A suggestion for the diminishment of Hearth Vault viablilty.

[TheVampirate]

My suggestion is simple, and one I have thought about a bit before I post it. Dat suggested I post as he liked it so I shall.

To lessen the effectiveness of hearth vaults institute a crime bar.
A crime bar fills based on the amount of crimes you commit. The simple and main result is the inability to place a new hearth. You could take on more, but that is the basic one.
What this does is effectively make someone tracked by scents more accountable, as they can't just transport out (aside from villages of course) and pop down a new hearth. The filling of the crime bar would be based on the crime because as Dat pointed out, sometimes you are like "sure just grab it" or "hey can you smash my hearth for me"... tho for those people I would also suggest making a kin group with allowances for such occurences.

Anyway the bar would fill as follows.

Trespassing: Five minutes
Stealing:Five minutes per item stolen (subject to tweaking of course)
Assault: 12 hours (subject to tweaking)
Vandalism: 25 hours
Murder: 3 days

Important to note the bar would be capped at three days, so if you murder someone after assault you don't end up with 3 days and 12 hours. Also important to note tho is murdering another person right before the bar degrades will cause it to refill.

This means someone who has a hearth within a hearth vault can't jump as their wall is bashed. It also mean ranging will serve it's intended purpose.

[cobaltjones]

We already have a huge fucking thread about this you turd.

[cobaltjones]

Also I just read your idea and it's fucking horrible. "Crime" is amoral in this game. There's no way to define what is "justified" and what is not.

[TheVampirate]

Also I just read your idea and it's fucking horrible. "Crime" is amoral in this game. There's no way to define what is "justified" and what is not.

... if only there were some sort of system, where you had to turn on a flag to do things that could help define it. "Illegal acts" or something like that.

[novaalpha]

Bad idea, OP please swim a lake.

[TheVampirate]

Bad idea, OP please swim a lake.

You make some good points. If you hadn't made a well worded arguement and demonstratable reasons why it was a bad idea one might mistake you for being useless.

[MagicManICT]

Bad idea, OP please swim a lake.

You make some good points. If you hadn't made a well worded arguement and demonstratable reasons why it was a bad idea one might mistake you for being useless.

He makes very good points and has good ideas, especially after this:

We already have a huge fucking thread about this

and

"Crime" is amoral

Instead of creating whole new mechanics, try working with what is there. If you're going to do something new, it's going to get way more detailed than what you've posted. I don't see a thing about balance considerations, only 'anti-raiding' concepts. If you don't want the risk of getting raided, don't play games like HnH. I hear Hello Kitty Online Adventures would be a good game for someone like you.

[TheVampirate]

Bad idea, OP please swim a lake.

You make some good points. If you hadn't made a well worded arguement and demonstratable reasons why it was a bad idea one might mistake you for being useless.

He makes very good points and has good ideas, especially after this:

We already have a huge fucking thread about this

and

"Crime" is amoral

Instead of creating whole new mechanics, try working with what is there. If you're going to do something new, it's going to get way more detailed than what you've posted. I don't see a thing about balance considerations, only 'anti-raiding' concepts. If you don't want the risk of getting raided, don't play games like HnH. I hear Hello Kitty Online Adventures would be a good game for someone like you.

I don't mind getting raided if it happens. Also if you are going to put something in quotes please let it be something I said. Hearth Vaults are the problem, not raiding. They are a mechanic exploit. If there are threads about it I assume they present their own ideas. Following the guidelines I made a seperate thread for my idea. The crime bar is filled by criminal acts, if criminal acts are not crimes please give me a better definition. If you are going to go ad hominem like a child then you should not try and take part in serious discussions. I hear 4chan's /b/ might be a good place for someone like you.

[MagicManICT]

Also if you are going to put something in quotes please let it be something I said.

You need to learn a bit about how to use quotes. Another discussion, another time, and a lot on the net about it, but a couple of quick points. You don't quote the entire forum post you're replying to. You use snippets. Second, they're used to bring attention to what someone else said for further discussion, so therefore I don't have to quote you if I don't want to. Just be glad this isn't the old usenet days. You'd get banned from some of the forums for those kinds of posts. (You still can on some forums because it's considered distracting from the discussion.)

I don't mind getting raided if it happens. Also if you are going to put something in quotes please let it be something I said. Hearth Vaults are the problem, not raiding. They are a mechanic exploit. If there are threads about it I assume they present their own ideas. Following the guidelines I made a seperate thread for my idea.

Hearth Vaults aren't a problem, the siege mechanics are. If the siege mechanics were different, a HV wouldn't exist (at least in it's current form). Yes, they present different ideas, but in just posts from the last 24 hours, I think I've seen three different threads on vaults. In the last week, that number is over a half dozen. Forum rules aside, this kind of discussion needs to be better consolidated and everyone brainstorming together.

All this is still an aside, though. You're post doesn't really implement an idea, just tossing a few thoughts up in the air and seeing where they land. That is considered crap by the forum rules. Feel free to work on it and post something that works without penalizing real raiders--those players that have balls enough to raid and kill without retreating all over the map for a week.

As a note, some vaults will take 4+ days to break into, even a week if designed properly.

[TheVampirate]

Words

My point was you put quotes around something I didn't say, and never mentioned 'anti-raiding concepts'. Thus not a quote. A quote requires that I actually had to have said or alluded to a concept. Furthermore my idea is fully formed, not just tossed out. it will be MONTHS before siege and world six are implimented. After Salem, this is a bandaid for the issue that could be implimented in a relatively short time. It isn't a complete fix all, but it helps. If there needs to be more time added to it, fine extend the bar to last five days to a week. I fail to see how real raiders would be penalized, as their hearths aren't likely to be constantly moved. I actually got with a raider or three... six to be specific to hammer out the idea.