Skirmishes


Pathfinder Online

51 to 100 of 101 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lifedragn wrote:
Savage Grace wrote:


Combat is not harassment.

If you want combat free towns, crowdforge it.

Killing people in town is poor behavior and drives people out of the game. If you want a game with the population of a ghost town, then keep on.

This. Having the Thornguards be "better trained" to protect people in town will help. While no where can be truly safe, there should be some measure of safety in one's own town to be able to do what you need or want without having to constantly be next to the computer to defend yourself because someone else wants to fight.

You call it combat, but I call it harassment because one party is not wanting a fight and there is nothing short of logging out and not playing that will fix it at the game's present state.

Goblin Squad Member

(You people are fast typers!)

They are upset because they lost durability to what they are wearing or lost everything in their inventory because it was looted.


KOTC WxCougar wrote:

(You people are fast typers!)

They are upset because they lost durability to what they are wearing or lost everything in their inventory because it was looted.

The moral of the story is dont afk with stuff you don't want to break or lose. That's just laziness on the players part really what makes you think that AFKing should ever be safe?


Crowdforge the combat out of towns, then, folks. I've got lots of accounts that can't decide what they want to be when they grow up.

If you crowdforge combat out of towns, I can finally start spending their xp and create my own personal Military Industrial Complex that will join you in crafting invulnerability cheesiness.

Goblin Squad Member

So rushing off to take care of something is considered lazy? In cases where one can log off, they can log off to avoid this, but there are cases (especially young children and pets) that can't be done.

My main issue is with someone trying to craft - they can't even see an attacker coming until its too late.


KOTC WxCougar wrote:

So rushing off to take care of something is considered lazy? In cases where one can log off, they can log off to avoid this, but there are cases (especially young children and pets) that can't be done.

My main issue is with someone trying to craft - they can't even see an attacker coming until its too late.

Give me a break are you telling me every AFKER that gets killed is running off to deal with a rl event that cant be put on hold for the 10 seconds it takes to unequip and bank your things? In my mind that is pretty minor although I can agree with the thornguard changes and the crafting, one should not be able to be killed without knowing when dealing with crafting at the trainers.

Goblin Squad Member

Flynn Pontis wrote:
KOTC WxCougar wrote:

So rushing off to take care of something is considered lazy? In cases where one can log off, they can log off to avoid this, but there are cases (especially young children and pets) that can't be done.

My main issue is with someone trying to craft - they can't even see an attacker coming until its too late.

Give me a break are you telling me every AFKER that gets killed is running off to deal with a rl event that cant be put on hold for the 10 seconds it takes to unequip and bank your things? In my mind that is pretty minor although I can agree with the thornguard changes and the crafting, one should not be able to be killed without knowing when dealing with crafting at the trainers.

I didn't say ALL were dealing with RL problems. Some are. It was to the comment made that indicated all were lazy if they didn't log off. I was indicating that it was not always the case.

I honestly think the fix to the Thornguards will be very helpful and finding some means of showing the mini map while crafting or something that gives you a heads up could help solve that issue.

I know this is a game where there is pvp and danger and so forth and should be as this is the River Kingdoms. I'm not expecting immunity to combat in towns either. Just something better than it is now. I hope a balance can be found for both parties.


"I honestly think the fix to the Thornguards will be very helpful and finding some means of showing the mini map while crafting or something that gives you a heads up could help solve that issue."

"I know this is a game where there is pvp and danger and so forth and should be as this is the River Kingdoms. I'm not expecting immunity to combat in towns either. Just something better than it is now. I hope a balance can be found for both parties."

I completely agree with you here this patch where thornguards actually do something to attackers is great and will protect people better so that they attacker wont get a free kill.

Goblin Squad Member

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Or you guys could just keep complaining about pvp until GW nerfs it into none existence and we all go play crowfall.


Gol Phyllain wrote:
Or you guys could just keep complaining about pvp until GW nerfs it into none existence and we all go play crowfall.

Do you know how much money I have sunk into this game?

You're not leaving until at least April 30th buddy! ;-)

err umm please, Benevolent Dictator?

Goblin Squad Member

Gol Phyllain wrote:
Or you guys could just keep complaining about pvp until GW nerfs it into none existence and we all go play crowfall.

Hey, some of us might play Black Desert.

Goblin Squad Member

Don't lie tink, you'd follow us if we went to crowfall :D

Goblin Squad Member

Gol Phyllain wrote:
Or you guys could just keep complaining about pvp until GW nerfs it into none existence and we all go play crowfall.

Not sure if you are meaning my comments or just in general, but in regards to myself I am not against PvP. I am against meaningless PvP killing. Quite possibly the instances I am talking about have nothing to do with what the meaningful PvP'ers are doing.

As I said, I hope there can be a balance that allows meaningful PvP to be possible that doesn't harm the meaningful PvP'ers or harm the experience of those who are unable to defend because they can't see (ie crafting or AH interfaces blocking everything).

In my own experience I have died once to another player and would consider it meaningful PvP. I had no weapons on me so I couldn't do anything about it but was traveling and inadvertently went into an open window Tower Hex. I was killed once and then was chased by another out of the hex (who gave me a warning shot and verbal warning). That I see as meaningful (and I would think) more fun than killing people who do nothing at all because they aren't there.

Just my own thoughts. There are other valid opinions out there, and do not see my stance as better than another's.

Goblin Squad Member

AFK = A Free Kill

There isn't much more to it than that. Until people start thinking like this, they will get killed. And yes, RL happens, but it takes all of 2 seconds to click the logout button so unless it's a real disaster, there is time.

That said, people killed while at the crafting stations have absolutely no chance of knowing that there is a "hostile" anywhere near them at the moment - that's not only not fun, it's not "fair" (and, yes, life is not fair, but if you want people to pay to play this game there has to be some perceived degree of fairness. This applies to the PvPers as well, although their definitions of fair may be different - remember Bluddwolf railing about Ryan's comment that GW would be "arbitrary and capricious" in their dealings with griefers?)

The Thornguard change should take care of most of this anyway as far as "safety" in town goes. Perhaps the fact that towers can be defended now will take care of the rest.


KOTC WxCougar wrote:


Not sure if you are meaning my comments or just in general, but in regards to myself I am not against PvP.

Ya most of this isn't aimed against you in fact I agree with you in regards to much of the points you brought up the general thing here is that people are getting the feeling that pvp is constantly under attack (which it is). There have been many a thread that have complained about people getting killed so your initial comment (which I am too lazy to quote at this point) was vague enough to solicit a response from the people wanting to make sure pvp remains existent and meaningful. Most of these comments are really just ill will towards some of the reputation related changes coming in the next patch. Which I would encourage you to look into if you haven't yet.

Goblin Squad Member

The fact that you think that the only meaningful pvp is in the tower hexes mean you and I are speaking a different language. To me any gatherer anywhere who is collecting resources that will go in to armor of people who will fight me is meaningful. Killing a crafter who is dumb enough to afk in a none safe spot is meaningful. Killing a random newbie in a starter town is not meaningful pvp.

Goblin Squad Member

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Gol Tink wrote:
Towers don't provide it; there are too many to make it worth defending the ones you hold, much easier to just run off and grab someone elses when their window comes up.

You are choosing not to defend your towers (which is supposed to be the main source of consensual PVP right now), and then complaining that there isn't enough PVP to keep you happy?

Maybe you should try defending your towers when someone attacks them?

Goblin Squad Member

@Flynn I am noticing the attacks which was why I wanted to make sure what I was saying was clearer than my initial post. I do apologize for that misunderstanding.

I have looked at the rep changes and honestly don't agree with most of it. I like that you can gain rep while offline, but the rate to regain it is too low. It hurts the meaningful PVP'ers more than solves the issue of stopping those being jerks.

It would be nice to have some kind of flag that allows for consensual PvPing (akin to feuding and wars) that could be in place now until those features are in. There are the Towers and the rep free windows but those can be limiting as well.

Goblin Squad Member

Crowfall...does look good.

I think both sides of this PvP/Non-PvP argument are wrong, to be honest.

There needs to be danger in AKFing, or even being in town, but it shouldn't be a constant danger that a group is attacking 3-4 times a day. The levels of protection need to be increased so that it takes a decent effort into breaking into towns and doing damage, which just isn't there.

I think the problem for KP, is we have 4 groups of people from 3 settlements all attacking that one location, at least 3-4 times per day.

Goblin Squad Member

I'll start by saying I very rarely initiate PvP. I don't attack random people while off on my own and I don't kill people that are AFK. That being said I think this game seriously lacks a sense of danger. People are AFKing all over the place. If I go AFK due to something RL I have no right to come back and expect to be alive.

The war of towers is dull. I've scouted and sat outside towers to guard them and no one shows up. We attack towers and no one shows up to defend. Like so many have said there's really no point in defending when you can just take another. Seeking out PvP with the towers more often just ends in boredom.

This is a game where PvP is supposedly a major pillar. It's free for all enabled with the obvious consequence of losing reputation. When it log in I acknowledge that. To be surprised that someone attacks me at all or at any time strikes me as...well the internet is old now. There shouldn't be any surprises.


Gaskon wrote:
Gol Tink wrote:
Towers don't provide it; there are too many to make it worth defending the ones you hold, much easier to just run off and grab someone elses when their window comes up.

You are choosing not to defend your towers (which is supposed to be the main source of consensual PVP right now), and then complaining that there isn't enough PVP to keep you happy?

Maybe you should try defending your towers when someone attacks them?

Alright first off the way tower capping usually plays out is one naked guy will run into a tower and afk capture the tower. Now killing that person is rather easy and is hardly even considered pvp there is no fight or resistance. When the player sees that someone killed him to defend the tower he simply walks over to another tower and begins capping that one. This not meaningful pvp this is just a chore.

Goblin Squad Member

There are to many towers.
Plain and simple.
The people that want to PvP that the WoT was for are not willing to to spend the time to go out and try to find the handful of towers that might be open at a given time.

I really hope there are other systems added in b/c quickly the PvPers are going to get bored and either leave or start really messing with towns and driving off PvEers.

Goblin Squad Member

Savage Grace wrote:
Lifedragn wrote:
Savage Grace wrote:
KOTC WxCougar wrote:
having people be harassed in town is not something I care to see.

Combat is not harassment.

If you want combat free towns, crowdforge it.

Killing people in town is poor behavior and drives people out of the game. If you want a game with the population of a ghost town, then keep on.

I haven't done it even once. But until the devs tell me they are going to let your Military Industrial Complex craft gear for your PvPers in utter invulnerability, it remains a viable option.

And I'm still puzzling how an AFKer who isn't even at their computer can get upset over something they didn't even see happen.

Yeah, I mean how can that be upsetting?

Goblin Squad Member

Saiph wrote:
Savage Grace wrote:
And I'm still puzzling how an AFKer who isn't even at their computer can get upset over something they didn't even see happen.
Yeah, I mean how can that be upsetting?

This made me laugh. I guess Savage Grace wouldn't get upset to come of out of a movie and find that their car had been keyed.


long term afk folks do it with no gear on.

They just come back and find themselves at another part of the settlement.

It's about as disconcerting as coming out of a movie and finding a flyer on the windshield of your car.

Unless you're really really sensitive and nerdrage about them lifting your wiper blade.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

1 person marked this as a favorite.

What meaningful human interaction occurs when you gank an unequipped AFK character?

Goblin Squad Member

*eye roll*

Goblin Squad Member

DeciusBrutus wrote:
What meaningful human interaction occurs when you gank an unequipped AFK character?

When one set of players kills AFK characters in a settlement, it sends a signal that the AFK player's leadership and settlement are not strong enough to stop such raids. If nothing else, it is posturing: we are stronger than you. Join us or be our victims.

Posturing is meaningful, because humans do it all of the time. It is deeply fixed in their emotional make-up. (I wish I had an elf avatar to say that.)

Of course, settlements are sieves (until Thursday?) and no one should feel weak because a gang of people ran through and killed an undefended character. It's more like :yawn: It's that time of day. The PvPers want someone to keep them entertained. Responding to them is an emotional response; doing something else may be more efficient and rewarding.


I liked Keeper's Pass' solution the other day...

Hey, we're taking our towers back... wanna play?

I don't even know who won that night, I wasn't nearby, but it is one way of keeping people's PvP thirst in check. Just giving people a fight AWAY from town, every so often.

By the way, I was on my first crafting character last night. Boy did I feel vulnerable.

But we *do* have to crowdfroge a happy medium that doesn't allow crafters to be impervious members of the Military Industrial Complex, but also allows reasonable people (probably working TOGETHER) taking reasonable precautions to get crafting done.

We'll see how the rep gain change and Thornguards change go next week.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

Yrme wrote:
DeciusBrutus wrote:
What meaningful human interaction occurs when you gank an unequipped AFK character?

When one set of players kills AFK characters in a settlement, it sends a signal that the AFK player's leadership and settlement are not strong enough to stop such raids. If nothing else, it is posturing: we are stronger than you. Join us or be our victims.

Posturing is meaningful, because humans do it all of the time. It is deeply fixed in their emotional make-up. (I wish I had an elf avatar to say that.)

Of course, settlements are sieves (until Thursday?) and no one should feel weak because a gang of people ran through and killed an undefended character. It's more like :yawn: It's that time of day. The PvPers want someone to keep them entertained. Responding to them is an emotional response; doing something else may be more efficient and rewarding.

Thanks for actually answering the question. I don't think that is the motivation behind the players that are doing that, but it is sufficient reason to not outright ban the practice as harmful to the game. Importantly, it provides a meaningful distinction between doing the same action in a NPC town.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Savage Grace wrote:
But we *do* have to crowdfroge a happy medium that doesn't allow crafters to be impervious members of the Military Industrial Complex, but also allows reasonable people (probably working TOGETHER) taking reasonable precautions to get crafting done.

Per my GW post here the eventual introduction of raidable outposts and POIs will provide for partially filling that need nicely, by giving PvP oriented folks a solid reason to attack/defend that permits a significant impact on setlement resources without going after the people in town. When we get past the essentially insignificant Tower Wars, things will be more interesting for everybody.

And here's the direct to the blog, for those without GW forum access:
The Window's a Wound, the Road Is a Knife

Goblin Squad Member

Savage Grace wrote:

Combat is not harassment.

If you want combat free towns, crowdforge it.

I can see both points of this easily enough. Yeah, PvP can be a lot of fun when you're in combat fighting other people. The thing is, combat involves others fighting back. If they don't fight back you are just committing murder.


Tell that to the World War 2 bomber pilots dropping bombs on factories that produced the items that fed the enemy war machine.

All sides gave their bomber pilots medals, and they bombed more enemy factories and cities than they did battlefields.

Strategic Warfare is real, and arguably effective. As long as crafters are supplying the war effort, simple human logic will lead combatants to take the fight to them. You can still call it murder, both in games and the real world, but if people can fuel a war effort without any risk, that seems quite unbalanced.

If I'm a "murderer" the day I go into town and kill an opponent setttlement crafter (which I haven't done yet), what does that make the friendly settlement crafter that provided me with the weaponry for "murder"?

Heck, I could even buy the weaponry at YOUR auction house, perhaps from the very crafter that I later killed.

Goblin Squad Member

Savage Grace wrote:

Tell that to the World War 2 bomber pilots dropping bombs on factories that produced the items that fed the enemy war machine.

All sides gave their bomber pilots medals, and they bombed more enemy factories and cities than they did battlefields.

Strategic Warfare is real, and arguably effective.

Actually not really but its going to be a TL&DR to argue out here in any detail.

Suffice to say in WWII the whole bomber command approach of targeting civilian centers to reduce enemy morale which was being pushed by Bomber Harris was very controversial. The US in particular was actually opposed to it claiming that the resources were better spent on military targets, that it actually hardened enemy morale and that the end result would be a flattened Germany that the US would have to pick up the tab for when it came to rebuilding after the war.

In the end Churchill also disagreed with the strategy and ordered Harris to stop the campaign.

Post war in high school history lessons and in popular movies the strategic bombing is represented as a resounding success (for obvious political reasons) but any in depth studies usually deem it to be a failure.

If you want a comparison to real life the best one is the abundance of sociopaths (not murderers, people who put there own success and pleasure above the well being of others and their community/group)in politics and business is a good example. Sociopathic attitudes (which many PvPers display in abundance) in real society tend to lead to success for the individual at the expense of the good of the company, political party or society as a whole.

Yrme wrote:

When one set of players kills AFK characters in a settlement, it sends a signal that the AFK player's leadership and settlement are not strong enough to stop such raids.

No its a sign that GW have dropped the ball and stuffed up the game balance badly.

When the game pretty much requires that an entire group of players sit around and do absolutely nothing but "guard" on the off chance that someone else in that 4 of 5 hour period will log in a character for several minutes when they feel its a good time to kill a few players, loot some stuff and log out again (as opposed to hitting the settlement next door) the game balance is all wrong.

I live in losec in EVE and even their you can dock up or AFK cloak and be safe.

This is not the way it was described by GW at the start and the current plans to change the way Thorngard work are not going to work either.


I purposely used the word "arguably".

But the U.S. Air Force was still championing Strategic Warfare when I was in AFROTC in 1978 and 1979 (pre-Reagan). That was 34 years after WW2.

They were thoroughly calling it a success in the past, as well as preparing us to bomb/nuke cities... or in my case, to write the computer programs to effectively nuke cities, as well as to write some sort of decentralized digital communication system (let's call it an inter-net) that would allow us to communicate after many cities (including some of our own) were destroyed in the nuclear holocaust.

Goblin Squad Member

Savage Grace wrote:
But we *do* have to crowdfroge a happy medium that doesn't allow crafters to be impervious members of the Military Industrial Complex

Kill the gatherers. They have to leave town.

Then you even get the loot from them, so its a net positive for you, not just a loss for the enemy.

Running in to kill AFK crafters should never be part of a valid strategy, because you can't actually stop them from crafting by killing them, it doesn't even slow down the queue.


I prefer the mobile nodes gatherers for just this reason.

Still, refiners/crafters currently are moving from the bank to refining/crafting stations carrying resources, and I've heard that Ryan has said he EXPECTS people to be killed for their inventory.

Also, though it may have been a bug, and perhaps cured on login, on Teamspeak I heard someone complain that when they died (out adventuring) their crafting job disappeared. So... are you SURE killing a crafter doesn't interrupt their crafting? I don't know the answer, but have obviously heard what I described above.

If your crafting job magically lands in your inventory, perhaps your husk should (does?) magically get the resources from your unfinished refining/crafting jobs, too.

Goblin Squad Member

Savage Grace wrote:
So... are you SURE killing a crafter doesn't interrupt their crafting? I don't know the answer, but have obviously heard what I described above.

Huh. I am pretty sure I've died while having a job queued, but I'm not 100% positive.

Goblin Squad Member

Gaskon wrote:
Savage Grace wrote:
So... are you SURE killing a crafter doesn't interrupt their crafting? I don't know the answer, but have obviously heard what I described above.
Huh. I am pretty sure I've died while having a job queued, but I'm not 100% positive.

I definitely have.

I fact my technique for long distant transport involves queuing a slow craft job, then queue up a lot of refines after that, then run home with limited stuff in inventory and finally logout near the bank or the AH (either will do) before the refines hit the inventory and take me up to 500 encumbrance.

On numerous occasions I have died half way and it never broke the queue.

Goblin Squad Member

Savage Grace wrote:

I purposely used the word "arguably".

But the U.S. Air Force was still championing Strategic Warfare when I was in AFROTC in 1978 and 1979 (pre-Reagan). That was 34 years after WW2.

They were thoroughly calling it a success in the past, as well as preparing us to bomb/nuke cities... or in my case, to write the computer programs to effectively nuke cities, as well as to write some sort of decentralized digital communication system (let's call it an inter-net) that would allow us to communicate after many cities (including some of our own) were destroyed in the nuclear holocaust.

I am probably a little cynical but it seems to me an air force that is continually facing congress funding cuts is probably unlikely to announce strategic bombing as a failure :D

You also would expect anyone opposed to military spending to argue it was a failure.

I am however no expert, just saying it is controversial- this book for example:

The Bombing War: Europe 1939-1945


Neadenil Edam wrote:
Gaskon wrote:
Savage Grace wrote:
So... are you SURE killing a crafter doesn't interrupt their crafting? I don't know the answer, but have obviously heard what I described above.
Huh. I am pretty sure I've died while having a job queued, but I'm not 100% positive.

I definitely have.

I fact my technique for long distant transport involves queuing a slow craft job, then queue up a lot of refines after that, then run home with limited stuff in inventory and finally logout near the bank or the AH (either will do) before the refines hit the inventory and take me up to 500 encumbrance.

On numerous occasions I have died half way and it never broke the queue.

It was probably just a bug, then. My guess is it showed up again once he logged out and in, the same way my inventory does, sometimes.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Gol Phyllain wrote:
Or you guys could just keep complaining about pvp until GW nerfs it into none existence and we all go play crowfall.

Can I haz your stuff?

Goblin Squad Member

1) Personally WoT doesn't work for me. I play European times and 99% of the PvP windows are in the middle of the night for me. I get up at 6am for work, so I can't really be playing at 3am. I have 2 small children, so even at the weekend I can't be playing at 3am.

2) The Thornguard fix is overkill. They need to be able to differentiate between Thornguards in NPC settlements and PC settlements. NPC settlement Thornguards should attack attackers, PC settlement Thornguards should attack based on reputation. I don't think the reputation level at which the PC settlement Thornguards react should be adjustable or every settlement will have it set at 7499.

3) The reputation gain fix is also overkill. 10 rep per hour real time is far too slow. Forcing people to PvP only in tower hexes doesn't work for everyone (See 1).

Goblin Squad Member

Savage Grace wrote:

I liked Keeper's Pass' solution the other day...

Hey, we're taking our towers back... wanna play?

Keep your enemies straight, that was Phaeros (The Seventh Veil), not Keeper's Pass. Although we do hang out in KP a lot to make use of the crafting facilities.


Hey, if we call people who can't and won't fight "carebears", what are "coreboars"? "Cureburrs" are obviously those healers who just stick mindlessly to their allies without paying attention to the rest of the battle, but "coreboars"..."corebores"? "Choirbriars"?

What? Topic? Oh, right.

Settlements, with their crafters and AFKers, are more interesting targets because they present more challenge—there's the chance that someone from the same settlement will try to defend their lazy* comrade, allowing for a battle with much more "real" stakes. Towers are very insignificant as far as motivation goes, but protecting your friends is a matter of both pride and loyalty.

This is really making me want to get better with my combos so I can start ganking some gatherers. Word chosen for alliteration, not provocation.

*In fairness, while logging out takes two seconds, logging back in takes twenty. :P

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kobold Cleaver wrote:
"Cureburrs" are obviously those healers who just stick mindlessly to their allies without paying attention to the rest of the battle

I thought coreburrs was the fishwife?

Goblin Squad Member

'Ey there! What ye calling me names for 'lil elfie?! Ye don't see me making fun of them there biggie ears do ye?!

<cackles>

Goblin Squad Member

<Kabal> Kradlum wrote:

1) Personally WoT doesn't work for me. I play European times and 99% of the PvP windows are in the middle of the night for me. I get up at 6am for work, so I can't really be playing at 3am. I have 2 small children, so even at the weekend I can't be playing at 3am.

Yeah, because towers are sort of undefendable against a concerted attack on multiple towers it makes sense to have your PvP window during a quiet server time. yes you have less defenders but they also have more trouble getting a strike force together.

I would assume if the balance was more in favor of defense you would see the slots move to US or Euro prime time.

The real problem in any game with this sort of capture the flag thing is the attackers have a huge advantage simply becasue they can dictate the terms of engagement and even choose to not log in at all today, whereas mounting a defense means a lot of hours spent sitting around every day 7 days a week. The limited PvP hours help a little but its still an issue.

<Kabal> Kradlum wrote:


2) The Thornguard fix is overkill. They need to be able to differentiate between Thornguards in NPC settlements and PC settlements. NPC settlement Thornguards should attack attackers, PC settlement Thornguards should attack based on reputation. I don't think the reputation level at which the PC settlement Thornguards react should be adjustable or every settlement will have it set at 7499.

3) The reputation gain fix is also overkill. 10 rep per hour real time is far too slow. Forcing people to PvP only in tower hexes doesn't work for everyone (See 1).

I am a little concerned these changes might backfire against any defenders or "white knights".

Whats needed in settlements is:
- get the crafting working directly from and too the inventory
- purchased items at the AH should vault by default, allow movement of items between vault and inventory while at the AH
- allowing crafters to see what is happening in game while in a craft window. At present if you turn the sound down you will not even realize you are being attacked.
- fix the ridiculous situation where you can wait at a spot people are likely to login (such as the bank) and target and start to kill them while the player in question is still looking at a "loading textures" prompt
- make it harder to move around a settlement while having low rep with stealth (more Thornguard ?)


Personally, if I were in charge of a settlement, I'd put my PvP window at a moderately accessible hour. This encourages some attacks, leading to some of our towers getting stolen from time to time. This in turn will motivate members of my settlement to go out and claim new towers/get revenge on the "thieves".

At this low-stakes segment of the game, I think the best we can do is just try and preserve momentum and keep people playing.

But maybe that's why I'm in charge of jack diddly.

Goblin Squad Member

Neadenil Edam wrote:

Whats needed in settlements is:

- get the crafting working directly from and too the inventory

I think you mean get the crafting working directly from and to the Vault.

51 to 100 of 101 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Paizo / Licensed Products / Digital Games / Pathfinder Online / Skirmishes All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.