Game is way too carebear now

[jorb]

That's something else, though.

I think that a decent settlement should be able to defend itself. IRL you could, for example, have been forced to surrender your weapons at a gate, or the like, to be allowed entry. In a game the social setting is different, and noone wants to play the guard. I don't mind using abstract mechanics to represent things like that.

And I think that open gates being a "mechanic" is a joke. At the very least the gates should auto-close, and that removes that "mechanic" as well.

[Kaios]

give this ability to barterstands and similiar only? solved

+ small area around it where u cant aggro, and certain item (of proper value) would be needed to build stand, so they cant be spammable, but can be worth the price

Dude, you're just making it more complicated and the more complicated it becomes increases the possibility for abuse. There is nothing wrong with the visitor mechanic it is siege that is the issue.

From what i understand about the criminal system as it is now with the debuffs and Nidbane, is that if you leave a scent you are guaranteed to die.

At early game when your character is shit, yeah, very likely. Later on they are easy to kill.

[Bob_the_Cat]

The only reason open gates were ever a thing was that the game did not automate a task which should have been automated -- i.e. closing the gate -- and which no decent player ever failed at. The only people who paid the price for that mechanic were wee nubs who forgot to close their gates. Perhaps not entirely true, but true in principle.

The visitor debuff allows you to let relative strangers visit you without necessarily having to be afraid that you'll lose everything by doing so. Is that a bad thing, or a bad ambition? I am perhaps not saying that the game isn't too carebearish, but shouldn't, for example, open trading hubs be possible?

I feel like high end barter stands that cant be destroyed easily, and cant be built next to things (so that people dont abuse them to block stuff off or something lol) would do a better job at promoting trade than visitor debuff tho. Visitor debuff doesnt seem that bad if you are just walking through an open gate to trigger it whe nthe nub forgot their gate open, but for trade I feel like its not that important seeing that you still cant take stuff or anything, so I dont see how it would be that useful for actual trading. I may be missing something cuz I dont know much about it, but visitor debuff seems like the least of a raiders problems atm. Although I feel like the old village claim mechanic for no trespassing worked pretty well for being able to make open towns. Like Brodgar, at least the one I remember.

I'm curious tho. Now that you are here, whats your opinion on the current criminal mechanics? Are you satisfied and feel like they belong, or are they just here until you have something better and more fitting? Cuz I understand that with no repercussions too many nubs will be killed and it hurts the game. But I really do feel like the current system is just annoying and prevents crime through wasting time (like I dont want to boat over an hour back to my base to afk if I leave this crime off in the middle of nowhere), instead of better mechanics that actually make them afraid of revenge for their crimes. Which would happen to me all the time back in the day. I would end up on the forums, and a ton of people would try to kill me. This should be the main prevention.

[jorb]

The red-handed debuff is intended to nerf crimes of opportunity. Before it, it used to be the case that any nub with only a claim could be robbed blind by some dork on the other side of the world out on a stroll, happening across his base, who would then just teleport home and instantly put three hours worth of walking between the nub and any attempt at justice. I think that was a fairly bullshit use of teleporation mechanics, and I don't miss it. Sure, it was very comfortable for the thief.

I don't think of this as punishing a particular playstyle, or whatever, as that argument can easily be turned around. I could just as easily argue that willy-nilly teleportation punishes the playstyle of farmers.

Siege and PvP are the single hardest things to get right. I entertain no illusions that present mechanics are perfect. The game is in permanent alpha, so any position it takes is in a sense temporary.

[Zeler]

The single thing about visitor I dislike is that it can knock you down. There should be no way to instantly knock someone down and kill him without any danger involved. While I can imagine that teleporting someone just out of the claim could lead to some wall-jump-abusing, it should teleport you to hearthfire even with red-handed.

[jorb]

That I can agree with. The knockout thing is somewhat retarded.

[Aceb]

With visitor buff... Couldn't it be possible to make something similar with like... "special stone fence" which can be built max 20 squares away from the closest barter stand and after making a square, rectangle, cricle or whatever of it, make there a "market buff" which works the same? And block possibility to makes something similar in closest 2 grids?

[Robben_DuMarsch]

The only reason open gates were ever a thing was that the game did not automate a task which should have been automated -- i.e. closing the gate -- and which no decent player ever failed at. The only people who paid the price for that mechanic were wee nubs who forgot to close their gates. Perhaps not entirely true, but true in principle.

Also half of the villages in W8, if memory serves right.

[jorb]

Fair enough, but doesn't that, in that case, make the visitor debuff more motivated?

[Kaios]

Also half of the villages in W8, if memory serves right.

But in that case they had their gates open because they thought visitor would protect them