Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 41
  1. #11
    1) About Bonuses for holding a controlltotem:
    a.)Fight is in each week on the middle of the week and on Saturday for 2 hours
    b.)Controltotem must be maintaince with products from agriculture(potatoes or other) or Animal things
    c.)Each controlpoints generated daily things what all the tribes needed most and rare resources: example daily 100 dollar...100 rare resources...and 100 nails..and 10 Human bones? (other pieces or daily higher amount additonal,or additional we can put self a wanted daily award!)
    d).if a attacking tribe wins the fight on WEDNESDAY or SADURDAY they can loot/remove the amount of daily generated thing and then they can put the BUTTON DESTROY and set her own controltotem(if the have one free) or the put the BUTTON CHANGE THE OWNER! If you have your controltotems at your limit you can with capture a other controltotem improve your amount of controltotem
    e.)the owner of the controlpoint can put out the daily rewards if the fight/OPEN TIME ends on WEDNESDAY and SATURDAY and
    we have also a thing where we can build for EVENTS
    2) Control totems. I think this one could be tied to claim size. A homestead would have to place one control totem; a band would have to place two; a clan three; and a tribe 4.

    3) Claim size. I think 50 x 50 should be minimum claim size especially if you can only hold one territory at a time.

    4) Control totems -open. 2 hour in the middle if the week and 2 hour on Saturday
    5) Control totem -open time. TWO hour sounds appropriate possibly more.

    6) All totems open or alternating. I'd say all open at the same time. From #1 above, a homestead defending a claim would place one totem and defend only that one --possibly against a much larger force. A tribe, with quite a few more members, would have to place 4 totems and defend 4. If this type of totem calculation is used the number of totems needed to claim a territory could be determined instead by the number of active players at the time of claim totem placement --to serve as a slight equalizing factor when a small group is facing a much larger group.

  2. #12
    I personally don't like the idea of being able to set a territory to, "safe from pvp", considering this is supposed to be the war server.

    I can't imagine the amount of bitching that will come if to many areas are set to safe from pvp and the players on the war server start to feel like it's no longer a war server.

    PVP'rs want pvp, they want to know where to go to get pvp and they want it 24/7, not just a couple times a week during an open takeover session.

    The problem with pvp in this game right now on the warring server is that there are no PVP hotspots and the only way to get it makes it feel like griefing because you have to pretty much camp someones tibe location and wait for them to step off or camp the trash piles.

    However, if you go this route, there should be much higher upkeep costs for keeping an area safe.

    Another thing to think about is if you don't allow the non-tribe members and allies of that tribe to continue using their occupied space (rented house, etc) you're going to have people just quit playing instead of moving to another location.

    I like the idea of the rare resources becoming available if set to PVP in that area, I also think that the resources you get should be varied, in order to create more value on an area for what it can produce.

    The areas with the most valuable resources will be the most contested areas and tribes that don't want that kind of attention will go for the less valuable areas.

    I think the process should work more like this:

    1. You start placing your totems to initiate the takeover, when the first totem is placed a wager amount is taken. (if you lose the takeover, you lose your wager to the defending tribe)

    The wager would help to control the chaos and create risk vs reward. (there should be some risk for losing a takeover)

    2. The totems should be destroyable, you would need to place and guard your totems from destruction for a period of one hour.

    3. In order to lay claim to the area, your 4th totem (or however many totems you need to place) must be placed down within that 1 hour.

    4. If using 4 totems to claim an area, once your 3rd totem goes down any tribe that also placed control totems should have their totems removed.

    5. The defenders would need to destroy all totems placed and/or keep the 4th totem from being placed during that one hour period.

    If the defenders are successful, then all totems would be removed at the end of the one hour.

    6. If the attackers are successful, all but the first totem should be removed.

    The first totem placed would be the totem used for keeping up with the upkeep costs. If upkeep costs are not met after a set amount of time, the controlling totem would be removed and the original tribe would automatically regain control of the area.

    As the controlling tribe, you would need to be able to get your upkeep costs to your totem.

    Also, once you set either safe or pvp for that area, you shouldn't be able to change it again, or you would just change it to safe so that you can get your upkeep costs to the control totem without getting killed, then turn it back to pvp.

    When the open period starts, the controlling totem should be removed, if nobody contests (the defenders can keep anyone from placing totems, or just no totems are placed) the area should go back to the defenders.

  3. #13
    - Imagine a territory has 3 guilds leaving there. what happens if all 3 tribes decide to put each one its own 4 control totems? how is then the territory owner decided? WouldnĄt it be better if each territory, by default, had its own and single 20x20 area with 4 totems and it is that area the one that must be fought to control it? So that it is not the tribes who put the totems, but they are part of the territory already.

    - About totems being active each day or each X period of time automatically, I think that is a wrong way of doing it. it is better if the owner (defender) had to set a period of time in which an attacker tribe could attack, that way tribes can organize better cause people can't be online everytime or when you decide. On the other hand, the attacker tribe, the one interested in conquering the territory, should have to PAY something (money, resources, animal sacrifice whatever so that it becomes also a "gold sink"). Conquering should be risky for the ones wanting to do it, so that a tribe has to really think about it before doing it so defenders-owners can't be trolled. That way it is also more rewarding too when you win (for attackers and defenders). Many games have this system in place, where attackers have to pay a price to declare war or do a siege to other enemy clan and where owners decide when their land is "protected" and when "vulnerable for attacking".

    - You could even mix those 2 ideas I said before, by creating in each territory the 4 totems by default, and there could be a bidding system where every tribe that wants controls of that territory, has to bid. After X days, the tribe who bid more, wins the right to declare the war to the owner and try to conquer it. If they win, they get the territory bonuses etc. If they lose, the defender gets the rights but also X% of the attacker bid for them as prize.

    - You could link pvp and pve by making something rare and expensive only obtainable through pve (rare animals, mist, revenants, etc) that is needed to declare the war or to bid etc, so that will make the player economy much better. Or even create a special weapon needed to conquer the totem that needs new mats only obtainable by pve or trading with players. And of course, owning territory bonuses have to be very rewarding and very good so that people are interested in conquering and it becomes a normal week to week activity in the game.
    Last edited by treyu; 01-27-2016 at 09:53 AM.

  4. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by Xsyon View Post
    - What is the minimum size tribe that should be allowed to control a territory? I think BAND is good to start off with.
    No minimum. As someone in a 3 member tribe, I don't want to have to add 2 random people (and potentially ruin our RP theme) to experience something that will be very defining of the PvP server. I know you want to give incentives to forming large tribes, but when it comes to PvP, a large number is a benefit in and of itself.

    If a couple of players want to try and recreate the Conan "Two Against Many" scene, why not let them?

    I also see this as an opportunity to expand the Allies system. Several Homesteads or Bands taking on a large Tribe seems like an epic battle and perfect underdog story.

    Quote Originally Posted by Xsyon View Post
    - How many control totems should be required to claim a territory? I think 4 is a good starting point, possibly 2 or 3 though due to the currently low population.
    Maybe different amounts depending on the size of your tribe/alliance. Could also be based on the size or resources of the territory itself.

    Quote Originally Posted by Xsyon View Post
    - How much land should a control totem claim?
    If these can't be terraformed and have limited building available, I'm not sure it matters much, myself.

    Quote Originally Posted by Xsyon View Post
    - How often should control totems become ‘open’?
    Once a week seems about right. Then you can choose the time of the week --based on when you placed it-- best suited for your tribe to defend it. Not everyone gets normal weekend days off from work.

    Quote Originally Posted by Xsyon View Post
    - For how long should control totems become ‘open’?
    One or two hours --again based on when it was placed, to accommodate players with unusual schedules-- seems fair. When clicking on a control totem it should tell you exactly when it will next be open so attackers can schedule for it.

    Also, it should not be possible to place within that time span before maintenance, or some people will exploit that shortened time to defend each week. Thinking about it, same goes for after maintenance to cover patch days.

    Quote Originally Posted by Xsyon View Post
    - Should control totem’s alternate being open, or should all of them be open at one time?
    Either way seems okay, but if it alternates, the total amount of time should remain the same. Prolonged battles each week would feel like a chore to most players.

    Quote Originally Posted by Xsyon View Post
    - Would you like to see the controlling tribe set a territory to Safe or PvP? Or would you like to see controlled territories always be set to PvP? (Regardless, while control totems are open the entire territory would be open to PvP).
    Since the server is currently open world PvP, I don't personally care either way. However, a lot of people are hoping to attract more players from the PvE server. In which case, having safe zones they can claim will give more people a reason to play on this server.

    I think an even better idea would be setting the danger level --complete with the new PvP rules you mentioned for each type. Tribes in the territory would get some level of increased resources from it being PvP this way, but not as much as the controlling tribe. This also gives different levels of PvP that can be set. It could be interesting to see how the danger levels would shift from the choices of the player base.
    Last edited by XenMistress; 01-27-2016 at 10:46 AM.
    Xen
    Three Moon Falls
    War Server

  5. #15
    Hi

    I dont know why everything has to be micro managed.....have 6 random zones all around the map...random generate a 2 hr totem to flash up on the map...oh ya...you would need to implement a game map in game...2 hrs with bonus in that area, 4-6 hr cooldown then random picks a new spot...let pvp/bag loot happen during that 2 hr window. This way no one can monopolize on a zone and everyone that wants pvp and 2x bonus can go there.
    You could even implement this on pve.

  6. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by Ooloo View Post
    Hi

    I dont know why everything has to be micro managed.....have 6 random zones all around the map...random generate a 2 hr totem to flash up on the map...oh ya...you would need to implement a game map in game...2 hrs with bonus in that area, 4-6 hr cooldown then random picks a new spot...let pvp/bag loot happen during that 2 hr window. This way no one can monopolize on a zone and everyone that wants pvp and 2x bonus can go there.
    You could even implement this on pve.
    Because that sounds really boring and what is going to be in the "loot bag"? It sounds like very little strategy or PVP happening at all really.
    Monopolizing a zone should totally be possible to skilled players. If high skilled and dedicated players PVP why shouldn't they be able to control areas in PVP?

    I've heard a lot of good stuff in this thread, keep it up guys this sounds great.

  7. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by Ooloo View Post
    Hi

    I dont know why everything has to be micro managed.....have 6 random zones all around the map...random generate a 2 hr totem to flash up on the map...oh ya...you would need to implement a game map in game...2 hrs with bonus in that area, 4-6 hr cooldown then random picks a new spot...let pvp/bag loot happen during that 2 hr window. This way no one can monopolize on a zone and everyone that wants pvp and 2x bonus can go there.
    You could even implement this on pve.
    That doesn't sound fun, While it does encourage some pvp, its not going to encourage smaller tribes to work together for or against an area being controlled by a larger one.

    Its like when a tribe decided to put a totem on a scrap pile, people band against them. The only thing is its gets boring after a while because you literally have no other control other than just a totem safe zone so you have to camp out in the zone until they leave their little area.




    On the peace server: I honestly dont think you need any bonus on the pve server, That server already allows you unrestricted access to everything. Its common practice to leave baskets on junk piles and drop what ever you cant carry into it, people freely go and pick stuff out of them and take when the owner isn't around, but rarely does anyone actually complain.

    We would need to seriously up the amount and difficulty of revenants in those same zones on Peace, That server is already easy as it is, your only challenge is what little is posed by the wildlife.
    TokTok - Axe Welding Basket Weaver

  8. #18
    A few comments:

    - I agree with having control totems 'open' during initial placement. So tribes would need to place and defend totems for an initial territory claim. Makes sense.

    - I don't agree with smaller tribes being able to claim a territory with less control points. That would just allow tribes to ally during a fight and have a small tribe control an entire territory just with one control point.

    - As for small tribes controlling a territory, if I allow tribes to ally and give control to the 'leading' tribe, the control could go to a smaller tribe. I think that would be ok.

    - About tribes potentially setting many areas as safe: That's up to the player population both to establish the zones as they want and for other tribes to contest them.

    - I agree with allowing tribes to set when their territory becomes 'open'. They would still be required to set this at least once per week.
    Imagine a territory has 3 guilds leaving there. what happens if all 3 tribes decide to put each one its own 4 control totems? how is then the territory owner decided?
    First tribe to place and defend all 4 totems would claim the territory.

    Wouldn't it be better if each territory, by default, had its own and single 20x20 area with 4 totems and it is that area the one that must be fought to control it? So that it is not the tribes who put the totems, but they are part of the territory already.
    Possibly, but it would more work for me and I think players are more familiar with the details of the terrain than I am. I'm trying to find a solution that players want and that is feasible for me to implement without too much time and trouble.

    Thanks for all the feedback and keep it coming. I'm going to be concentrated on code for the next few weeks but this thread will be kept open and all points of view are welcome!

  9. #19
    Hi

    To clarify 2 points in my origional post.

    1) its bag loot not loot bag, ie: no full loot but only the loot that they have in thier bag on them.

    2) being skilled in pvp ie: good knowledge of the combat system,good gear vs a new player who has diddly squat along with the ability to control an area that once won , no one else could harvest there is to me equal to a cash cow in other games...by just keeping the area open to all but the area is small then a little guy could sneak in and get some stuff now and then.

    dont get me wrong cause i like the defend stuff pvp...but all other games ive played its the same guild or people who allways win and to the rest you show them the road...I can count on one hand the amount of active or semi active players who could always win and i bet they always will if this is implemented this way.

    as a last comment tho...dont always bash a lesser idea and make those people feel like they know nothing.

  10. #20
    I dont play on the war server yet but after reading some stuff on here i think a cool idea would be to set up a zone that gives you access to rare recources if you hold. Itd start off as like a 50x50 empty plot and as different tribes own the place it they add more defenses and personality to it. it could be like other people have said twice a week which gives more opportunity to other tribes to take advantage of the recources but enough to time to get what you can out of it for the reigning tribe. utilizing that 1-2 hour invasion window on those two days allows for other tribes to team up or plan attacks and I feel would allow pvp to be centralized without negatively impacting preexisting tribes' plots of lands. Something like that would be cool on the pve server which would be like those server wide pvp events in WoW or ESO only not as often. Essentially like Wintergrasp was in WotLK in World of Warcraft.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •