Lack of offline protection will cost the game

[Svaar]

I think we are jumping to conclusions though. I think there will be offline personal house protection, as long as you arent in a guild. But to say a guild of 5 cant come together to defend a zone of control and needs offline, No Way.

guys at the time of MO1 there were no global gaming communities like now (over 500 people). Now one community can go into the game with 500+ (for example) people and sweep whatever they want into offline raids. and no NPCs will help protect it. You think the old fashioned way.

 

[Rhias]

guys at the time of MO1 there were no global gaming communities like now (over 500 people). Now one community can go into the game with 500+ (for example) people and sweep whatever they want into offline raids. and no NPCs will help protect it. You think the old fashioned way.

Remembers me of "ZERK" at steam release. That was a slaughter feast.

 

[MolagAmur]

Rat's going to walmart to become dogs doesn't occur.

Oh. Aight

 

[Kaemik]

guys at the time of MO1 there were no global gaming communities like now (over 500 people). Now one community can go into the game with 500+ (for example) people and sweep whatever they want into offline raids. and no NPCs will help protect it. You think the old fashioned way.

That actually is something I've seen in multiple games and a point I've made before in these threads. More than once I've seen guilds in games with territorial control that have a huge reserve of players from other games that will just show up for sieges. Like they're off playing MOBAs or even sometimes other MMOs and really only show up if their territory is pushed.

To a certain degree this is a positive thing for the game. Keeping their community connected will mean if MO2 makes improvements people who occasionally play will still be active enough to know and get hooked back in. But yes it can absolutely get to the point these numbers are consistently the deciding factor in sieges when sieges are a quick/easy endeavor. And that really shouldn't be the case IMO.

 

[Kaemik]

Lions and predators stalking illustrates the real world necessity to be stealthy when making a kill.

7 Brutal Sieges - HISTORY

"... The stranglehold lasted for seven brutal months until—reeling from starvation and disease—the town’s leaders sent out their young sons and daughters to beg for peace. Having pacified the surrounding region, Thutmose spared Megiddo in exchange for a vow of loyalty from the city’s survivors..."

"...The deadlock began in May 1863, when Union General Ulysses S. Grant trapped Confederate forces... ...without reinforcements and with only meager supplies, Pemberton finally capitulated on July 4..."

"...After a seven-month standoff, the Greek forces finally breached the fortifications and took the island in a brutal onslaught..."

"...This two-decade siege began in the 17th century, when a band of the Knights of Malta raided a fleet of Ottoman ships and fled to the Venetian-controlled city of Candia, located on the island of Crete..."

"... In 149 B.C., a Roman army led by Scipio Aemilianus arrived in North Africa intent on destroying Carthage once and for all... ...Faced with this level of resistance, the Romans were held at bay for three long years. When they finally breached the walls in 146 B.C., Scipio’s forces had to fight their way through the city streets for six days and nights before defeating the Carthaginian resistance."

"...Despite these horrific circumstances, the citizens of Leningrad managed to endure life under siege for 872 days from September 1941 until January 1944. Even in victory, the siege proved tragic: By the time the city was finally freed by the Red Army, an estimated 1 million Soviets—most of them civilians—had perished..."

"... By that time, the British forces on Gibraltar had been under siege for three years and seven months..."

Armies are not lions. They do not stalk, they stampede. And armies are what it takes to capture a well fortified position. Ninja sieges as anything other than an extremely rare exception to the rule is exceptionally unrealistic. Yet in any MMO they are allowed, they become the standard. It takes an exceptionally clever general to capture a fortified position with a real army that will wake up the moment commotion breaks out and march enough men up to their position you can attack them unnoticed when the coming and going of an army is rarely missed. It takes no real cleverness to wait until the bulk of your enemy's forces are sleeping in a video game played by people with more important things to do much of the time.

But I do agree it would be cool to see sieges in MO2 be more similar to sieges in the real world. What that actually means is most contested sieges lasting in-game months or even years (Assuming time passes a bit quicker in-game than IRL).

 

[Goltarion]

Remembers me of "ZERK" at steam release. That was a slaughter feast.

lmao yeah i remember that too. They were announcing on the forums how they gonna bring their chinese zerg to the game and dominate everything, then they got griefed out of the game in like 3 weeks

 

[agui]

You know what. NO!!

offline protection guards are enough.

And yes i was often very angry when we lost the keep the fuckign third time ninja, and when some ashole ninja sieged down my house twice. And yes a balance would be nice like, harder to siege, BUT!!!!

When they make something like siege timer and some off world protection, than im outta here. Than i would straight out say fuck this game. nice 11 years but just fuck you.

Im not a pvp guy, just self defence, and people that personally killed me inside cities get attacked from me on sight.
but protection in form of offworld restriction are the worst shit possible. Mortal is life
You have enough friends aliances and guilds that will help you to protect your stuff. thats also the game not some offline protection.

But restriction from the game like time windows and some other machanics would be the worst shit ever that can happen to this game.

If you haven't get it. this game is about pure freedom. not Restriction online!, like any other shitgame.

People here can be the biggest assholes and get away with it. its called freedom. but gues what you have the freedom to to ruin thier reputation or hurt them very hard were it really hurts. And if they hate you they will siege your stuff and you will siege theres. thats normal. Thats the definition of freedom. Self Justice and Own Morals, and everyone with a own style of Playing.

Some of my guildmates even like me with full time jobs. have emergency notification on that at 4am you can quickly login to defend or siege some stuff. Fuck WOrk and FUCK real life. Yeah even i as a german say FUCK WORK. Im not good at pvp but atleast i can distract some people and block until the real fighters come. the constant tenshion and political movements makes it exciting.

It dont ment harsh as i wrote. im sry i just cant write in an other style. I have nothing against you wesley.

But you need to understand, that this game is bassed on the Ultimate Freedom of Choice and opportunity.

and if you take that away. whats left?

a boring game.

Totally agree with you Mr. Lets party guy ("spoiler").

U just said the core words of the game and no more word needs to be adressed to it anymore:

"this game is based on the Ultimate Freedom of Choice and opportunity."

Ppl that doesnt understand that needs to understand that any mecanich which doesnt correspond to the core words of the game will kill it.

 

[Teknique]

7 Brutal Sieges - HISTORY

"... The stranglehold lasted for seven brutal months until—reeling from starvation and disease—the town’s leaders sent out their young sons and daughters to beg for peace. Having pacified the surrounding region, Thutmose spared Megiddo in exchange for a vow of loyalty from the city’s survivors..."

"...The deadlock began in May 1863, when Union General Ulysses S. Grant trapped Confederate forces... ...without reinforcements and with only meager supplies, Pemberton finally capitulated on July 4..."

"...After a seven-month standoff, the Greek forces finally breached the fortifications and took the island in a brutal onslaught..."

"...This two-decade siege began in the 17th century, when a band of the Knights of Malta raided a fleet of Ottoman ships and fled to the Venetian-controlled city of Candia, located on the island of Crete..."

"... In 149 B.C., a Roman army led by Scipio Aemilianus arrived in North Africa intent on destroying Carthage once and for all... ...Faced with this level of resistance, the Romans were held at bay for three long years. When they finally breached the walls in 146 B.C., Scipio’s forces had to fight their way through the city streets for six days and nights before defeating the Carthaginian resistance."

"...Despite these horrific circumstances, the citizens of Leningrad managed to endure life under siege for 872 days from September 1941 until January 1944. Even in victory, the siege proved tragic: By the time the city was finally freed by the Red Army, an estimated 1 million Soviets—most of them civilians—had perished..."

"... By that time, the British forces on Gibraltar had been under siege for three years and seven months..."

Armies are not lions. They do not stalk, they stampede. And armies are what it takes to capture a well fortified position. Ninja sieges as anything other than an extremely rare exception to the rule is exceptionally unrealistic. Yet in any MMO they are allowed, they become the standard. It takes an exceptionally clever general to capture a fortified position with a real army that will wake up the moment commotion breaks out and march enough men up to their position you can attack them unnoticed when the coming and going of an army is rarely missed. It takes no real cleverness to wait until the bulk of your enemy's forces are sleeping in a video game played by people with more important things to do much of the time.

But I do agree it would be cool to see sieges in MO2 be more similar to sieges in the real world. What that actually means is most contested sieges lasting in-game months or even years (Assuming time passes a bit quicker in-game than IRL).

So did they announce that they will attack at this date, this time, and this location or did the army wait to get spotted first?

Ambushes never happened?

I understand that sieges often involved starving out the castle, that doesn't really relate to what i'm saying about declaring a siege window.

If you recall from earlier in the thread wars definitely lasted months in real life time.

Individual sieges have lasted 48 hours.

The same individuals that cried ninja also cried about multi day sieges for the same reasons, since they're two sides of the same coin. You're still sieging while i'm offline.

 

[Kaemik]

No. They did not announce the time of their arrival. Though when they are moving thousands of men usually your scouts would make you aware of their rough arrival time days or weeks in advance.

Ambushes? Sure. Teutoburg Forest was a famous example where thousands of men were massacred in an ambush. Of course, they were out the open marching through a forest in unfamiliar territory. Ambushes of heavily fortified positions? Almost never. I mean it did happen but it was incredibly uncommon. You didn't just march into the Roman Empire and "ambush" Rome until the empire had decayed around it sufficiently to allow such things. Even then, the sieges were still fairly drawn-out affairs compared to what you might assume if you only knew sieges through movies and games.

I'm anti-siege window as well. But I believe ninja sieges should be next to impossible via some other means however sieges play out. 48 hours should be on the short end of a contested siege. The mechanics should just be fun enough that when it drags out for several days or weeks that people are actually enjoying it.

 

[Bogler]

Guys let's stop using IRL as a reason to change or keep game mechanics. You can argue all day how the English used to sling used sheepskin condoms at people for defense but that doesn't really make for a fun GAME. There should be a system in place to allow for players owning land/keeps ect to defend them with the entirety of their forces because that makes for a fun game where majority of people can be involved. You still have opportunities to cloak and dagger, outmaneuver players just not at 2 AM when they are all asleep.

 

[MolagAmur]

Kaemik, you need to realize that a lot of people in this thread are from known "siege" guilds. They have knocked down many keeps, many houses, etc. If you are trying to make it so that they have to have constant battles and fights to achieve their goals...they aren't going to be happy. There is a reason why these guilds didn't rise to "power" until the game was on its last leg.

Again, all we can do its hope SV has good plans for it. MO2 is going to be an entirely different ballgame than MO1.

Guys let's stop using IRL as a reason to change or keep game mechanics. You can argue all day how the English used to sling used sheepskin condoms at people for defense but that doesn't really make for a fun GAME. There should be a system in place to allow for players owning land/keeps ect to defend them with the entirety of their forces because that makes for a fun game where majority of people can be involved. You still have opportunities to cloak and dagger, outmaneuver players just not at 2 AM when they are all asleep.

I'm all for the cloak and dagger shit at 2 am as long as the sieges last for longer than a single sleep cycle. If they want to cloak and dagger a control tower, a guild asset(mines, lumbermills, etc)...so be it. You shouldn't lose the entire war while you're in bed or at work though.

 

[Kaemik]

Guys let's stop using IRL as a reason to change or keep game mechanics. You can argue all day how the English used to sling used sheepskin condoms at people for defense but that doesn't really make for a fun GAME. There should be a system in place to allow for players owning land/keeps ect to defend them with the entirety of their forces because that makes for a fun game where majority of people can be involved. You still have opportunities to cloak and dagger, outmaneuver players just not at 2 AM when they are all asleep.

Fun and realism are not always mutually exclusive. In this case, I think it's both realistic that sieges should be meant to take a long time, and it's more fun.

The developers have also prettymuch said they want their game to have a lot of realism, so it should be a goal of the community to suggest things that incorporate fun and realism together when possible:

But I got off on that tangent because we were discussing the realism of how a lion stalks it's prey, and I simply wanted to convey the idea that how a lion stalks is prey has very little correlation to the reality of siege, which were almost always long and drawn out.

 

[Teknique]

Kaemik, you need to realize that a lot of people in this thread are from known "siege" guilds. They have knocked down many keeps, many houses, etc. If you are trying to make it so that they have to have constant battles and fights to achieve their goals...they aren't going to be happy. There is a reason why these guilds didn't rise to "power" until the game was on its last leg.

Again, all we can do its hope SV has good plans for it. MO2 is going to be an entirely different ballgame than MO1.


I'm all for the cloak and dagger shit at 2 am as long as the sieges last for longer than a single sleep cycle. If they want to cloak and dagger a control tower, a guild asset(mines, lumbermills, etc)...so be it. You shouldn't lose the entire war while you're in bed or at work though.

I don’t know why it’s hard to understand that declaring your sieges takes so much sand out of the box.

 

[Kaemik]

I could be wrong, but I kind of got the impression in that Molag is like me in that he doesn't care when you begin a siege so long as you can't resolve it in the time it takes him to finish work and get home.

Making sieges take a properly realistic time doesn't make the game any less sandboxy. If anything it makes it more sandboxy.

 

[Teknique]

I could be wrong, but I kind of got the impression in that Molag is like me in that he doesn't care when you begin a siege so long as you can't resolve it in the time it takes him to finish work and get home.

The unfortunate truth is we had that system,

sieging was basically impossible. Sieges we're resolved by the NPC guards and 2 people with fire arrows half the time.

The game was arguably better when defending was too difficult.

If people ask SV to make it hard to siege I fear they'll find themselves regretting that.

I only say this for context but as molag said we sieged many keeps and houses successfully despite these changes.

Molag stopped playing a long time before this in an era where you couldn't really defend unless you won the fight.

I think we all essentially agree though longer siege where you have to win the fight to win the siege makes sense.

 

[Kaemik]

You had one version of that system. I feel the version I've proposed is better in many meaningful ways. There is absolutely no way 2 people could hold against a concerted group effort in the system I proposed because you actually have to endeavor to control the territory outside your walls.

 

[Teknique]

You had one version of that system. I feel the version I've proposed is better in many meaningful ways. There is absolutely no way 2 people could hold against a concerted group effort in the system I proposed because you actually have to endeavor to control the territory outside your walls.

You're way too hung up on the outposts.

We basically had that with a few tweaks. Hopefully they do it better this time.

This thread isn't even really about that, its about siege windows which i'm against, because I feel its super zerg friendly.

Only a fool would say the siege system in MO 1 was good as is.

 

[Kaemik]

"A few tweaks" matter when they address the specific problem you're referring to of people hiding behind a wall shooting fire arrows.

I keep on it because it's a solid system. When the worst criticisms people can throw at it is unflattering comparisons to old system that aren't possible as I described it, or vague concerns it can be exploited even though nobody can say how, and I can explicitly spell out multiple ways to exploit their own system... I think I'm on something pretty solid.

 

[Jhackman]

Just make it so you have to build siege equipment at your keep and have to drag it to the place you want to siege. It will be enough of a deterrent youd have to have pissed someone off real bad to get sieged. Lol

 

[ElPerro]

Maybe the best way to keep it sandbox while still offering some protection would probably be "soft" siege windows with guards on active duty and high hp on structures. So sieging a guild at off hours would be possible but very hard and not to be done in a day or 2. Sort of how sieges lasted in MO1. It would be more of an economic battle, slowly grinding away at a guild's resources via killing their guards and damaging structures. These should maybe have a timer where if they take x amount of dmg you cant repair them in x amount of time. A keep should not be capturable during these hours.

Then sieging a guild at their on hours could be much easier. There would be no guards to help defenders and straight up capturing the keep would be possible. Of course it shouldnt be done in 10 mins but at least let defenders gather up and try to fight.

This would give players more of a choice while still keeping sieges organic and not feel like your queuing for a battleground.