Lack of offline protection will cost the game

[Rorry]

what offline protection, if you cant protect ur territory you shouldnt have it simple..... maybe have a guild that can protect ur territory 24/7 have both NA and EU in ur guild

This is the way we had it in MO1. Which is fine, certainly, if you want SV to develop the game for a very small number of very large groups.
I would prefer they set it up for a large number of small groups, I think that would be more sustainable as well as more fun.

 

[AnabolicRage]

This is the way we had it in MO1. Which is fine, certainly, if you want SV to develop the game for a very small number of very large groups.
I would prefer they set it up for a large number of small groups, I think that would be more sustainable as well as more fun.

Its way better with a large number of smaller groups. You have to add a couple zergs in there but the fights and politics are well worth it. I just hope a large population comes to MO2. It will easily make MO2 the best mmorpg by far if the population is good.

 

[MolagAmur]

what offline protection, if you cant protect ur territory you shouldnt have it simple..... maybe have a guild that can protect ur territory 24/7 have both NA and EU in ur guild

Great feedback man. 10/10. Can't wait for your next input.

I'm still a bit lost on how guards are supposed to work. Had some folks the other night drawing out guards one by one from Fab and easily killing them. I like that the guards are killable, and with enough 'criminals' a town may be overwhelmed unless the local pop fight together to help drive them off, but it would seem to me that guards shouldn't be so dumb as to run out alone when there are other 'criminals' within the area.

Thats the issue. The AI more than likely won't ever be good enough and as Kaemik said, people will eventually figure out how to cheese it as they do all things.

 

[Teknique]

Great feedback man. 10/10. Can't wait for your next input.

I thought it was alright.

 

[Bicorps]

what offline protection, if you cant protect ur territory you shouldnt have it simple..... maybe have a guild that can protect ur territory 24/7 have both NA and EU in ur guild

There is so much carebear over here... its quite awkward.

 

[MolagAmur]

There is so much carebear over here... its quite awkward.

Are you saying that wanting a better sieging system is carebear? That since people can't be on 24/7 and not everyone wants or can put together a group that can always be on to defend assets...that makes them carebear?

If anything its carebear to be able to ninja siege someones shit when they aren't online to avoid fights...

 

[Evelyn]

"Zergs and massive alliances will ruin MO2"
...
"If you don't have a huge guild or a massive alliance you shouldn't own territory"

Pick your poison, you can't have both.

 

[Bicorps]

Are you saying that wanting a better sieging system is carebear? That since people can't be on 24/7 and not everyone wants or can put together a group that can always be on to defend assets...that makes them carebear?

If anything its carebear to be able to ninja siege someones shit when they aren't online to avoid fights...

Its so carebear that i dont even want comment about it anymore.

Replacing Player by NPC such a great idee. Make these NPC really strong all right? So they can DESTROY these stupid player. Yeah right .... no more comment.

 

[Handsome Young Man]

I wish people just fluently spoke English.

And no, don't try to jump on me and call me 'X' because I said 'bad thing'. I just wish dialogue wasn't so absolutely broken to read.

 

[Rhias]

"Zergs and massive alliances will ruin MO2"
...
"If you don't have a huge guild or a massive alliance you shouldn't own territory"

Pick your poison, you can't have both.

MO1 has always been about alliances and politics. And in my opinion this makes it interesting. Or the drama when you were in a ARPK guild and you killed some really annoying idiot. Hilarious.

 

[Rhias]

What's the most fun part of the housing/TC system? Building it, or seeing it sit there and paying upkeep? Personally I like to build stuff, even when it's not necessary.
In other games like Rust you re-build your base at least once per week. And it's still fun every time you do it.
However, in my opinion the main problem is not TC being sieged too easy, or during offline time. The main problem is that it takes ages to build/farm all the stuff you need.

 

[MolagAmur]

What's the most fun part of the housing/TC system? Building it, or seeing it sit there and paying upkeep? Personally I like to build stuff, even when it's not necessary.
In other games like Rust you re-build your base at least once per week. And it's still fun every time you do it.
However, in my opinion the main problem is not TC being sieged too easy, or during offline time. The main problem is that it takes ages to build/farm all the stuff you need.

Well I think we can all agree thats the answer to all this right? The perfect balance of cost to seige, cost to build, fun, and purpose.

 

[Kaemik]

what offline protection, if you cant protect ur territory you shouldnt have it simple..... maybe have a guild that can protect ur territory 24/7 have both NA and EU in ur guild

What similar hardships will we be inflicting upon attackers to balance this, or do we just want a system that is easy mode for attackers and then requires an incredible amount of organization and hardship on the part of defenders?

 

[Kaemik]

@MolagAmur - What Bicorps is saying is he's afraid of a siege system that actually challenges both sides, and just wants to easy mode knock people's buildings down while they are offline. And actually making him do any work is carebear. Because big strong tough PvPers fight people while they are afk. That's basically what he's saying.

Personally. I think anyone who doesn't want the siege system to yield as many good fights as possible are the real carebears here.

 

[Svaar]

Since when do time windows give 100% siege protection? What's the problem with adding timelines? Let's say 3 time frames. The time frame will make it possible to more accurately plan sieges at the hour of judgment (as happened in the same LIF). Diplomacy will still work. Let's say a siege gilde is set up that does not coincide with the prime time of the besieging side. The besieging side will have to negotiate with the guilds from the alliance or hire a mercenary or participate in the siege of the enemy who has set the hour of judgment at the wrong prime time.

The time frame narrows the ability to besiege the castle, but thereby concentrates more preparation for the siege. Nobody wants to live 24/7 in the game and shake their belongings. And yes, as practice shows, an NPC with its AI will not give any protection in the absence of it.

 

[Kallardian Prince]

not everyone wants or can put together a group that can always be on to defend assets...

You are basically complaining the game is too hard for you, because you lack organizational skills...

 

[Goltarion]

What similar hardships will we be inflicting upon attackers to balance this, or do we just want a system that is easy mode for attackers and then requires an incredible amount of organization and hardship on the part of defenders?

If you had ever been part of organizing and running a siege in MO1 you would see that this question makes no sense. As i remember it, most of the time it was a cancerous headache on the part of the attackers.

Im sorry to jump to the "you didnt play MO1, you dont know what you are talking about" argument, but maybe just chill a bit with the passionate arguing untill you see those systems in action. Just my advice



On the topic: There is a lot of good ideas in this thread that arent as lame as "keep is only vulnerable between 6pm and 9pm EST". Siege camps and stuff like that sound like they could be fun and engaging systems. Im not a fan of guards or preset vulnerability timeslots.

 

[Kaemik]

@Goltarion - If you would describe the MO1 attacking system as a "cancerous headache", then is that the system you want to see them use in MO2? If you're argument is "It's super bad and unfun for the attackers so make it super bad and unfun for the defenders too" my response would be make the whole system fun for both sides if they actually enjoy fighting to take/defend territory.

I think any system the revolves around using offline attacks as a balancing mechanic is inherently bad as a system, whatever game we're discussing. Offline attacks is PvP for people who don't actually enjoy PvP. There are better ways to do it.

 

[Goltarion]

If you would describe the MO1 attacking system as a "cancerous headache", then is that the system you want to see them use in MO2?

I do not want the same siege mechanics as in MO1, i never said that. Its very probable that sieging will have different mechanics, according to what Henrik said in streams. And thats a good thing.
This thread isnt about siege mechanics as a whole, its about offline protection, which im against. There are other ways to prevent ninja sieging, a lot are mentioned in this thread. Lets just see how the MO2 system is first, before arguing too much about what it could be without having any info about it. It will probably be a lot of months before there even is anything in the game you could siege lol
I doubt it will be a lame timeslot, outside of which assets are invulnarable.

 

[Kaemik]

The point is it's a recurring theme in this thread "you should need to have people on 24/7 to avoid losing your assets or you're a carebear". You didn't make that argument, but the person I was responding to did. If that is the system we want for balancing sieges, then attacking should be similarly cancerous. If the old system of attacking was total dogshit then I guess that will work to accompany the total dogshit mechanic of offline sieges being viable.

The old system may not be the new system. So my point stands. If we want defending to be cancerous crap then attacking should be too. If we want attacking to be a smooth and enjoyable system, them defending should be to.