Game Development: Kicksleddin' on Thin Ice

[pawnchito]

Its kind of a cool idea. What if there is some incentive to bringing a fighter to the group. Like you can get 25% pali bashed if you have X crazy high strength and weapon Q. The benefit to using a fighter is you can bash a portion of the wall fast then use your catapult to pierce a layer at the opportune time. The cost is the fighter takes a hit of damage opening him up for a counter. Or its on a cool down so it can be used a few times to bring a push quickly into an enemy camp.

[jorb]

I mean... let's say it's four hours.

[algeralith]

I mean... let's say it's four hours.

No amount of time period will negate the human side of gaming.
There is no desire among people to have to choose between defending their base or attending the funeral of a loved one.

It'll also kill off any community projects.

Likewise, if meteors remain as they are, every top faction will just make a hidden vault somewhere under layer 9.

[jorb]

No amount of time period will negate the human side of gaming.
There is no desire among people to have to choose between defending their base or attending the funeral of a loved one.

True for any competitive environment. At that point you're basically saying that siege just shouldn't be a thing, and I don't think that's the game we're trying to build.

[Zentetsuken]

No amount of time period will negate the human side of gaming.
There is no desire among people to have to choose between defending their base or attending the funeral of a loved one.

True for any competitive environment. At that point you're basically saying that siege just shouldn't be a thing, and I don't think that's the game we're trying to build.

I think you must first decide who you want siege to be available for. Is it meant to be only an action taken between 2 massive villages? Should a massive village be able to wipe out shitloads of small ones? Should a small one be able to siege a big one? Should a small village have an advantage, or be protected from siege? I think you need to draw a line in the sand and let feedback help you flesh out the rest.

[wonder-ass]

No amount of time period will negate the human side of gaming.
There is no desire among people to have to choose between defending their base or attending the funeral of a loved one.

True for any competitive environment. At that point you're basically saying that siege just shouldn't be a thing, and I don't think that's the game we're trying to build.

just make it 4 hours of purge where nothing can be stolen or vandalized but claim and doors are forced open so you can aggro people on them. this way high scented people with murder cant get away and are forced to deffend themselves meanwhile lil hermits are safe to do w/e they want since it doesnt effect them in any kind of way.

[Archiplex]

Four hours, assuming something like i said earlier where siege machines can be used instantly after being built, seems pretty fine to me.

That said, I do fear alt-vaulting and whatnot will become new methods of dealing with that 4 hour space of time; although it has some interesting implications for people who are outlawed during this reckoning hour deal.

[algeralith]

No amount of time period will negate the human side of gaming.
There is no desire among people to have to choose between defending their base or attending the funeral of a loved one.

True for any competitive environment. At that point you're basically saying that siege just shouldn't be a thing, and I don't think that's the game we're trying to build.

The issue is, there exists two communities within the game. A vocal minority who only want to PVP, and a more quiet majority who just want to play casually.

If you go that route, I feel like you'd disenfranchise the latter. If things become open to free sieging, people will abuse it. You will see those people suffer.

I know you guys want to introduce a proper siege system, but you really need to consider what value such a thing actually has.
It is a dangerous tool, you will not be able to maintain the casual player base if they become even more vulnerable.

Mega factions are already an issue, and I think it be compounded even more. Just take a look at any other Sandbox, such as ARK where that issue exists.

[wonder-ass]

No amount of time period will negate the human side of gaming.
There is no desire among people to have to choose between defending their base or attending the funeral of a loved one.

True for any competitive environment. At that point you're basically saying that siege just shouldn't be a thing, and I don't think that's the game we're trying to build.

The issue is, there exists two communities within the game. A vocal minority who only want to PVP, and a more quiet majority who just want to play casually.

this is such a huge lie. literally like every small hermit at the start of w11 was power hungry little shits. they lose in the quality and stat grind so they become "peaceful" hermits to avoid getting killed.

[Granger]

they lose in the quality and stat grind so they become "peaceful" hermits to avoid getting killed.

And here is the fault in the mechanics, that you can 'lose' the grind.

If that would be turned into you might suck at it, whatever hard, but you can turn it around within a world (which would have the implication of solving the problems with starting late, character and/or base death) then we could talk about siege.

Before it has to be basically impossible or it'll kill participation by every metric, simply as our residential asshats would burn everyone and -thing to the ground for their lulz, to make them quit by making them 'have lost'.