Nek wrote:Redlaw wrote:so no more trade cities
Already debunked. Trade cities have been a thing before visitor debuff was implemented and wouldn't stop being a thing if it disappeared again.
No they haven't. To my knowledge, Venetia in world 8 was the first public trading city, and it was built after Visitor was implemented.
Nek wrote:SlicingTheMoon wrote:no visitor buff = no trading
Bullshit. Trading persisted before it and will continue persisting after it.
Trading before the visitor debuff consisted of contacting somebody outside the game to organize a trade, then using charter stone teleportation bullshit with alts to actually perform the trade. (Side note: this would no longer be feasible under current mechanics.) It was such a horrible system that it stopped me from trading unless it was absolutely necessary.
Nek wrote:Nobodies going to be stupid enough to wander into those huge trading hubs causing shit. That is a death sentence unless they have an army, and you better believe the owners of said trade hubs have armies/allies of their own.
And what about smaller trading posts? Should they just get fucked?
Anyways, I think we should go back to the original problem, which seems to be combat outposts with gates on all sides providing people a massive advantage if they take shelter there during combat.
Visitor debuff is not the cause of the problem; it is merely a symptom. Would removing Visitor make combat outposts not advantageous? No,
just removing Visitor would only remove some of the advantage of combat outposts (which is only due to a specific part of Visitor, I'll get to that later)
and you would still be screwed if you had to chase somebody into a combat outpost. Then what is the cause for combat outposts existing now where they previously didn't?
- I think the primary cause for this would be the increased ease of palisade construction. Prior to world 8, a palisade on initial construction could have only one gate, period. Adding more gates would require using a battering ram, which took not just resources but also significant time, or having a palibasher present during construction of any palisade. Adding more than one gate to a palisade was a non-trivial process and therefore reserved to places you actually want to put effort into, not random outposts. (Having to wait 12 (I think?) hours after placing the cornerpost to start construction also made it more of a hassle to put up palisades in general.)
- The most obvious counter to this - palibashing - was removed. Palisades are now cheap-to-construct impenetrable fortresses.
- Pclaims have been made trivial. Prior to world 8, you could have only one pclaim per character; to get more than one claim you had to have one extra Yeomanry alt per claim. Nowadays anyone can put a pclaim anywhere with ease, and charging it/keeping it charged is easier than ever before.
Now, there is one, non-essential, thing about Visitor that does cause issues: the power of eviction. Eviction changes the home field advantage from just advantageous to completely overwhelming; because of eviction somebody with Visitor can do nothing against an enemy in combat. I've always found eviction clunky and questioned its necessity. Isn't it just enough to forbid the visitor from committing crimes against others, and allow people without Visitor commit crimes against visitors with no repercussions? That should be sufficient to get troll alts off your land (and if they're non-alt trolls and too powerful for you to handle, then I'd argue that would be a deserved advantage for them) while negating most of the impact on combat Visitor has right now (it doesn't end combat relations, they just can't start new combat relations (including having allies join the fight) and can't loot the enemy after combat - though if necessary an exception could be made for that as well).
Anyways, I think it's at least pretty safe to say that entirely removing Visitor doesn't fix nearly as many problems as it would cause.
jorb wrote:Public venues are worth too much to consider the complete removal of this mechanic, but..
Alternative suggestion would be adding new types of gates; merchant or visitor or what have you. These cost more materials than regular gates, as well as dreams (or other hearth magic esque items, to give a reason why neener-neener can't do anything past this line)
... this is a change we ourselves have proposed, and we are considering implementing it for the reset. If anyone has strong arguments against it, feel free to share.
'Make stuff more expensive' has never worked as a real solution to buildable/craftable stuff being abused. Yes, it will make it happen less often. But that's because the richest players will just keep doing it while the less rich players can't afford to do it. And it also goes in the other direction - legitimate use of the structures will also become that much more expensive, making it harder for people to build legitimate public places (and again restricting the option to the richer players). Earlier in the thread it was mentioned that Rock Crystals as building requirement are a joke and it would need to be more expensive than that, but if even 'only' multiple rock crystals were required I would definitely be unable to build a small trading post like I did back in world 9.