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

[MaltGrain]

1. Make bases cheaper, disposable, and more at risk.

This is within the players control, already.
It's entirely possible, and wholly beneficial, to create multiple bases of operation instead of the one or two homestead claims that players usually make. Doing so essentially spreads your assets into multiple smaller holdings, so that if one is targetted you only lose a portion of your entire stock. You can even build roadsigns and footpaths between them, to balance convinience and security :3
Investment 101 man, I've read half a book on economics

There're other considerations in how to make your spots look less enticing to thieves and vandals, but for the most part the 'security meta' as we currently share it shapes Hearth for the worse, both in terms of player engagement and immersive storytelling capacity.

[Massa]

9 pages of posts in like 5 days god damn

i should be able to break into anything i want. they should make stat equalization so intense that 90 mc can contend with 700 so the hermits are emboldened to attack me back. i have spent many worlds as a disgusting violent hermit. they should move away from this silly color deck shit to collision based combat with scaling stats and armor. make it so NO ONE is safe, just less endangered. ALL hearthling lives are disposable. for the last like 5 worlds major villages haven't been broken into, not even minor ones. it's NOT epic. i want so many fucking bodies next world that even the big boys have died like 4 times each.

[MightySheep]

I still find it funny conversation being had under the presupposition that siege exists but OP still wont say how he lost village, its pretty obvious it wasnt a real siege

Somebody mentioned mindset of "My stash is completely protected" as an issue. Why? Your base literally is completely protected.

Unless for some bizarre reason you pissed off some tryhards enough to the extent they are willing to spend a bunch of time and effort to camp you for multiple days and pull all nighters. Even then you have plenty of time to just relocate your shit or log it off so you really only losing infrastructure. Luckily thats not really a thing at this point in the world so you dont need to worry about it. At worst you get hit by someone trying to sneak a ram and you just bash it.

[Robben_DuMarsch]

OP still wont say how he lost village

The truth is even funnier. Pm me on discord if you want the details.

[Potjeh]

I'm pretty sure the average user would get frustratingly good at escaping if Jorbtar added a rabbit dungeon that required you beat it in a track race

No they wouldn't, at least on default client. Seriously if PvP is supposed to be all about running, why the hell isn't terrain flattening and object hiding in default? That's such a big handicap that it is pretty much impossible to be good at running without a custom client. And if devs would do it Jorb would probably figure out a way to make it look better than those ugly ass squares in custom clients, so videos of the game wouldn't look like absolute cancer.

But anyway, yeah, as far siege is concerned, with how much time it takes to improve infrastructure quality and livestock stats, siege should stay practically impossible. It would probably make for a more interesing game if it was possible to siege, but then it would have to be possible to get back to where you were in like a week after losing your base, and that would upset people that like watching numbers go up.

[Neppy]

I'm all for more PvP but what ruins the fun for me and probably many other newer players is the constant fear of permadeath. It's overkill.

[Robben_DuMarsch]

I'm all for more PvP but what ruins the fun for me and probably many other newer players is the constant fear of permadeath. It's overkill.

It'd be pretty funny if the faction players and murderers had the same fear.

[SnuggleSnail]

Things you actually lose in a siege:

• Buildings
• Paveart
• Cheeseracks
• Empty cupboards
• Kiln
• Smelters
• Tarkilns

That's literally it, and in most cases you won't even lose all of those because people will be too lazy to bash everything. The reality is you lose very little in a siege. In the amount of time it takes to do a siege you could replace all of these things 10 times over.

In my experience people who get sieged usually quit, and people who get raided usually don't - even though you lose far more and probably die during a raid. The difference is being sieged is a very drawn out, and stressful experience.

In practically every siege I've participated in with this system the goal has not been to win at siege chess then crack the walls open. The goal has been to put in minimal effort to be maximally annoying. Eventually the defenders will just give up after days or weeks or having to be online all day, feeling helpless, not being sure what to do, etc.

People who constantly suggest siege be harder, getting sieged be less punishing, etc are missing the point. It will not solve the psychological issue unless done in hyper specific ways. Meanwhile, the sieges that are actually good for the game and build hype, shit like auroa, are impossible because of how defender sided things are.

[Robben_DuMarsch]

The reality is you lose very little in a siege.

https://youtu.be/4-C2QX8LuIk?t=227