No risk to crafting, Needs Penalties

[oneyedwang]

Currently in game there is little to no risk in being a pve focused crafter.

A crafing character can set his totem near reources, harvest in saftey, and once they are all depleted, abandon the totem, log off during the cooldown and place a new one near new resources.

A crafter doesnt need to leave the safezone to skill up and progress, in fact most stay at home near the saftey of their premission locked baskets to do so.

You cant even terraform without remaining inside your magical safe zone.

A combat character on the otherhand, needs to do all of his skill leveling far from any safe zone, animals are so hard to come by that other players are the better route. However if a death penalty that removes stats and skills is implimented, it puts all of the risk of the game on the combat characters.

Currently the largest tribe is full of crafters...how many crafters does one tribe need? Does a tribe of 10 or 20 need to have 15 crafters? Is this realistic in a dangerous and new world ravaged by an apocalypse? Civilizations of past relied on a few "crafters" in which to support the many "combat" people of their armies, defense of the tribe was the number one important factor of their survival, not who can weave the most baskets.

My hope is that this turns into a civilized and respectfull discussion about the purpose of a crafter heavy game, removing the no risk gameplay invloved with crafting, and why all of the risk must be plased on a player who chooses to defend said crafters, having to progress outside the safe zone and without any other means to progress other than hunting people.

You're really looking at the whole concept all wrong. You're question or argument is that crafters have no reason to leave their safe area and that solo crafters can just pickup and leave. Well flip that around, where is more reliance on combat from crafters.
IMO there is nothing wrong with the current safe zones as long as a more engaging (doesn't need a complete overhaul) combat system with more points of PVE interest to cause pvp strife. If a crafter needs a mutated deer skull to make l33t headgear_001 it should require a player or group of players to hunt. The two worlds need more synergy more reliance not necessarily forcing crafters to leave a safe point to get ganked by a 5yr old. Causing players to become easy targets to all when they've chosen a path that doesn't really give them the skill to defend themselves against such a thing isn't the answer.
Think outside the box or expand the conception of the box to include new facets. Ganking a guy fishing shouldn't be removed from the game While people find it annoying it's part of this games style and premise, but causing strife through pve elements that are limited by quantity or location or both thus forcing tribes to move into or near those areas in an attempt to control those resources might be a reasonable solution in the long run and would make for a more enjoyable game for both opposing views.

[fflhktsn]

I think its time to really think outside the box, ditch your safe zone and use the community for protection. We have plenty of games with safe zones and consensual pvp, this doesnt need to be just another one.

Also you have noticed how most people are crafters...theres not much reason to be a combat, hence the few of us that are have free reign on all the defenseless crafters who roam too far from their magical safe zone.

removing safe zones and any idea of death penalties only for evil aligned players and tribes will create a need for combat protection, give evil players some people to actually fight against, and wont create and eve type hot spots...where the powerful can camp and wait for anyone dumb enough to enter.

having the game system nudge you towards a good aligned crafter, by creating penalties, and removing any real way to progress as a combat without recieving harsh penalties isnt a sandbox.

the point was, i can craft and progress inside a safe zone, as a combat i have to kill people to progress, making me evil in the process. this is what im talking about. not my ability to gank a guy fishing...i know that isnt going away.

[oneyedwang]

the point was, i can craft and progress inside a safe zone, as a combat i have to kill people to progress, making me evil in the process. this is what im talking about. not my ability to gank a guy fishing...i know that isnt going away.

Guess my point was directed more at the two opposing views of "go back to DFO" or "go play atitd" There are games who have provided roadmaps on how to bridge these two worlds into one mmo. This game is attempting such a feat, but the combat and crafting need to have more reliance. The combats need more to do than gank a guy fishing Combat needs to provide more than I killed this guy or omfg deers do exsist.

[fflhktsn]

Guess my point was directed more at the two opposing views of "go back to DFO" or "go play atitd" There are games who have provided roadmaps on how to bridge these two worlds into one mmo. This game is attempting such a feat, but the combat and crafting need to have more reliance. The combats need more to do than gank a guy fishing Combat needs to provide more than I killed this guy or omfg deers do exsist.

understood

my aim is to give the combats a reason not to gank to progress, as it is currently the only way to progress. I know mobs are comming in the next part of the game, however to lay the foundation for a balanced game now will only serve to benifit the game later on.

[Yokilla]

Xyson says in update thread that server will be up round 1123 pm central.

[JCatano]

Ok. But he doesn't say:"Tribal saftey zones will be removed." Or revoked or anything like that at all. I don't care when/if he adds zones without safty. I don't care if he adds the ability for tribes to remove their safty. I care about and want my magic safe zone where I can disengage from any pvp fight at any time. I've been paying close attention to what I've read about it. If they said that they were planing on removing the safty zones then I would plan on likely leaving the game at that time. I will eventuall have some fictional diety to thank for my magic safe zone. Thank <insert diety name> that <insert caster's name> has such a good connection to the spirit world.

I'm telling you exactly what he posted in the past year. During Prelude, there are safety zones (tribe areas). After Prelude, that safety is being turned off. We may have an option to turn off safety zones in tribes areas during Prelude. We may also get another server without tribal safety zones during Prelude if there are enough subscriptions.

Even the people who dislike PvP in here know what he has said about them.

[fflhktsn]

I'm telling you exactly what he posted in the past year. During Prelude, there are safety zones (tribe areas). After Prelude, that safety is being turned off. We may have an option to turn off safety zones in tribes areas during Prelude. We may also get another server without tribal safety zones during Prelude if there are enough subscriptions.

Even the people who dislike PvP in here know what he has said about them.

Its all to cater to the solo player, which is always a terrible idea, especially in a game like this. Join an alliance, make your homestead within friendly territory pick a spot far from the lake, there are plenty of ways for players who do not wish to partake in the "crowd" and yet remain relativly safe.

The longer these safe zones remain, the less able our community who relies on them will be able to adapt. So since totems are not attackable anyway...why not just get rid of them all together?

this really isnt about the safezone however. its about what route a combat character must take in order to progress, and what options a crafter has to progress...resulting in 90% of the game being crafters. They need to get rid of this notion that crafters must be protected by game systems, and create an actual need to have combat characters in your tribe and as friends.

THis isnt about forcing pvp on crafter either, its all about creating a need for a chosen path and creating balance. A tribe of all crafters should have a more difficult time surviving than a well balanced tribe with both player types.

This also has to do with removing any intentions or talk about nerfing your choice to go evil ( a choice that is currently forced upon all combat characters) we need a foundation for factional balance as well. Choosing evil should mean you remain evil, same with going good, it shouldnt change, there is no body of law in the lore in which to label you good or evil based on actions. The current system may result later on on one faction being a zerg...not fun. Any "good" alignment tribe that is actually evil in intentions, could then be shunned by the rest of the good tribes for their actions, and possibly removed using neuteral merc tribes to do thier biddings.

[Dade512]

I'm just not understanding how you won't have anyone to fight against as a combat player. There's other people making combat oriented characters, not to mention, as you pointed out, the crafters who have to leave their safe zone to go find new materials or hunt, thus needing protection.
You keep telling people how YOU want them to play, man. You were the annoying kid in the sandbox "No! You're building it all wrong!! *kicks over castle* You HAVE to do it like this!"
FFS, the game hasn't even officially launched and you're saying it's all wrong. Let them get it going and let's see what develops.
Who knows...maybe you'll find all these crafters you're looking to get a "fight" out of.

this really isnt about the safezone however.

It isn't??

They need to get rid of this notion that crafters must be protected by game systems,...

Totems, btw, are also the tribal quest and tribal management hub. Getting rid of those would impair the tribe...

What it all boils down to is how YOU wish you could play...that's all

its about what route a combat character must take in order to progress

You're having a frustrating time right now because tribes currently have safe zones. Safe zones that will be eventually going away. Safe zones that some clans may eventually be able to turn off during Prelude if they so decide.
You want the game and other players to fit how you want to play, right now, and to hell with anyone else.
You keep talking about how the only way to play a combat character is a way that forces you to be evil. Did it ever occur to you that because of the way you CHOOSE to play your combat character is why you're becoming evil. Perhaps methods other than random pk's allow a combat character NOT to be evil. Just an idea not founded in any sort of functional theory...

[ifireallymust]

Its all to cater to the solo player, which is always a terrible idea, especially in a game like this. Join an alliance, make your homestead within friendly territory pick a spot far from the lake, there are plenty of ways for players who do not wish to partake in the "crowd" and yet remain relativly safe.

The longer these safe zones remain, the less able our community who relies on them will be able to adapt. So since totems are not attackable anyway...why not just get rid of them all together?

this really isnt about the safezone however. its about what route a combat character must take in order to progress, and what options a crafter has to progress...resulting in 90% of the game being crafters. They need to get rid of this notion that crafters must be protected by game systems, and create an actual need to have combat characters in your tribe and as friends.

THis isnt about forcing pvp on crafter either, its all about creating a need for a chosen path and creating balance. A tribe of all crafters should have a more difficult time surviving than a well balanced tribe with both player types.

This also has to do with removing any intentions or talk about nerfing your choice to go evil ( a choice that is currently forced upon all combat characters) we need a foundation for factional balance as well. Choosing evil should mean you remain evil, same with going good, it shouldnt change, there is no body of law in the lore in which to label you good or evil based on actions. The current system may result later on on one faction being a zerg...not fun. Any "good" alignment tribe that is actually evil in intentions, could then be shunned by the rest of the good tribes for their actions, and possibly removed using neuteral merc tribes to do thier biddings.

Back to the anti solo player issue again. I think you're smarter than that. I think you know as well as I do that a tribe of 5 against a tribe of 50 with no safe zones, no walls, no buildings, no defenses of any kind, jumping into the game and trying to find a place to put a totem is dead meat, same as the solo player is dead meat against a tribe of 5. Please don't make up excuses for why you want the safe zones gone at launch if those excuses are going to pin some sort of blame on me for somehow 'ruining' your game play with my tiny little safe spot and my solo play style. You're wrong, you know you're wrong, and it's getting old.

[fflhktsn]

Back to the anti solo player issue again. I think you're smarter than that. I think you know as well as I do that a tribe of 5 against a tribe of 50 with no safe zones, no walls, no buildings, no defenses of any kind, jumping into the game and trying to find a place to put a totem is dead meat, same as the solo player is dead meat against a tribe of 5. Please don't make up excuses for why you want the safe zones gone at launch if those excuses are going to pin some sort of blame on me for somehow 'ruining' your game play with my tiny little safe spot and my solo play style. You're wrong, you know you're wrong, and it's getting old.

Catering to solo players is a fundamantal error that wrecks the game for a majority of players. People will choose the path of least resistance always, if its easyer to progress as a solo player, protected by the game system, people will take that route, a lot will. You can still play solo, with out any protections, and still be a participant in the multiplayer aspect of this game, its just your going to have to work harder at it than those who dont, simple as that. That is how it should be