Get rid of Visitor Debuff

[Granger]

The limitation would directly return us to the old inside spy meta where anyone a can let in 'friends' that then happily level all areas areas the spy has access to, as soon as there is even one route between the village and the outside that dosn't go through the one and only merchants gate.

Wouldn't be that convenient for the villagers, I guess. But I can see why non-members of a village would like the idea.

While I get the point that visitor on siege palisade boxes is a problem... this solution would massively reduce village layout options for groups that are not connected through RL ties (where they could physically punch the jerk that completely destroyed their village on purpose).

[Nek]

Oh that. That is a problem that will technically never ever be solved fully, just like the botting one. There are work arounds to it though, they just require some effort and planning which I don't think is too much to ask from people. Having a good security setup should be down to the players. The current system it's too hand holdy and restrictive either way and not very thought provoking.
Also I'd just like to point out that this problem you speak of wouldn't be exclusive to mineholes, which is why I wasn't sure what you were referring to. An insider could just open a gate at the side/back of the Village (wherever the visitor gate isn't at basically) or whatever and let people in that way. It would achieve the same thing.
The insider idea only really works against the inexperienced and those who are too easy to hand out trust (which tbh still probably falls under inexperienced), because you can set your Village up in a way that this issue becomes negligable and highly unlikely to cause any lasting or significant damage.
The last village I was in had a setup which pretty much eliminated any possibility of this happening so it can be done.

[Granger]

Oh that. That is a problem that will technically never ever be solved fully, just like the botting one.

I think it's a fallacy to steer people using can't be done anyway toward ok, let's forget about it completely.

Also I'd just like to point out that this problem you speak of wouldn't be exclusive to mineholes, which is why I wasn't sure what you were referring to. An insider could just open a gate at the side/back of the Village (wherever the visitor gate isn't at basically) or whatever and let people in that way. It would achieve the same thing.

Sure, i just noticed it when I though about what possible exploits could this give, and mineholes were somewhere high on the list as they are easier to build than a new gate inside an existing wall - also there was a case not that long ago that exploited a fresh-spawn from a charter building a minehole, wasnt it?

The insider idea only really works against the inexperienced and those who are too easy to hand out trust (which tbh still probably falls under inexperienced), because you can set your Village up in a way that this issue becomes negligable and highly unlikely to cause any lasting or significant damage.

Sure we can make it secure, by not giving keys to anything remotely important to anyone we don't trust 100%, which (slightly exaggerated) is no one - so we'll end up with a setup that dosn't have any community object accessible to an average villager without supervision, which sounds to me as a good part from the definition of either a prison or a kindergarten.

I think I prefer the setups that Visitor currently allows - likely because I'm usually not in the role of a non-villager wanting to burn a place to the ground.

[maze]

I look at this topic and see no examples of
"Why the buff was made" and only see is "trade hub".
but sure lets cover it~ some of it.


The first market in world 8? lets reverse all the way back to world 3. the market that I personally got to see destroyed (sodom? sodium?)
All the market stands destroyed, easy.
world 8, the real first market (small and unknown) it had an air lock system with stands inside. stands were easily destroyed by anyone who walked in.

After "sandcastle" patch,
-big markets were made
-open towns
-noobs forgetting to close door or "leaving it open only for a moment"
-server crashes (very few and door was left open since server crash lasted 4-6 hours before server was rebooted)
-town plots such as brodgar was easier to make.

-prevents insiding
-prevents random murder in markets by sneak attack
-prevents random destruction
-prevents minehole dropping and getting raided by mine hole (noobs who don't secure it)


list can go on and on.

the problem is not visitor de/buff
it's the ability to use it for combat

currently there is a toggle to stop you from going near visitor doors.
better solutions should be made, getting rid of visitor is not one.

added/edit:
more door types "basic door with out buff" do not fix any problems and just open us to old problems.
pro players will lock down/store any shit good for raiding.
opening up noobs to just getting rolled.
noobs already have a hard time creating brickwalls (not that anyone needs to make brick anymore).

also so some of you can read the toggled (since after reading much of this topic I've noticed you've not played in a long time)

[Granger]

If it's not intended to be used with Siege Camps then have it require a week IRL to activate.

The more I think about it: wouldn't that, applied to normal palisade and brickwall gates, not be enough to solve the issue?

In case someone thinks it's not enough: only activates on gates covered by an active village claim (so it won't work on a pclaim box at all).
Would have the downside of hermits having to build a village when wanting to have that feature.

[Nek]

I think it's a fallacy to steer people using can't be done anyway toward ok, let's forget about it completely.

Not so much forget about it but more so let's try to work around it. If we took the same approach to this as we do with botting then there will be just as much progress on this issue as with botting, aka non what so ever. You've gotta push forward and try new things because theorycrafting and ideas on paper can end up working a lot differently in practice.

Sure we can make it secure, by not giving keys to anything remotely important to anyone we don't trust 100%, which (slightly exaggerated) is no one - so we'll end up with a setup that dosn't have any community object accessible to an average villager without supervision, which sounds to me as a good part from the definition of either a prison or a kindergarten.

Bit of an extreme comparison tbh but if you think about it the reality is the only places that should remain locked for people you don't trust are the other entrances into the village. Nowhere in the village itself needs to be locked off theoretically. If your villagers need to enter or exit, they can do so through the permanently left open Visitor Gate, no? You see what I'm getting at? The minor inconvenience of not having access to the gates that would pose a serious security threat to the village is a small price to pay in my honest opinion.
When you think about this all logically, it becomes apparent that the ONLY gates that are a security threat are the outer gates, right?
The non Visitor outer gates should be emergency gates of sorts that only few people get access to because realistically they shouldn't be getting opened much and I don't think it's a big deal restricting less trust worthy people to using the main gate.
I'm just not seeing the issue here, I don't see any villages getting burned to the ground unless they make serious security errors and if they do then that's on them honestly.

but sure lets cover it~ some of it.

Everything you said in regards to Big Markets and Open Villages can be resolved by the Visitor Gate idea that is being discussed.

EDIT -
I've just read your edit
>more door types "basic door with out buff" do not fix any problems and just open us to old problems.
Such as? The problems it would fix are numerous but what are these problems it would bring?
>pro players will lock down/store any shit good for raiding.
That's why there should be a hard limit on how many of these can be created per village claim. Vaults and Safehouses are also already a thing with the current system.
>opening up noobs to just getting rolled.
Best way to learn is through experience. No good game that has ever existed has been built around catering to new players who do not understand the mechanics of said game fully yet.

[Granger]

Bit of an extreme comparison

True, I exaggerated a bit to make the point.

If your villagers need to enter or exit, they can do so through the permanently left open Visitor Gate, no? You see what I'm getting at? The minor inconvenience of not having access to the gates that would pose a serious security threat to the village is a small price to pay in my honest opinion.

When you think about this all logically, it becomes apparent that the ONLY gates that are a security threat are the outer gates, right?

So you want to have a constant traffic of members of the working class (eg. miners) enter and leave through the main gate?
Apart from the idea of having to use the same entrance than servants likely being appalling to honored guests of the upper class of the village hirarchy, where would these servants (eg. miners) then go? To a minhole located outside of the village? Because leaving the village area on the lower levels wouldn't be an option anymore.

Sorry, not convinced.

[Aceb]

I've just read your edit
>more door types "basic door with out buff" do not fix any problems and just open us to old problems.
Such as? The problems it would fix are numerous but what are these problems it would bring?
>pro players will lock down/store any shit good for raiding.
That's why there should be a hard limit on how many of these can be created per village claim. Vaults and Safehouses are also already a thing with the current system.
>opening up noobs to just getting rolled.
Best way to learn is through experience. No good game that has ever existed has been built around catering to new players who do not understand the mechanics of said game fully yet.

After "sandcastle" patch,
-big markets were made
-open towns
-noobs forgetting to close door or "leaving it open only for a moment"
-server crashes (very few and door was left open since server crash lasted 4-6 hours before server was rebooted)
-town plots such as brodgar was easier to make.

-prevents insiding
-prevents random murder in markets by sneak attack
-prevents random destruction
-prevents minehole dropping and getting raided by mine hole (noobs who don't secure it)

He literally answers all of your stuff here, especially when server crash. The problem is not visitor but how it is used for combat and special gates will be a big rollback to era prior vistor. You can call an experience when some noob forget to close the gate, but You can't call a server crash experience.

[Nek]

So you want to have a constant traffic of members of the working class (eg. miners) enter and leave through the main gate?
Apart from the idea of having to use the same entrance than servants likely being appalling to honored guests of the upper class of the village hirarchy, where would these servants (eg. miners) then go? To a minhole located outside of the village? Because leaving the village area on the lower levels wouldn't be an option anymore.

I think your first point ain't really a big deal, but for all we know a Villager Gate could be twice as wide as a regular gate, you know and even if it wasn't I just don't see traffic being a huge issue.
As for your point about miners, well I did have a different more elaborate idea in mind but why not just up the limit of how many gates you can have then to 2 / 3 then? I mean this sort of thing is malleable, I only said limit it to 1 because I hadn't thought of the underground section of the village but I wouldn't be opposed to having the limit slightly raise for something like that even though that problem CAN be fixed by making the miner take an ever so slightly longer route into the village as you yourself stated, but whatever, the limit could be upped to avoid that extra tedium.

[Nek]

He literally answers all of your stuff here, especially when server crash. The problem is not visitor but how it is used for combat and special gates will be a big rollback to era prior vistor. You can call an experience when some noob forget to close the gate, but You can't call a server crash experience.

All of those have been addressed though besides the server crash problem but I'll go ahead and address why that isn't an issue either.
Simply don't open your non Visitor Gates except for emergency situations (as in the enemy has successfully sieged you and now you just want to attempt to GTFO of there).
Sounds to me like the only negative remaining argument for visitor debuff staying is laziness because the main gate for your village could be left open indefinitely and provide the same security as current gates do.
The other gates should be treated as fire exits. If they're not being opened regularly, as they shouldn't be then there's minimal risk of server crashes causing any issues.