Crossroads - vote on the poll to make haven great again

[SnuggleSnail]

I've held the same stance pertaining to fast travel regardless of my status in the world, I've always felt that criminal deeds should retain a punishing factor associated with them and it's an opinion I've held for I don't know how long.

Okay, so how is this opinion not "fuck outlaws for no reason" as I previously suggested? I FEEL like I've demonstrated like 5 different EXTREMELY viable methods to get to a village you're sieging/griefing quickly outside of charters. If your goal is to find general victims, fast travel is irrelevant because they're everywhere.

Also, reminder that what I assume we all agree the best method of travel for outlaws requires a lot of knarrs. The best way to farm knarrs rn is to waypoint around the ocean nearby markets on a rage alt and just take nab's knarrs. The inability for outlaws to port to charters turns mindless griefing into a productive activity

also limits the ability of more aggressive players to travel around where and when they please.

But it doesn't. Like, not at all. Reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

[Kaios]

But it doesn't. Like, not at all. Reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

Oh cool, so it's all good then.

[SnuggleSnail]

Making something not fun is not the same as making that thing impossible/harder/limited u nerd

[Kaios]

I think if you want to port around on this world as an outlaw and the devs are willing to change that then I don't give a fuck if it makes life easier for you but it still would not be a good mechanics change overall from my perspective. I can't agree with you on the knarr thing unless every player is building a speed capped knarr which I don't think they are, what is the use in taking some q40 knarr over to enemy territory?

[SnuggleSnail]

I notice whenever you've nothing you can even pretend is relevant to say you just make noise unrelated to the subject
I bet it works, tho, I wouldn't read this thread if I weren't emotionally invested.
Anyway, you're very blatantly wrong, and your only reasoning behind anything that has been internally consistent has been "I don't like it!1!!!", but I'ma go do literally anything else now

Edit: a couple points for posterity
If you're waypointing back to your main base on an alt, the quality of the knarr is literally irrelevant other than maybe taking like 1 extra tarstick to repair. Like I give a crap if somebody kills my fresh naked alt, or steals a random Q20 knarr. I would legitimately trade most of my knarrs for a murder scent on anybody relevant.

Also, if knarr quality were relevant, which to I maintain it definitely is not for this instance - it would be a much more imbalanced strat. I have access to enough Q10 bones, shitty 2 generation old wood, first spiraled wrought and cisterns of tar(free byproduct of spiraling) to make like 40 Q300-400 knarrs today and not notice the materials are even missing. Well, *I* don't have that, but my anvildaddy does. I imagine so does AD's anvildaddy. Point being, if knarrQ were relevant that would be good for me, because it would be bad for everybody else.

[wonder-ass]

Wtfrick snail calm down this is manslaughter ...

[Agrik]

So, ease of socialization and locality mattering are two conflicting design goals we have, and historically we have been mostly on the side of locality. I have, lately begun to question the wisdom of that. I'm not keen on reintroducing crossroads, but I am becoming somewhat supportive of decent fast travel.

"Ease of socialization" affects forceful socialization much more that freewill one, I think. It isn't a big difference for those who travel once to the densely populated region, especially after the world map is more or less outlined. But fast travel greatly helps raiders who constantly compete in Q with everybody in their reach.

Also, that ease of socialization lowers socialization at the same time too, so unsure if it is changes in total. Why establish trade with rare biomes, why use roads, wagons and mercenaries... when you can teleport between villages?

They're not all widely used, but if one is nerfed into the ground everybody will move on to the next best thing on the list.

As I said in another topic, if somebody prefer one way to another, they obviously see some difference, even if subconsciously. Thus forcing them to move from the best thing to the next best, then to the third best, then to the Nth not-that-really-best would change something in their mind, and probably avert some of them some of the time from such action.