Originally posted by Grunties

I do worry a bit about the cost and how it will be easier for larger guilds to continually produce them over the smaller ones.

It seems to me that the larger guilds SHOULD be more succeptible to attack than smaller ones, as they have the manpower to put up a better defense. They shouldn't have better access to attack immunities. Rewarding a group that is already well defended with the best chances of becoming even more defended? It would be like giving tax breaks to the wealthy :)

I always felt that mmos should factor guild population numbers into the cost of things. The larger the guild, the more land, the higher maintenance prices and defense become. These protection items should become more expensive the larger a guild is, to prevent 'zerg guilds' from being the only valid strategy.

Im terrible at history but didn't rome (and several other places) die out because they tried to control too much land and people and werent able to keep up with the logistics to support it all? There should be incentives to have medium guilds over larger guilds, and dynamic costs depending on membership seems like a good balancing idea to me, and makes realistic sense as well.

I agree with most of what you said.

Hamlets should cost significantly less to protect for 12 hours then the bigger cities. Having a universaly crafted item will disporportionally help larger guilds who already can have more people on during off hours.

This was a major issue with SB and their system still is not perfect.

the risk/reward of sieging should be balanced with the size of the land grab.

 Didn't they ask us not to cross post from the beta forums despite the NDA being lifted. Yes they did tch tch.

Sounds pants to me they are 'making it up as they go along' rather than implementing a carefully thoght out game design. It is indicatove of some of the problems with DF they have a shoping list of features and skills rather  than a carefully integrated game design.

As with all MMOs, Darkfall is a work in progress

Originally posted by strongaxe

Originally posted by Blodpls

Originally posted by strongaxe 

Why not? You can siege other late night clans. It is going to be played around the world, this just gives an option(that you will have to put an effort into getting) to protect your clan when you are asleep(whenever that may be).

 

I think this gives guilds far too much protection.  I would prefer it if 3am city destruction was in the game, I realise that this is probably unpopular but I feel that the game will be worse off without it.  Big guilds will be extremely hard to shift from their guild cities.

 

But big guilds should be hard to oust from their cities. 3am city sieges are just a stupid concept. Darkfall is still a game, and you cannot be on in force 24/7. Spending months building a city only to have it taken when you are asleep is not a mechanic that helps a game.

I quite agree, the thing that ultimately drove me from SB (besides the poor server performance) was waking up one morning to find our clan city totally destroyed (except for 7 protected buildings) by a 3 am raid from a West Coast based empire.

I'm glad to see mechanics that prevent this sort of thing and give people a chance to defend themselves.

Being in a large guild should not be something that is penalized.  People work very hard to create and maintain such organizations and they have a right to enjoy the game too.

Originally posted by strongaxe

Originally posted by Xantheous

Is there any way to disagree on these forums and not be called a troll?

 

Anywho, I thought that this was one of the big draws to the game. Like it or not, they are not ready and they need your cash to keep ot going. Call it an investment..maybe you will feel better.

 

Wow really? I called the 2nd poster a troll because he trolled, he did not disagree with me in any way. Reading helps you not look stupid my friend.

I said this site not this thread.

Originally posted by Kyleran

I quite agree, the thing that ultimately drove me from SB (besides the poor server performance) was waking up one morning to find our clan city totally destroyed (except for 7 protected buildings) by a 3 am raid from a West Coast based empire.

I'm glad to see mechanics that prevent this sort of thing and give people a chance to defend themselves.

Being in a large guild should not be something that is penalized.  People work very hard to create and maintain such organizations and they have a right to enjoy the game too.

Actually it will not prevent what you just described. These shards will only protect a hamlet or city from being claimed by someone else... raids that "disable" buildings and walls will still be in full effect 24/7.

So in fact it is exactly as you described only worse because you could log on with only your TOL still standing and all other buildings gone/damaged....

"disabled" is an odd term to use but something I come to expect from AV... disabled could mean damaged, destroyed, or nonfunctional.... Easy to argue that the buildings will not be completely destroyed and when that is proven not to be the case, just as easy to say they told us all along building would be destroyed and we "interpreted" it wrong to begin with.

Originally posted by Xantheous

Originally posted by strongaxe

Originally posted by Xantheous

Is there any way to disagree on these forums and not be called a troll?

 

Anywho, I thought that this was one of the big draws to the game. Like it or not, they are not ready and they need your cash to keep ot going. Call it an investment..maybe you will feel better.

 

Wow really? I called the 2nd poster a troll because he trolled, he did not disagree with me in any way. Reading helps you not look stupid my friend.

 

I said this site not this thread.

Then why post it in this thread haha?

And as to your well written comment about them wanting your money and not being ready........... troll.

Originally posted by atziluth

Originally posted by Kyleran

I quite agree, the thing that ultimately drove me from SB (besides the poor server performance) was waking up one morning to find our clan city totally destroyed (except for 7 protected buildings) by a 3 am raid from a West Coast based empire.

I'm glad to see mechanics that prevent this sort of thing and give people a chance to defend themselves.

Being in a large guild should not be something that is penalized.  People work very hard to create and maintain such organizations and they have a right to enjoy the game too.

 

Actually it will not prevent what you just described. These shards will only protect a hamlet or city from being claimed by someone else... raids that "disable" buildings and walls will still be in full effect 24/7.

So in fact it is exactly as you described only worse because you could log on with only your TOL still standing and all other buildings gone/damaged....

"disabled" is an odd term to use but something I come to expect from AV... disabled could mean damaged, destroyed, or nonfunctional.... Easy to argue that the buildings will not be completely destroyed and when that is proven not to be the case, just as easy to say they told us all along building would be destroyed and we "interpreted" it wrong to begin with.

If you want to know what disabled means all you had to do was ask. Disabled buildings are at 1% life and cannot be used until they are repaired with repair shards. I also see you dedcided to ignore my comments about walls and towers.

Originally posted by strongaxe

Originally posted by Blodpls

Originally posted by strongaxe 

Why not? You can siege other late night clans. It is going to be played around the world, this just gives an option(that you will have to put an effort into getting) to protect your clan when you are asleep(whenever that may be).

 

I think this gives guilds far too much protection.  I would prefer it if 3am city destruction was in the game, I realise that this is probably unpopular but I feel that the game will be worse off without it.  Big guilds will be extremely hard to shift from their guild cities.

 

But big guilds should be hard to oust from their cities. 3am city sieges are just a stupid concept. Darkfall is still a game, and you cannot be on in force 24/7. Spending months building a city only to have it taken when you are asleep is not a mechanic that helps a game.

Full loot.

Isn't that the mantra of the DF fanboi internet tough guys?  Isn't that how they gauge their personal badass-ness?

So, why not full loot on cities?  Anytime.  Anyplace.

What if players are allowed at some point to make personal "protection shards" that would allow their bodies not to be looted?  Wouldn't that go against the core concept of the game?

DF fanatics preach freedom of action as a main selling point of this game.  So, what is DF really about - freedom, or security?

Originally posted by Rohn

Originally posted by strongaxe

Originally posted by Blodpls

Originally posted by strongaxe 

Why not? You can siege other late night clans. It is going to be played around the world, this just gives an option(that you will have to put an effort into getting) to protect your clan when you are asleep(whenever that may be).

 

I think this gives guilds far too much protection.  I would prefer it if 3am city destruction was in the game, I realise that this is probably unpopular but I feel that the game will be worse off without it.  Big guilds will be extremely hard to shift from their guild cities.

 

But big guilds should be hard to oust from their cities. 3am city sieges are just a stupid concept. Darkfall is still a game, and you cannot be on in force 24/7. Spending months building a city only to have it taken when you are asleep is not a mechanic that helps a game.

 

Full loot.

Isn't that the mantra of the DF fanboi internet tough guys?  Isn't that how they gauge their personal badass-ness?

So, why not full loot on cities?  Anytime.  Anyplace.

What if players are allowed at some point to make personal "protection shards" that would allow their bodies not to be looted?  Wouldn't that go against the core concept of the game?

DF fanatics preach freedom of action as a main selling point of this game.  So, what is DF really about - freedom, or security?

Why does a individual who likes full loot games have to be an internet tough guy and a wannabe badass? You can attack someone city, anytime, any place.  You just cant siege them without declaring siege, and if they are under the protection shard you wont be able to declare siege.

Calm down haha. Darkfall fans do want full loot and freedom, but of course we still want the game to be fun and not require being on 24/7. Believe it or not Darkfall fans have lives as well! Has any Darkfall fan asked that your character remain logged in even when you are offline? Funny how quick you are to try and jump on the concept of player freedom, did some DF fans come into your house and break your moms legs or somthing?

Originally posted by strongaxe

Originally posted by atziluth

Originally posted by Kyleran

I quite agree, the thing that ultimately drove me from SB (besides the poor server performance) was waking up one morning to find our clan city totally destroyed (except for 7 protected buildings) by a 3 am raid from a West Coast based empire.

I'm glad to see mechanics that prevent this sort of thing and give people a chance to defend themselves.

Being in a large guild should not be something that is penalized.  People work very hard to create and maintain such organizations and they have a right to enjoy the game too.

 

Actually it will not prevent what you just described. These shards will only protect a hamlet or city from being claimed by someone else... raids that "disable" buildings and walls will still be in full effect 24/7.

So in fact it is exactly as you described only worse because you could log on with only your TOL still standing and all other buildings gone/damaged....

"disabled" is an odd term to use but something I come to expect from AV... disabled could mean damaged, destroyed, or nonfunctional.... Easy to argue that the buildings will not be completely destroyed and when that is proven not to be the case, just as easy to say they told us all along building would be destroyed and we "interpreted" it wrong to begin with. 

If you want to know what disabled means all you had to do was ask. Disabled buildings are at 1% life and cannot be used until they are repaired with repair shards. I also see you dedcided to ignore my comments about walls and towers.

I did not ignore it, it is just not relevant. If a zerg raiding group has the capacity to bring all buildings down to 1% the cost of repairs would still demand 24/7 protection.

What is the material and gold cost on crafting repair shards? This could cripple a guild just as effectively as taking the untire city over. Especially if it is done on consecutive nights.

Originally posted by strongaxe

Originally posted by Xantheous

Originally posted by strongaxe

Originally posted by Xantheous

Is there any way to disagree on these forums and not be called a troll?

 

Anywho, I thought that this was one of the big draws to the game. Like it or not, they are not ready and they need your cash to keep ot going. Call it an investment..maybe you will feel better.

 

Wow really? I called the 2nd poster a troll because he trolled, he did not disagree with me in any way. Reading helps you not look stupid my friend.

 

I said this site not this thread.

Then why post it in this thread haha?

 

And as to your well written comment about them wanting your money and not being ready........... troll.

Thanks

It seems that you missed me mentioning "Siege as being a huge draw" and focused on everything else. IMO if something is not ready for launch, at launch, they should promise it as the first huge patch or expansion. My problem is not with the game really, I just that that they lack project management skills (among other things) and they do not seem to communicate with the player base enough. I know it is all a part of creating hype (i.e. Sony not mentioning Jedi's where not in the game at launch or no siege/guild cities in AoC's launch) and If I seem jaded then I am so for great reason as are many other players. However, If this is a sign as to "what is to come" in Darkfall then I would say the future looks bleak.

This should not be necessary, this game has users on 3 continents - North America, Australasia and Europe. 

Guilds that cannot organise a diverse enough player base to protect their cities deserve to lose them imo. 

This change will encourage single nationality guilds, give too much power to large guilds and will greatly reduce metagaming opportunities.

It will still play it in couple months time if it proves to be decent but I am very unhappy about this.

Originally posted by Blodpls

This should not be necessary, this game has users on 3 continents - North America, Australasia and Europe. 

Guilds that cannot organise a diverse enough player base to protect their cities deserve to lose them imo. 

This change will encourage single nationality guilds, give too much power to large guilds and will greatly reduce metagaming opportunities.

It will still play it in couple months time if it proves to be decent but I am very unhappy about this.

What about when they release N. America servers? You think clans will have enough allies on at all times then? They are planning for the future.

Originally posted by Xantheous

Originally posted by strongaxe

Originally posted by Xantheous

Originally posted by strongaxe

Originally posted by Xantheous

Is there any way to disagree on these forums and not be called a troll?

 

Anywho, I thought that this was one of the big draws to the game. Like it or not, they are not ready and they need your cash to keep ot going. Call it an investment..maybe you will feel better.

 

Wow really? I called the 2nd poster a troll because he trolled, he did not disagree with me in any way. Reading helps you not look stupid my friend.

 

I said this site not this thread.

Then why post it in this thread haha?

 

And as to your well written comment about them wanting your money and not being ready........... troll.

 

Thanks

It seems that you missed me mentioning "Siege as being a huge draw" and focused on everything else. IMO if something is not ready for launch, at launch, they should promise it as the first huge patch or expansion. My problem is not with the game really, I just that that they lack project management skills (among other things) and they do not seem to communicate with the player base enough. I know it is all a part of creating hype (i.e. Sony not mentioning Jedi's where in the game at launch or no siege/guild cities in AoC's launch) and If I seem jaded then I am so for great reason as are many other players. However, If this is a sign as to "what is to come" in Darkfall then I would say the future looks bleak.

 

I dont get it? How is sieging not ready for launch? It has happened many times in beta.

They communicate with the beta testers on important issues, and the rest is communicated through patch notes.

Originally posted by strongaxe 

What about when they release N. America servers? You think clans will have enough allies on at all times then? They are planning for the future.

Even if it's only a US server people are online in mmorpgs 24/7, guilds should have to make provisions to ensure that they have members with diverse playtimes.  This goes against the survival of the fitest spirit of the game.   I am not expecting to be the fitest by a long way, but that is the kind of gaming environment I want to play in.

Originally posted by atziluth

What is the material and gold cost on crafting repair shards? This could cripple a guild just as effectively as taking the untire city over. Especially if it is done on consecutive nights.

Costs for anything really just boild down to the amount of time you need to macro be it skillls or mats. Most guilds will have vaults full of repair shards.

I don't want to start a quote fest so I will just start a new convo

I did not say it was a bad idea, I just pointed out that it was another example of piss poor planning. I agree, players should not be expected to be online 24 and more to protect their player base but this information would have been better served weeks ago when they knew it would not be implemented by launch. Things like this just add to the negative overtones DFo has seen and I think this game has seen enough.

Originally posted by Blodpls

Originally posted by strongaxe 

What about when they release N. America servers? You think clans will have enough allies on at all times then? They are planning for the future.

 

Even if it's only a US server people are online in mmorpgs 24/7, guilds should have to make provisions to ensure that they have members with diverse playtimes.  This goes against the survival of the fitest spirit of the game.   I am not expecting to be the fitest by a long way, but that is the kind of gaming environment I want to play in.

I don't think guilds should be forced to recruit people they don't want to recruit. That is as much a restriction of freedoms as putting up a limited attack window. Restricting freedoms by forcing a specific way for making a guild goes against the spirit of the game as well. If a guild wants their membership to be only from their own country or even timezone, that should be a valid option. That choice should not be punished.

Survival of the fittest can still exist without taking away freedom of choice. You would have no more right to force a guild to be active 24/7 than I would have to force a guild not to play during late nights. Immunity shards (my other criticisms of the feature aside) allow both guilds types to be viable. And thats the kind of environment I want to play in.

Originally posted by Gorilla

Originally posted by atziluth

What is the material and gold cost on crafting repair shards? This could cripple a guild just as effectively as taking the untire city over. Especially if it is done on consecutive nights.

Costs for anything really just boild down to the amount of time you need to macro be it skillls or mats. Most guilds will have vaults full of repair shards.

There again this system would give a further significant advantage to zerg guilds. This also depends on AV keeping a lax stance on macroing which if the case will likely ruin the game anyways.