Game Development: The Danger Zone

Announcements about major changes in Haven & Hearth.

Re: Game Development: The Danger Zone

Postby springyb » Tue Jan 19, 2016 3:55 am

DaniAngione wrote:
Although none of these ideas are enough to solve the most important problem: an indestructible object that can be abused/used for griefing/etc.


Maybe make it so under no circumstances can you build one on a claim you don't have permissions for, but also up the range they can move before needing repaired?
User avatar
springyb
 
Posts: 330
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 11:39 am

Re: Game Development: The Danger Zone

Postby Leez03 » Tue Jan 19, 2016 3:57 am

Found a parchment on beach..

Image

Someone can translate ? :D
Leez03
 
Posts: 32
Joined: Fri Aug 28, 2015 8:02 pm

Re: Game Development: The Danger Zone

Postby strpk0 » Tue Jan 19, 2016 4:04 am

"And he saw a wild boar . And the thought of bacon and Masebo
leather shoes . And it makes him well . And then the bad.
Because it also saw a wild boar"

Translated by google translate, I don't speak russian <.<
Granger wrote:Fuck off, please go grow yourself some decency.

Image
User avatar
strpk0
 
Posts: 704
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2011 11:44 pm

Re: Game Development: The Danger Zone

Postby DaniAngione » Tue Jan 19, 2016 4:06 am

strpk0 wrote:"And he saw a wild boar . And the thought of bacon and Masebo
leather shoes . And it makes him well . And then the bad.
Because it also saw a wild boar"

Translated by google translate, I don't speak russian <.<


We shall call this "Russian Drowned Poetry".
W10 Former King of The Northern Kingdom
W9 The Revenant of Wulf's Retreat
W8 Lawspeaker of New Thotoshire
W7 Lawspeaker of Esteldín
User avatar
DaniAngione
 
Posts: 1791
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2011 12:22 am
Location: The Hearthlands

Re: Game Development: The Danger Zone

Postby Pupsi » Tue Jan 19, 2016 4:29 am

Pearl Necklace was fixed?
w5 Hermit>Road Ville>Horde>RQ
w6 The Sparta
w7 Isla de la tortuga>A.D>CookieVille (not sure if it was w7 or w6)
w8 Amish Paradise
w9 Amish Paradise
w10 Amish Paradise > Maid Cafe (until april 2017)
w11 Funcy Huts
User avatar
Pupsi
 
Posts: 547
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2011 4:31 am
Location: heheh

Re: Game Development: The Danger Zone

Postby rye130 » Tue Jan 19, 2016 4:45 am

I don't understand how you guys could possibly think an unbreakable object is a good idea. People will abuse the living shit out of it!
User avatar
rye130
 
Posts: 2462
Joined: Mon Feb 01, 2010 9:41 pm

Re: Game Development: The Danger Zone

Postby MagicManICT » Tue Jan 19, 2016 4:57 am

I think an introduction of a major change of the current siege system needs to be done as a whole, not in parts, which is what I think is the intention of rams.

I think I get what the idea is behind the change for the ram is*. If I'm thinking correctly, six is still the wrong number, though, if you're looking to create confrontations. Four might be better as it narrows the window and gives both sides a bit more information as to when an attack is going to occur, and if a raid is successful, some time for the winner to actually collect some loot. It still forces the attackers to commit an entire play session (and then some for many people that aren't the hardcore of the hardcore).

The downside to this is the defenders if the attackers manipulate the schedule to attack where the defenders won't even be able to touch the ram. From that perspective, the rule is horrible. Not being able to attack the ram when the group has time available then becomes an automatic loss with no chance of trying to fight.

Another issue I see is simply having to move a ram more than X tiles. any smart village is going to set things up so the attackers have to repair the ram at least once before getting to the walls. This means the attackers still have to camp the ram six times number of times the ram needs repaired. It's not unreasonable to have to repair a ram at least twice before breaking any walls.

This is, of course, a problem with any online game where open pvp is possible, and the game developers have to balance the needs of those wishing to attack and those wishing to be able to defend their position. I've seen much worse time frames in games. Some limit attacks to Saturdays only starting at around 1600 UTC and no later than 2000 UTC, and have a two hour window on one day of the week to actually declare the attack. (I'll note the game has open pvp available, but you have declare yourself as pvp or force war on another group.)

*those looking to actually raid don't need to camp the ram more than six hours at a time compared to needing to watch it 24 straight hours, plus any drying time, somewhat reasonable... feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but i won't take a lack of answer as confirmation of my line of thinking
jorb wrote:You'll learn, I figure.
User avatar
MagicManICT
 
Posts: 15377
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2010 1:47 am

Re: Game Development: The Danger Zone

Postby Yasodhara » Tue Jan 19, 2016 5:15 am

Mechanics which require you to be in the game every x hours just make me sad and now we have one more! At least it makes sense for steel and silk (kinda), but why can't we destroy piles of wood with not dried glue on it right away? Whole part of the update about rams doesn't make much sense to me, even aside from direct purpose, indestructible objects the size of the ram are not very fun.
Yasodhara
 
Posts: 94
Joined: Sat Aug 29, 2015 5:10 am

Re: Game Development: The Danger Zone

Postby Redlaw » Tue Jan 19, 2016 5:17 am

Raiding should be about camping to get that reward to protect the item you are going to siege them with. Basically more time you can play better you should be able to bust open the pinata that is someones base. While this true a real siege could take weeks in not months as you well grief the other player over there wall.

I mean if I walked outside and aw a giant pile of flaming poo that hass been there all week despoiling all my crops and items... ya idk what I do. But that should be an option.
User avatar
Redlaw
 
Posts: 1552
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2011 10:58 pm

Re: Game Development: The Danger Zone

Postby rye130 » Tue Jan 19, 2016 5:18 am

MagicManICT wrote:Four might be better as it narrows the window and gives both sides a bit more information as to when an attack is going to occur


The problem with this is that I can very easily place a ram ever 4 hours and make you have to be on every 4 hours to break it. I can keep doing this and forcing you into playing every 4 hours. Basically raiders are going to make raiding alts and hide their main bases and just fuck over any visible developed village.
User avatar
rye130
 
Posts: 2462
Joined: Mon Feb 01, 2010 9:41 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Announcements

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests