Get rid of Visitor Debuff

[jorb]

Public venues are worth too much to consider the complete removal of this mechanic, but..

Alternative suggestion would be adding new types of gates; merchant or visitor or what have you. These cost more materials than regular gates, as well as dreams (or other hearth magic esque items, to give a reason why neener-neener can't do anything past this line)

... this is a change we ourselves have proposed, and we are considering implementing it for the reset. If anyone has strong arguments against it, feel free to share.

[azrid]

I remember the safe palisade thread.
There were plenty good ideas in it.
Just pick the correct one.

[dafels]

I agree, remove the visitor debuff or nerf it, the debuff has opened so many ways to cheese the game, there are other better solutions to the things that visitor debuff is supposed to fix.
"Think of the trade and roleplay!!" there was trade and roleplay even before the visitor debuff, I think the importance of it is being overexaggerated

[eliminoid]

... this is a change we ourselves have proposed, and we are considering implementing it for the reset. If anyone has strong arguments against it, feel free to share.

There is a lot of pvp going near structures like CF anyways so it wouldnt solve the problem of running back and forth to safety.
Large factions will have no problem building visitor gates for their huge ass bases.
Siege camps will be built with increased cost in mind.
This affects only smaller folks who will just get less incentive to open gates.
This might ruin private trade outposts and I've seen some in this and previous world.

Either remove visitor alltogether or make it so once you've been aggroed, you cant get inside (may combine with visitor gates idea to render it pointless to use it on siege camp...)

[Adder1234]

There is a lot of pvp going near structures like CF anyways so it wouldnt solve the problem of running back and forth to safety.
Large factions will have no problem building visitor gates for their huge ass bases.
Siege camps will be built with increased cost in mind.
This affects only smaller folks who will just get less incentive to open gates.
This might ruin private trade outposts and I've seen some in this and previous world.

Either remove visitor alltogether or make it so once you've been aggroed, you cant get inside (may combine with visitor gates idea to render it pointless to use it on siege camp...)

This

I would recommend making it so that anyone who initiates combat, or who is attacked and fights back, is unable to enter a gate that would cause them to receive the visitor buff. This would allow people who have been aggroed but who don't want to fight to escape, but would prevent a fighter who is losing from escaping inside.

[MagicManICT]

Public venues are worth too much to consider the complete removal of this mechanic, but..

Alternative suggestion would be adding new types of gates; merchant or visitor or what have you. These cost more materials than regular gates, as well as dreams (or other hearth magic esque items, to give a reason why neener-neener can't do anything past this line)

... this is a change we ourselves have proposed, and we are considering implementing it for the reset. If anyone has strong arguments against it, feel free to share.

Just do it already. This gets the sieging care bear paw of approval.

[Hrenli]

I would recommend making it so that anyone who initiates combat, or who is attacked and fights back, is unable to enter a gate that would cause them to receive the visitor buff. This would allow people who have been aggroed but who don't want to fight to escape, but would prevent a fighter who is losing from escaping inside.

That sounds a bit in the direction of "make it so that the one who doesn't fight can not be killed". Maybe it's more reasonable if "fighting back" means use of any combat abilities (including defenses). Still shaky and most probably subject for abuse. Not sure how effective it might be, but running in and out of gates just to bodyblock and help other "proper" fighters seems to be one of abuse options.

[Aceb]

Public venues are worth too much to consider the complete removal of this mechanic, but..

Alternative suggestion would be adding new types of gates; merchant or visitor or what have you. These cost more materials than regular gates, as well as dreams (or other hearth magic esque items, to give a reason why neener-neener can't do anything past this line)

... this is a change we ourselves have proposed, and we are considering implementing it for the reset. If anyone has strong arguments against it, feel free to share.

I'm afraid that this is a grey area that will affect only early game where building such gate is more costly, but later on, it doesn't change a fact that faction would try to use it exactly the same way. Unless there will be changes that I have no idea /understandment how it will work.

The best solution to fix is, imho, lies in interaction (type of it especially) between two and more players and addition of gates and visitor, instead of visitor buff and players to it. Since if You will be stuck around fixing gates and buff itself, You will make just things harder and complicated but on the end I believe nothing will change. Since it's not gate problem, it's player usage problem.

[Nek]

If the main problem with this gate idea is people building too many to replace regular gates late game, then why not simply put a hard limit on how many can be built per village claim? Also, another way to limit it is the cost. I've noticed that when something gets added that is supposedly costly, it's actually not very costly at all in the grand scheme of things but only seems like that at first. Like I remember when people were complaining about rock crystals being used in charter stones. Fucking rock crystals, they're really not an issue to get a hold of. If the gate is ACTUALLY costly as fuck to make then people aren't realistically going to be able to substitute them for regular gates.

Seriously though there's no point going through with this gate idea if there's not going to be one of the two limitations I mentioned IMO. If a Visitor Gate is just gonna cost the same resources as a normal gate but with some Dream requirements or some shit then nobodies going to bother making regular gates anyway and the problem will be exactly the same as before.
Personally I think a hard limit on how many you can create per village should be looked into.

[Aceb]

If the main problem with this gate idea is people building too many to replace regular gates late game, then why not simply put a hard limit on how many can be built per village claim? Also, another way to limit it is the cost. I've noticed that when something gets added that is supposedly costly, it's actually not very costly at all in the grand scheme of things but only seems like that at first. Like I remember when people were complaining about rock crystals being used in charter stones. Fucking rock crystals, they're really not an issue to get a hold of. If the gate is ACTUALLY costly as fuck to make then people aren't realistically going to be able to substitute them for regular gates.

Seriously though there's no point going through with this gate idea if there's not going to be one of the two limitations I mentioned IMO. If a Visitor Gate is just gonna cost the same resources as a normal gate but with some Dream requirements or some shit then nobodies going to bother making regular gates anyway and the problem will be exactly the same as before.
Personally I think a hard limit on how many you can create per village should be looked into.

Hard limit on gates doesn't change a thing as long as You need only 1 gate to work imho.