PvP, Player Attrition, and the Future of Haven & Hearth

[SnuggleSnail]

Doctor: smoking is bad for you
Guy that's gonna die @ age 47: You got a source for that buddy? You're doing a Argument from Authority fallacy if you won't teach me and every other guy who has put fourth no effort every aspect of biology/chemistry relevant to to the subject then you're being disingenuous

Look, it's not an ad hominem to tell somebody who has literally no experience they don't know what they're talking about. Again, your FEELINGS about the systems are valid. 90% of the purpose of games is to trick you into feeling some way, and if they're not doing that for most people there's probably a flaw.

However, if you want to make specific mechanical arguments you kindof need to understand it before you can criticize it. I can tell nobody arguing that it's not absurdly defender sided understands it, because it's so defender sided that reasonable informed people cannot disagree. I'm pretty sure it was intentionally designed to functionally be removed without actually removing it. There is no group of motivated people who understand siege at a basic level who can be sieged.

We probably even agree on most things. I think it's a complicated, bloated mess that can only be leveraged to punch down on people who don't understand it (which is most people), and that it doesn't work at all for peer conflicted because of how much it mechanically favors defenders. It doesn't even work for things like removing safepalis, it's purely a tool for griefing in its current state.

[MightySheep]

Did you even read my comments? I addressed like 90% of the shit youre talking about already.

Argument from Authority & Anecdotal Fallacy:
You constantly present personal experiences as universal truths without evidence, which can’t be verified by others.

Yes god forbid the 2 people who actually have done sieges this world speak from experience wtf else are we supposed to do? who comes up with this fallacy shit? Yes Im speaking from authority. Ya got me.

Straw Man & False Dilemma:
You repeatedly reduce criticism of PvP mechanics to simplistic extremes (“you just want PvE,” “git gud”) rather than addressing the real arguments about accessibility and fairness.

I couldnt have addressed the arguments about accessibility any more if I tried. I pretty much covered every single talking point. What more do you want from me? Please tell me what argument about accessibility and fairness I missed. Do you guys not just want pve? Pretty sure that seems to be the majority opinion.

Ad Hominem & Gatekeeping:
Personal attacks and dismissing entire groups of players (“undeserving sympathy,” “hermit defeatism”) is neither productive nor logical. It only discourages genuine discussion about improving the game.

Youre just saying random buzzwords now. If somebody makes absolutely no effort then they dont deserve sympathy when bad things happen to them. How is that gatekeeping? It doesnt even fit. I'm literally trying to open the gate. I want hermits to stop being defeatist. Thats why Im debunking all the dumb excuses to not even try.

Ignoring Context & Circular Reasoning:
You dismiss the context of average players (limited time, no PvP experience, no specialized clients) and rely on circular logic: “it’s a PvP game so PvP must be hard,” without allowing any room for reasonable improvement.
The core point remains unanswered: the current siege system doesn’t work for the majority of the playerbase—casual, average players—not because they refuse to “try,” but because it requires an unrealistic level of commitment, resources, and knowledge.

When did I say PvP must be hard? My exact words were "very low skill ceiling". That means theres really not much depth to it. You're right I do dismiss the excuses you listed. I already mentioned how the client thing is just nonsense, just use the public clients. i also told how I can log in after 5 months and I still would feel fine about going to pvp. Either way its absurd to compare yourself to the time investment of the top 1% like that even means anything, it still doesnt matter because the game favors running away. I'm not gonna be mad if someone hits harder than me when they invested 5 months more grinding, but its still just 1 of many factors in pvp and I can always just run away.

This world I sieged about 3-4 villages solo. I built a catapult and stuck gear on an alt and watched the defenders cry then I go to sleep and 24h later its a raid. Literally all the defender had to do was click destroy on the catapult. I dont know what the situation was with your village Im betting it was similar. Thats the 'defeatism' I referenced. It afflicts probably most people. Now you cant even catapult walls so I doubt I would even bother sieging anymore its a massive hassle. Lets be honest you didnt go through a whole ordeal of multiple catapults and rams and 24h camping at your village. Nobody is doing that. You probably got raided by someone plopping a ram and trying their luck. Now you want to claim it was some impossible task to defend. If you would just be honest I would be less dismissive. Youre the one spewing a bunch of shitty arguments that dont add up.

[Havenasket]

Summary of the Discussion: PvP, Siege, and Game Accessibility

Over the last few pages, this thread has focused on how siege and PvP work in Haven & Hearth, especially for new or casual players.

Experienced PvP players have made it clear that, from their perspective, defending against sieges is “incredibly easy if you know what you’re doing.” Arguments often come from personal experience — “Yes, I’m speaking from authority. Ya got me.” — and are backed by claims that the only real problem is players not being willing to engage with PvP or learn the system. At the same time, some admit that the current mechanics mostly let experienced players “punch down on people who don’t understand it (which is most people),” and that sieges are rarely used for fair conflict between equals, but more often as a tool for griefing.

Critical feedback throughout the thread has highlighted a different side:

Many players simply don’t have the time, experience, or technical background to master siege defense.

Advice like “just use a better client” or “just try harder” ignores the realities for most of the community, who aren’t long-term PvPers.

Suggestions have been made to improve the system, such as:

- Automating and enforcing ransom mechanics, so defenders can reliably “buy out” a siege if they choose.
- Letting defenders pick the window for siege fights, to account for time zones and work schedules.
- Raising the cost and adding cooldowns to sieges to prevent abuse by stronger groups.
- Adding ways for weaker groups to recover after being attacked, so they’re not simply wiped out and lost as players.

On the tone of the conversation:
The discussion has sometimes gotten personal, with experienced players dismissing concerns as “defeatism” or “excuses.” Still, the main point stands: even some PvP veterans agree that the current siege system mostly punishes those without insider knowledge, and doesn’t really support healthy or interesting competition.

Conclusion:
The real split here isn’t about PvP vs. PvE, but about how accessible and fair the core mechanics are for the wider playerbase. While the top PvPers may thrive, the current system isn’t working for most people — and both the frustration and the player attrition show that something needs to change. The thread contains several concrete suggestions that could help make PvP more balanced and engaging for everyone, not just a handful of experts.

Personal attacks and off-topic posts have been left out to keep this summary focused on the main issues and ideas.

[MightySheep]

I'm not reading that chatgpt shit lol ur last generate was a flop this 1 prob the same

[Fostik]

ai nonsense slop

Here's a translation for that bs:

Summary of the PvP and Siege Discussion in Haven & Hearth:

The thread discusses how PvP and siege mechanics work in the game, especially for new or casual players.

Veteran PvPers say defending is easy if you know what you're doing, but admit the system mostly benefits experienced players and is often used to bully weaker ones.
Casual players argue the system is too complex, time-consuming, and punishing for those without deep knowledge or custom tools.
Suggestions to improve fairness include:
Letting defenders choose when sieges happen (to fit real-life schedules).
Making it easier to recover after being attacked.
Adding costs and cooldowns to prevent abuse.
Creating a system to “buy out” of a siege.
Main takeaway:
The issue isn’t PvP itself, but that the current system is unfair and inaccessible to most players. Even some PvP veterans agree it needs changes to be more balanced and fun for everyone.

[OIchi]

chat gpt slop

Yeah, AI failed you completely this time. It's sad that some people can't think for themselves and at least verify what the ai generates for them.

[Halbertz]

So, we have crossed the half-hundred-post mark in yet another "siege bad" thread.
At the moment, both sides agree with each other, but do not yet realize it: the forces of chaos believe that the siege mechanics are poorly done; the carrot-planters (supported by artificial intelligence) believe that the siege mechanics are bad because they are exist.
Will this topic be able to change the status quo? We'll find out in the next fifty posts. Stay tuned.

[SnuggleSnail]

I'm a li'l embarrassed I replied tbh
I should go back to just calling retarded people retards and getting 1 week bans every second post