Order, Counter-Order = Disorder

[Koll]

Gentlemen Devs of Xsyon;

Make up your minds: Branchez-vous ostie !

Please STOP changing the tribe size or whatever group to include new groups for everyone. Stop trying to please everyone you are just making things more complicated for all of us; Especially 3 days before the final Wipe. We have a saying in the military:
Order, Counter-Order, Disorder or Disaster. Especially before your H hour.

Please no more new sub sub tribe groups such as "Pals" (2-3) "Drinking Buddies" (6-7 members) or "Horde" (100+).

We all understand and agree that the world will be a crowded place; especially around junkyards and you know what; its fine. Not everyone can have their cookie. They are just gonna have to fight for it.

Stop trying to bend over like a contortionist from Cirque du Soleil and tell people to "s... it up princess".

thank you.

[yoori]

We can't fight for land for next 6+ months and even then not every one will choose it. The point of this change is not to please people, but to make more territories different in size, 10 people tribe had the same amount of land reserved as 60 men tribe. This change is to make scrap pile areas more crowded and leave more "wild" areas for animals.

[Roxout]

/signed

[BigCountry]

/signed stamped stepped on

This game is doomed if this guy keeps changing things like this....I would rather have no announcements at all...then have them daily and they keep changing...lol


"In addition, tribes will be able to place totems at starter areas except for Founder's Isle. However, these will still be safe zones without combat or terraforming. The safe zones will be removed after we set starting zones based on tribe locations (tribes will be able to specify if they want a start zone near their tribe or not)."

What in the heck does that mean?

[Haunt]

What this does is further strengthen Carebear Zerg tribes like the ones that rhyme with Sloppy. Give them control over a larger area of the game, and allow them to keep that whole area of the game a "safezone". While smaller groups of friends (like my Tribe... Clavenova... err wait... Band... no that that's not right... Gang... Bookclub... Uhm Clan... whatever) will have less area they can claim and control.

I am now convinced that the creators of this game are retired politicians. You cannot believe anything they say and you can be sure that what they tell you now is only good for the amount of time they deem it good for.

Just in the short month that I have been in the game they have stated a few major, rock solid statements about the game and went back on them. I fear for the future... what changes next update?

[BigCountry]

Politicians....haha good analogy...

[yoori]

What this does is further strengthen Carebear Zerg tribes like the ones that rhyme with Sloppy. Give them control over a larger area of the game, and allow them to keep that whole area of the game a "safezone". While smaller groups of friends (like my Tribe... Clavenova... err wait... Band... no that that's not right... Gang... Bookclub... Uhm Clan... whatever) will have less area they can claim and control.

I am now convinced that the creators of this game are retired politicians. You cannot believe anything they say and you can be sure that what they tell you now is only good for the amount of time they deem it good for.

Just in the short month that I have been in the game they have stated a few major, rock solid statements about the game and went back on them. I fear for the future... what changes next update?

We're not a zerg tribe and never wanted to be.

What's the point in having tribe if you can't reach max size of it? To keep other tribes away?

Placing a tribe totem you reserve 220 or 250m radius around your totem, if you can't or don't want to reach the limit you're only blocking others from settling near you.
If we're overcrowded with tribes, not players, it's a good move. I prefer this over splitting in 2 servers.

If Jooky has to change his mind to improve the gameplay, I'm fine with it as long as he doesn't change core design.

[fiolaja]

This game is doomed if this guy keeps changing things like this....

This game is NOT doomed if the developers make adjustments and changes to fix unexpected problems. This change was not made because people complained about a situation. It's to give more room to the creatures so they don't get pushed into the mist too quickly and ruin thier behavior.

This is an MMO. And in every MMO I've ever played there has always been adjustments and changes to make things more balanced.

It's good that he is finding potential future problem now and fixing them before launch, instead of just saying "Screw it, maybe this problem will work it self out".

We need to cut down on the drama.

[BigCountry]

We need to cut down on the drama.

We are not causing the drama. He is. Says one thing, then days later (heck sometimes hours), he says something else.
:(

He should just do weekly announcements. Put some more thought into what's going to take place. It's hard to trust anyone that's so wishy washy. You lose our trust, you lose your community.
:(

I use to hate not having announcements when I first starting playing Darkfall...we could not stand Tasos for it, but now I understand why it was like that and why his announcements were so sparse. You do not tell your community anything until it's set in stone and ready - so they can adjust themselves properly to your game. No one wants to have their time wasted, it's sorta amateurish. Sandbox, themepark, indy, massive, it does not matter - it's simply bad business practice.

Mortal Online made an art out of this.....
haha
:D

[Dubanka]

the problem i have with current revision of the tribal configs, isn't necessarily the radii of the entity, its the lock down it places on members.

I can lose members, and redux in tribe type/size. Great.
I am hard capped at the number of members i can have? wtf?

Our happy little band is 15ish...doubt we'll hit the 20 mark.
however, i have a solid 25-30 guildies that are kinda sittin around watching to see what happens, where if the game moves in the 'right' direction over thenext couple of months, they would like purchase the game. Now in this scenario, I'd have to go find a new place to live, in a world that would be crowded, AND in a world where i don't have the ability to forcibly evict someone from their area because i'm a bad neighbor and need to expand.

I'm sure we're not the only group in this situation.

it does give a very big territorial advantage to those entities that are large now. I'm nto sure why they need it.

[BigCountry]

the problem i have with current revision of the tribal configs, isn't necessarily the radii of the entity, its the lock down it places on members.

I can lose members, and redux in tribe type/size. Great.
I am hard capped at the number of members i can have? wtf?

Our happy little band is 15ish...doubt we'll hit the 20 mark.
however, i have a solid 25-30 guildies that are kinda sittin around watching to see what happens, where if the game moves in the 'right' direction over thenext couple of months, they would like purchase the game. Now in this scenario, I'd have to go find a new place to live, in a world that would be crowded, AND in a world where i don't have the ability to forcibly evict someone from their area because i'm a bad neighbor and need to expand.

I'm sure we're not the only group in this situation.

it does give a very big territorial advantage to those entities that are large now. I'm nto sure why they need it.


Yeah like some of his previous announcements, I have read it like 6 times to translate it...lol

I think what he is saying is there is no number cap on how many players you can add to any of the groups. That player cap he posted refers to the territory space calculations?

So for example, you can form a "Clan", starting with 10 members. You can grow the "Clan" as large as you want (unlimited members), but the territory radius will only grow according to 25 members worth of territory space ("Clan" type cap).

Is that correct?

If so, that actually is a good balance.

[Grass_Ninja]

u are all unable to read and its laugh able, seriously. and surprise its all the known griefers!!!

u are NOT locked into any size limit u are LOCKED into a land size so even if all ur special friends come and play too u all will just have to huddle together and share a bunk like in the navy :)

these changes are AWESOME btw keep it up Jordy

[Dubanka]

u are all unable to read and its laugh able, seriously. and surprise its all the known griefers!!!

u are NOT locked into any size limit u are LOCKED into a land size so even if all ur special friends come and play too u all will just have to huddle together and share a bunk like in the navy :)

these changes are AWESOME btw keep it up Jordy

Please note the post below mr carebear.


We're testing some tribe revisions. Tribes will now have 4 sizes.

Homesteads 1-4 starting members.
Bands 5-9 starting members.
Clans 10-19 starting members.
Tribes 20+ starting members.


This will allow smaller groups to form tribes with a decent claimed area but without crowding the world due to the maximum tribe size.

Each of the tribe types can grow in radius beyond the size of the next type, so their maximum radius anticipates some growth.


Homesteads have a fixed radius.
Bands grow in size up to 15 members.
Clans grow in size up to 25 members.
Tribes grow in size up to 80 members.

By stating a range of group size, that implies a limitation.
furthermore he states that if you drop below the group size you're in, you devolve into the smaller entitity.
he DOES NOT STATE that if you increase in size you evolve into the larger entity.
but if you you CAN increase in size (50 person homestead 4tw) the original point stands.

This gives maximum advantage to the guilds that are large now...and this is an advantage that will persist as long as they retain their membership (i don't believe we'll every be permitted to seige prelude territory, to much carebear angst about the potential loss of pixels)...

What this is doing is motivating the playerbase to zerg it up...but not giving us the time to do it :p it's actually kinda comical.

[Mactavendish]

I was thinking the same thing myself.

If your band grows you become a clan and get more area automatically, grow again into a tribe and it grows again.

why was that hard to understand?

I believe you guys just thrive on drama and look to find the slightest little thing to gripe over. Drama queens all.

[Dubanka]

I was thinking the same thing myself.

If your band grows you become a clan and get more area automatically, grow again into a tribe and it grows again.

why was that hard to understand?

he doesn't say that. he says your clan will increase in radii to reflect up to 25 people. he DOES NOT say that your clan will turn into a tribe (otherwise why would he state that it will grow, as a clan, in radii up to 25 people...reading comprehension 4tw)

[BigCountry]

I was thinking the same thing myself.

If your band grows you become a clan and get more area automatically, grow again into a tribe and it grows again.

why was that hard to understand?

I believe you guys just thrive on drama and look to find the slightest little thing to gripe over. Drama queens all.

This is not what he said.

You need 20 people up front to obtain the default (minimum) "Tribe" territory radius. You cannot grow into it from a "Clan". A "Clan" will be capped at 25 person territory radius. But can grow, member wise, as large as the "Clan" wanted.

The more I think about it, the more it makes sense. It's a good balance. I think this will work (especially when you implement tribal warfare and totem/territory takeover).

Jordi just did a not so good job in explaining it. hehe

[Mactavendish]

It is very interesting that it is ok for you to make assumptions about what he means, but obviously everyone else's understanding is flawed, or they lack the ability to understand simple statements.

The thing is, what he says is something you disagree with ... that is the limit of your comprehension.

I too feel this is a good adjustment, that helps keep animals around and provides further opportunities to smaller groups.

Ok course, what this means for me by simply saying that is I will get put on your hit list, and blind rage will take over.

[Grass_Ninja]

Please note the post below mr carebear.


lol me a carebear lol go back to WoW ya i said it and i saw ur forums so yaaa... do it

[Dubanka]

lol me a carebear lol go back to WoW ya i said it and i saw ur forums so yaaa... do it

actually we never played wow (well messed around in the uowow emu) it's just the forum skin we put up a few years back.

sorry.

[galagah]

This gives maximum advantage to the guilds that are large now...and this is an advantage that will persist as long as they retain their membership


If they have enough members for it , then what exactly is the problem ?

If you have guildies sitting in the sidelines that can't decide , then that is their ( your guilds ) problem , not " ANY " of the current players who have decided to show their support by paying already. Why should a " Smaller " group get the same size as the larger tribes who have enough members .
If your going to demand a larger size for your smaller group , then i as a Homesteader with my Brother also want a larger area ( this line is sarcasm as i am perfectly happy with the small area i can share with my brother ) .

This change is "Better " for everyone all round . Group sizes are more dynamic and do not reserve more land than that group currently needs , this in turn helps EVERYONE by not pushing the creatures into the mist because there is nowhere for them to breed.

There is nothing stopping some of the smaller groups merging if they really " want " the larger area that " Tribes " give .

[Grass_Ninja]

If they have enough members for it , then what exactly is the problem ?

If you have guildies sitting in the sidelines that can't decide , then that is their ( your guilds ) problem , not " ANY " of the current players who have decided to show their support by paying already. Why should a " Smaller " group get the same size as the larger tribes who have enough members .
If your going to demand a larger size for your smaller group , then i as a Homesteader with my Brother also want a larger area ( this line is sarcasm as i am perfectly happy with the small area i can share with my brother ) .

This change is "Better " for everyone all round . Group sizes are more dynamic and do not reserve more land than that group currently needs , this in turn helps EVERYONE by not pushing the creatures into the mist because there is nowhere for them to breed.

There is nothing stopping some of the smaller groups merging if they really " want " the larger area that " Tribes " give .

BRAVO first awsome homesteader ive seen on the forums

[Chavoda]

ITs so simple ..just need some plain wording for the folks who cant read Coders talk.

-No land claim type has any membership limiteds
-Homesteads don't grow. 1 or 50 member it keeps the same size.
-A Band, a Clan, a Tribe all can grow, they all have a min and max size radius that upgrades as you gain more members,
(min size don't Mather since you evolve that by getting members from band>Clan>Tribe, Max size is the important trick here, the "to close to a other tribe" mechanic )
-Bands,Clans,Tribes can devolve back as members drop, decreasing their max "to close " and build able size.

Jordi does not recap old mechanics into new additions, the old homestead don't grow mechanic is still in place, He does only mentions what changes, never what stays the same unless he feels its needed to say, and being the guy who knowns everything it can be hard to Imagen how others will read his own post, and he cant write a manual for people who cant read between the lines and mix it whit old known info. he got a game to develop/tweak atm.

[Mactavendish]

The area does grow and shrink automatically to limits based upon membership numbers.

Once a group gets big enough for the next size up, even if they have to disband and re-drop the totem whats the big deal?

Too much "what if's" and not enough in-game experience to get anyone's panties in a wad.

[baka77]

Here is how I interpret his comments.

The key pieces of info are the size limits he mentions, but also this comment...


Each of the tribe types can grow in radius beyond the size of the next type, so their maximum radius anticipates some growth.

This means, the max radius for each tier (except HS) is actually the size of the tier above them. Anyway, on to the setup.

These aren't the actual numbers, but for example's sake, I'll assign land size radius as the following:

HS - 50m
Band - 100m
Clan - 150m
Tribe - 200m

Ok, so here is how I think each one will be configured...

Homesteaders: Start with max 50m actual radius. Upon reaching 5 members, totem will need to be removed & replaced as Band totem in order to increase land radius & max member size.

Band: Start with 100m actual radius, with built-in max radius of 150m. Upon reaching 10 members, land is automatically increased to max 150m actual radius. Upon reaching 15 members, totem will need to be removed & replaced as clan totem in order to increase max land radius & max member size.

Clan: Start with 150m actual radius, with built in max radius of 200m. Upon reaching 20 members, land will automatically increase to 200m actual radius. Upon reaching 25 members, totem will need to be removed & replaced as Tribe totem in order to increase max member size. Land size will already be at max.

Tribe: Start with max 200m actual radius. Upon reaching 80 members, tribe will need to start separate new sub-tribe in a new location. I speculate the developers determined that 80 people is the max amount they feel the tribe-sized parcel can support. There is a potential in the future of a 5th tier & beyond as expansion zones & more land are introduced (guilds? towns? cities? etc...).

[Puppet]

You need to add 2 more groups please...

200+ Zerg
500+ CN

That is all...

[Sirius]

This means, the max radius for each tier (except HS) is actually the size of the tier above them.

Actually, a close reading indicates that the max radius for each is LARGER than the min radius for the next highest type of settlement.

And, Puppet's post is spot-on :D

[BigCountry]

Homesteaders: Start with max 50m actual radius. Upon reaching 5 members, totem will need to be removed & replaced as Band totem in order to increase land radius & max member size.

Band: Start with 100m actual radius, with built-in max radius of 150m. Upon reaching 10 members, land is automatically increased to max 150m actual radius. Upon reaching 15 members, totem will need to be removed & replaced as clan totem in order to increase max land radius & max member size.

Clan: Start with 150m actual radius, with built in max radius of 200m. Upon reaching 20 members, land will automatically increase to 200m actual radius. Upon reaching 25 members, totem will need to be removed & replaced as Tribe totem in order to increase max member size. Land size will already be at max.

Tribe: Start with max 200m actual radius. Upon reaching 80 members, tribe will need to start separate new sub-tribe in a new location. I speculate the developers determined that 80 people is the max amount they feel the tribe-sized parcel can support. There is a potential in the future of a 5th tier & beyond as expansion zones & more land are introduced (guilds? towns? cities? etc...).


I do not think there is a limit on membership for any of the 4 types. You do not have to remove and replant a totem if you want to add more than 25 members to a "Clan" for example. The caps are only for territory radiuses on the 4 types. Least that's how I read it?

Now if you wanted a larger territory radius and you planted as a "Clan", then yeah, you would need to remove and replant. But to grow past 25 members you do not need to do replant your totem. That's only for larger territory radius. Is that correct?

[BigCountry]

You need to add 2 more groups please...

200+ Zerg
500+ CN

That is all...


rofl....

[jumpshot]

It'll be okay. Breeeaaathe

[baka77]

Yeah, this is confusing as fuck. We don't have enough information to piece this puzzle together. We're missing some numbers, intentional or not. LOL

So, each tier can grow beyond the size of the next tier. That beyond is a tricky word. How far beyond? To infinity & beyond??? He clearly states there is a maximum growth size, but that fucking beyond leaves everyone clueless as to what that maximum is...unless we're to assume that the starting tribe size is the maximum & both bands/clans get allotted this size, but have to unlock it with increasing membership? That can't be the case though, since he says tribe areas will increase with membership, so they too must have a hidden "max" radius. Perhaps this is the max for everyone?

Clans grow in size up to 25 members...but once they reach 20 are they not now a tribe?!?! Why does the tribe start at 20 & yet the clan threshold is 25??? Same with bands & clans. Why do we drop down a tier if we lose members, but there is no mention of moving up a tier if we reach the that tier's starting threshold???

Are we to then assume that the max size of a clan radius is actually 25% larger than the starting tribe radius (25 clan members is 25% larger than the 20 member tribe threshold)? This might actually make sense since that would imply a size "beyond" the next tier's starting size, but also maintains the assertion that clans would not automatically become tribes upon reaching 20 members. Hmmm, this may actually be what he's saying.

[Sirius]

Dude, I'd bet cash it's exactly what I said an hour ago. Each tier's MAX is higher than the next tier's MIN. Seems pretty clear to me.

[baka77]

Dude, I'd bet cash it's exactly what I said an hour ago. Each tier's MAX is higher than the next tier's MIN. Seems pretty clear to me.

Yep, you're right, 'twas you who pointed that out to me. I was just further speculating about the potential size of that difference.

I think we have a fairly good grip on the situation. The system allows for some growth without totem replacement, but it also allows for full shrinkage. In retrospect, it actually seems like a good compromise to allow growth & yet properly support land conservation for dwindling/dead tribes.

I just wish Jordi was a bit more articulate when differentiating between tribe member size & tribe land radius size. Sometimes he uses the same verbiage for both, just saying "tribe size."

[jumpshot]

Drama queens all.

this

[Burnt]

seriously, drama queens does not begin to describe it. I swear it is a favourite past-time of xsyon players to worry and specualte over every update, and complain about problems that are based on speculation.

[Zerlargal]

All PvP tribes should be homesteads, a taste of their own medicine :-)

[Sirius]

seriously, drama queens does not begin to describe it. I swear it is a favourite past-time of xsyon players to worry and specualte over every update, and complain about problems that are based on speculation.

As opposed to the legion of brown-nosing carebears who immediately insult anyone who makes any PvP-centric suggestions, fails to genuflect to Jordi at the mere mention of his name, or even dares to criticize a decision he makes as questionable? And I suppose this company's particular (cough, cough, UNIQUE) development model doesn't invite this sort of piece-meal discussion/reaction to the changes made on the fly and seemingly at random?

ROGER THAT

protip: professional game dev needs constructive player feedback, not unquestioning admiration and kissing-up by fanboys

[Zenmaster13]

And I suppose this company's particular (cough, cough, UNIQUE) development model doesn't invite this sort of piece-meal discussion/reaction to the changes made on the fly and seemingly at random?


I agree with this sentence. The rest of your post is garbage. Feedback can be positive or negative. Positive does not equal brown-nosing. Negative does not equal hate. Either way, it can be constructive. I will not teach you why with examples.

High IQ tip: don't call yourself a pro unless you are one

[Burnt]

As opposed to the legion of brown-nosing carebears who immediately insult anyone who makes any PvP-centric suggestions, fails to genuflect to Jordi at the mere mention of his name, or even dares to criticize a decision he makes as questionable? And I suppose this company's particular (cough, cough, UNIQUE) development model doesn't invite this sort of piece-meal discussion/reaction to the changes made on the fly and seemingly at random?

ROGER THAT

protip: professional game dev needs constructive player feedback, not unquestioning admiration and kissing-up by fanboys

I think you assumed way too much when reading my post. Discussion/reaction is great, all I was saying was that complaining about a predicted problem of predicted gameplay is pointless. Nothing about "pvp'ers" or "carebears" or insulting there. Don't get me wrong, discussion is great, I was just [pointing something out. I hope your professional opinion towards my post has changed now.

[Koll]

Again guys; the point of my post was to tell the devs to make up their goddamn mind; I dont care which way this goes; just stick to it.

ORDER COUNTER ORDER = DISORDER; there you go people are all confused as hell now.

[darg75]

What happens to your buildings if you remove the totem to replace it with the next tier totem? Do they disappear or remain?

[ifireallymust]

We're going to be crowded. Maybe packed in like little fishies in a can. No matter what changes are made, now or before launch, we're going to be stepping on each others toes.

I don't like it. Not for launch day, and not after launch. I don't want to see my neighbors more than once every few days, I sure don't want them close enough to see every day, and I definitely don't want to be close enough to hear them fart at at their camp fire.

I'm going to attempt to deal with it by plopping down on some junk, skilling as fast as I can skill, making as much as I can make, and then moving my asocial butt up a mountain that doesn't have junk for miles around, in hopes that then, I'll get some peace, and you dang nabbit kids will stay off mah lawn!

Failing that, I just hope the mists open soon or we end up with a second server after all.

I mean, not saying it's a bad thing this game is far more popular than anyone expected, don't get me wrong. NG will be able to do a lot more with it in the future with more sales and sub money coming in. But meanwhile, get your damn elbow outta my eye, neighbor!

[Zerlargal]

Again guys; the point of my post was to tell the devs to make up their goddamn mind; I dont care which way this goes; just stick to it.

AGREED.. however

When I raised the issue of split servers this late in the game with Jordi for the same reasons, the response was interesting. It gives you a view into his thinking...

"I am going to stick with my vision and that’s to adapt the game over time with the players… others seem to think my vision is to force players into fighting. My intention and vision is one of choices, and that’s what we’re doing here. J"

I think you will find the added totem's is just another adaptation. As game demand indicates changes are needed that is what is going to happen. I don't think Xsyon is going to a static MMO, change is going to happen fairly regularly and the playerbase will get used to it... or not, as the case may be. Really this is prelude, so I would expect it to be pretty fluid until we are out of this phase of the game.

Zerlargal

[jumpshot]

seriously, drama queens does not begin to describe it. I swear it is a favourite past-time of xsyon players to worry and specualte over every update, and complain about problems that are based on speculation.

This.

Although sort of understandable... I know I only read these forums so much because I would rather be playing xsion, and that's not an option.

As for the devs making up their minds... I'd rather them change it 10000000000000000 times and finally get it right than stop after 2 to appease forumwarriors.

[savageasf]

I don't really have a problem with the distinctions in size, I actually would like more. however I don't like the fact that you can't grow your "horde" (lol) from a homestead. I think all tribes should start from a homestead and grow from that, it's pretty lame you have to disband (abandon) your own home to join a tribe, especially if the tribe is right where you live! isn't it the tribal leader who makes the tribe? well why not start it from his house? I think it would be cool to go up from homestead because even in big tribes, everyone has to have a home right?

[Risk]

AGREED.. however

When I raised the issue of split servers this late in the game with Jordi for the same reasons, the response was interesting. It gives you a view into his thinking...

"I am going to stick with my vision and that’s to adapt the game over time with the players… others seem to think my vision is to force players into fighting. My intention and vision is one of choices, and that’s what we’re doing here. J"

I think you will find the added totem's is just another adaptation. As game demand indicates changes are needed that is what is going to happen. I don't think Xsyon is going to a static MMO, change is going to happen fairly regularly and the playerbase will get used to it... or not, as the case may be. Really this is prelude, so I would expect it to be pretty fluid until we are out of this phase of the game.

Zerlargal

lol no quoting the big guy when he's tired off his arse...says wierder things than Mihr when hes drunk...

Game will be fine if we get rid of homesteds...im a homesteder...still think there a plague...5 min on land else yer on yer own....

[Sirius]

I agree with this sentence. The rest of your post is garbage. Feedback can be positive or negative. Positive does not equal brown-nosing. Negative does not equal hate. Either way, it can be constructive. I will not teach you why with examples.

High IQ tip: don't call yourself a pro unless you are one

K. I'm not quite sure how your high IQ led you to reach the conclusion that I categorize feedback in that particular way, based on what I posted. Maybe it's not quite high enough. Or maybe you yourself are too high. That said, I don't appreciate toadies and I don't post hate for the devs. <3