's opposition. So it is a meaningful choice to take advantage of factional benefits.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Again, because I think some people are misunderstanding me. I do not want to just Solo Gather. I would rather do it in a group, and earn the higher payload, BUT I have not seen/read much on the group gathering activities, as was pointed out to me last night.
There will be large scale mining operations that involve a claim and take a long time to harvest. The exciting gathering related PVP will be there .Making the PVP worth it as far as gain vs loss because it involves control of territory seems good to me. A company should have a way to claim jump with just spending influence to declare a feud on the claim owner, unless I got how that works wrong. We don't need to make it viable for people to role play the worst sort of evil human behavior, killing people because you find it enjoyable. That type of behavior should get you removed , just like real life.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A bit of a tangent, I know, but if PvE in the wilds represents zero risk to a solo (or even group) of gatherers then PFO has a HUGE problem outside of the current discussion about bandits and reputation.
Don't get me wrong, I think PvP bandits should be a real risk out in the wilds too... but if PFO is a game where monsters encountered in the wild are nothing more then a minor annoyance to a player.... then it got something very, very wrong.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The PvE in Alpha so far has been mostly against low-level mobs - as in, level 1 or 2. The last Adventure Time with Bonny had us up against a higher level Escalation, and it's a very good thing we had as many people as we did. Some of those mobs were very hard to bring down.
You'll be able to pick your way through a hex if you're careful, but there will be significant danger if you aggro a group of mobs that includes ranged attackers that are near your level (ish).
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Monsters in the wild will never be much more then an annoyance. They are bots, which will always be overcome by some simple tactic. Yes, I do know that in the beginning there will be NPC's that can kill you... but is that really a problem that cannot be over come easily.
Players are the only real risk.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The PvE in Alpha so far has been mostly against low-level mobs - as in, level 1 or 2. The last Adventure Time with Bonny had us up against a higher level Escalation, and it's a very good thing we had as many people as we did. Some of those mobs were very hard to bring down.
You'll be able to pick your way through a hex if you're careful, but there will be significant danger if you aggro a group of mobs that includes ranged attackers that are near your level (ish).
Group of four, and for much of the time three, Ogres were yellow - Red and no real challenge. I don't recall who it was, maybe Pino, had killed 170+ Ogres. I got achievements Ogre Slayer 5, Goblin Elite Slayer 4 or something like that.
We were the only group doing that escalation and only managed to bring it from about 25% strength to about 20% in about 90 minutes. To be honest, I was getting bored and the others had to be as well.
Escalation PvE = Grind
If we had a larger group we would have advanced the escalation faster, but would have had even less risk.
Boss mobs don't take any different strategy to defeat, just more dps.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Monsters in the wild will never be much more then an annoyance. They are bots, which will always be overcome by some simple tactic. Yes, I do know that in the beginning there will be NPC's that can kill you... but is that really a problem that cannot be over come easily.
Players are the only real risk.
That's only if the designers choose to make it so, Xeen. Mobs can never be as smart as humans but they don't have to be.... tactics aren't the only thing that matters in a combat situation... raw power is a factor too. Put a human armed with a dagger into a pit with a tiger... 99 times out of 100, it's the tiger who gets to enjoy dinner that night.
Most MMO's have PvE that is not particularly difficult not becausde they are incapable of making it difficult...but because the Developers have made purposefull decisions to scale down and "dumb" down the mobs in PvE in order to make it easy for players. Trust me, they could make mobs with much more challenging and sophisticated combat behavior if they wanted to do so.... they don't out of a conscious choice to make the material easy for players.... because that's the sort of game they have set out to make.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Monsters in the wild will never be much more then an annoyance. They are bots, which will always be overcome by some simple tactic. Yes, I do know that in the beginning there will be NPC's that can kill you... but is that really a problem that cannot be over come easily.
Players are the only real risk.
As I have said, the only real challenge in escalations is avoiding friendly fire while in large groups.
I soloed a group of 8 ogres that were yellow and red to me, by first clearing a path behind me of any mobs and then kiting the Ogres one at a time, straight back. Yes it took a but of prep, thought and walking backwards. If some want to think of that as challenging, well I guess grenade fishing is challenging to some.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...the others had to be as well.
You might need to take a vote on that, Bluddwolf. The chatter in our Teamspeak makes it sound as if the Alphas who come to talk are far from bored.
Their standards are, of course and of necessity, their own, but there are at least some Alphas who've been in since Day One and are still mining fun.