Taxation for Protection

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

Re: Taxation for Protection

Postby Erik_the_Blue » Thu Jul 23, 2009 6:45 am

Ferinex wrote:Also, having so many people packed into an area makes in-community theft more practical. Someone may rob you blind, but they live inside the walls too.

They don't even have to rob farmers blind; picking pockets and locks should be profitable just through the sheer magnitude of available targets (though again, this requires a large enough player base). Really, I'd like to see a system where urban thieves and rural brigands are differentiated, but this is diverging from the original intent of this topic.
Jackard wrote:Since mines will appear in the wilderness after map reset, they might become like this if devs also remove the feature that allow you to build your own.

Indeed. A lot of people seem to be hoping that the reset will make the game more interesting in various ways, but we won't realize its full potential if people are stuck in the mindsets they have now post-reset.
User avatar
Erik_the_Blue
 
Posts: 218
Joined: Mon Jun 22, 2009 10:15 am

Re: Taxation for Protection

Postby Jackard » Thu Jul 23, 2009 6:49 am

i am adrool with anticipation
“A designer knows he has achieved perfection not when there is nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away.”
User avatar
Jackard
 
Posts: 8849
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 6:07 am
Location: fucking curios how do they work

Re: Taxation for Protection

Postby Laremere » Thu Jul 23, 2009 6:49 am

Most of this falls apart when the fact becomes apparent that ingame isn't populated by people 24/7. You can't have a patrol of guards walking around that can ring a bell to get the entire cities worth of guards to stop what they are doing to come join them. I was at bottleneck today for my first time, and for being known as a populated city, I saw two people, possibly the same person as I think they were wearing the same clothes. There has to be a point where the gameplay makes up for this fact, and so far I think the way they are doing it is working well. I do however think that there should be some super strong wall that takes a giant amount of work to make even a single wall piece that can't be taken down without major work, that is only practical for keeps and fortresses.
Image
User avatar
Laremere
 
Posts: 736
Joined: Fri May 29, 2009 9:02 pm

Re: Taxation for Protection

Postby Ferinex » Thu Jul 23, 2009 6:53 am

Laremere wrote:Most of this falls apart when the fact becomes apparent that ingame isn't populated by people 24/7. You can't have a patrol of guards walking around that can ring a bell to get the entire cities worth of guards to stop what they are doing to come join them. I was at bottleneck today for my first time, and for being known as a populated city, I saw two people, possibly the same person as I think they were wearing the same clothes. There has to be a point where the gameplay makes up for this fact, and so far I think the way they are doing it is working well. I do however think that there should be some super strong wall that takes a giant amount of work to make even a single wall piece that can't be taken down without major work, that is only practical for keeps and fortresses.


Building a strong wall is significantly easier than tearing one down. For instance, I can easily joint two pieces of wood together with my bare hands/perhaps a clamp, but breaking them back apart is significantly more difficult. The same goes for brick/mortar/whatever they used for brick and stone walls in medieval days.

Edit: Actually, you know what? Forget my 'real life' argument. I don't care about that. It's about balance. It should be easy enough for a party of people to build a fortress just for gameplay reasons. It's more fun when stuff like that doesn't take a week RL. Having it take so long just makes the people infinitely less likely to rebuild it or have any fun or feel any sense of accomplishment when it's destroyed. The destroyer will have a little bit of fun for a short period of time, but past that, the players are left on there asses SOL. Result? They quit. It's a game, and if they aren't having fun, there is no reason to play anymore.

But yeah, you're correct in that the game is not populated 24/7. I think Haven has matured to the point that we need to start spreading the word on other forums and communities (perhaps MMO communities). We need more people, and possibly NPC guards/guarddogs/archer towers.
i guess they never miss huh
User avatar
Ferinex
 
Posts: 1040
Joined: Sun May 31, 2009 9:05 am
Location: Miami

Re: Taxation for Protection

Postby Jackard » Thu Jul 23, 2009 7:02 am

Ferinex wrote:archer towers.

why can I shoot through palisades, anyways? that doesnt seem right
“A designer knows he has achieved perfection not when there is nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away.”
User avatar
Jackard
 
Posts: 8849
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 6:07 am
Location: fucking curios how do they work

Re: Taxation for Protection

Postby Erik_the_Blue » Thu Jul 23, 2009 7:05 am

Laremere wrote:Most of this falls apart when the fact becomes apparent that ingame isn't populated by people 24/7. You can't have a patrol of guards walking around that can ring a bell to get the entire cities worth of guards to stop what they are doing to come join them.

This equally applies to the brigands, however. Unless they organize well enough out-of-game to coordinate their attacks, it should be possible to find some point where things start to feel right. Of course, it's the time of the offense that's important, and that's in control of the brigands. If they're smart, they'd even engage in meta-game strategy, figuring out when the least number of city-dwellers are on. Worst case scenario: Guards know each others' phone numbers and call in the event of a raid. This reminds me of certain other online games, and is an entirely frightening idea.

Re: Strong Walls
Once we have proper city walls, there will be all the more reason to have siege equipment, as well as the army to operate and support said equipment. Said army would need to be fed, of course. Given enough thought, we could probably build a plan for the game from the top down.
User avatar
Erik_the_Blue
 
Posts: 218
Joined: Mon Jun 22, 2009 10:15 am

Re: Taxation for Protection

Postby Krantarin » Thu Jul 23, 2009 8:22 am

Erik_the_Blue wrote:Worst case scenario: Guards know each others' phone numbers and call in the event of a raid. This reminds me of certain other online games, and is an entirely frightening idea.


I chuckle to myself because everyone in my settlement knows not only each others' phone numbers, but also where each other lives :) .
A Lurker from the days when Laketown was on the frontier and Bottleneck was the military superpower.
User avatar
Krantarin
 
Posts: 362
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 4:29 am

Re: Taxation for Protection

Postby Erik_the_Blue » Thu Jul 23, 2009 10:34 am

Diverging onto the crime topic some more, it occurs to me that any attempts at realism will be futile as long as thieves are completely and unrealistically fearless (due to using alts as throwaway proxies). Never mind the zombie alt hordes we've seen recently.

As for those strong walls, those stones dug up from cellars might do the job nicely. They're expensive enough that encompassing a very large area would be impractical, and they'd probably be used to protect the cabins in question, leaving little room for fields inside. They also look like quality catapult/trebuchet ammunition.
User avatar
Erik_the_Blue
 
Posts: 218
Joined: Mon Jun 22, 2009 10:15 am

Re: Taxation for Protection

Postby sami1337 » Thu Jul 23, 2009 12:58 pm

I've thought about offering people an area with a wall around and they have the key to it. But right now we'd rather recruit people right into town instead of outside.
The ones who see things differently.

You can praise them, disagree with them, quote them, disbelieve them, glorify or vilify them. About the only thing you can't do is ignore them.
And while some may see them as the crazy ones, we see genius.
User avatar
sami1337
 
Posts: 1125
Joined: Tue May 26, 2009 1:52 pm

Re: Taxation for Protection

Postby Gauteamus » Thu Jul 23, 2009 5:03 pm

If someone feels the need to have their goods protected, I am sure Laketown is willing to lend them store space with guarantees (for a small compensation).
Image<<Bottleneck>>
What if Rosa Parks had a car?
User avatar
Gauteamus
 
Posts: 858
Joined: Fri May 29, 2009 7:16 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Critique & Ideas

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Barkrowler [Bot], Claude [Bot] and 0 guests