Best posts made by stkmro

Happy to be back home.

Hi guys, I am sure by now, most of the players have heard about the current city Bussy destroying the city La Ruche. Congratulations to Bussy for being the first city to successfully destroy another city. When a super strong elite top guild led by super strong leader with the backing of many elite guild members, I am definitely sure that when Bussy attacks a lesser city, there will be a 99% chance that the lesser city will be completely destroyed.

Now, what is going to happen when the cycle continues, after La Ruche is destroyed, Bussy will aim for the next target probably city Dragonspire. When Bussy destroys Dragonspire, they will aim for the next city and this will go on and on until all the cities on the server is owned by Bussy.

I think in order to prolong the longevity of the game, I would like to suggest some ways in which City vs City battles can be improved.

1st Suggestion: Attrition Based System.

The current system is that when the attacker attacks the defender city, the defender will be completely destroyed in a single battle. How the system can be improved is that the attacker will need to win multiple battles in order to completely destroy the defender city.

Example is that when the attacker win the 1st battle, the attacker cannot destroy any buildings in the defender city. Instead the attacker will get a prize of 10000 gold from the system. The defender city has x number days before the next siege to pay upkeep of 10000 gold. If the defender city default on the payment, then on the 2nd battle, the attacker will have the right to completely destroy all the buildings in the defender city if they win the 2nd battle.

Let’s say if the defender city decides to pay the upkeep of 10000 gold before the next siege. The attacker launch the next siege and win the 2nd battle. The attacker cannot destroy all the buildings, but they will win the prize and the prize will snowball to 20000 gold. Then the defender city can choose to decide if they will to pay the upkeep of 20000 gold.

The upkeep will continue to snowball to 30000, 40000, 50000, etc, etc, and get bigger every time the attacker keep winning the battles for every siege. If the defender city keep losing the siege battles every time, it will reach a point when the defender city is unable to afford the upkeep and hence they will definitely be destroyed by the attacker city.

2nd Suggestion: Allow Defender City to accept participants from other allied cities during Siege Battles

We all know how strong elite pvp players are and how a big group of them will keep farming non-stop and getting stronger non-stop to a point where they will be able to win every battle against the lesser players.

We have to be realistic and face up to the reality that the Bussy is indeed a top strong guild and when you have a top strong guild coming down on a pure pve Defender City, there will be a 99% chance that the Defender City will lose every fight until the city gets destroyed.

Hence the only way to balance the game is to allow Defender City to accept strong players from other cities to participate in the defense during the Siege battle.

These are just some suggestions from me. Even if they are implemented, I am pretty sure that eventually Bussy will still dominate and control the entire continent. This is just to delay the inevitable future that the server will just be controlled by a single guild.

When that time comes, the developers might have to make a decision and do a poll from all the players to decide whether there should be a server wipe to reset the entire map so that everybody can have fun building and destroying all over again. Of course I hope the developer will only wipe the continent but allow all players to keep their hard earned Knowledge Points and Recipes.

Every now and then, we heard various players said that they have got stuck on a map, either in a river, or rocky terrain, or being knocked by the mobs into a structure and got trapped inside.

Maybe the dev can introduce a command line tool like /unstuck which gives you five seconds to choose a location (within line of sight) to click on to teleport.

To prevent abuse, the teleport will take 10 seconds for you to teleport to the location and you will be able to receive any forms of damage during this period.

Also, you will die every time when you teleport to the new location. This means that 15% of your health bar is greyed out every time you try to use this tool. All these make this tool useless for both pve and pvp and nobody will ever want to use this tool unless they are genuinely stuck on a terrain.

This is just an idea and perhaps other people can also contribute and think of better ideas for the dev to consider making this kind of tool.

@OlivePit said in Let's talk about recipes:

I am in favor of the high effort solution.
The orb system is perfect model to adapt recipe system to.
It gives long term meaning to recipies, gives niche crafters a place to shine, reduces item spam from grinding for rank, makes entry easy enough that players cant complain much.
Have recipes drop more often in chests and this could work fine.

I see a highly valuable suggestion here by OlivePit. Yes, it might be really a good idea for the recipe system to model on the orb system.

1. Remove the bonus of primitive crafting on the higher tier items.
2. Everyone can craft higher tier items but the durability of the item will be only be 100 points.
3. Every increase of orb level in the corresponding crafting will increase the durability by 100 points.
4. To increase orb level in the corresponding crafting, you need to consume the corresponding recipe.
5. Hence if a player wants to level his/her scimitar crafting to level 10, he/she needs to consume a total of 68 scimitar recipes. The durability of a crafted level 10 scimitar will be 1100 points.
6. This will immediately solve point 1 and point 2 as mentioned by Spoletta. Recipes have a good purpose other than the outdated one-time recipe use model. This will also encourage the trade between players for recipes.
7. This will also solve point 3. No more trying to max out crafting experience of T1 gear so that you can get bonus on durability of T2 gear. No more trying to do mass crafting of items to reach max durability.