Goblin Squad Member
|
Is it really a war though?
My impression was that it is a cold war at most. Or just rivalry. And that the driver for it is the need to have some pvp in the game more than anything else.
something something about Golgatha playing the villains the game needs.
maybe I'm naive, but what I've seen so far is a bunch of players wanting the game to succeed and able to cooperate just fine in the background while fighting and looting each other in the foreground.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Is it really a war though?My impression was that it is a cold war at most. Or just rivalry. And that the driver for it is the need to have some pvp in the game more than anything else.
something something about Golgatha playing the villains the game needs.
maybe I'm naive, but what I've seen so far is a bunch of players wanting the game to succeed and able to cooperate just fine in the background while fighting and looting each other in the foreground.
I'm hoping this is the case. A war would be long, and drawn out, not fun IMO. a "fued between settlements" (not to be confused with the future Fued mechanic between Companies) would be fine, and fun. A short term thing. But I keep seeing the word "War", and I can go and neglect my duties in PFO's First War.
I don't talk with EBA people (except rarely Cheatle), so IDK what they're thinking, I just read whats posted. A lot can be lost through just reading something. Tone, sarcasm, emotions in general are all lost (mostly, some well written things can convey some emotions). To add, I'm very competitive, so If I see a challenge issued (call of War), I accept, and do what I can to win. The downside, is I could be taking this word with more meaning then intended. That's why I'm tryn to clarify.|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Given the current community's recent pushback on the devs' proposed WoT changes (to the point where many of us can now do just fine with a zero tower settlement), it is hard to imagine the exact same community won't crowdforge any crafting loss to similar irrelevance.Funny, I thought the community was trying - unsuccessfully - to get Goblinworks to make the Towers more significant by capping NPC Settlements at Level 6 (no Tier 2 at all) and starting PC Settlements at Level 7.
You make it sound like the community demanded the current system, but that's exactly the opposite of true.
No, there was no such crowd forging that discussed lowering NPC settlement training to 6.
The main thrust of the push back was that low population settlements would effectively be squeezed out of the game, its members forced to join the larger settlements.
The 4.0 changes were that all 6 alpha towers would be removed and training increase would be set at 4 Ts for every 1 level, above 8. The compromise was that every PC settlement would have a base of 9 (entry level Tier 2) and gain 1 level per 3 towers. But also, even if no towers were held, the PC settlements would still gain access to higher levels over time.
This compromise provided the opportunity for smaller PC settlements to created a gap between what they could offer to new players and what new players could receive in an NPC settlement.
This compromise also reduced the amount of Open PVP hexes, but that is seen as a reasonable sacrifice (by me and others) in exchange of having a more diverse settlement population.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Your Detroit tank factory premise is JUST as intriguing in the possibilities, especially in a game with bluff and disguise feats.But yes, attacking the settlement is certainly a viable way to handle it, and perhaps spares people the psychologically icky personalization of being PvP victims.
They didn't kill me. They damaged my workstation.
But will that workstation or the settlement drop recipes? 8-)
Part of the question is... how large-scale vs small scale do we want things to be? Depersonalizing some of the PvP by keeping it at a large scale might lead to a game that Ryan and Lisa are more comfortable with.
But I'd want a lone person or a small stealthy organized band of folks to feel like they too can have an effect on war (and even an outsized effect when defenders get sloppy). I really need to read up on whatever has been written about assassination. [Conjures Tigari].
Why a settlement or a workstation should drop recipes? It should drop broken versions of the materials used to craft the building and the materials currently in use in the different crafting buildings.
A real world kitchen, if invaded, has a chance to have recipes. It might not, but it just might.
Workers need instructions. Flash paper doesn't always work in time. :-)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Given the current community's recent pushback on the devs' proposed WoT changes (to the point where many of us can now do just fine with a zero tower settlement), it is hard to imagine the exact same community won't crowdforge any crafting loss to similar irrelevance.Funny, I thought the community was trying - unsuccessfully - to get Goblinworks to make the Towers more significant by capping NPC Settlements at Level 6 (no Tier 2 at all) and starting PC Settlements at Level 7.
You make it sound like the community demanded the current system, but that's exactly the opposite of true.
No, there was no such crowd forging that discussed lowering NPC settlement training to 6.
The main thrust of the push back was that low population settlements would effectively be squeezed out of the game, its members forced to join the larger settlements.
Crowdforging: Changes to War of Towers for EE 4.0
Start at the linked post and keep reading. You'll see a significant number of voices asking for NPC Settlement Training to be lowered to 6. Prominently, Azure_Zero - one of the most enthusiastic advocates for helping "small Settlements" - also added his voice to the calls to cap NPC Training at Level 6.
As I've said a number of times, I really try not to "correct" people's opinions, but when you assert as fact something that is provably not a fact, I can't help but link the relevant proof.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
They're not just saying they don't enjoy PvP, they are literally calling other players "sociopaths", for doing things in game the CEO says they should be able to do.
Eh, I don't really mind being called something that doesn't really mean anything. People really need to step up their medical diagnosis game. If anything I would have APD. Though I do find the thought of someone with APD having a social anxiety disorder rather amusing.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The ramifications of killing other players will vary on the basis of many factors. The most significant effect may be the emergent behavior of other players in the game, as opposed to a game mechanic.
I think it likely there will be horribly evil kingdoms run by rogues, assassins, spies and traitors. What the other players do about that will be up to them.
The game should just let us rob the banks. It would take all that icky personalization psychology out of the picture.
Our bank was robbed. We should do something about that.
You have what you hold can carry from the enemy's bank.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The game should just let us rob the banks. It would take all that icky personalization psychology out of the picture.
Our bank was robbed. We should do something about that.
You have what you
holdcan carry from the enemy's bank.
That would make things pretty interesting now wouldn't it?
To me once the seige mechanics are in, it would make sense to be able to loot from the settlement you just destroyed. In a sense if bank robbers came in with an army they would indeed reap the benefits of being able to take down an entire settlement.
In my early years of TT I played a thief who absolutely stole from the local banks. So despite me playing in a non-aggressive group the thought of being able to steal something from a bank with the skills I have trained does appeal to part of my inner gamer.
I also imagine being able to loot from enemy outposts (banks in a POI for lack of better phrase). This would all of course have be much later in the development, but it would certainly change the way we all think.
The downside would be the potential player loss. Which would mean a happy balance would need to be found so players would still keep their subscriptions going. Not to mention the complications of programming such a feature, being able to defend against theft, etc.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Wouldn't it be cool if banks were vulnerable -> Nothing important is kept in vulnerable banks.
Ryan used that specific example at one point when talking about the problem that mechanically permitting some kinds of activities leads to players universally avoiding the behavior which would enable that activity. Lootable banks would simply mean that a city threatened with siege would move all of its assets away long before the siege could be completed, and the coding effort to enable the feature would be wasted.
We've been promised raiding on holdings and outposts, though those will hold only the bulk resources for settlements, I think.
I'm not sure if that would be much of a reward for an unaligned company. It would depend on if there is a market for those bulk resources, since they wouldn't have a personal use for bulk resources.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think this thread perfectly illustrates a number of PVP-related issues:
1) Some people will never, ever like PVP, and will react quite negatively if forced to PVP.
2) Some PVPers do not understand that mentality, and react negatively to it, further reinforcing negative stereotypes of PVPers.
3) People hate losing stuff, and generally react poorly to it.
#3 is tricky. GW has set up the current system to make PVP rewarding- the winner has the possibility of walking away with some nice loot. However, many times, that loot really means little to the victor, but means much more to the loser, and he basically loses everything. You then add onto that the item decay from dying, so the loser is doubly penalized. People who PVP often may not care about that, but those who don't PVP often will, and they probably aren't good enough at PVP to avoid dying often.
At one point in SWG space PVP, dying meant significant decay to your ship equipment. Once people found out that the gun or engine they spent a year building would be destroyed in 2-3 nights of heavy dogfighting, they stopped PVPing. Not switch out to cheap, lower performance parts- stopped PVPing altogether. Once PVP decay was eliminated, PVP picked up again. My fear is the current system will ultimately push the bulk of the population into heavily defended settlements with a few excursions every day or so for bulk resources. Those looking for PVP will have a difficult time finding it.
I'd prefer a system that doesn't heavily penalize you for losing in PVP and as a result doesn't push people away from PVP. I'm all for rewarding PVP, but a zero-sum game between victor and loser is a tough sell.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It seems like this game was advertised to have open world PvP as a core feature, so I feel that #2 is somewhat more justified than #1.
1) Some people will never, ever like PVP, and will react quite negatively if forced to PVP.2) Some PVPers do not understand that mentality, and react negatively to it, further reinforcing negative stereotypes of PVPers.
Yes and no. If you followed the Kickstarter, Blogs, and Forums, yes you should be well aware of what you are getting into. However, we have picked up a number of people who are Pathfinder players/fans who have jumped into the game because it is Pathfinder and don't have that foreknowledge. While I'd never jump into a game without looking at all the info out there, others don't, and the game itself doesn't make any of the "open-world PVP sandbox" gameplay clear at all.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
One of the challenges PFO set forth for itself is to try and shake the Sandbox PvP MMO = murder hobo simulator mentality. Unfortunately not enough systems are in place yet to really make that clear.
I see one of the biggest problems is that PvP loss is very one sided and often inevitable for the targets. The all or nothing issues as pointed out above create frustration and incentives to pursue the negative feedback loop which many are not mentally prepared for. Coupled with the fact that just because you didn't rob that person more than once this week doesn't mean they haven't been robbed every night this week, what may be intermittent for you can certainly be a regular occurrence for someone else. I don't think there is much you can do about that latter case outside of always managing to outnumber your possible assailants.
There is also an important distinction between the mentalities of 'Not Friendly Kill' and 'Not Enemy Don't Kill'. Both accept PvP and are part of the sandbox, but reflect different play-styles.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I think most PvP'ers understand that mentality. They just don't care.
In EVE there are entire groups dedicated to harassing PvE players into quitting the game :D
They are easy enough to avoid (or fight) by any more experienced players of course but do cause the occasional rage quit by new players accompanied by a flurry of forum melodrama.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think most PvP'ers understand that mentality. They just don't care.In EVE there are entire groups dedicated to harassing PvE players into quitting the game :D
They are easy enough to avoid (or fight) by any more experienced players of course but do cause the occasional rage quit by new players accompanied by a flurry of forum melodrama.
Some drama might be warranted with action like that. Trying to get people to ragequit is clearly metagame harassment, not in-game "I'm playing a badguy" behavior. I'd ban the crap out of them.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Something with the husk looting - I had understood it to be that there is a 25% chance of each item being destroyed and each looter would be able to take 1 item (or 1 line item). So a group of 4 bandits could each take 1 item from the husk for a total of 4 items (or line items) from the husk.
Since that is not the case in practice, I likely misread the blog/post about it. Its also possible other people had read it the same way as I had.
Not that I am advocating any one way in particular, but was tossing out there other potential misunderstandings.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Something with the husk looting - I had understood it to be that there is a 25% chance of each item being destroyed and each looter would be able to take 1 item (or 1 line item). So a group of 4 bandits could each take 1 item from the husk for a total of 4 items (or line items) from the husk.
Since that is not the case in practice, I likely misread the blog/post about it. Its also possible other people had read it the same way as I had.
Not that I am advocating any one way in particular, but was tossing out there other potential misunderstandings.
The looting is one item at a time but if you take long enough you can get it all.
This has in some cases led to an impression of "husk camping" as looting a husk one item at a time probably takes an awful long time.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
A friend of mine who is in BWG but is not active on the forums asked me to post this.
My guildmates and I discovered why PvP outside of The Window is fundamentally broken last night.
We're a small guild: half a dozen players who go on PFO once a week as a group; we chat, joke, kill mobs, gather mats, and craft. We enjoy it, even with some of PFO's rough edges.
Last night, we discovered that we'd lost the game.
A party of PvP-ers waited around until we'd spent about an hour killing and harvesting, and were heading back to town. They killed and looted each one of us at least once, even when we were all together in an 8-person-strong quasi-party. They were able to do this because PvP is the winning strategy in PFO.
How is PvP the "I Win button"?
1: their build is more XP-efficient: our 8 characters have spent XP in combat areas, gathering areas, and crafting areas. We're "well-rounded" characters. They spent all of their XP on cranking up pure combat effectiveness. Thus, in a fight, they are more powerful and will win virtually every time.
2: we've "wasted" XP that can never be gotten back: no one in our party will ever be able to stand toe-to-toe with one of the PVP-ers we encountered. They have the edge now, and we will always have thousands fewer XP to spend on combat abilities due to having spent it on gathering and crafting.
3: we had discovered a handful of new-to-us recipes and spells, which they now have
4: therefore, PvP-ers can kill PvE-ers basically at will, with very little chance of repercussion. Because they can do so, they needn't spend XP on gathering skills; thus, they have more XP to spend on combat abilities, thus they can more easily kill PvE-ers and bring their ill-gotten mats back to town where one or two characters can fulfill all of the refining/crafting roles.
5: we can also never catch up because we can't learn the spells or recipies we need to become powerful enough to defend ourselves.
This is a positive feedback loop for the PvP-ers: the more PCs they kill, the more able they are to kill more PCs.
This sets up a negative feedback loop for the PvE-ers: the more they die to PVP-ers, the less able they are to build up enough strength (ie., craft more powerful items or learn more powerful spells) to protect themselves in the future _and_ they lose what protections they already have, to boot (ie., their equipped gear loses durability even while they lose all of the mats they've gathered).
PvP outside of The Window also discourages friendly encounters with strangers: once you (or your party members) have been killed by two or three random PCs, you start to assume that all unknown PCs are out for your blood. Thus, you start to avoid unknown PCs, building up an insular community. This stands in direct opposition to the goal of encouraging PCs to drive the game through communication and trade.
PvP outside of The Window also removes any possibility of playing PFO as a casual or PvE game. The only possible way to not continually die to PvP-ers is to follow their tactics and become the very thing that is draining the fun out of PFO.
At the end of the day, no one likes being beaten up and having their lunch money stolen. With PvP outside of The Window, becoming a bully and stealing the lunch money of others is the only way to play.
PvP needs to be restricted to The Window for PFO to be viable in the long-term. PvP griefers (because, let's be honest: that's what they are) suck the fun out of the game. Fundamentally, people play games to have fun. Thus, PvP harms the long-term viability of PFO.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Given the current community's recent pushback on the devs' proposed WoT changes (to the point where many of us can now do just fine with a zero tower settlement), it is hard to imagine the exact same community won't crowdforge any crafting loss to similar irrelevance.Funny, I thought the community was trying - unsuccessfully - to get Goblinworks to make the Towers more significant by capping NPC Settlements at Level 6 (no Tier 2 at all) and starting PC Settlements at Level 7.
You make it sound like the community demanded the current system, but that's exactly the opposite of true.
No, there was no such crowd forging that discussed lowering NPC settlement training to 6.
The main thrust of the push back was that low population settlements would effectively be squeezed out of the game, its members forced to join the larger settlements.
Crowdforging: Changes to War of Towers for EE 4.0
Start at the linked post and keep reading. You'll see a significant number of voices asking for NPC Settlement Training to be lowered to 6. Prominently, Azure_Zero - one of the most enthusiastic advocates for helping "small Settlements" - also added his voice to the calls to cap NPC Training at Level 6.
As I've said a number of times, I really try not to "correct" people's opinions, but when you assert as fact something that is provably not a fact, I can't help but link the relevant proof.
You have linked the compromised version and the responses that followed. I had stated the original version of EE4 was not crowd forged. Unless you are trying to claim that Azure Zero is crowd forging for additional limitations?
The NPC settlements remain at 8, not 6, therefore 6 was in fact not crowd forged as of 4.1, 4.2. I stand by my factual statement, and the evidence is in the game.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
A friend of mine who is in BWG but is not active on the forums asked me to post this.
My guildmates and I discovered why PvP outside of The Window is fundamentally broken last night.
We're a small guild: half a dozen players who go on PFO once a week as a group; we chat, joke, kill mobs, gather mats, and craft. We enjoy it, even with some of PFO's rough edges.
Last night, we discovered that we'd lost the game.
A party of PvP-ers waited around until we'd spent about an hour killing and harvesting, and were heading back to town. They killed and looted each one of us at least once, even when we were all together in an 8-person-strong quasi-party. They were able to do this because PvP is the winning strategy in PFO.
How is PvP the "I Win button"?
1: their build is more XP-efficient: our 8 characters have spent XP in combat areas, gathering areas, and crafting areas. We're "well-rounded" characters. They spent all of their XP on cranking up pure combat effectiveness. Thus, in a fight, they are more powerful and will win virtually every time.
2: we've "wasted" XP that can never be gotten back: no one in our party will ever be able to stand toe-to-toe with one of the PVP-ers we encountered. They have the edge now, and we will always have thousands fewer XP to spend on combat abilities due to having spent it on gathering and crafting.
3: we had discovered a handful of new-to-us recipes and spells, which they now have
4: therefore, PvP-ers can kill PvE-ers basically at will, with very little chance of repercussion. Because they can do so, they needn't spend XP on gathering skills; thus, they have more XP to spend on combat abilities, thus they can more easily kill PvE-ers and bring their ill-gotten mats back to town where one or two characters can fulfill all of the refining/crafting roles.
5: we can also never catch up because we can't learn the spells or recipies we need to become powerful enough to defend ourselves.This is a positive feedback loop for the PvP-ers: the more PCs they kill,...
I'm sorry, but so much of that is wrong
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The looting is one item at a time but if you take long enough you can get it all.
This has in some cases led to an impression of "husk camping" as looting a husk one item at a time probably takes an awful long time.
I haven't killed anyone and taken their stuff. Do you get to choose from a list or do you get a random item each time you loot? Because if it's the latter, I can carry a lot of tansy leaves.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
This is the current situation the way I personally view it (note I tend to play more PvP games then PvE myself):
1. Because of the way the game was promoted the majority of players seem PvE focused and many are the sorts of personality that if they cannot, with precautions, avoid or escape PvP then they will likely quit. Players like the BWG crew will make some effort to protect themselves but will never ENJOY or like PvP.
2. In EVE (which this game is based on) its possible with sensible play to avoid PvP and you can always dock up or AFK cloak and be perfectly safe in any system. There is absolutely no-where in PFO whatsoever you are safe from a PvP player that decides to attack you, not even in the middle of your own settlement.
The game is more PvP focused than EVE and the only reason PvP in PFO is relatively rare is most of the early player base were not PvP players and the rep system etc limits how much PvP the few dedicated PvPers can undertake. The large number of craft settlements is a sign of how PvE focused the current player base is.
3. PvE type players generally do not "learn to like PvP". Most quit and get replaced by a new generation of players with a personality more suited to a PvP game. PvP players tend to have a competitive (with a sometimes approaching sociopathic personal achievement focus)personality that a lot of PvE players simply do not have.
This seems to be what is happening in PFO, the original game was supported by a community with a mainly PvE focus however over the next 12 months a good percentage of those will quit to be replaced by players from other games like EVE. For example if the recently sold Blackwood Glade is taken over by a PvP group a good percentage of the adjoining Keepers Pass players would quit.
4. Ryan has stated elsewhere this is "not the long term intention" but for the foreseeable future there is not likely to be anywhere in PFO (even in a settlement) where you are even slightly safe.
@theStormWeaver
The builds of nearly all those PVPers is the same as any combat PvE player.
If someone made a PvE character to kill mobs and collect recipes/spells/maneuvers (and my mates got at least 8 spells off husks that night) that PvE-er's build will not be inferior to Savage Grace and most of my mates.
Yes, gatherers and crafters are inferior to that build, but Midnight is a tier 2 gatherer of every gathering type and has never lost a load to bandits and has downed many characters who dared to hunt or gather in a hex she's territorial about.
Midnight hasn't lost stuff to bandits because she always remembers Richard Pryor's advice and knows its always an option to "RUN!"
When people run from me, my mates on voice-comms hear me praise them as smart gatherers.
It is smart to run from me. Not because I'm an awesome PvPer (I'm not), but because you have little to gain by sticking around.
Too many gatherers decide to play Superman and stand their ground, instead.
I *love* Superman.
Superman leaves a husk.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@theStormWeaver
The builds of nearly all those PVPers is the same as any combat PvE player.
If someone made a PvE character to kill mobs and collect recipes/spells/maneuvers (and my mates got at least 8 spells off husks that night) that PvE-ers build will not be inferior to Savage Grace and most of my mates.
Yes, gatherers and crafters are inferior to that build, but Midnight is a tier 2 gatherer of every gathering type and has never lost a load to bandits and has downed many others who dared to hunt or gather in a hex she's territorial about.
Midnight doesn't lose stuff to bandits because she always remembers Richard Pryor's advice and knows its always an option to "RUN!"
When people run from me, my mates on voice-comms hear me praise them as smart gatherers.
It is smart to run from me. Not because I'm an awesome PvPer (I'm not), but because you have little to gain by sticking around.
Too many gatherers decide to play Superman and stand their ground, instead.
I *love* Superman.
Superman leaves a husk.
In general I would agree. In EVE I have indy alts that regularly run up to a PLEX or more of PI through losec on a regular basis and they have never been caught in the 3 or more years I have been doing it. They fly fast aligning cloaky ships and have scouts ahead and always fly at quiet times by a roundabout route. If necessary they will AFK cloak for hours if the situation looks dangerous.
Bear in mind in PFO however that these small settlements are under a lot of pressure to get to T2 production at present and that often means virtually everyone in the settlement has dedicated up to half to 3/4 of their XP to gather/refine/craft.
This of course is why Ryan keeps saying the small settlements are not viable but that is beside the point. A settlement like BWG usually needs everyone to craft and even then they may not yet be able to make some T2 items. Feasibly some of their players will still be regularly dieing to yellow ogres or even Alpha Wolves. They do not have the advantage of "dabbling" in refining or crafting to get an ability up and getting any gear they need from the rest of the settlement its essential they all do it or the settlement will fail.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What irks me, is that for some reason, some people have trouble understanding it's *all* role playing.
When you play a paladin and rush into battle heroically against 30 monsters ogres, it is recognized as roleplaying, nobody actually thinks you have the personal gumption to fight 30 people in hand to hand combat in real life. It's role playing, you get to pretend to be a hero. I'm not going to count on you to protect me from a mugger in real life.
But then, when you play a villain, who attacks and steals from other players in a game, you are called a sociopath? Even though in real life you might never ever consider doing such a thing and are a kind and law-abiding citizen. You're roleplaying, it's just acting and for pretend.
You are aware that you are comparing two different things?
"play a paladin and rush into battle heroically against 30 monsters ogres" vs. "play a villain, who attacks and steals from other players in a game" aren't comparable as one affects NPC the other PC.Possible paragons are:
"play a paladin and rush into battle heroically against 30 monsters ogres" vs. "play a villain, who attacks and steals from the trainers and destroy NPC settlements"
or
"play a paladin that defend a settlement PC against assaults from other settlements" vs. "play a villain, who attacks and steals from other players in a game".
I think that the kind of argument you are making fail most of the time for that kind of error.
You can't compare affecting NPCs with affecting PCs.
DISCLAIMER: I am not against PvP, actually, so far, I prefer the PFO version to EVE version of it. I am simply saying that you are making a wrong example that will foster more incomprehension, not clear up things.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If that is the kind of crap information that was being bandied about BWG forums, then I'm not surprised that they left. From their perspective, they were essentially doomed from the start. Unfortunately, they are almost entirely wrong in their assumptions on the scaling of player power level.
I have dumped almost the entirety of my main characters XP into being a better PvP combatant. My build is nearly identical to that of a PvE combatant, though I probably use a few different utilities than they do. Since getting into T2 gear, the majority of my XP has been spent shoring up circumstantial weakness' in my build. Things like getting more Power, or the rest of my attacks to Rank 4, or, in my particular case, training up my 2-Handed Sword skills because I needed the Strength.
I have not had a considerable boost in effective power in the last, I want to say, three weeks. About the time I got my T2 spear. I am more versatile, but someone who started the game three weeks after I did could have caught up with me in this time. I will hit T3 first, and for a little while I will have the potential to be a hell of a lot stronger than they will, but not long.
If you are in T2 gear, you stand a fairly good chance of killing me. I might have more actual PvP experience, so chances are I will win the fight through that, but it won't be because my character is inherently better than you. It will be slightly better, but that could easily be mitigated by a few lucky critical strikes, or you getting the jump on me, or heaven forbid you find some friends and hit me two on one. I can take three or four T1 opponents at once. I would struggle to run away from two T2 opponents who know what they are doing (especially if one is a Rogue).
If they had wanted to, they could have fought us. But we worked harder, smarter, and longer than they did. And we were rewarded by winning the fight. It is a shame that they took that failure as an absolute, instead of a challenge to rise above.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Given the current community's recent pushback on the devs' proposed WoT changes (to the point where many of us can now do just fine with a zero tower settlement), it is hard to imagine the exact same community won't crowdforge any crafting loss to similar irrelevance.Funny, I thought the community was trying - unsuccessfully - to get Goblinworks to make the Towers more significant by capping NPC Settlements at Level 6 (no Tier 2 at all) and starting PC Settlements at Level 7.
You make it sound like the community demanded the current system, but that's exactly the opposite of true.
No, there was no such crowd forging that discussed lowering NPC settlement training to 6.
The main thrust of the push back was that low population settlements would effectively be squeezed out of the game, its members forced to join the larger settlements.
Crowdforging: Changes to War of Towers for EE 4.0
Start at the linked post and keep reading. You'll see a significant number of voices asking for NPC Settlement Training to be lowered to 6. Prominently, Azure_Zero - one of the most enthusiastic advocates for helping "small Settlements" - also added his voice to the calls to cap NPC Training at Level 6.
As I've said a number of times, I really try not to "correct" people's opinions, but when you assert as fact something that is provably not a fact, I can't help but link the relevant proof.
you shot your own settlement member, Nihimon, as it was he put it out the idea and I just agreed with the idea, and pointed out things that could help those struggling, as I would like the game's power distribution and player distribution to be distributed across the map as evenly as possible for the health of the game.
As there are feedback loops that boost bigger settlements and weaken the smaller ones.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If they had wanted to, they could have fought us. But we worked harder, smarter, and longer than they did. And we were rewarded by winning the fight. It is a shame that they took that failure as an absolute, instead of a challenge to rise above.
Potentially.
It is important however for those of us from big groups to realize that settlements with 5 or 10 members often need everyone to craft. Even the PvE combat ability is secondary.
I know nothing about BWG other than meeting them in game and they seemed nice guys but if they are like most small settlements they would have been struggling to get to T2 gear and almost everyone would have been of necessity a dedicated refiner or crafter with a modicum of combat.
This is of course exactly why Ryan said small settlements are not viable.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
you shot your own settlement member, Nihimon
Huh?
I said I thought the community was trying to get Goblinworks to cap the NPC Towers at 6.
Bluddwolf said I was wrong.
I linked the posts where the community was suggesting capping the NPC Towers at 6. I mentioned that you seemed to be agreeing that the NPC Towers should be capped at 6.
What am I missing here?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If you are in a small settlement and you need Tier 2 gear, you can ask a larger group if you could buy gear with materials. If someone were to offer us a sizeable amount of coal or the like, I'm fairly sure we could come to some sort of arrangement. Same with recipes etc.
People think they are stuck. The answer is to change your perspective and realize that individuals can work together, groups can work together, and settlements can work together.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If you are in a small settlement and you need Tier 2 gear, you can ask a larger group if you could buy gear with materials. If someone were to offer us a sizeable amount of coal or the like, I'm fairly sure we could come to some sort of arrangement. Same with recipes etc.
People think they are stuck. The answer is to change your perspective and realize that individuals can work together, groups can work together, and settlements can work together.
Absolutely, even Keepers cannot make everything at T2 themselves yet. ... which reminds me must talk to you guys about trading for some T2 longbows.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If they had wanted to, they could have fought us. But we worked harder, smarter, and longer than they did. And we were rewarded by winning the fight. It is a shame that they took that failure as an absolute, instead of a challenge to rise above.
Potentially.
It is important however for those of us from big groups to realize that settlements with 5 or 10 members often need everyone to craft. Even the PvE combat ability is secondary.
I know nothing about BWG other than meeting them in game and they seemed nice guys but if they are like most small settlements they would have been struggling to get to T2 gear and almost everyone would have been of necessity a dedicated refiner or crafter with a modicum of combat.
This is of course exactly why Ryan said small settlements are not viable.
No one in BWG at the time had Tier 2 gear. A few of us had some Tier 1 +2 stuff, but that was about it.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If you are in a small settlement and you need Tier 2 gear, you can ask a larger group if you could buy gear with materials. If someone were to offer us a sizeable amount of coal or the like, I'm fairly sure we could come to some sort of arrangement. Same with recipes etc.
People think they are stuck. The answer is to change your perspective and realize that individuals can work together, groups can work together, and settlements can work together.
The biggest problem is communication, as in-game those mechanics are juvenile compared to other MMOs. There are the boards of course, but I suppose you have to live your life on here to be embroiled.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What exactly was the tragedy here?
From what I've been reading the game, as it's intended to be experienced, happened.
No.
The game as some of the PvP fraternity intend it to be experienced happened.
In EVE the philosophy is learn to PvP or go play another game. People go out of their way to harass PvE people in EVE with the idea they need to either get into PvP or just quit.
Pathfinder is not actually meant to be that way longterm.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have dumped almost the entirety of my main characters XP into being a better PvP combatant. My build is nearly identical to that of a PvE combatant, though I probably use a few different utilities than they do.
I doubt that your build is so similar to that of a PvE combatant.
A PvE combatant would have spent a good number of XP in knowledge skills to get more loot. How many you have spent there?AFAIK a good number of conditions don't work on NPCs while they work on PCs. I am fairly sure that your actions bars are different from those of a PvE combatant and more efficients at killing PCs.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Maybe I should have done more research into this game, hindsight is 20/20. However, I am glad I sold my account as now that I read the forums, more and more this is not my game, nor is it really Pathfinder... more like PvPfinder.
It is misleading named.
Golarion Online was probably a more appropriate title.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
What exactly was the tragedy here?
From what I've been reading the game, as it's intended to be experienced, happened.No.
The game as some of the PvP fraternity intend it to be experienced happened.
In EVE the philosophy is learn to PvP or go play another game. People go out of their way to harass PvE people in EVE with the idea they need to either get into PvP or just quit.
Pathfinder is not actually meant to be that way longterm.
The problem is that peer pressure don't work to maintain "predatory" behavior in line, actually I think that it work in the other directions as the people that like to play "predators" is more likely to try and pressure other people into playing the kind of game they like, while people more interested in building stuff and a cooperative game tend to let other people play as they like until they are the target.
You will not get a herd of bison into stalking a wolf.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What exactly was the tragedy here?
From what I've been reading the game, as it's intended to be experienced, happened.No.
The game as some of the PvP fraternity intend it to be experienced happened.
In EVE the philosophy is learn to PvP or go play another game. People go out of their way to harass PvE people in EVE with the idea they need to either get into PvP or just quit.
Pathfinder is not actually meant to be that way longterm.
Actually, yes. A group that wanted to play alone and not deal with other settlements (trade, alliances, tribute, banditry, etc), found that the game didn't work for them. Ryan and the devs have made it clear time and time again that very small groups are not viable for PFO, and you need to work with others. If that doesn't work for you, then the core gameplay mechanic doesn't work.