Trending Games | ArcheAge | Destiny | Guild Wars 2 | World of Warcraft

  Network:  FPSguru RTSguru
Login:  Password:   Remember?  
Show Quick Gamelist Jump to Random Game
Members:2,856,340 Users Online:0
Games:740  Posts:6,239,481
City State Entertainment | Official Site
MMORPG | Genre:Fantasy | Status:Development  (est.rel N/A)  | Pub:City State Entertainment
PVP:Yes | Distribution: | Retail Price:n/a | Monthly Fee:n/a
System Req: PC | Out of date info? Let us know!

Camelot Unchained Forum » General Discussion » What about keeps design ?

2 Pages 1 2 » Search
25 posts found
  BowbowDAoC

Novice Member

Joined: 5/11/10
Posts: 482

 
OP  3/27/13 5:34:06 PM#1

It might be a bit early, but did you have any thoughts so far as how the keeps are gonna be ?

I remember that in DAoC (yeah another reference to the game i'm sorry :D), all the keeps on all 3 realms looked the same, so once you had a strategy established, it was good for all 18(?) keeps, plus 3 relic keep wich if i recall were identical to one another too.

What would be REALLY nice is that all keeps were at least a bit different from one another, none looking exactly like the others, And it would be SO nice to have them all very different from one another.

- Some could have inner courts, some not

- different amount of floors

- different amount of towers

- of course different sizes

- even the keep lord could be not static, he could move around the keep too (so even defending the keep would require adaptation at times, and the attackers would have to find him too)

- one could have a drawbridge that require a stealther (or who knows....a crafter ?) to sabotage the bridge in order to lower it.

- Some could have many rooms and corridors while others have less but bigger ones

- There could also be some type of system implemented as to when a realm captures a keep he could choose between a few minor changes in the building's design (keep the same basic structures, size, floors etc, but could choose i.e. if it has many small rooms, more or less towers etc). not truly an option tu change the level of the keep, really just affect a bit of the layout.

All that would totally go with the FP #8 too.

Of course it requires a bit more work, but could really improve the fun factor in the game.

Bowbow (kob hunter) Infecto (kob cave shammy) and Thurka (troll warrior) on Merlin/Midgard DAoC
Thurka on WAR

  Plastic-Metal

Novice Member

Joined: 2/20/13
Posts: 423

3/27/13 5:41:56 PM#2

This will be an interesting post.  I've been working on writing a post regarding rethinking keep design (including some concept art attached and low poly model examples) to generate some excitement.

I'll look forward to how this post plays out :)

My name is Plastic-Metal and my name is an oxymoron.

  sweetdigs

Advanced Member

Joined: 11/11/03
Posts: 199

3/27/13 5:43:39 PM#3

I would like to see keeps start out very basic, and then require the owner of the keep to build/expand/design the keep.

When a keep is taken, it is "razed" and the new owner has to start from the beginning.

That way you'll never know what you're going to run into.  You could have all sorts of walls, traps, moats, etc. built as part of the fortifications.

This wouldn't apply to every player city or perhaps not even every fort.. but the key ones, perhaps.

  Vargur

Novice Member

Joined: 1/15/10
Posts: 142

3/27/13 5:59:53 PM#4
Originally posted by sweetdigs

I would like to see keeps start out very basic, and then require the owner of the keep to build/expand/design the keep.

When a keep is taken, it is "razed" and the new owner has to start from the beginning.

That way you'll never know what you're going to run into.  You could have all sorts of walls, traps, moats, etc. built as part of the fortifications.

This wouldn't apply to every player city or perhaps not even every fort.. but the key ones, perhaps.

Interesting idea. One of the annoying things in DAoC was that once the lord died, the gates closed automatically. I recall spending hours working on relic keep doors in OF, and actually feeling useful to my realm.

I also hope CU takes its keep inspiration from OF rather than NF. When it becomes easier to raze a section of the wall rather than go through the gate, something is wrong with the design. NF keeps also looked more generic while the OF had more "class" :)

  Edany

Novice Member

Joined: 3/22/13
Posts: 187

3/27/13 6:03:33 PM#5
Originally posted by sweetdigs

I would like to see keeps start out very basic, and then require the owner of the keep to build/expand/design the keep.

When a keep is taken, it is "razed" and the new owner has to start from the beginning.

That way you'll never know what you're going to run into.  You could have all sorts of walls, traps, moats, etc. built as part of the fortifications.

This wouldn't apply to every player city or perhaps not even every fort.. but the key ones, perhaps.

I love this concept, especially in light of how Crafting is going to play out in RvR. Why relegate crafters to just 'seige' weapons and armor, etc.?

Perhaps there could be a Carpenter or Stonemason craft, or both, that work in tandem so that if they are in a guild, and a guild has good resources, they start out with a generic basic structure, but depending on the level of craftsmanship they've attained, they can add various items to the keep as mentioned.

GW2 does this, albeit in a vendor style, so that whoever wants to contribute can purchase upgrades over time. I'd rather have the crafters build or design the keep using stationary points in a similar manner.

So you start out with the Generic Box Structure claimed by Guild A. Each Structure can have up to 5 or 10 build points, and depending on a Crafter Bob's skill, he will have a set of structures / fortifications he can add to the Generic Box. The build points may remain stationary, but Crafter Bob can add whatever is in his toolbox to those build points so that no two builds would look the same.

Take that a step farther by having each Realm's Crafters have a unique Style (just like with the Armor), so you can tell by the building features / designs which realm owns it.

Crafters can start out by being able to add simple fortifications, to adding outright level or room additions such as guard quarters / supply shops / what have you at the later stages. 

Have Crafter Bob the Carpenter be able to add seige, while Crafter Joe the Stonemason can add Castle Turrets, if they work together and combine their skills, they can possibly add something even cooler than that.

I don't know, maybe the concept is too advanced for the budget, but something along these lines in a Keep Warfare type of setting would really prevent a lot of the staleness, as you just never know what you're going to get. Or, even if you DO know what you're going to get, you are never quite sure what's around the corner every time.

  Bordog

Novice Member

Joined: 6/24/08
Posts: 34

3/27/13 6:55:51 PM#6
Originally posted by sweetdigs

I would like to see keeps start out very basic, and then require the owner of the keep to build/expand/design the keep.

When a keep is taken, it is "razed" and the new owner has to start from the beginning.

That way you'll never know what you're going to run into.  You could have all sorts of walls, traps, moats, etc. built as part of the fortifications.

This wouldn't apply to every player city or perhaps not even every fort.. but the key ones, perhaps.

Yep, this. I also agree that a basic "keep", probably a solitary square building should be the basic design and then you need to build walls and other buildings to expand around the basic building. This keeps crafters busy and allows for variation. Could be a big letdown though when you've worked so hard on it and it gets destroyed. So there would need to be some level of expediency in getting a fresh keep upgraded. A couple days to a week?

  Stiler

Hard Core Member

Joined: 10/19/05
Posts: 599

3/27/13 6:57:04 PM#7

I hope keeps aren't "pre -built" npc keeps that you simply "occupy."

 

Keeps need to create bonds for players, creat tanbible reasons for players to care about keeps nad want to hold it/keep it from falling ot the enemies hands.

 

The NPC style of keeps (IE Warhammer, Guild wars 2) just didn't do this. It was like you were protecting someone elses "home" and got just a behind-the-scenes buff for doing so, there no was bond for between players for wanting to control keeps, and when the keeps just bounced backa nd fourth between realms it got repeitive after so long, like "why do i care if that realm hoolds this keep or that keep? meh.

Keeps should work more realistically like they did throughout history. Giving way to strategic places, in return forming towns and other reasons for people to be there and to "want" to control/stay there rather then not.

 

Imagine if keeps, and other structures/lands were treated more like how an RTS game does it.

 

Where instead of simply "taking over" a pre-built keep, a guild or group of people lay claim to a plot of land, and then with the help of crafters, resources, etc they can then BUILD the keep there over time. Starting out as just a lowly "wooden" style keep.

 

Then over time as the guild gets more money and other things along with their crafters gaining more skill and harvesting more resources, they can upgrade their keep, to a stone keep, reinforced, all the way up to a "castle" like building complete with walls, inner courts, etc.

However the "keep" itself is only PART of this whole thing. As once a guild plaes a keep, even the lower ones, this opens up that area for players to build their own houses and things. In return for protection from that keep(IE npc guards that patrol around it) among other things.  Also within the keeps walls, as it grows, the guild can create shops, forge area's for crafters, stables for horses (if they make it into game) among other elements.

Also just like keeps, these houses/shops and other things that can be built can be "upgraded" over time, as that person that owns it acquires more wealth and what not. Eventually that "small keep" can become a large city-like castle.

To me that would be the perfect way to have keeps work. It leads to people forming bonds over that area, it leads to a sense of community, it leads also to tangible means that want you to defend that keep.

The guild which owns the keep (and thus the city) can also set taxes and the leader  (and people he gives permission to) could be allowed to set where buildings are placed and bascially be given an "RTS" like tactical view to build their city. Setting where walls go, where certain buildings can be built (IE shops/stables/housing for other players, etc). Also setting up towers and other defensive aspects of the city, such as traps, boiling oil traps, and other elements to defend the city.

If anoyne here has played the excellent "Stronghold" series you know what kinds of things I'm talking about.

See this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9tjpq6yqDZM

 

That would be like a dream come true in terms of giving players and keeps something different in an mmo space. it would also be a blow when your city is sacked, and it would sting, but thhat would help create the dynamic of the game, and when you claw your way back from that it will be all the much sweeter.

  KappenWiz

Apprentice Member

Joined: 12/06/07
Posts: 163

3/27/13 7:08:15 PM#8

The keeps in DAoC were not all the same, not even OF. The did have the same basic set up: outer door, inner door, run up to lord room. But there were differences, which got even greater when NF was patched in.

Anyhoo, I like some of the concepts, in general, especially the idea of rebuilding after a take. Hilarity always ensued  during standoffs in/around the lord room when the new Lord would spawn and be killed back and forth. Anything that would encourage or enable some drawn out battles would be great, which, if handled correctly, rebuilding should do. A period of relative weakness encourages a counterattack. Of course, insta spawning a complete keep does help underdog realms have at least some sense of hope, so that has to be managed carefully.

Also, either NF or Warhammer, I'm old and can't remember which, had roaming lords and it was a friggin nightmare. Maybe the coding was bad or whatever, but it was exploited like mad. You could pull the lord out of the keep without hardly taking it, he warped all over the place, and just a bunch of other bugs. Anyway, it never made it past beta stage. In concept, it sounds great, but again, it has to be done right.

 

  BowbowDAoC

Novice Member

Joined: 5/11/10
Posts: 482

 
OP  3/27/13 7:13:51 PM#9
Originally posted by Bordog
Originally posted by sweetdigs

I would like to see keeps start out very basic, and then require the owner of the keep to build/expand/design the keep.

When a keep is taken, it is "razed" and the new owner has to start from the beginning.

That way you'll never know what you're going to run into.  You could have all sorts of walls, traps, moats, etc. built as part of the fortifications.

This wouldn't apply to every player city or perhaps not even every fort.. but the key ones, perhaps.

Yep, this. I also agree that a basic "keep", probably a solitary square building should be the basic design and then you need to build walls and other buildings to expand around the basic building. This keeps crafters busy and allows for variation. Could be a big letdown though when you've worked so hard on it and it gets destroyed. So there would need to be some level of expediency in getting a fresh keep upgraded. A couple days to a week?

I don't think it could go as far as a total raze on the keep, otherwise you wouldnt even have put the 1st layer of bricks that ennemies would simply be back and capture it again,

I assume that there will be building that can be burned to the ground, but i guess that the main buildings will remain basically intact (assumptions no known facts here).

We'll probably erven be able to partially damage the main keeps with fire, but partially only, but when the keep is taken the main structure might recover on its own (again, assumptions), Otherwise, crafters would have more than their hands full with all the weapons, armor, housing, shops and all the other things that will be crafted

Of course, these are all assumptions.

Edit : Quick thought : I'd be surprised, but there might not even be keeps to capture like there was in DAoC :P, It could be something totally different.

Bowbow (kob hunter) Infecto (kob cave shammy) and Thurka (troll warrior) on Merlin/Midgard DAoC
Thurka on WAR

  KappenWiz

Apprentice Member

Joined: 12/06/07
Posts: 163

3/27/13 7:28:57 PM#10
Originally posted by BowbowDAoC
Originally posted by Bordog
Originally posted by sweetdigs

I would like to see keeps start out very basic, and then require the owner of the keep to build/expand/design the keep.

When a keep is taken, it is "razed" and the new owner has to start from the beginning.

That way you'll never know what you're going to run into.  You could have all sorts of walls, traps, moats, etc. built as part of the fortifications.

This wouldn't apply to every player city or perhaps not even every fort.. but the key ones, perhaps.

Yep, this. I also agree that a basic "keep", probably a solitary square building should be the basic design and then you need to build walls and other buildings to expand around the basic building. This keeps crafters busy and allows for variation. Could be a big letdown though when you've worked so hard on it and it gets destroyed. So there would need to be some level of expediency in getting a fresh keep upgraded. A couple days to a week?

I don't think it could go as far as a total raze on the keep, otherwise you wouldnt even have put the 1st layer of bricks that ennemies would simply be back and capture it again,

I assume that there will be building that can be burned to the ground, but i guess that the main buildings will remain basically intact (assumptions no known facts here).

We'll probably erven be able to partially damage the main keeps with fire, but partially only, but when the keep is taken the main structure might recover on its own (again, assumptions), Otherwise, crafters would have more than their hands full with all the weapons, armor, housing, shops and all the other things that will be crafted

Of course, these are all assumptions.

Edit : Quick thought : I'd be surprised, but there might not even be keeps to capture like there was in DAoC :P, It could be something totally different.

I was gonna say something about that, too. It is a little early, but, from a general design/theory standpoint, it's fun to gab.

Also, as for the rebuilding, that could be another time when the random dice generator comes into play. Every time the lord is killed, the new realm inherits the keep/area at a different level of completion...might even encourage a realm that knows it's gonna lose something to set it aflame....

  Ziftylrhavic

Apprentice Member

Joined: 3/15/13
Posts: 223

3/27/13 8:04:03 PM#11
Originally posted by Edany

I love this concept, especially in light of how Crafting is going to play out in RvR. Why relegate crafters to just 'seige' weapons and armor, etc.?

Perhaps there could be a Carpenter or Stonemason craft, or both, that work in tandem so that if they are in a guild, and a guild has good resources, they start out with a generic basic structure, but depending on the level of craftsmanship they've attained, they can add various items to the keep as mentioned.

What you are refering to in the second paragraph and later in the post are in fact the "houser", not crafter (MJ already said he really had to rename housing into building, i think he was right ^^).

 

I was thinking about the differences you could have between the keep, it would be nice to have each keep designed to give an advantage to the realm that owned it first.

To take DAoC as an example, it would be nice to have a corridor in hibernian keep that goes like this : first a turn, then straight 1000 unit long corridor, another turn, another 1000 unit straight and another last turn.

This would allow animists to summon their mushrooms in the middle turn (from the last turn) and to have every single player that shows up at the first corner to be a possible target to the pets while not being able to see the animist himself. You would need enough people to show up at the same time so the mushrooms can't hit the CCing class and rupt it if they want to avoid being free cast by those pets. It would have been insanely deadly before the limitation to the number of pets animists can summon :D

Did you know than animists now have moving pets? Funny to see those mushrooms move around :)

 

Likewise, it would be great to have the keeps designed so the classes of the realm that build it have advantages like that^^

 

EDIT : It would naturally be done with the "let's build the keeps ourselves" way of doing things the previous posts ask for, and i would be happy if it could go that way, but i was asking for in case there are predetermined keeps^^

  BowbowDAoC

Novice Member

Joined: 5/11/10
Posts: 482

 
OP  3/29/13 8:00:29 AM#12

I just thought of another cool feature we could have with keeps.

Tunnels !

we could be allowed to dig 1 tunnel from outside the keep to inside the keep, allowing us to get inside secretly (when its ours).

Bowbow (kob hunter) Infecto (kob cave shammy) and Thurka (troll warrior) on Merlin/Midgard DAoC
Thurka on WAR

  Niix_Ozek

Novice Member

Joined: 2/26/13
Posts: 404

3/29/13 12:38:45 PM#13
Just FYI back when daoc was at its best every realm had unique keeps and unique relic keeps
NF was not a good thing in daoc so look to ore NF for keep taking/design

Ozek - DAOC
Niix - Other games that sucked

  BowbowDAoC

Novice Member

Joined: 5/11/10
Posts: 482

 
OP  3/29/13 4:03:46 PM#14

Thats part of what i mean, each realm could have different keepsnot only from one realm to another, but various ones witihin the same realm.

Edit : changed text completely, it was not formulated well at all :D

Bowbow (kob hunter) Infecto (kob cave shammy) and Thurka (troll warrior) on Merlin/Midgard DAoC
Thurka on WAR

  Zintair

Apprentice Member

Joined: 8/21/08
Posts: 63

3/29/13 5:10:30 PM#15

I definitely want crafters to have a MUCH MORE proactive roll in RvR.  I think it would add a huge strategical element to the game if you had to always protect your crafters while you are looking to take the keep. 

In terms of Keep design...

 

I am against a total raze/rebuild setup.  I don't think that is really the way to go.  There is also a lot of room for QQ when things like this are done.  You always need to look at things from both perspectives because so many og these ideas look great on paper and then when they are implemented really FLOP.  One example would be the battle weeks for GW2 starting at 2 weeks long.  Who would have expected that after two days of losing servers would totally give up and hibernate back to PvE making it pointless to have a battle longer than a week.

 

I'm thinking something along the lines of SWG.  Where you can place the structures down with an aerial terrain editor and it will start construction.  It would be neat that you could hire workers or help to perform the work yourself along with other crafters.  There is really a lot of different directions they could take here.

  BowbowDAoC

Novice Member

Joined: 5/11/10
Posts: 482

 
OP  3/29/13 5:24:42 PM#16
Originally posted by Zintair

I definitely want crafters to have a MUCH MORE proactive roll in RvR.  I think it would add a huge strategical element to the game if you had to always protect your crafters while you are looking to take the keep. 

+1 right there

Bowbow (kob hunter) Infecto (kob cave shammy) and Thurka (troll warrior) on Merlin/Midgard DAoC
Thurka on WAR

  RealLifeGobbo

Novice Member

Joined: 3/20/13
Posts: 218

3/29/13 5:32:08 PM#17


Originally posted by Zintair
I definitely want crafters to have a MUCH MORE proactive roll in RvR.  I think it would add a huge strategical element to the game if you had to always protect your crafters while you are looking to take the keep. 

In terms of Keep design...

 

I am against a total raze/rebuild setup.  I don't think that is really the way to go.  There is also a lot of room for QQ when things like this are done.  You always need to look at things from both perspectives because so many og these ideas look great on paper and then when they are implemented really FLOP.  One example would be the battle weeks for GW2 starting at 2 weeks long.  Who would have expected that after two days of losing servers would totally give up and hibernate back to PvE making it pointless to have a battle longer than a week.

 

I'm thinking something along the lines of SWG.  Where you can place the structures down with an aerial terrain editor and it will start construction.  It would be neat that you could hire workers or help to perform the work yourself along with other crafters.  There is really a lot of different directions they could take here.



I agree there is all sorts of things you could do with it. You could make it into a kind of RTS type game, with different structures giving the area different bonuses/resources. Like SWG, different areas could have better/different resources than other areas that you accumulate over time. Thinking back, SWG did have some good ideas, but they went to the dumpster rather quickly.

Aspiring Game Musician <<>> Inquiring ears, feel free to visit: http://www.youtube.com/user/vagarylabs

  Zintair

Apprentice Member

Joined: 8/21/08
Posts: 63

3/29/13 7:24:40 PM#18
Originally posted by RealLifeGobbo

 


Originally posted by Zintair
I definitely want crafters to have a MUCH MORE proactive roll in RvR.  I think it would add a huge strategical element to the game if you had to always protect your crafters while you are looking to take the keep. 

 

In terms of Keep design...

 

I am against a total raze/rebuild setup.  I don't think that is really the way to go.  There is also a lot of room for QQ when things like this are done.  You always need to look at things from both perspectives because so many og these ideas look great on paper and then when they are implemented really FLOP.  One example would be the battle weeks for GW2 starting at 2 weeks long.  Who would have expected that after two days of losing servers would totally give up and hibernate back to PvE making it pointless to have a battle longer than a week.

 

I'm thinking something along the lines of SWG.  Where you can place the structures down with an aerial terrain editor and it will start construction.  It would be neat that you could hire workers or help to perform the work yourself along with other crafters.  There is really a lot of different directions they could take here.


 


I agree there is all sorts of things you could do with it. You could make it into a kind of RTS type game, with different structures giving the area different bonuses/resources. Like SWG, different areas could have better/different resources than other areas that you accumulate over time. Thinking back, SWG did have some good ideas, but they went to the dumpster rather quickly.

Agreed,

Yeah there are so many ideas.  Considering its open world I'm not sure how they are going to handle the resources and distribution.  If they do tie it with the keeps I hope its a system that is balanced.  It's so important to literally plan for everything.  Not to mention keep the quntities realistic.  Because if everything is OPEN and you can place keeps then they shouldn't be able to upgrade that quickly and should require some form of system that works with currency, resources, npcs, player interaction and maybe more.  Some form of realm effort.  But at the same time not overly penalize other realms if their organization isnt 24 hours.

One of the biggest peeves of GW2 for me was the need to have 24 hour coverage on a server. 

  Vargur

Novice Member

Joined: 1/15/10
Posts: 142

3/30/13 6:51:09 AM#19

I do think that the damages a realm does to a keep should remain after the lord is killed. If someone needs to raze a section of the wall to enter, then they should not be rewarded with a complete wall once the lord is killed. I liked the way the OF relic keeps worked where the doors had to be repaired after an attack, and getting a new door just because the lord has been killed feels wrong to me.

Now, to balance that, the enemy must  spend some time to return and begin their siege giving the crafters time to fix the defences, and it should be possible and affordable to make some rudimentary fixes if reports of enemies are closing in. Having make-shift barricades in breeches could be a way to go.

  Speely

Novice Member

Joined: 2/16/13
Posts: 864

3/30/13 12:51:43 PM#20
Two things that are obvious: that CSE has a ton of things they could do with concepts like these (good stuff all!) and that since this is a purely RvR game, it is almost impossible that they wont implement dynamic keeps in some form or another.

I love it :)

http://www.mmorpg.com/blogs/PerfArt

2 Pages 1 2 » Search