Wall jump exploit: sipmlest solution.

[Avu]

Well that should be easy to take care of. Have new walls get crap soak until they "dry". There goes walling my wall with wall thing.

[Potjeh]

You can put crossroads in your wall.

[Neptjunoue]

Any thoughts about borrowing castle concept from the Stronghold series?

[GreenScape]

maybe brickwall should require more resources, like 100 bricks for a section?

[burgingham]

Yeah, no.

[Oddity]

maybe brickwall should require more resources, like 100 bricks for a section?

But how does this help anyone? And this would piss everyone off to no end.

[Jackard]

yes truly the "sipmlest" solution

[GreenScape]

maybe brickwall should require more resources, like 100 bricks for a section?

But how does this help anyone? And this would piss everyone off to no end.

Newbie thiefs will be incapable of walling themselves.

[Avu]

Noobs don't last long anyway.

[Potjeh]

The problem with rams is that they're too easy to destroy. If wall jumping was removed you could protect them with walls, and put an idol inside this siege camp to ensure you're not walled off from the ram in return. Sieges would basically be about who has more bricks and wrought for walls.

IMO making the warfare more about expenditure of resources is a good thing, but I have to admit that building walls all over the place is kinda lame. What we need is additional passive defences to keep the ram safe while it's drying. Dogs for protection of the siege camp would be nice (they must be able to permakill), but since those aren't likely to happen any time soon due to lack of AI, traps could also do the job. Traps should be capable of killing or seriously handicapping a character. The latter could be some long-lasting debuffs that make a character useless in combat, such as doubling cooldown of all moves or drastically lowering skill values. They should also be capable of outright preventing a character from passing through, so that no amount of con will let you walk over them and destroy the ram. Traps also need to autoreset, so you can't just use a bunch of alts for demining. The only way to deal with them should be detecting (per*exp vs int*stlth) and defusing (dex*per vs dex*int), and defusing should run risk of triggering the trap and suffering it's effects. This way breaking a ram won't be a trivial thing, and failure could badly tip the scales against you in the upcoming combat.

Of course, such traps would be a griefer's wet dream, so they should be limited somehow. My solution is to make them only placeable on claims, if the claim is later removed they're rendered inactive and revealed so anyone can salvage them without risk. Of course, that doesn't with personal claims, since those can be revoked. For that, I'd make siege camps a formal element of the game. They would be a new kind of claim that's sort of like village claim, but not quite. Siege camp claim should be able to overlap the target's village claim, but it shouldn't be revocable like a personal claim. Instead, you'd have to get to it's mini-idol and break it (always breakable, unlike normal village) to remove it. Crossroads should be buildable on siege camp claim. This claim should be a remote extension of a village claim, and it should come with a hefty authority drain, preferably proportional to the distance from the main village. Perhaps traps themselves should also come with authority drain (though it'd make them unbuildable on personal claims), so that defenders can't just cover their whole town in traps.

Siege camps could also be tied into a system for taking over villages. Like, if you extended it over the enemy's idol it'd stop authority gain and disable porting to that idol, plus add a drain on the target village's authority. If you can hold the idol long enough (depends on how much authority they have to begin with) it'll go out and you can destroy it or relight it to take the village for yourself. The defender must destroy your siege camp before the timer is out to prevent this.

This all works fine if the people you want to summon don't just keep switching hearth forts, so some measures against those might be in order. Firstly, hearth vaults should be harder to reuse. As things are, after a breach you can just patch the hole and have a fully functioning fort again. Idol takeover takes care of that nicely, but I also support Avu's (I think) idea of making unsupported wall segments fragile, so you could reduce a breached fort to nothing. Secondly, they should be more expensive, ie you should be forced to build larger forts. A way to do this would be to make people summonable at their idol, which means that if people can get close enough to your fort's idol to see it, they can also summon-execute you with bows. Of course, a lot of the current villages would be screwed over by this because they weren't built with it in mind, so this one probably has to wait for the reset. There's the question of villageless criminals, and the only solution that comes to mind is to make them summonable anywhere. Yeah, it's unfair to newbie thieves, but I think that the pros outweigh the cons. Besides, even hermits can build idols nowadays. Anyway, I reckon idol summoning could completely replace hearth summoning, so you could safely use the hearth as a travel bookmark. Of course, this all makes trust within a village much more important, but I don't think that's a negative. Fifth column activities can be the most delicious of all drama.