I don't see that as an issue, but if you do then disallow the "lazy" members from using the crafting stations.
Posts made by spoletta
-
RE: First Impressions on the new City System
-
RE: First Impressions on the new City System
There are 2 different ways to run a city.
-
You are a big guild (big enough to own all the plots). In this case, you don't need external help, you play with your members and what they bring. The crafting stations get set to citiziens only and you are good to go.
-
You are not a big guild. You WANT solo players and small guilds to take plots in your residential area. They are additional resources and contribute to your economic system. You leave crafting stations open to them, and probably keep the taxes low, because you want players to come live in your region. For the same reason, you don't hunt them near resources. Again, solo players and small guilds are an asset which will be contended between regions. Who has more of them has the advantage over the neighbours.
There will be a new player global chat in game, which means that new players will now which regions are friendly and which are not. I don't see an issue.
The only issue that I see, but only because we lack any kind of info on this, is that big guilds could try to conquer everything. We don't know if there is a limit of some kind, or how hard it will be to prepare a siege.
-
-
RE: Solo pvp areas
Yes, it is not the same, but what you ask isn't feasible. 1v1 in a controlled environment is the closest realistic feature to what you are asking.
-
RE: npc cities
The game mechanics right now support evil aligned cities, there is no need for NPC cities doing that.
Also, IIRC Prometheus was quite adamant against NPC cities.
-
RE: The decision for public vs citizens-only crafting stations should be made by Governors, not Dynamight
You literally said:
"if a solo player got to a level he can do a boss then there shouldn't be a game mechanic that prevent that"
A solo player will NOT get to a level where he can do a boss alone, specifically because THERE IS a game mechanic preventing that, called horizontal progession.
Sure, you can grow in options and many fights will become easier, but those are fights that are in a scale supposed to be tackled by a single well prepared player.
"Bosses", whatever we mean for these, are not something that falls into that category.
-
RE: The decision for public vs citizens-only crafting stations should be made by Governors, not Dynamight
This is a game which is supposed to have an HORIZONTAL progress.
In no case a player should become so strong as to do the work of multiple players.
-
RE: Solo pvp areas
I see the following issues with your idea:
- It is a real challenge to code correctly. Such an area is open to so many exploits that it would take a lot of work to get it right.
But let's assume that point 1 is invalid and you can indeed do that.
-
You talk about "Only a small area", but actually you need at least 27 of them. No less than 3 per continent, or you polarize solo players to a specific area/continent. The game doesn't like that. The game design assumes that solo players are equally distributed across the land, for many reasons than I'm not going to list here.
-
What do you put in these areas? Surely you can't put all resources inside those areas, so you have to select which resources would be more accessible than others thanks to being in solo friendly areas.
-
Those areas would be stealth ganker's heaven. An area where your friends can't help you? They would be unstoppable.
-
What would be the purpose of such zone and so much effort? 1v1 PvP is better served in a controlled environment. It is a good idea as a specific city building for example. Fighting zergs? You do that by going all out on friendly fire mechanics. I don't want to discourage zergs because they artificially can't hurt me. I want to discourage zergs because if they make a mistake and I play my cards correctly, I go home with all their heads in my bag.
-
RE: Feudal System could be an option to small group of players
Hamlets depending on villages and villages depending on cities is already what happens with this system.
Obviously if your guild is small, you will HAVE to join an alliance if you want to manage a city. There is nothing wrong with that.
If you don't think that you can manage a city with multiple guilds, then let someone else do that. Being able to band together agains the bigger fishes is part of the challenges that this game offers.Personally I'm in a small guild and right now we are actively looking for allies for the next test.
-
RE: First Impressions on the new City System
I do remember that being said in the video, but is there a limit on how many you can build per land parcel?
As long as the true limiting factor in crafting becomes the processing step, and you can't just spam processing stations in the residential area, then this system could work. Owning a city should provide a significative boon to your production capability.
Edit: I'm talking about regions which have that resource obviously. If you need to import that resource, then the limiting factor is the raw material.
-
RE: The decision for public vs citizens-only crafting stations should be made by Governors, not Dynamight
No one said anything about solo players being able to do end game content or being competitive.
Obviously you need to form groups to do that stuff.In the system I proposed, you can't do anything above a certain scale without having a city.
-
RE: The decision for public vs citizens-only crafting stations should be made by Governors, not Dynamight
A game like this cannot live without solo players.
I've made a suggestion here which potentially bridges the gap and makes owning a city desiderable without limiting solo players.
https://forum.fracturedmmo.com/topic/13248/first-impressions-on-the-new-city-system
-
First Impressions on the new City System
I would like to share my first impressions of the new city system after looking at the introductory video.
First of all, it looks like this change in design was made to make the game more friendly to solo players and small groups of players. In this, I think that this new solution surely is good. As much as we love our guilds and would like a game centered on them, a huge amount of players that approach a sandbox are usually organized in groups of 2-4 friends. Without them, this game has no future, so this change is surely a good step in the right direction.
Now, this obviously rises some concerns from the those that prefer a guild centric system, and I find those concerns to be justified.
In particular, the "value" of putting together a city has now dropped considerably. Right now the value of a city is represented by the crafting stations and the natural resources, which can be accessed only by the citiziens. If those are available to everyone, then having your own city or just being a resident of someone else's city, doesn't make that big of a difference. We could have a leeching problem. Sure, owning the city will allow me to steer the direction of the tech tree, and I will have processing facilities dedicated only to the citiziens, but many will just prefer not having to build and maintain the city.
Also, if the spawn times of minerals are kept like the current ones, all big guilds will PK on sight anyone getting close to the mines. The minerals are too rare to be shared with other players.
With all the previous considerations, I would like to share a proposal which could potentially solve some of these issues.
The main point is to restore the "value" of owning the city and to lessen the impact that residents in your area have on your resources.-
Increase the spawn rate of natural resources, or make it client side. Right now the limiting factor in how much stuff you can craft per day, is the natural rate of resources spawning. If many players have to share them, this limit should be moved to something else (point 2). At the same time, increase the mining time required to turn a node into a resource. Extracting minerals should be a time consuming activity, so that the raw ore keeps a part of its value and so that you create a window of opportunity for potential attackers to raid the miners.
-
Move the limiting factor to the processing step. Processing facilities (like smelters) inside the city as far as I understood are only for citiziens. Allow a resident house to have a limited amount of such facilities, so that owning the city comes with the "value" of having a widely increased resource production capability. In order to do this, we need all types of crafting to require a "processing" step. Right now only leather and metals have such a step. We need woodcutting and weaving facilities and relative processes. High level enchanting materials could also potentially be obtained with refining processes.
This way, you can create this environment of big guilds and small groups coexisting in the same region, since you make them beneficial to each other.
Having your own city allows you to produce many more resoruces (which, afterall, was the same concept of the last alpha test). This allows you to equip your guild with much more ease, making wars with other regions a more feasible activity.
Players playing alone or in small groups can still access all content, and they can organize between neighbouring houses to put together small productions.
The residents impact on the guild's resources will be a lot lessened, which makes having residents actually a good prospective. They provide you with additional population for the tech tree and with gold for your maintenance. They are also potential future citiziens.
Cities will have a constant production or resources, which makes raiding them profitable. Right now the cities rarely stock resources, they are immediately used.
Leeching off another guild will be detrimental, since if you don't develop your own city and try to live just as a group of residents, you will be crushed by the other guild's production capabilities (while providing them with your gold). If you want to be an enemy of that guild, you have to make your own city.
-
-
RE: Idea: PvP Is Determined By Which World You Choose To Play In
Demons cannot stay for long on Arboreus, but I think that as a human you can just travel to Arboreus at a certain point.
-
RE: Guilds and new players
That's only partially true.
If talents weren't so effective, I would agree.
The reality right now is that a player with 60 talent points is completely on another level compared to someone with 20. That's not horizontal.The initial idea was that talents were there just to give an edge over other players, for those that were interested in min/maxing. Right now they are effectively a level system.
Base stats should be higher and talents should be less powerful to achieve an horizontal progression.
-
RE: [Feedback] Rock, paper, stack evasion... and a list of other things
Archers do feel quite powerful at the moment. Probably too much.
They are not even countered by warriors. It's just that in this test warriors were equipped with extremely advanced equipment which stops physical damage almost completely AND archers had their damage halved by wrong collisions AND the archer talent for bypassing armors isn't working AND mark of death isn't working.
I shudder to think what archers could do without all those handicaps.
Acid arrows is surely too good at the moment. It should be more tied to the Int/Dex build. The corrosion effect shouldn't go on every arrow, but should be a probability based on INT. Right now the difference between a DEX build and an INT build using that skill is minimal.
Other concerns I have for PvP:
- Silence is too strong of an effect. It shouldn't shut down all schools of skills, and the power word silence lasts too long.
- As I said in another thread, poison is too binary. You are immune or you are death.
- Not enough effects have friendly fire. Friendly fire is the counter to zergs, and no one likes those. More effects should have friendly fire. Including arrows, yes.
- Minor heal on high INT heals really too much. The cooldown should be less dependent on INT.
- Consumables are fine if they occupy a slot in the skill bar. If you can use them from the inventory, it makes it a game of have/have not.
-
RE: [FRAC-2394] Land parcels still have the old cost
Update:
The land parcel costs 200 gold, but requires 1000 in your inventory.
-
[FRAC-2394] Land parcels still have the old cost
It still requires 1000 gold to get a land parcel. According to the news, they were supposed to be 200 gold for this test.
-
RE: OVERVIEW: SUGGESTIONS. (PvP) and some general observations
A few answers to your points:
"**I also realized that some mages use 03 strong spells at the same time, and can full damage all of the enemy's HP, this should receive special attention." - This is currently done mostly through the Ice Spike spell, which is already receiving attention and will be modified.
"Piercings weapons could add the application of poisons." You can already do that.
"Maces, A chance to provoke "Stun" with just a simple blow hit." They already do that.
"Naked, take much more damage, this will solve the problem of opportunists players in a full lot game" They already do.
"Magic and enchanted items, earning some extra bonuses, but that do not make anyone using these items to be BOSS, the skill should be worth over the use of items, a pvp based item is not viewed with good eyes if you want a more realistic immersion game." The items don't count a lot in the game currently. The enchants are important, but are also something that can be done quite fast by everyone. They are part of the build.
"You should create two large areas with NPC guards protection, in the two corners of the map, for pve players. Where Pks could not enter without being attacked by strong guards, who would do a lot of damage to them. However, these players should always pay an amount of gold to the crown for protection." PKs cannot attack you in cities. All cities are already safe.
-
RE: No Hunger & Rest Depletion In Towns.
Indeed you are right, so I agree that it should be paused only while inside the inn.