Sabotage and game mechanics

[Robben_DuMarsch]

You are wrong. Just because you live in the center of the world where there is 3 other cities or whatever around doesn't mean that is true for everywhere else. The game is a wasteland. A gigantic one at that.

And even if it wasn't Potjegh's point still stands. You cannot say it doesn't matter if a few people quit over a bad mechanic just because there is enough others left. The mechanic should be good to begin with. How is it a real casus belli if your city is gone? That is just a reason to walk away...

Okay - Let's say Ainran decides they want to siege your city one day and they do, and destroy all your infrastructure and kill two of your crafters.

You now have 12 angry players, most with developed characters and no infrastructure.

LadyGoo messages you on Skype - "Hey Burgingham those nasty Ainran give us problems too! Let's kill them together. We will give you some infrastructure and let you live in our vault until your bwall is done."

Next day Ainran is burning.
Your guys rebuild over a week.
Ainran can't rebuild because they will get decimated if they do. They split and join other factions.

Other factions get the message.

[burgingham]

You don't have 12 angry players. You have 12 people not playing the game anymore.

And lol at rebuilding in a week... An actual developed town needs several weeks if not months to recover from a proper raid.

[Robben_DuMarsch]

Do some players quit in that process? Probably, and most will likely come back later. I don't agree that all 12 of your players would quit if they knew revenge was a very real possibility.

And players quit anyway, many get bored of the total insulation. I doubt all of Sodom want to sit bored behind their bwalls forever.

All they can do now is quality grind and then maybe leave their walls to go PK some newbs.

I think we should err on the side of player interaction here, but I can see we are coming at this differently.

[Archiplex]

Or if master keys are stolen, the new city just moves and nobody is any wiser about who the new village is.

[burgingham]

The argument that players might come back doesn't make a bad mechanic good. You can just use a good mechanic instead...

And you have absolutely no clue who Sodom is I think. We never went out to just PK anyone. We sit in our walls, yes. That is what we do.

Good player interaction is not destroying what has been built in months in a single night's raid. That is just idiotic and there is not even a need to discuss that. Don't think a single person has ever disagreed on that before...

Since such mechanics would allow for other mechanics making brick walls breachable more easily it would also incentive more player interaction, not less. Right now nobody goes to war because either they can't (you cannot possibly ever enter a bricked town that is active and has proper recruitment policies) or because they would lose too much in case of retaliation. The only thing happening are small outside skirmishes.

[Robben_DuMarsch]

Since such mechanics would allow for other mechanics making brick walls breachable more easily it would also incentive more player interaction, not less. Right now nobody goes to war because either they can't (you cannot possibly ever enter a bricked town that is active and has proper recruitment policies) or because they would lose too much in case of retaliation. The only thing happening are small outside skirmishes.

So ultimately you want to see less vandalism, but more siege?

I can get behind that.

Unfortunately, we have the real possibility then that if the defenders are given time to react to a siege they can move their hearth fires and characters into vaults in a weird game of "Whack-a-mole."

I propose that under such a system, a hearth fire can't be moved while it's scented, and summoning be brought back (but only on a hearthfire.)

[burgingham]

That works just fine, sure.

Vandalism should ultimately still be possible too, but take a lot more effort. Poison for animals, setting fire to buildings that will slowly burn them down etc. etc.

[Tonkyhonk]

If an account has been on a Village (any of its chars), this info remains on a log that can be checked by the lawspeaker of a village.

What a retarded idea. If i want to play like spy - i will. If LS doesnt care about his village members it will be punish for him.
Its like you take homeless into your house and be surprised when he steal all your shit.

Politics and spy games is a part of hnh. It was and it will be.

actually headshot is correct here. we have had spies and will most likely have some from now too, except that it is not just about haven but other online games as well. just because you had never seen/heard of one before doesnt mean there were none nor there will be a lot this world.

btw, why is this thread in the moot?

[banok]

Honestly I dont think there is any way you can make game mechanics to stop betrayal, even if dev's wanted to.

We had a bw'd noob area and were super vigilant about letting people in. Then one day for whatever fucking stupid ass reason, that vigilance went out the window and a couple of people were let straight into the main area. It bothered me at the time, I think I even brought it up but I was pretty inactive at this point.

anyway not too salty, my main characters are alive cause I was out all weekend

[molenga]

Honestly I dont think there is any way you can make game mechanics to stop betrayal, even if dev's wanted to.

We had a bw'd noob area and were super vigilant about letting people in. Then one day for whatever fucking stupid ass reason, that vigilance went out the window and a couple of people were let straight into the main area. It bothered me at the time, I think I even brought it up but I was pretty inactive at this point.

anyway not too salty, my mains alive cause I was out all weekend

This.

Stopping betrayal is the same as stopping botting, it is simply not possible. Best the devs could do is create mechanics that would make it less advantageous or necessary.

Now, as much as I would like to see a siege system in haven, this would most likely destroy the game, because it will turn the game inbto a no-lifer game in which you need to play nearly 24/7 in order not to get screwed, which would be both annoying and unfun.

Sure, it sucks to get betrayed, but this is life in the hearthlands.

But i agree that the vandalism system should have some changes as to make it harder or more costly for the attackers to simply grief an entire village in a few hours, there should at least be some form of defense against that to make betrayal a bit less OP.

Also, Robben is delusional if he thinks this game has enough players to be able to afford people rage-quitting all the time.