This weeks post break down. Ready?
How did you get the data that you repersent most? Also can you show me the data? So far I can see in this forum thread here MOST people agree that there should be LESS safe area. Which would disagree with your post. Just using this forum thread here. So there is my data. Im not even going as far to say that most agree with me. Im just saying that your numbers are not right and just 100% made up. Please show me where you can even remotely get 90% of the people agree with you. Or how you got that number.
Clearly the Dev posted and read other posts, we already knew from what was put out MARCH 5th how the system was going work, the new Dev is simply supporting that new system. However, my disagreement and many others (Note I didnt give % nor say most) dont like that and thus are stating why its a bad idea.
We are constructive, read our posts again and see we do not only offer our opinions and express how we do not like something, we also offer ways to fix it to how we do like it. Those are called IDEAS. Many are well thought out. I dont even post full detailed posts because its a waste of time falling on deaf ears when the system that gets put in place if it were changed is likely not even using any part of the system I said. Sometimes it works out sometimes it doesnt.
Ive pointed out WHY thats a bad idea a few times already but I can post it here again.
Why? Because placing a safe totem wherever you want, whenever you want can be exploited. You will have tribes that claim rare resources, or place totems to stop another tribe's growth. With NOTHING the other tribes can do. Its every exploitable which is NOT good. Safe areas should be preset by the devs and limited in resources. (Hmmm starting to sound like what the new dev is saying isnt it?)
Saying you are going to "Defend against it" isnt saying HOW you going to defend against it. Plus if "moving" is such an ez option then why not allow take over of totems? According to you if someone has to MOVE then they will quit.
You cant say that "Hardly" because 1) few people playing post on the forums its only a small %, 2) is the fact you didnt even add up the numbers of people that agree with you. Plus your numbers that DISAGREE are wrong. I would go count but its pointless see reason #1.
So says you, first why would an attacking tribe destroy all the buildings if they were going to claim a totem? Next if destruction is put in right, it would take a long time to take out someone elses stuff, thus making it long process and make for constant PVP. Now having said that, I expect more items and tools to be in place to take out buildings/walls/gates faster, which would also create a need for resources for those tools. Im guessing some kinda catapult or ram. These tools and items would take time to make.
Anyways clearly what you are saying makes no sense. Most likely people that are getting attacked would 1)defend it, 2)call for help to defend it, 3)work out a deal with the attackers 4)move, 5)quit the game. In that order. Not "Im going to kill myself and quit" pretty sure Ive played enough pvp games to know thats the last option.
2 problems with that. 1)If you didnt build it yourself the you wouldnt get the location you wanted nor would the plans be correctly built how you wanted. 2)You would also have the skills to TAKE a totem from someone when defense is (and should be) easier.
So why not build up a totem, and defend it? That would be a lot easier and if you are a "crafting" guild at heart the normal thing to do.
If you dont piss of people, and make good plans for defense you shouldnt have any problems at all. But somehow I doubt thats your mindset. Likely you will have tons of people knocking on your door.
Also dont forget in your idea of "Taking a totem" that you didnt build up. You would still then have to defend it.