The Potential City Problem.
-
@Nekrage said in The Potential City Problem.:
100% this. I want this changed. If it’s not changed I will certainly abuse it.
@Nekrage said in The Potential City Problem.:
@Roccandil said in The Potential City Problem.:
@Nekrage said in The Potential City Problem.:
@Tuoni said in The Potential City Problem.:
@Ostaff I did not want a list of all games you have played which have alts. Only those where alts have actual impact to other players gaming experience and especially to the player driven economy. Anyway, if you think this is generally just about having several alts then I understand why you do not acknowledge the concern. I guess you have not seen how alts can be used very wrong like in Albion and EvE online. Anyhow, even I would personally want to see as less as possible impact from alts, I can personally adapt and take the maximum benefit out from them if that is the case.
100% this. I want this changed. If it’s not changed I will certainly abuse it.
How would you abuse it?
As stated earlier I won’t provide details publicly but steps are already being taken. As long as it’s not cheating it’s fair game. I will be testing this going forward and providing details via PMs to devs instead of posting it publicly. This thread already draws enough attention to the issue.
If this is not changed I question the direction Fractured is going and worry for its longevity, quality and support of a competitive environment.
Perfect you and your awesome guild are already planning on how you can break the game and its only in alpha. And this is fun for you? You said early in this thread that perhaps you had backed the wrong game. I am thinking now that as the game gains some recognition and grows that due to some of the people coming in that perhaps I have backed the wrong game. Yes there are indeed some troubling things happening in the Fractured-verse.
-
@Gibbx said in The Potential City Problem.:
Perfect you and your awesome guild are already planning on how you can break the game and its only in alpha. And this is fun for you?
Yes. Being the best I can be is fun for me.
Intentionally looking for ways to utilize the game's systems for progression is a main goal for me. Whether it benefits me or not I want to see this specific issue resolved because I believe in Fractured.
@Gibbx said in The Potential City Problem.:
You said early in this thread that perhaps you had backed the wrong game.
Please point out where I said that. I bet you can't because I never did.
@Gibbx said in The Potential City Problem.:
I am thinking now that as the game gains some recognition and grows that due to some of the people coming in that perhaps I have backed the wrong game. Yes there are indeed some troubling things happening in the Fractured-verse.
You attempted to insult me by claiming I made a statement(which I haven't) that you just made yourself....um ok.
Don't you have some furry community to type to instead?
-
This post is deleted!
-
@Specter said in The Potential City Problem.:
All characters on an account share an identifier (I assume it'll be an account-wide name) to make sure you can't just put all your alts in different guilds without anyone knowing.
Also, housing is account-wide so if one of your Human characters joins a city, your whole account is part of that city. You can't put your alts in different towns on the same planet.
You could buy multiple accounts to hide your identity but it's going to be a lot of work to maintain them all, especially if a guild wants to maintain alt cities. Maintaining one city is already supposed to be a lot of work, now imagine having to maintain multiple cities on multiple alts.
This is a really good step towards the right direction. I like that!
-
@Gibbx said in The Potential City Problem.:
Perfect you and your awesome guild are already planning on how you can break the game and its only in alpha.
Actually one part of the testing is try to break the game so the issues can be addressed and fixed before the game goes live. Yeah it sounds bad, but it is better that someone does that during the test phases rather than when the game is already released.
-
@Specter said in The Potential City Problem.:
@Nekrage The governor decides who can harvest the resources, it's not free for all. The same applies to "timed" crafting stations like the tanning tubs, those too can be managed by the governor. You can't just join a city and immediately start harvesting their resource nodes, unless you can convince the governor to give you permission to do so.
So this means I can't go to enemy territory and harvest their resources?
Hmm I don't know how i feel about this..
Maybe for arboreus... but for PvP area this kinda doesnt seem very fitting.
-
@Gothix said in The Potential City Problem.:
@Specter said in The Potential City Problem.:
@Nekrage The governor decides who can harvest the resources, it's not free for all. The same applies to "timed" crafting stations like the tanning tubs, those too can be managed by the governor. You can't just join a city and immediately start harvesting their resource nodes, unless you can convince the governor to give you permission to do so.
So this means I can't go to enemy territory and harvest their resources?
Hmm I don't know how i feel about this..
Maybe for arboreus... but for PvP area this kinda doesnt seem very fitting.Right? Such a blow to the game for me.
@Tuoni said in The Potential City Problem.:
@Gibbx said in The Potential City Problem.:
Perfect you and your awesome guild are already planning on how you can break the game and its only in alpha.
Actually one part of the testing is try to break the game so the issues can be addressed and fixed before the game goes live. Yeah it sounds bad, but it is better that someone does that during the test phases rather than when the game is already released.
Agreed 100%. The problem people are those that find something broken with the game such as an exploit and NEVER REPORT IT so they can abuse it until the end of days.
-
Wow i am super late to the party going on in this thread
Actually... this thread has branched off into so many different topics it's quite hard to try to reply to all the big points at once, but I want to contribute to the discussions as well.
If each city gets to control 1 (possibly more than 1 in the future) resource nodes, then the important information would be:
- How the resource node is managed (Does the governor control it? Will there be a "log" of which citizen took what?) - I believe Specter already answered this earlier in this thread confirming that Governors will be able to decide who can harvest the resources, which is GREAT news!
- Will there be ways to collect the same resource but from a much more limited source that is NOT controlled by any city? (Example: City A controls a Yew Tree Forest, but would there be 1 or 2 random Yew Trees in the wild that can be cut down by anyone on Syndesia that are in PvP areas? I know Arboreus brings a whole other picture, but I am trying to ask specifically about areas that will allow for PVP)
What @Nekrage is saying here is that the implementation of the city resources features is extremely important to the long-term health of the game, which I believe we can all agree on. I'm sure the developers also know this and have brainstormed a few ideas, we as regular players just don't know what they have in store yet so some concerns are being voiced. I just hope that after we do get to see what's planned, that we can continue giving valuable feedback to the developers and that they will continue to acknowledge any potential issues.
Fractured's most unique vision is the implementation of the three planets, three playstyles, and so with the appeal to all those different playstyles we get quite a mix of a crowd here on the forums.
For those who are planning to purely play on Arboreus, the "one resource node per city" feature is great because it will promote trading between cities and goodwill across the continent. For those on Syndesia and Tartaros, however, this is a feature that HAS to be carefully implemented, especially due to PVP playstyles! The biggest difference is the city sieges. If we can only siege cities that are directly connected to us on the road, we will be er.. fighting our neighbors quite often!
My experience with human nature is that if two groups are at war, they will not be working nicely to promote trade with each other Which means... there will have to be other ways provided by the developers to possibly obtain the resources either through PvP/conquest/city raiding.. OR unfortunately players will try things like backstabbing each other to steal from each other's cities via spying or "secret second accounts to steal resources". Yes I know, to the players who are more in tune with the Beastmen/Angels playstyle this is terrible, but all full-loot PvP types of games will invite more "demonic" communities where people will try to gain the upper hand by unsavory means. Don't underestimate how crazy the hardcore player mentality will be as they try to play to be the very best! That is why the developers must plan ahead and curb the potential for that unsavory conduct by providing better alternatives in-game. Since Tartaros is for that type of community and Syndesia is somewhat partial to it as well, all the different feature implementations of Fractured have to be fully considered for all the different rulesets, not just for one of the rulesets.In this matter, I think Nekrage and I both agree that bringing issues like this to the attention of the developers is in favor of having a healthy, long-term game. We don't want Fractured to be ruined by something that might have been overlooked or unintended.
I am looking forward to see how this will be implemented. Governors getting to decide who will harvest the resources is a big step in the right direction!
-
I see a heated debated here! Let me give you some clarifications
First of all, you already know players can create multiple characters per account, and we fully expect most will do that. This shouldn't be a surprise for anyone - Fractured features 3 races enjoying different planets and gameplay and sub-races with unique abilities. Moreover, you sort of "create your own class" by setting attributes during character creation, while attributes respecs will be very limited. You have to create alts if you want to have a "mage" character, a "warrior" character, a "rogue" character, etc - just like you would do in almost all existing MMOs.
We don't see having multiple characters in the same account as an issue really. You can only become the citizen of one city per planet account-wide. Even if you created multiple accounts and bought access for all of them, why bothering? Resource extraction and processing for advanced crafting is a group effort and requires permissions, as @Specter mentioned. Now let's assume you played 12 hours per day with 4 accounts, citizens of 4 different cities and part of the crafters group of each city... Well, it's legitimate, but if you wanted to "get rich" I can assure you there are plenty of faster ways to achieve that than being a crafter in 4 different cities
On a guild level, the situation is different. The risk of a guild claiming a small city with a handful of secondary accounts just to gather resources so they don't have to trade with anyone is real. Again, it's not clever, but I can see why a guild might want to do that to be entirely self-sufficient. We must make it a very unprofitable choice through maintenance costs, time required to move resources and other tech tree shenanigans
-
Thank you @Prometheus. I agree with you 100%, and think you guys have been doing a great job. Alts really do not matter with that 1 resident per planet rule, and you even have a way to check alts at that. Multiple accounts is always a problem, and again something I don't really think you as a company can really deal with, as you can not tell rather the extra account is from another family member or not. I do suggest however, that when you finish the API for this game, that you give us the ability to check for duplicate IPs being used at the time of play (by account name) for us to better monitor our internal guild members (I prefer this much easier step compare to the alternatives).
I see this as being the main issue the PvP people are actually having, since you really have already taken care of the Alt issue.
-
@Prometheus said in The Potential City Problem.:
On a guild level, the situation is different. The risk of a guild claiming a small city with a handful of secondary accounts just to gather resources so they don't have to trade with anyone is real. Again, it's not clever, but I can see why a guild might want to do that to be entirely self-sufficient. We must make it a very unprofitable choice through maintenance costs, time required to move resources and other tech tree shenanigans
Agreed 100%. Go out of your way to block this playstyle choice.
I like your mindset on most of this however I STRONGLY disagree with the lack of an option to steal resources from an enemy city. It allows for additional PvP elements when sieges are not occurring. Additionally it's very easy for a guild to refuse to trade with another guild (this is guaranteed to happen) and lock each other out of resources.
I personally see no reason for resources to be protected without player interaction. If players want to protect their resources, place guards or players to do so.
This would also promote daily guild vs. guild activity rather than waiting for scheduled events.
-
I do agree with it being nice to be able to steal from opposing cities.I think Prometheus has already said something about "raids" which is different from "seiges" and that may allow for the resource stealing you are wanting. If anything, they could always allow "pure theft" from cities on Tataros, crime "theft" on Syndesia, and "No theft" on Arboreus keeping with the main game design.
Tararos is suppose to be completely chaotic anyhow, so no limits barred on that planet would work.
-
What I would like to see is protection in place to prevent bots and scripts being used to run alts. I fully support alts as long as the player is actually playing them.
-
@Harleyyelrah said in The Potential City Problem.:
The biggest difference is the city sieges. If we can only siege cities that are directly connected to us on the road, we will be er.. fighting our neighbors quite often! My experience with human nature is that if two groups are at war, they will not be working nicely to promote trade with each other
Good point!
Of course, there will be advantages to warring in only one direction (a multi-front war may not be desirable), which will open possibilities for trade, even on PvP worlds.And if the PvP worlds coalesce into a few power blocs, and everyone starts holding hands, trading may not be a problem at all.
-
@Nekrage said in The Potential City Problem.:
I like your mindset on most of this however I STRONGLY disagree with the lack of an option to steal resources from an enemy city. It allows for additional PvP elements when sieges are not occurring. Additionally it's very easy for a guild to refuse to trade with another guild (this is guaranteed to happen) and lock each other out of resources.
...but the option does exist! Guilds can launch raids on cities without having to own a neighboring city. The raid battle happens at a given time the day after the raid is declared, but resources that can be stolen are locked beforehand.
Also, once multiple resource nodes per city are implemented, all cities in proximity of a node will be able to vie for the control of that node.
There are a lot of opportunities for PvP. Allowing players to freely use the nodes that belong to other cities would make the whole resource nodes system pointless though.
-
@Prometheus said in The Potential City Problem.:
@Nekrage said in The Potential City Problem.:
I like your mindset on most of this however I STRONGLY disagree with the lack of an option to steal resources from an enemy city. It allows for additional PvP elements when sieges are not occurring. Additionally it's very easy for a guild to refuse to trade with another guild (this is guaranteed to happen) and lock each other out of resources.
...but the option does exist! Guilds can launch raids on cities without having to own a neighboring city. The raid battle happens at a given time the day after the raid is declared, but resources that can be stolen are locked beforehand.
Also, once multiple resource nodes per city are implemented, all cities in proximity of a node will be able to vie for the control of that node.
There are a lot of opportunities for PvP. Allowing players to freely use the nodes that belong to other cities would make the whole resource nodes system pointless though.
Ohh hell ya! We’re in business boys!
This is a different ballgame now and much different than what was originally explained earlier. Thanks for clearing this up!
Hype level increased.
I bet we have some upset roleplayers lol. Some just found out there will be full loot PvP on all planets
-
its getting crispy up in here
-
@Nekrage Prometheus's explanation only applies to cities on Syndesia and Tartaros. Cities on Arboreus can't be raided and will have a different mechanic to deal with the ownership of resource nodes.
-
@Specter said in The Potential City Problem.:
@Nekrage Prometheus's explanation only applies to cities on Syndesia and Tartaros. Cities on Arboreus can't be raided and will have a different mechanic to deal with the ownership of resource nodes.
Makes sense. The casuals need their safe zone!
-
@Nekrage said in The Potential City Problem.:
@Ostaff said in The Potential City Problem.:
As for multiple alts.. of course everyone will have multiple alts... that is the whole intention of the game.
Then it seems I am supporting the wrong game. I would love to hear that "alts are the main purpose of Fractured" from Prometheus himself.
@Nekrage said in The Potential City Problem.:
@Gibbx said in The Potential City Problem.:
Perfect you and your awesome guild are already planning on how you can break the game and its only in alpha. And this is fun for you?
Yes. Being the best I can be is fun for me.
Intentionally looking for ways to utilize the game's systems for progression is a main goal for me. Whether it benefits me or not I want to see this specific issue resolved because I believe in Fractured.
@Gibbx said in The Potential City Problem.:
You said early in this thread that perhaps you had backed the wrong game.
Please point out where I said that. I bet you can't because I never did.
See above
@Gibbx said in The Potential City Problem.:
I am thinking now that as the game gains some recognition and grows that due to some of the people coming in that perhaps I have backed the wrong game. Yes there are indeed some troubling things happening in the Fractured-verse.
You attempted to insult me by claiming I made a statement(which I haven't) that you just made yourself....um ok.
Don't you have some furry community to type to instead?
I made no 'attempt' to insult you. If you see yourself reflected in my comments well then as they say if the shoe fits...
Happy gaming and please by all means enjoy 'being the best'
