I just took a Sabbatical Period, here's why

[Kruzminator]

How high do you get before thinking this thought? Many players can do action many times more than one player.

First I appreciate if you focus more on formulating the message you are trying to get across then on insulting me and my ideas (specially when your English could be improved)

I think what you are trying to say is that a village with many villagers will be able to have more miners, more farmers and more hunters and also more attackers. This is true. However there is also more mouths to feed and more players to equip.

With that said even the medium q resources do not seem very rare (or perhaps I am just very lucky) which in turn discourages more the gathering of players to fight for those resources.

Finally in respect to the attackers, imagine that I was attacked with lets say 100 catapults shot by 50 different characters, between drying and building times, I bet I could hearth vault all of my most precious items and the loot would have been more or less the same as if I had been attacked with only one or two strong characters. I would suffer a bit with some vandalism but shortly after they are gone I would be back on my feet.

The case I am trying to build here is that there is not enough encouragement for people to create villages and protect themselves in groups and with hermits scattered around the world you will never have strong in game politics and consequent interesting warfare. Alliances are formed between two groups and not individuals (that's called friendship. =) )

[Kruzminator]

@sabinati
I did but not with the most recent changes. Brimstone is somehow very rare to me.

I was the one suggesting about using rams in rafts so I could shorten the waiting times. we were partially successful with that one.

[Ysh]

How high do you get before thinking this thought? Many players can do action many times more than one player.

First I appreciate if you focus more on formulating the message you are trying to get across then on insulting me and my ideas (specially when your English could be improved)

I think what you are trying to say is that a village with many villagers will be able to have more miners, more farmers and more hunters and also more attackers. This is true. However there is also more mouths to feed and more players to equip.

With that said even the medium q resources do not seem very rare (or perhaps I am just very lucky) which in turn discourages more the gathering of players to fight for those resources.

Finally in respect to the attackers, imagine that I was attacked with lets say 100 catapults shot by 50 different characters, between drying and building times, I bet I could hearth vault all of my most precious items and the loot would have been more or less the same as if I had been attacked with only one or two strong characters. I would suffer a bit with some vandalism but shortly after they are gone I would be back on my feet.

The case I am trying to build here is that there is not enough encouragement for people to create villages and protect themselves in groups and with hermits scattered around the world you will never have strong in game politics and consequent interesting warfare. Alliances are formed between two groups and not individuals (that's called friendship. =) )

I think maybe you can do some refrains from commenting the English when you yourself do not have perfect English. I react maybe too strong with the comment, but you do some postings with ideas that seems to me very obvious wrong. You have theory that single man is just as strong as large village, but all strong faction are large village. Your theory is obvious false.

If the amount of input required to support the man is more than the man will produce, nobody could play the game. It is clear that more man producing more output will outweigh more man requiring more input. And that is not even with consideration that specialization is greater efficient than Jack who trades in everything. This is clear, it could not be untruth.

[Kruzminator]

@Ysh

My attack on your English was a perhaps disproportioned reaction to your personal attack. I just loose a bit of control when people focus more on the messenger then on the message. I suggest we call it even and focus on the important thing that is to try and improve the game. =)

I understand and agree with what you say. Villages will always be stronger than hermits. In fact what I would like is for less protection of the individual so that he or she feels the need to seek protection in other groups, and hence strengthen the village.

[Ysh]

@Ysh

My attack on your English was a perhaps disproportioned reaction to your personal attack. I just loose a bit of control when people focus more on the messenger then on the message. I suggest we call it even and focus on the important thing that is to try and improve the game. =)

I understand and agree with what you say. Villages will always be stronger than hermits. In fact what I would like is for less protection of the individual so that he or she feels the need to seek protection in other groups, and hence strengthen the village.

We have much conflicting opinion. I play this game because I can success with just some friends of mine. I do not need to join a massive zerg group to play this game. I would not like to see this one change.

[joseboda]

But sabinati, didn't the last patch actually made it harder to siege?

I think the issue here is that end game raidingis only accessible to large dedicated parties, and even them have tons of hoops to jump through in order to get it going. A small setup can hardly camp a siege machine for 12 hours and with visitor debuff it can't use subterfuge to raid.

[LadyV]

Fine i'll say it again. Haven & Hearth has combat but is not a combat game. The core of this game is survival and development. Combat is a means to achieve that but it most certainly is not the focus. To remove those defence issue so many claim would merely mean kill kill kill and nothing. And when people got tired of it in a month or so no one would be playing. The only true point is Haven needs late game material and option far beyond its current scope.

[Karede]

But sabinati, didn't the last patch actually made it harder to siege?

I think the issue here is that end game raidingis only accessible to large dedicated parties, and even them have tons of hoops to jump through in order to get it going. A small setup can hardly camp a siege machine for 12 hours and with visitor debuff it can't use subterfuge to raid.

Is full-on siege only being accessible to seriously dedicated groups such a bad thing?
And you can use subterfuge to raid, it's as simple as having an inside man build a minehole

[Kruzminator]

@Ysh
If you have already some friends playing with you than you are not a real hermit. =) and you are leaning more towards having a small village.

@joseboda
yeah visitor debuff does impede sneak ins and other ways to loot from a criminal acts and avoiding combat. perhaps rearranging it would allow for more exploitation of loners and less protected villagers in this manner.

@LadyV
My suggestions are not to try and and create a sole pvp world.If you think that's all the would do then I would not want them. what I would like with this suggestions is to emphasize the survival part to encourage people to teamwork and form big villages
I really enjoy the development part but either the devs give us an infinite amount of stuff to discover and craft or at a certain point they will end and the game has to have something else to offer. This is where ingame politics, world wide trades and alliances would come to play. I think this would only be possible with the presence large villages with many real characters, not just alts and not lone hermits caring only about themselves.

I do not want to create a game where its kill or be killed where crafting and exploring dont matter. what I want however is to people to weigh more carefully their decisions when it comes to adventure, on their own, into the wilderness. I believe that by overprotecting hermits we are in some way discouraging relations in game.

[Ysh]

We have much conflicting opinion. I play this game because I can success with just some friends of mine. I do not need to join a massive zerg group to play this game. I would not like to see this one change.

@Ysh
If you have already some friends playing with you than you are not a real hermit. =) and you are leaning more towards having a small village.

I would like ... to encourage people to teamwork and form big villages

I am skeptical there can be balance that will allow small village to be viable and hermit to not be viable. Maybe we consider different number for what is small village, but I am currently only doing some play with 3 people including my own self. I also like that hermit is viable in this game.

Never mind the fact that as I quote I think you are argue for something not good for me. Maybe what you want is good for this game Haven and Hearth, but what you want is not good for me my own self I think.