Posts made by spoletta

@GorethMolier I'm trying to give an answer to those players which don't like the fact that a single char can craft anything. Personally I don't have issues with it, but I can why someone would dislike it.

We have been noticing this happening around, I believe that the devs are already working on it. Thanks for the coordinates.

No, if you have transferred the account succesfully and had a package on the previous account, there is no need to purchase a key.

Both the wiki and the game contain that information.

Press the Alt key when hovering the tooltip of the spell, you will see that the description of the effects takes the form "X to Y".
Those are the values that skill assumes respectively at level 0 and level 10. All other levels are linearly placed between those 2.

This for example is what you read on the fireball

It means that a level 0 fireball has a damage multiplier of 36, while a level 10 one has a multiplier of 54.

You can expect a level 5 fireball to have a multiplier of 45.

It isn't implemented in this test.

Guess they didn't make it in time.

For some reason Italians always make that spelling mistake. I know that I do

Thanks for the report.

Thanks I will add these to the bug list as soon as I can.

Welcome!

@HolyAvengerOne

got some info on this point.

By default no, a standalone key does not also get a Steam key by default.
The reason for that is that both keys are valid, and what happened with other games is that as soon as a game releases Steam Keys for everyone, the secondary market gets flooded with those Steam keys, which eventually damages the game.
That's why lately games have started avoiding giving away Steam keys.
With that said, the devs have not yet decided on this matter, and they are trying to see if there is a feasible way to provide those Keys while avoiding the effect I just described.

When was the last time you tried this?

In the recent versions the node spawning has been made 3x faster and resource refining has also been made easier.

You mean that you have 2 accounts, one of which with foundation levels? I don't think that foundation transfering is possible.

DIscounts go from 40% on the adept package to the 20% on the eternal. I see them correctly.

Could be that I've never run chars with very high STR values, but normally the inventory space isn't the limit. The problem is the carried weight.

@rgarrett items don't make that much of a difference after the recent changes.
Most importantly, the weapons are easier to access, which was the biggest problem previously.
Apart from the weapon, a lot of builds don't really gain that much from being equipped in tier 1 or tier 2 armor.

Added some images to make it more clear.

@rgarrett Technically one char can do everything, but many make more chars. Usually one to manage home while the other is away. Also, the attributes you select at the char creation will influence how well you use skills, so people also make alts to have different attributes.

Second post of the day, and second round of possibly quick changes which can solve old issues of the game.

This time we talk about player crafting specialization. There is a general sentiment that people don't like that all players can craft everything without a need to specialize. There have been multiple proposals which ranged from attribute based crafting to limit of recipes known per char.

Probably there is a much easier solution to that.
Put a hardcap on how many production/refining facilities you can build on your plot.
Limit the player simply by using the facilities he has access to. If he wants to "respec" he simply has to scrap the current facilities and build new ones. Easy to do, but bothersome enough that people will do it as less often as possible.

I would also limit it based on the size of the house on the plot.
2x2: 4 refining facilities, 1 production facility
3x3: 2 refining facilities, 3 production facilities
4x4: 0 refining facilities (obviously, you have no room outside)..., 5 production facilities
5x5: Same as 4x4.

Refining facilities: Tanning Tub, Smeltery, Distillery, Woodcutting station.

Production facilities: Sewing station, Essences Extractor, Forge (counts as 2), Woodworking table, Fletching table, Potion table (?), Imbuing table, Wizard table.

This way a person cannot do it all on its own and will focus on certain aspects. It can still use the public one in the cities, but those have taxes coming with them.

This isn't an harsh way to "specialize" players, but is very quickly done. It keeps the concept that a single char can technically do it all on its own, but at least it makes it convenient to rely on others. Your plot will be part of your "build".

As an added benefit, we will no longer see industrial plots (plots without house on it and only crafting stations).

There have been plenty of discussions recently on the future of cities and their tech trees.

On one hand, you can't remove tech trees. They specialize a city, which creates treading opportunities between different cities, and also gives value to ranking up the city, which in turns creates a need for food and consequently opportunities for conflicts between cities (on Syndesia).

At the same time, we are getting close to the Steam Early access, and we can't ask for significant changes. Probably anything that isn't just a numerical change will not get to pass.

Let's analyze what we have, and look at what is and isn't working:

1. The last system of tech trees allows a city to craft advanced crafting items, and also improves their quality. This solution kind of works, but it also creates a double gate for advanced crafting, since you need both the recipe and a city with the related technology. For solo players this can be an issue. It also creates an issue where the biggest city has the biggest pull factor toward new residents, so all players tend to go to the same few cities.

2. In the last tests, the tech trees have been disabled and everyone could craft everything everywhere. This obviously had a specific reason to be, due to the nature of those tests, but it has also shown that this system isn't all bad. The obvious issue was that there was no reason to invest in a city (which requires a huge amount of resources).

3. In the older version of cities, only the citizens of the city got to get something out of the city, and only them could harvest the resources of the region. Now, this created a very intensive trading between cities, but clearly most players felt left out of a big portion of the game.

4. In none of the previous incarnations, there was an actual shortage of food, so no drive to raid other cities apart from getting into a fight for fun purposes.

This is the info on the results that we got from the tests so far.

What does this lead us to? I don't have a clear answer to this, but I got a potential proposal which with only minor changes could give us a system which learns from past lessons. The aim is always to have lots of trades, lots of fights and be as less impactful as possible on those players which don't want to interact with cities.

The tech tree

Don't have any gating on production given by the tech tree. Everyone can craft anything in their homes (as long as they have the recipe). Instead focus the tech tree on enchanting and resources. The tech tree allows players to use the enchanting table to increase the items to +1/+2/+3/+4 and part of the gold spent is sent to the city coffers. Players which want to craft those kind of items will find it easier to be near a town which has said tech, but will still feel a lot less restricted. The techs must be purchased for each single item you want to enchant, and the t2 version requires the tech in the t1 one.

Edit: Added an example image to make it more clear. These are leather armor, rogue armor and ranger armor. Each of these steps should cost 1 point.

In addition, the tech tree should focus on the resource part, which is normally what really characterizes a city. The size of the tree should be massive. With each resource having a specific tech i.e. bronze, mammoth hide, blazium oil. These techs unlock another craft to get those materials, which has slightly better returns, for example "Bulk Arboreal Dragon Leather" instead of tanning skins to leather in ratio of 5:5 in increments of 5, it instead works in increments of 10 and with a 10:11 ratio. Ingots could go from the 3+fuel : 2 to 15+5xfuel : 11. Oils from 2:5 to 4:11. These are simply additional crafts to make. Same items involved, probably same icon with just a "B" symbol on it. And it doesn't make any sense for a city to develop a tech which is not relevant in its location, so they will specialize. Going to the territory of another city to haul back minerals will yeld less final resources than a resident of that location doing it, so you are more likely to purchase them from that city. These techs should cost 2 points.

Edit: This is how the fabric part could look like.

With that said, how many points should a city get? Depends on the planet. Syndesia cities should get more points than Arboreus ones. The reason for that is that further down you will read that I'm proposing for Arboreus to produce more food, so Arboreus will have more city of high rank compared to Syndesia. Arboreus cities should get one point per Rank, so a max rank city gets to bulk produce 3 resources and enchant a t2 set and its t1 version to +4. A Syndesian city should get double that. Keeping together a city with scarcity of food and constant pvp threat should be rewarding.

City Progress

Let's not reinvent the wheel. The cities should follow the current 15 rank system based on prestige and food requirements that they currently have.
Where instead there is a need to act is on the available quantity of food. Syndesia should feel properly starved, so that people contend with each other for food. Arboreus instead does not have city fights, so there is no reason to starve those cities, and it makes sense for Arboreus to be more fertile. You still want cities specialized in food that provide it to other cities though, because trading is fun.
The main way to realize this, is by simply the prestige value of fields to a negative value. This way it becomes impossible to have a big city and also have it sustain itself. You will never get to have both the necessary food and prestige. A city to reach max rank needs the support of other cities. The fertility of Arboreus should be such that one rank 9 city providing food is enough for another city to reach max rank.

On Syndesia you should need one and a half. So probably the fertility of Arboreus should be set to 150% and then the food requirements per rank of city should be rescaled appropriately. Naturally for a Syndesian city having a city from Arboreus supply you with food is a perfectly valid option.

As I previously said, for a guild keeping a city on Syndesia is a high risk high reward scenario. Harder to do, but also is worth double the techs.

Another important change to be made, is to lower the amount of players required to found a city. I would set it to 5. You want all cities taken. The cost of founding one isn't cheap, so if a group of players believe that he was what it takes to keep a city around, they should have the chance to try.

Tldr:

Techs less restrictive and more based on enchants and resource gathering. Massive tech tree with lots of very specific options to force cities in specializing. Less food on Syndesia, more on Arboreus. More techs on Syndesia, less on Arboreus. Easier to found cities.

You are answering to a 3 years old conversation. Most of the info here is outdated.