Thank you for that post, LadyGoo. I appreciate the analysis very much, and found it thoughtful.
And thank you as well, Granger.
Everyone in general, for that matter.
LadyGoo wrote:Yes.loftar wrote:Astarisk wrote:I've done far more time consuming things for a raid, such as building a 10+ hour road to zox's this world. Generally the effort involved is equal to how good the loot is, and the chance it'll succeed. Most cases in legacy hafen, anything worth that amount of effort had every counter measure to almost guarantee it'll fail. i.e: it's on an island, they have counter rams, patrol bots are used etc.
Coming back to this, I do have to ask: Why is it that brickwalls are considered completely impenetrable as it is now? I mean, if you're willing to go these lengths to raid someone, why is guarding the ram for 24 hours a non-starter? It doesn't seem like that inhuman a task to me. Is there something I'm missing?
RISKS: Only big factions can perform something like this, since there are huge risks involved. Any middle-tier raiders will be wiped out, once the village owners will plea for help. Moreover, the big factions are also hesitant to camp something, since people tend to go afk during camping, get bored and leave for real-life reasons. Therefore, you will have a disorganized and tired group against fresh and concentrated reinforcements, who will in 90% of cases outnumber you.
LOOT: People inside of the village will alt-vault everything valuable, transport key instruments, curios and food to elsewhere. You will land no kills, and will get no loot as well. You might destroy some ovens and cupboards, but they are easy to restore as well. You cannot do anything to the village idol.
BRICKWALL: Any large village has a plot-based system + external wall. This is the major reason why they are considered unbreakable. Let's say you have camped the ram for 6 hours, broke the first layer, then rolled the ram and need to camp it for 8-16 more hours to reach the nearest plot. This is why it is impossible. People cannot stay online 24/7, therefore the ram will be brocken and the walls will be repaired. You might keep coming back and destroying the freshly-repaired walls, but you cannot place a new ram inside of the place.
In previous worlds we would have brick walled pockets for the rams, which could be built inside of a village, which is being sieged. And we would have alts, who would be able to summon us inside of the pockets.
Result: high risks and no reward. It does not even hurt the enemy, considering how much time you have spent sieging the place.
Ethan wrote:To expand on this, the aggressor needs at least an equivalent army to the village to be on for 24 hours to theoretically successfully defend the ram. The target only needs a larger army on for a few mins to destroy the ram.
Using this logic, we're returning to a dull and boring game, where everything is meaningless after 2-3 months. What are you going to do, once you have reached some decent quality stuff, tried all the aspects of the game? Sit inside of your impenetrable walls, boringly checking them once or twice a day until you will quit? Hafen in comparison with W7 (worst legacy world) is 10 times more boring. Nothing has happened for 3 months now.loftar wrote:Ethan wrote:To expand on this, the aggressor needs at least an equivalent army to the village to be on for 24 hours to theoretically successfully defend the ram. The target only needs a larger army on for a few mins to destroy the ram.
Seeing how you're intending to destroy something they've been building for months, though, I'm not sure that seems unreasonable.
LadyGoo wrote:Using this logic, we're returning to a dull and boring game, where everything is meaningless after 2-3 months.
Of course. But why has it be hours and hours of watching the ram? As I have mentioned before, people would make brickwalled pockets for their rams. It would consume a lot of effort and have 50 to 50 success rate. Nor saying it is ideal, but it is something better than sitting and watching a ram, which is boring. Make it fun!loftar wrote:LadyGoo wrote:Using this logic, we're returning to a dull and boring game, where everything is meaningless after 2-3 months.
Preferably not, but I'm sure you can agree that some kind of investment on the part of the aggressor is surely in order?
loftar wrote:Really, though, one of the main reasons we ourselves focus on it is because I think what the game really needs is more social interaction and happenings. People hermitting inside their walled compounds isn't very conducive to that, no matter how much content there is.
Xcom wrote:Most good things last only a short time
loftar wrote:Ethan wrote:To expand on this, the aggressor needs at least an equivalent army to the village to be on for 24 hours to theoretically successfully defend the ram. The target only needs a larger army on for a few mins to destroy the ram.
Seeing how you're intending to destroy something they've been building for months, though, I'm not sure that seems unreasonable.
LadyGoo wrote:You will land no kills, and will get no loot as well. You might destroy some ovens and cupboards, but they are easy to restore as well.
[...]
It does not even hurt the enemy, considering how much time you have spent sieging the place.
loftar wrote:LadyGoo wrote:You will land no kills, and will get no loot as well. You might destroy some ovens and cupboards, but they are easy to restore as well.
[...]
It does not even hurt the enemy, considering how much time you have spent sieging the place.
What does this mean, though? Don't production centers matter at all? That doesn't seem to be what I've heard otherwise.
Granger wrote:Fuck off, please go grow yourself some decency.
Users browsing this forum: Bytespider [Bot], Google [Bot], Hingle_McCringle, Python-Requests [Bot], Trendiction [Bot] and 20 guests