Add small unguarded capms with basic necessities scattered across the world

[Tashka]

The title says it. Add small camps here and there with stables, pet brokers, some with extraction tools, maybe trade broker too. No need for a bank or a priest.

- it will make loosing your horse more bearable. Instead of having to have taming you can travel with some gold on you and if you loose a horse, you move to the nearest camp and buy a horse there. Right now having points invested in taming is almost mandatory if you want to travel anywhere.

- it will remove semi-P2W element from being detested, since you can now access extraction and refining tools without having a blue alt or having to travel to Kranesh or GK. It will also distribute the detested population more equally around the world instead of em all sieging Fabernum 24/7.

- extraction tools in these camps could give a small bonus (like 5% maybe) to yields, adding a risk vs reward element

- while the RPK population may increase slightly, they will be busy fighting eachother (and those who dare to travel there) more on these camps, so graveyards may actually become a bit safer

 

[Belegar]

No thank you. You are trying to add more "NPC" to a player driven game.

-If you travel far, use a caravan group where one player has taming. This is the idea behind the game, we must compliment one another's skills. My group sometime tames a random wild horse and keep him around for incase one horse dies. This is the risk of riding around solo.

-Maybe move from the areas you stay to avoid the sieging, if that bothers you. There are many quieter towns in Naive. Build a house and keep tools there.

-How is this more risky? Traveling all the way there getting your materials and riding all the way back is just as risky, but with less reward as you can't refine the ore until you get home.

-You will create more pvp content, true. Do you really want these place to become hot ganking spots?

 

[Tashka]

No thank you. You are trying to add more "NPC" to a player driven game.

No. Having guarded towns is what adds more NPC to a player driven game. Lawless camps are the most player driven places in game. Having pet brokers around the world PROMOTES player-driven gameplay, because now instead of just taming horses all by yourself you BUY them from another player.

If you travel far, use a caravan group where one player has taming. This is the idea behind the game, we must compliment one another's skills. My group sometime tames a random wild horse and keep him around for incase one horse dies. This is the risk of riding around solo.

Ah so basically screw solo players right? I don't get that attitude to be honest. I'm in a guild but one must realise that solos are the ones actually driving the economy. Being in a guild, i rarely if ever need to buy anything from the broker, and when the buy orders are in, it's solos who will supply most of the mats.

Maybe move from the areas you stay to avoid the sieging, if that bothers you. There are many quieter towns in Naive. Build a house and keep tools there.

Lol i don't want to avoid sieging. I want more evenly distributed PvP so it's not either a griefest hell or carebear heaven.

How is this more risky? Traveling all the way there getting your materials and riding all the way back is just as risky, but with less reward as you can't refine the ore until you get home.

Well maybe i don't know standing there in an unguarded spot waiting for the crusher to do it's job adds some element of risk after all? And since there will be no bank, you'd still have to travel home to bank the extracted/refined materials.

-You will create more pvp content, true. Do you really want these place to become hot ganking spots?

Yes. It's not like going there would be mandatory, you have all you need in blue towns where you can't be ganked.

The world is much bigger than it was in MO1 yet the towns/camps distribution does not reflect that. You loose a horse, you have to walk 30-60 minutes to the nearest town if you don't have taming.

 

[ArcaneConsular]

Yeah could use more lawless camps, although would be cool if eventually player made settlements served the same function

 

[[CTX] Contractor]

In MO1 we had placeables. Campfire for resting & cooking, appliances for extraction. It was limited and that system could come back with more.

 

[2Op4Scrubs]

By adding these camps its going to restrict game play. By not allowing player built settlements to serve a purpose. If you add "Small camps" With stables and other sorts of amenities it might as well be a town. I get the idea if there was to be no housing, But this would hurt the economy more then anything IMO because Its up to the players to build these camps and communities out in the wild..

Ah so basically screw solo players right? I don't get that attitude to be honest. I'm in a guild but one must realize that solos are the ones actually driving the economy. Being in a guild, I rarely if ever need to buy anything from the broker, and when the buy orders are in, it's solos who will supply most of the mats.

Yeah Screw the solo player. If your cocky enough to think you can make it alone, I wish thoes people a swift demise. In fact if you add these camps it will screw them even more. Because if you truly think the solo player drives the economy. It will as stated above make ganking hotspots and solo players will be killed 2x as much by guilds. I also do not think that a solo player will be the main source of supplying buy orders. Sure they will sell sea due and wolf carcass, Plants, mushrooms and metals. But troll and spider carcass will be in just as high demand as the other things, which a solo player will not be able to do.

In MO1 we had placeables. Campfire for resting & cooking, appliances for extraction. It was limited and that system could come back with more.

I also think this is dumb. I understand the campfire and normal every day stuff like cooking. But Extraction appliances? That is absurd to me. Like what is this? A pocket Grizzly, Crusher, furnace? Like what, Look how big thoes are in towns, and mfers gonna have them in their prison pouch?

 

[Tashka]

By not allowing player built settlements to serve a purpose.

Well we can come back to this when we can place stables and crushers and presses and ovens and i suspect that will only be a thing in keeps. Because screw small groups along with solos.

 

[Rhias]

Well we can come back to this when we can place stables and crushers and presses and ovens and i suspect that will only be a thing in keeps. Because screw small groups along with solos.

As far as I understood Henrik's streams TC structures (using their MO1 term) will be placeable also for houses. But no walls. Those are limited to keeps.

 

[Belegar]

No. Having guarded towns is what adds more NPC to a player driven game. Lawless camps are the most player driven places in game. Having pet brokers around the world PROMOTES player-driven gameplay, because now instead of just taming horses all by yourself you BUY them from another player.


Ah so basically screw solo players right? I don't get that attitude to be honest. I'm in a guild but one must realise that solos are the ones actually driving the economy. Being in a guild, i rarely if ever need to buy anything from the broker, and when the buy orders are in, it's solos who will supply most of the mats.


Lol i don't want to avoid sieging. I want more evenly distributed PvP so it's not either a griefest hell or carebear heaven.


Well maybe i don't know standing there in an unguarded spot waiting for the crusher to do it's job adds some element of risk after all? And since there will be no bank, you'd still have to travel home to bank the extracted/refined materials.


Yes. It's not like going there would be mandatory, you have all you need in blue towns where you can't be ganked.

The world is much bigger than it was in MO1 yet the towns/camps distribution does not reflect that. You loose a horse, you have to walk 30-60 minutes to the nearest town if you don't have taming.

Yep Solo player must die. You can solo, no one stops you, but is hard and deservingly so. You want things to be friendlier? Adventure up with friends.

 

[Tashka]

Yep Solo player must die. You can solo, no one stops you, but is hard and deservingly so. You want things to be friendlier? Adventure up with friends.

Why the hell it should be like that huh? Because you have a preferred playstyle and thus everyone should embrace it? This game is perfectly soloable, it's not easy and you won't do dungeons and stuff (however you CAN gather a group like it used to happen in the good ol'days) but it's not mandatory. Hell i don't want to gather a group every time i need to gather some Meduli sea dew. Not everything has to be a team effort.

Some QoL things for solo travellers won't ruin your gameplay.

 

[Rhias]

We actually got Risar standing, and Thursars can even get positive. Where are the Risar camps with benches etc which you can use?
The impact of the Risar standing might be a major decision faction when choosing the race at persistent. Still it's not implemented and we got no clue if it will be usefull at all.

 

[Emdash]

To be honest, I think this is the solution to all of the problems. lol. I have been fighting rep system, but it's the wrong battle.

Add in camps, as said, cuz people did anyway w/ TC, but these things should be static. ESPECIALLY, though, and here's the kicker! Add in camps that are related to each town w/ access to their broker, pet broker, etc. Sure you might not be able to go in and get books or other such things, but people can always throw books on the broker for 'reds.' A little camp could have all the benches, the NPCs you might find at jungle camp, and a separate bank. It's not unheard of to have a broker that is tied to a town. How hard would it be for that guy to walk to the town haha. It would keep people of ill repute out of towns but close enough to still be part of the town scene. It would allow them to interact with brokers and EQ as well as craft, which is probably the most important thing towns have to offer. I don't need to afk at the bank w/ all my buds, but I wanna be able to live in some manner. People can roll up on me and kill me at any point if that's their fancy, so I think it's fair. Even while I'm crafting. Even blues, if they want, could kill me with no penalty, if my 'rep' was bad. But if I was offering goodstuff to the city then they probably wouldn't.

Then you guys can have whatever convoluted rep system you want GG. GLHF.

BRILLIANT

 

[Emdash]

BUMP, please consider this! Everyone wants reds to be outcast, but to outcast and shuttle them to one area of the map IS WACK! Maybe even throw in an appliance here and there in said camps. Doesn't need to be all in the same one, but give people a chance to LIVE just not as easily as in town. We need to adjust the 'punishment.'

 

[Amadman]

As others have mentioned, this should be something that players themselves are able to set up.

Which also would open them up to be taken down/destroyed by players as well.

We just need tools for the sandbox that allow us to do things ourselves.

 

[Tashka]

As others have mentioned, this should be something that players themselves are able to set up.

Maybe it shouldn't? Sandbox doesn't mean "build a base and live off it". There are games that are better at that kind of gameplay. Here, towns and camps need to have something to attract players there. Keeps are one thing but i don't want a full set of extractor stuff near every house.

 

[Amadman]

Maybe it shouldn't? Sandbox doesn't mean "build a base and live off it". There are games that are better at that kind of gameplay. Here, towns and camps need to have something to attract players there. Keeps are one thing but i don't want a full set of extractor stuff near every house.

If it is left to the players and someone does not like it then they can try to change it. That is the beauty of it.

Granted what we had in MO1 with walls was too much. They should not allow it too be closed off either way.

 

[Tashka]

If it is left to the players and someone does not like it then they can try to change it. That is the beauty of it.

Anything that's left to players ends up not working as intended. MMO design 101. That's why we have guards in towns and don't just rely on ARPK guilds ensuring safety.

I don't see how being able to have a full set of appliances in and near your house can benefit the gameplay dynamics. If players can set up anything they need in the middle of nowhere, why bother having towns at all?

 

[Amadman]

Anything that's left to players ends up not working as intended. MMO design 101. That's why we have guards in towns and don't just rely on ARPK guilds ensuring safety.

I don't see how being able to have a full set of appliances in and near your house can benefit the gameplay dynamics. If players can set up anything they need in the middle of nowhere, why bother having towns at all?

Players do not have to have the ability to place everything. But they could have tools to "add small unguarded camps with basic necessities". That could naturally scatter across the world and change over time.

 

[Emdash]

As others have mentioned, this should be something that players themselves are able to set up.

Which also would open them up to be taken down/destroyed by players as well.

We just need tools for the sandbox that allow us to do things ourselves.

The reason why I slightly disagree is that TC isn't in yet, and more than likely they will be set up, as they were. I don't see a downside. Maybe they could remove them when TC is in the game and functioning correctly? Or people could vote whether to keep them. I'm speaking of something a lot less 'all amenities' than what a TC thing would be. Just something people can use in passing so that being locked out of towns isn't such a grabass. People want players out of towns, but they can also camp the camps if they don't want certain players to do things there, and then if you are a red-but-cool person (ahem ahem) they can be like oh it's you, I'll guard you! I think red/blue interaction in non-town spaces will be enlightening for everyone. People will realize that not all reds are bloodlusting PKers, and some are actually on your side! It's much harder to be on their side as a red, tho, if you have no place to set up. Like reds can police the GY if they have a camp nearby. They cannot if they are working out of the three or four spots on the map they can actually access.

 

[Tashka]

Players do not have to have the ability to place everything. But they could have tools to "add small unguarded camps with basic necessities". That could naturally scatter across the world and change over time.

Well having prebuild camps shouldn't stop players from doing that. So why not add those and then see if the player-owned towns idea can really fly? Because i don't want to wait for 2-3 years to see if it does and don't have those lawless camps while i'm waiting.