Prelude: World 12

[Lunarius_Haberdash]

[*] All crops have a local quality field, which caps their quality growth.[/list]

It also introduces a _very_ unfun mechanic of having to make safe palis everywhere to plant flax in order to check for a higher quality node.

This seems like an extreme view of this, really.

By the time regular people have flax seeds high enough to even know if they're on a good spot, autists will have surpassed them, so this will not encourage significant trade.

There is some risk to this, yes. Picking a spot has become 'mostly luck' for a lot of people rather than picking surrounding resources. It would be nice if there was some way to check for local crop quality prior to building your base...

On the other hand, I approve of some of what I hope this will accomplish. It'll be an interesting world finding out if they don't just back off and not do the thing. I hate it when they introduce an idea, even a seemingly bad idea, and don't follow through with it for the length of a world or so.

[VDZ]

P.P.S: Please consider making rivers wider(not crossable with roads) in the map gen, with less shallow water to make it a bit harder for people to use horses in combat

to make it harder for people to use horses in general*. Rivers are already annoying for mobility on horseback, but roads allow us to at least cross the river with some effort rather than having to leave the horse behind. (This is especially notable when you're on an 'island' surrounded by rivers, where otherwise your tamed horses would be essentially useless.)

Yeah, once again: Reduce binary outcome of siege.
Add some timer, crime counter, or any other means to measure looting activity and means to stop that activity after threshold is reached.

Any kind of counter of non-villager activity can be abused by defenders by having non-villager alts. So a timer seems most fair approach.

It's not as simple as 'just fix this problem'. I can't imagine any simple mechanic to reduce the impact of a successful siege without completely overhauling siege in general. You say to just 'add some timer [or counter]', but what precisely should trigger that timer or increment that counter? How would you protect that system from alt abuse (having a non-villager theft/vandal alt trigger the timer early so it runs out by the time the siege is successful, or repeatedly steal an item and put it back to increment the counter)? How would you prevent botting to do all theft and vandalism within the timer anyways? How do you prevent raiders, once inside the base, from just standing there idling (and killing anyone logging in at the base) until they're allowed to steal and destroy again? How would you prevent raiders from taking actions to prevent the wall from being repaired so they can raid again once they've cheesed around whatever measures are in place to stop such abuse?

Players will always try their hardest to abuse the shit out of any PvP mechanic that gets introduced. Something like a timer or counter has tons and tons of potential abuse cases that would all need to be considered and designed around, and doing so would definitely not be trivial (and perhaps not even viable at all). Telling them to just 'Reduce binary outcome of siege' is just like saying 'Just make siege possible but not problematic' or 'Just make PvP fun for those into it but not problematic for peaceful players'. I'm sure the devs would love to do so (judging by their many attempts at improving the PvP systems) but it's not a simple fix.

[SnuggleSnail]

Rafts

[pppp]

Try this: timer starts when walls are broken. This can be defined in many ways, e.g. open path from nearest siege engine to the idol, or breaking the shield. Defining starting moment is indeed a hard part.
Then while timer runs it is free to loot. Once timer runs out a number of overpowered NPCs spawn and chase away attackers. So the attacker has some time to loot and then has to GTFO. Timer scalable with claim size.
Then there is a protection timer over the broken claim - 24h, maybe more.

Timer based on breaking shield seems hardest to abuse because breaking it early would hurt defenders and at the same time breaking shield is a necessary step in legitimate siege.

[Gutharr]

Decided to make the following changes:

• The claim drops two power levels during the vulnerability, rather than down to zero.
• The vulnerability window is 4 hours, rather than 8.
• Inspecting a claim for vulnerability status costs 1 unit of Brimstone.

Updating OP. We're still working, so there's more coming.

If I would like to point out one problem that this game has, it's you devs. Your post didn't address most of mentioned problems in this thread, to the point of your changes sounding lazy.

I get you don't like the changes but don't you think your way of addressing this is kinda rude? It's still a free to play game running for like 10 years... Just saying

[jorb]

Decided to make the following changes

• In the event of claim overlap between a vclaim and a pclaim, the older claim's power level takes precedence.
• Pclaims can be claimed over by vclaims as previously, and cannot revoke them simply by overlapping them.
• Removed forest stamina bonus and ridge traversal bonus from Strider credo.

Updating OP.

[Audiosmurf]

Decided to make the following changes

• Removed forest stamina bonus and ridge traversal bonus from Strider credo.

Based?

[ghandhikus]

Decided to make the following changes:

• The claim drops two power levels during the vulnerability, rather than down to zero.
• The vulnerability window is 4 hours, rather than 8.
• Inspecting a claim for vulnerability status costs 1 unit of Brimstone.

Updating OP. We're still working, so there's more coming.

If I would like to point out one problem that this game has, it's you devs. Your post didn't address most of mentioned problems in this thread, to the point of your changes sounding lazy.

I get you don't like the changes but don't you think your way of addressing this is kinda rude? It's still a free to play game running for like 10 years... Just saying

It went pay 2 play one time, and it got changed because people were rough with it. I'm sorry for being rude I just felt it needs a little push. Devs been like this for a long time, every single patch update or whatever. There are some things that need to be addressed but aren't. I literally got two people DMing me on discord after writing that:

Was chatting with my brother today about it and told him I wouldn't be surprised if they kept silent and just added the changes along with the new world

jorb likes to keep things quiet but sometimes there could be more communication

Again I'm sorry for being rude but we are the ones playing the game and we want the best experience we can get.

Edit:

Decided to make the following changes

• In the event of claim overlap between a vclaim and a pclaim, the older claim's power level takes precedence.
• Pclaims can be claimed over by vclaims as previously, and cannot revoke them simply by overlapping them.
• Removed forest stamina bonus and ridge traversal bonus from Strider credo.

Updating OP.

Thanks for updates!

[bmjclark]

Decided to make the following changes

• In the event of claim overlap between a vclaim and a pclaim, the older claim's power level takes precedence.
• Pclaims can be claimed over by vclaims as previously, and cannot revoke them simply by overlapping them.
• Removed forest stamina bonus and ridge traversal bonus from Strider credo.

Updating OP.

Whats getting added to strider instead? Have you decided yet?

[DDDsDD999]

Removed forest stamina bonus and ridge traversal bonus from Strider credo.

Oh my god you mad man you actually did it. Can you also remove the speed boost on pearl diver? It's the only other difficult to get credo (hunter's easy enough that's it not a problem) that leverages a significant advantage in combat.