Posts made by GreatValdus

I would go with a moving cube with a pixel sword if the game system is good, and this is good!

@Laita welcome to the forum!

@Delta55 welcome to the forum, see you soon in game, maybe!

@Logain indeed we're making speculations without knowing how the game will evolve.
I for one am used to try and see possible exploits in everything, so I see some here, in one way or another.
But maybe in the end the losing guild will prefer to leave the city altogether and move to the next place, who knows.
It's good to rise the point though, food for thoughts.

This really sounds like a tricky topic, having no reliable way to tell true soloists apart from old guild supporters when a city gets captured.
I agree with @Rife that you can really end up in a situation where the first guild owning a city can in fact hold it by leaving its members around the now enemy city, exploiting resources and having a permanent untouchable base of operation against the city itself.
On the other hand I also agree with @GamerSeuss on the fact that soloists taking home in residential areas should not be damaged by city change of head.
Devs have already said their position, but of course positions can change if reality shows that the system is ending up being damaging the game core mechanics.
In the end if the whole guild war system will be damaged too much by that, probably the soloists will end up paying for it by seeing the introduction of eviction system, who knows.
I'm often a soloist, but I understand that the game style of few can't destroy the main mechanic of most.

@tpopcaz welcome to the forum!
There are some games out there with the risk vs reward feeling, but this promises to beat them all hard to the ground!

@Farlander you make a fair point, but that would make conquering cities really inconvenient.
If a guild has a city and all the residential area around, it will be more efficient than a guild that conquered a city and can house its guildies only in the city center.

@Rife you rise a very good point here, and the solution is not bad.
I would extend that even more maybe, making the governor able to evict people even after city capture, maybe at higher cost the longer the person has been living there, so that if the guild grows more room can be made for new guildies, always at a cost, a rising cost.
The refugee status system is not bad actually, but something in the back of my mind calls out "exploitable!", but I just can't figure out how right now.
All in all nice job, a good point to start from!

@Bernu some might be flexing, but if a guy can complete Dark Souls using the guitar for Guitar Hero it means that some people can actually win by skill and not by gear.

@Prometheus I've probably lost the moment when the neutral status went away then!

Anyway I suppose that when you say "If you turn aggressive, you start taking damage from AOE abilities cast by all other players" you still mean only from flagged ones.

@Ostaff ah right, right, so again, more compact than ever!

Any(not F) vs Any(F or not) = Nothing
GN(F) vs GN = Nothing
GN(F) vs E or Any(F) = Damage
E(F) vs Any(F or not) = Damage

@Ostaff ok I'll try to sum that up based on your notation system.

Any(not F) vs Any(F or not) = Nothing (we can say that a non flagged will NEVER damage someone first, unless flagged by something)
GN(F) vs GN = Nothing
GN(F) vs E = ?
GN(F) vs Any(F) = Damage
E(F) vs Any(F or not) = Damage

Is that correct?
We must only understand if a GN flagged player can initiate hostility against a non flagged E.

@Ostaff yeah I've been wordy because I think sometimes schematic tables are less readable by some players, but your answer really helps narrowing down stuff a lot!

I thought there were a lot more strange interactions based on PvP flagging, but the way you put it out is really easier to understand.

When you say that an E player will always harm all other players regardless of alignment, do you also mean they do it regardless their own flagging?
I mean, must E player be flagged to harm in the first place or is being evil enough, like being E equals also being flagged?
Because I think I remember to have read the concept of Evil non flagged player somewhere.
But I might be wrong of course.

I think it could be beneficial for everyone to set in stone the interactions between alignments and PvP flags.
I'm doing this little table in hope that someone helps me solving the doubt situations, maybe this can go in the wiki after it's done.
Let's suppose two characters: A and B, we'll also suppose that A is always the source of the offending skill, and try to nail down all the possible combinations and their effects.
Every character can be either Good, Neutral or Evil, and can be flagged for PvP or not, a lot of combinations, so here we go!
(I don't know if there can be differences between single target skills and AoE, if there are we must expand the table further to consider them!)
(I will skip the cases where A and B are both not flagged for PvP, because I suppose that if both are not flagged no hostile interaction can go on anyway)

A Good No PvP
B Good PvP: interaction since B is flagged? Does A get flagged too? Does being both Good prevent hostile interaction or does the PvP flag on B get precedence? First doubt here.
B Neutral PvP: interaction since B is flagged? Does A get flagged too? Does A being Good prevent hostile interaction or does the PvP flag on B and its neutrality get precedence? Same doubt as above.
B Evil PvP: interaction seems natural, B is Evil and flagged, so I suppose that A gets flagged for PvP too since it's attacking another player.

A Good PvP
B Good No PvP: interaction since A is flagged? Does B get flagged too? Does being both Good prevent hostile interaction or does the PvP flag on A get precedence?
B Good PvP: interaction since both characters are flagged? Even if they are both Good?
B Neutral No PvP: interaction since A is flagged? Does B get flagged too? Well you know the drill now.
B Neutral PvP: probable interaction since they are both flagged and not both Good.
B Evil No PvP: probable interaction since B is Evil and A is probably hunting for Evil, but can a Good initiate combat this way against a non flagged?
B Evil PvP: this seems certain, interaction because Good A is hunting evil B.

A Neutral No PvP
B Good PvP: interaction since B is flagged? Does A get flagged too?
B Neutral PvP: interaction since B is flagged?
B Evil PvP: interaction seems natural, B is Evil and flagge, so I suppose that A gets flagged for PvP too since it's attacking another player.

A Neutral PvP
B Good No PvP: interaction since a Neutral flagged player can initiate combat I suppose, B gets flagged because attacked by hostile player.
B Good PvP: interaction since both characters are flagged.
B Neutral No PvP: interaction since a Neutral flagged player can initiate combat I suppose, B gets flagged because attacked by hostile player.
B Neutral PvP: interaction since both characters are flagged.
B Evil No PvP: interaction since a Neutral flagged player can initiate combat I suppose, B gets flagged because attacked by hostile player.
B Evil PvP: interaction since both characters are flagged.

A Evil No PvP
B Good PvP: can Evil character simply attack anyone already flagged even if they're not currently?
B Neutral PvP: can Evil character simply attack anyone already flagged even if they're not currently?
B Evil PvP: can Evil character simply attack anyone already flagged even if they're not currently?

A Evil PvP
B Good No PvP
B Good PvP
B Neutral No PvP
B Neutral PvP
B Evil No PvP
B Evil PvP
I suppose any combination where A is Evil and PvP flagged produce interaction, and flags B if not already flagged.

Ok now please help me correct the mistakes I might have made and fill out the borderline situations!
Hope this will be of help not only for me, but for every player in the end!

@vashin1 welcome to the forum!

@Bernu I guess as hard as the skill gap between the two players.
I remember people in UO killing enemies while playng naked, just because they knew how to move, how to dodge and how to time their strikes.
In action combat games the player skill is usually really relevant in the combat outcome, often more that character stats and gear.

@ElphXIII I think the town governor can issue such orders for the town, so that people can auto-sell stuff needed.
I'm not sure whether normal citizens or land owners can issue these buy orders too, I think only governors.
Maybe in the future it could be interesting to add the same mechanic to every chest, for example, so that everyone can become a little shop, buying and selling what's needed.

@Pispita welcome to the forum!

@Farlander planets are also locked for races.
Humans set as good can stay from 20 to 40 real hours on Arboreus, but not forever, they'll be sent back anyway after that time, for example.
Wiki has some of these numbers in the worlds pages.

@Muchu welcome to the forum!
If I find you naked and at 10% health then maybe, maybe, I'll be able to kill you...