End Alt-Harvesting

Thoughts on the further development of Haven & Hearth? Feel free to opine!

Re: End Alt-Harvesting

Postby ArgentRhapsody » Wed Jul 19, 2017 6:42 am

jorb wrote:It's funny how everyone wants autarky to not be a feature of the game, but also consistently hate on any and all attempts to break it.

I am tempted to agree that randomizing the locations on at least some of them could probably be more interesting than what we have now. Will consider, but it should also be said that the resources being possible to claim and fight over was one of the intended purposes of them.
Because most of these attempts only really benefit big factions with the biggest numbers. Big factions with big numbers that can do whatever they want with the current system and are categorically the bane of this game, and make it entirely boring for everyone else and every other playstyle. There's no reason for them to want to share or trade these resources, and no one but the biggest factions CAN fight over them. It's a stale mechanic dominated by big factions like always. Until there's real incentives for big factions to not totally smother the fun out of this game for everyone else, little mechanics like this won't change a thing, and everyone will still be autarkic, especially the big factions.
ArgentRhapsody
 
Posts: 65
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2017 11:42 pm

Re: End Alt-Harvesting

Postby boreial » Wed Jul 19, 2017 9:04 am

I've said it before, will say it again. Alt's will never go away unless it becomes a 1 character per account and it is pay to play only game, then there will be a huge reduction in alt's. So get used to seeing alt fires around static resources, walled or otherwise.
User avatar
boreial
 
Posts: 536
Joined: Mon Sep 02, 2013 4:02 am
Location: Smack dab in the middle of NoWhere

Re: End Alt-Harvesting

Postby infectedking » Wed Jul 19, 2017 11:18 am

ArgentRhapsody wrote:
jorb wrote:It's funny how everyone wants autarky to not be a feature of the game, but also consistently hate on any and all attempts to break it.

I am tempted to agree that randomizing the locations on at least some of them could probably be more interesting than what we have now. Will consider, but it should also be said that the resources being possible to claim and fight over was one of the intended purposes of them.
Because most of these attempts only really benefit big factions with the biggest numbers. Big factions with big numbers that can do whatever they want with the current system and are categorically the bane of this game, and make it entirely boring for everyone else and every other playstyle. There's no reason for them to want to share or trade these resources, and no one but the biggest factions CAN fight over them. It's a stale mechanic dominated by big factions like always. Until there's real incentives for big factions to not totally smother the fun out of this game for everyone else, little mechanics like this won't change a thing, and everyone will still be autarkic, especially the big factions.

I'm actually the happy owner of a walled salt spot, this ensures that I can get a minimum of 2 salt every 3days if needed. Though out of fairness of the game, I left like 4-5 more salt nodes around my walled off node available for anyone to take (which I have even notified people in my area about) and they're happy to race and capture it from eachother with no rough housing (as from what i've seen). I think the greediness of bigger factions (Mainly Dis). where they literally try to wall off like 30+ salt nodes and 15+ ice nodes just so they can use it/no one else can get it, then when they start to quit sell it off for IRL cash transfer is the main problem.
Alts can be KO'd and stolen from, just catch them at the respawn timer guys. If it's a bot, it will login right on the dot then you strike, who knows it might have stuff on it from previous logins aswell.
dafels wrote:I like to be under Frosty's command.

Any Questions about the game or anything, hit me up on skype: deadlytroll1 Or you can find me in the hedgehug realm chat on discord.
W7: Hermit
W8: Peaceful Farmer of F&I
W9: Peaceful Farmer of F&I
W10: deserter-Peaceful Farmer of F&I
User avatar
infectedking
 
Posts: 1472
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2012 4:59 am

Re: End Alt-Harvesting

Postby 2d0x » Wed Jul 19, 2017 12:21 pm

A simple sketch:
Any local resource is a village claim (100x100 or even more). Any local resource can be obtained only in exchange for a special item that can't be transferred. It's possible to get it in a Hearth Fire (like a hat) once a week. A week later, the item disappears if it has not been used. Well, we need some kind of verification in order to have a new item in a week.
Excuse me, I don't speak English.
User avatar
2d0x
 
Posts: 782
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2016 4:09 am
Location: Russia

Re: End Alt-Harvesting

Postby Granger » Wed Jul 19, 2017 5:29 pm

2d0x wrote:A simple sketch:
Any local resource is a village claim (100x100 or even more). Any local resource can be obtained only in exchange for a special item that can't be transferred. It's possible to get it in a Hearth Fire (like a hat) once a week. A week later, the item disappears if it has not been used. Well, we need some kind of verification in order to have a new item in a week.

The verification would need to be an active subscription, else it wouldn't change anything...
⁎ Mon Mar 22, 2010 ✝ Thu Jan 23, 2020
User avatar
Granger
 
Posts: 9254
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2010 2:00 pm

Re: End Alt-Harvesting

Postby 2d0x » Wed Jul 19, 2017 6:23 pm

Granger wrote:The verification would need to be an active subscription, else it wouldn't change anything...

Yes, I thought so too. IP verification is bypassed with a proxy. Periodic confirmation of an account on a mobile phone (for example, once a week or a month) is not very convenient.

But the village claim on the local resource will not let you put your hearth fire near the resource itself and create your village in the immediate vicinity of the resource (it blocks access to the resource).
Alts of the same account do not suffer if the developers do not want to deal with them. Bypass - multi-accounts. A multi-account is not such a disaster, but only if it is not "dead" (only to receive a resource).

In any case, this is just a poorly thought out draft of the proposal.
Last edited by 2d0x on Wed Jul 19, 2017 6:46 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Excuse me, I don't speak English.
User avatar
2d0x
 
Posts: 782
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2016 4:09 am
Location: Russia

Re: End Alt-Harvesting

Postby Aceb » Wed Jul 19, 2017 6:30 pm

Better would be to make localized resources to be "built" inside existing village, only one per-kind on certain distance and only one for every village.



But then again, we would have an army of ghost villages,mmmm?
A quest for a hat. - W10
Image
Haven't spawned yet
User avatar
Aceb
 
Posts: 1830
Joined: Wed Jun 16, 2010 2:34 pm

Re: End Alt-Harvesting

Postby 2d0x » Wed Jul 19, 2017 6:33 pm

Aceb wrote:Better would be to make localized resources to be "built" inside existing village, only one per-kind on certain distance and only one for every village.



But then again, we would have an army of ghost villages,mmmm?

Yep, I also thought about it. On a global resource, only a sample is taken to create its own resource, and then by the scheme above... But it completely excludes fights near resources (many like it and is part of the game process).
Excuse me, I don't speak English.
User avatar
2d0x
 
Posts: 782
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2016 4:09 am
Location: Russia

Re: End Alt-Harvesting

Postby Ants » Thu Jul 27, 2017 5:08 am

boreial wrote:I've said it before, will say it again. Alt's will never go away unless it becomes a 1 character per account and it is pay to play only game, then there will be a huge reduction in alt's. So get used to seeing alt fires around static resources, walled or otherwise.

I agree, mostly. We should only be allowed to have one character for free, alts should be paid for. We should also be able to delete unwanted characters. People caught botting should be banned. As things are, there are no repercussions for those who don't play fair and I think it's pretty detrimental to the game.
Haven's most kawaii retarded ethot karen
Image
User avatar
Ants
 
Posts: 1842
Joined: Sun May 04, 2014 9:55 pm
Location: inside your head

Re: End Alt-Harvesting

Postby tyrtix » Thu Jul 27, 2017 6:22 am

Salem "recently" put up a system that spawns events around, and if you, exploring, find the event, you can gather the equivalent of haven localized resources.
I love such things.
What i think is that: i don't care if someone fights over some part of resources, while i'm able to get some of the elsewhere, even in small quantities and by luck.
Ppl complaining for localized resources actually seems to forget that node ql are the same as localized, so a good clay node is always claimed at least, same for water and dirt, mines got walls at the entrance (wich is the same thing as the walled localized, except they cannot even be bashed down and won't decay) and so on.

What i propose is that: let the big ones fight for localized resources, wich will have a steady, but slowly spawn of those resources, and maybe make it so that every month or two the resources basically destroy any building or built thing in a x radius: earthquakes, tornadoes, laser rays, anything.
Then make some events that will spawn randomly and in wich a lucky explorer can gather 2 or 3x quantity of such resources in a time, maybe adding some interesting challenge to that, like having special items or the need to build something in the place to start gathering (a quarry for a crystal vein? a lumber camp for getting special wood? this may require even some time and resources to build the structure and MAY need some toons cooperation).

All in all, the worst problem with localized resources is that it's too hard to bash the walls down, and claims and hearthfires are a pain because too hard or nearly impossible to interact with them.
User avatar
tyrtix
 
Posts: 1102
Joined: Wed Feb 19, 2014 12:54 am
Location: Leghorn

PreviousNext

Return to Critique & Ideas

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Claude [Bot], Majestic-12 [Bot] and 60 guests