#makeTCMatter

[wyqydsyq]

TL;DR​

You shouldn't be able to build/claim inside an enemy guild's claimed territory, if you want to build there siege it and claim it for yourself.
Overlapping territories makes TC a meaningless, goofy and bad player experience.

House and SH claimstone territories should behave as a TC claim/build exclusion zone to non-allied players so enemies can't just plop houses with claimstones in the middle of your supposed "territory" and have overlapping territory claims allowing them to build "territory control" structures inside your "territory" while you sleep.

If you want to claim an area you should first have to siege any enemy buildings there containing a claim stone, removing their territory claim and allowing you to build your own house/SH with a claim stone, claiming the area for yourself and preventing enemies from being able to simply rebuild in the same spot while you're asleep.

This will make TC actually meaningful since it will become worthwhile for guilds to siege each other's assets (despite the high cost to siege) in prime locations to claim it for themselves and deny it from their enemies, with their own territory claim being protected by the high cost to siege if their enemies want to reclaim it.

We can keep the high cost to siege so random bluebob villages who mind their own business and are situated out of the way don't ever really have to worry about being sieged. The only players/guilds that sieging would be a concern for are those who are trying to compete for highly contested areas.

The radius of the exclusion zone can be tweaked and balanced, but I think anywhere from 20m-100m would be a good starting point. Note that I'm saying this should only exclude TC claimstones/buildings. It should not prevent building houses, just prevent putting a claim stone in them or building TC assets if it's near a non-allied TC claimstone/asset.

What about existing overlapping territories or when a guild drops alliance with territories overlapping their former allies?
Simple solution: Put overlapping territories in a "conflict" state where all TC functions of both zones are disabled (no guards or TC NPCs) until the conflict is resolved through one of the opposing claims being sieged/removed/decayed.

 

[Weis]

Yeah I hadnt even thought about the claim area overlap. Youd think this would be a mechanic to convince guilds to actually fight over territory. What gets me the most right now is this stupid 48 hour loot timer. Makes it not worth it to spend resources when people get two days to move their items.

Hoping they reduce this to around 2 hours or so, otherwise its too much of a resource drain to even justify blowing things up. Whats really annoying too is the defense values of new houses that guilds can place and claim accross the map. Id have to Ninja siege a storehouse across the map just to take down a enemy house in my territory. Otherwise its just zero damage to the structure until then... wth

 

[Domtomsen]

I completely agree with this. I just hope any staff member reads this. TC os broken since its launch and since players have figured it out sieging is impossoble and just another griefing medium.
We need at least supply lines-, towers- and storehouses to be LOCAL defense bonus only. And we ned no-build zones like described. It is so important for the game. Its definitely not all that can be done to improve TC, but this is the bare minimum to make it at least work.

And of those things are not big changes yet we are waiting over 4 MONTHS for just that. Henrik thinks its OK to leave it in such a state for such a long time.

 

[Emdash]

zero damage

Which should never be a thing lol when I saw that it's like HMMM.

I dunno if I even feel the supply tower thing. They look ugly. They are in the way. There had to be a smarter way to do it.

 

[Doom and Gloom]

I would be cautious with no build-zones, many games have fallen to the trap that only old players get to own land or buildings, as areas will become all claimed. Sure, the map is huge and not that many players atm, but in general it is a bad idea to not allow ppl to build at least houses also to areas that are controlled by large guilds.

Otherwise yeah, TC came TC went didn't change my game experience one bit.

 

[Jackdstripper]

Totally agree with OP. We aren't talking about regular houses, those can be placed by anyone anywhere they want.
Its the territory control structures and buildings that should never be allowed to be built by enemy guilds inside your territory. Like wtf is the point of having a territory then?

Also, you should never be able to put a claim stone inside a building which is OUTSIDE your territory (what to speak of inside enemy territory) and get the same damage protection as your keep. This is absolutely absurd. You should get the defence bonus only INSIDE your territory. It is completely moronic that you can build on the other side of the map and make it invulnerable with just a claim stone. Whomever made this mechanic is a moron.
Building outside your territory should have no extra defence. If your territory shrinks because you lose towers, then those building no longer inside your territory lose the extra protection, and become siegeable regardless if they have a claim stone.

Dont even get me started on rings with in rings in the territory map. Or even the absurd defence bonus on keeps. What a complete clusterfuck.

 

[wyqydsyq]

I would be cautious with no build-zones, many games have fallen to the trap that only old players get to own land or buildings, as areas will become all claimed. Sure, the map is huge and not that many players atm, but in general it is a bad idea to not allow ppl to build at least houses also to areas that are controlled by large guilds.

Otherwise yeah, TC came TC went didn't change my game experience one bit.

Yeah maybe building houses is fine, you just shouldn't be able to put a claim stone in said houses or build TC structures if the area is already claimed by another guild you're not allied to. Otherwise we get situations like around GK risar dungeon where different enemy guilds have priests, barracks and guard towers on top of each other without sieging each other. If you're in one of those guilds or their allies it feels goofy having guards that ignore the enemy guards 5m away from them or camp enemy/your buildings, if you're not allied to anyone in the area it's more painful than any one guild/alliance having the area controlled could ever make it

 

[Emdash]

Yeah maybe building houses is fine, you just shouldn't be able to put a claim stone in said houses or build TC structures if the area is already claimed by another guild you're not allied to. Otherwise we get situations like around GK risar dungeon where different enemy guilds have priests, barracks and guard towers on top of each other without sieging each other. If you're in one of those guilds or their allies it feels goofy having guards that ignore the enemy guards 5m away from them or camp enemy/your buildings, if you're not allied to anyone in the area it's more painful than any one guild/alliance having the area controlled could ever make it

legit reading stuff like this makes me wanna quit the game, even tho I don't care about that. It doesn't bother me that people are genning massive OGH etc but just fails on that level... I mean how is that any different than walls? I can't fkn believe they added guild guards. FOR REAL. That's sooo cheesy in such a small pop game. I thought they had promised they weren't gonna do that.

 

[wyqydsyq]

legit reading stuff like this makes me wanna quit the game, even tho I don't care about that. It doesn't bother me that people are genning massive OGH etc but just fails on that level... I mean how is that any different than walls? I can't fkn believe they added guild guards. FOR REAL. That's sooo cheesy in such a small pop game. I thought they had promised they weren't gonna do that.

It's way different to walls, walls allowed completely blocking off areas. Guards can only be placed where you can build which usually there isn't that much free space to build around highly contested spots like near dungeons, camps and POIs so there's pretty much always blind spots the guards won't bother you. Guards are broken and pretty useless atm anyway, as soon as you walk into a player structure they just forget you exist. If they fix guard AI so it works reliably I think they should nerf the aggro range a bit

 

[Emdash]

It's way different to walls, walls allowed completely blocking off areas. Guards can only be placed where you can build which usually there isn't that much free space to build around highly contested spots like near dungeons, camps and POIs so there's pretty much always blind spots the guards won't bother you. Guards are broken and pretty useless atm anyway, as soon as you walk into a player structure they just forget you exist. If they fix guard AI so it works reliably I think they should nerf the aggro range a bit

pop in game is too low for guards. Guards were aids in MO1, too. Zero reason you should be able to have NPC fighters. Just my 2c tho.

 

[wyqydsyq]

pop in game is too low for guards. Guards were aids in MO1, too. Zero reason you should be able to have NPC fighters. Just my 2c tho.

Yeah overall I'm pretty indifferent and could take or leave guards, in their current state they're probably better off gone. I think there's some merit to TC guards in that you should get slightly increased security in your village with the huge investment to build full TC stuff, but their AI needs to be fixed, machine gun bows nerfed, and their leash range needs to be a lot shorter (by at least 50%) for them to be worth keeping in the game. Otherwise they're just janky and unpredictable / exploitable and a bad experience for everyone involved

 

[ElPerro]

Yeah overall I'm pretty indifferent and could take or leave guards, in their current state they're probably better off gone. I think there's some merit to TC guards in that you should get slightly increased security in your village with the huge investment to build full TC stuff, but their AI needs to be fixed, machine gun bows nerfed, and their leash range needs to be a lot shorter (by at least 50%) for them to be worth keeping in the game. Otherwise they're just janky and unpredictable / exploitable and a bad experience for everyone involved

Thats the issue, the guard AI has been the same since MO1. They probably cant fix it at this point

 

[Teknique]

Thats the issue, the guard AI has been the same since MO1. They probably cant fix it at this point

It seems like the copy and paste function copied a lot of the bugs. Weird

 

[Emdash]

Yeah overall I'm pretty indifferent and could take or leave guards, in their current state they're probably better off gone. I think there's some merit to TC guards in that you should get slightly increased security in your village with the huge investment to build full TC stuff, but their AI needs to be fixed, machine gun bows nerfed, and their leash range needs to be a lot shorter (by at least 50%) for them to be worth keeping in the game. Otherwise they're just janky and unpredictable / exploitable and a bad experience for everyone involved

It's a good idea like many other things, but I don't think it's good for the game. Like I said take a trip to Hyll and see all the guards. I haven't even fought anyone from that guild because I have a feeling even if they are grey, if I hit them, those guards are gonna blow me up. So it's like ???

walls seem like a good idea. Mining NPCs seem like a good idea, but in the end it's just another rich get richer mechanic. It actually makes more sense to have 'job' NPCs like butchers, extractors, who do so at a pretty meh but respectable rate. Active (and walls are active due to stopping activity) TC is bad design, esp in a small game. The fact that due to the skill level of a game a guard is probably a better fighter than the average player is... lol.

I guess if people wanted to make a city and for it to have Tindrem or Khurite guards w/e, that would be slightly different, but I still oppose it. Shows how dead MO has really become because in MO1 all the pvpers were raging against guards.

At some point, they just need to accept this is gonna be a small pop game and balance it for that. They could at least make a respectable niche game, but even TC seems like a fakn joke.

I kind of realize the game is just gonna be trash. I wanna play for my free month, but hehhhh, dunno if I can hold on.

Bad / janky / buggy game is one thing, but bad mechanics on top of that?

 

[wyqydsyq]

It's a good idea like many other things, but I don't think it's good for the game. Like I said take a trip to Hyll and see all the guards. I haven't even fought anyone from that guild because I have a feeling even if they are grey, if I hit them, those guards are gonna blow me up. So it's like ???

walls seem like a good idea. Mining NPCs seem like a good idea, but in the end it's just another rich get richer mechanic. It actually makes more sense to have 'job' NPCs like butchers, extractors, who do so at a pretty meh but respectable rate. Active (and walls are active due to stopping activity) TC is bad design, esp in a small game. The fact that due to the skill level of a game a guard is probably a better fighter than the average player is... lol.

I guess if people wanted to make a city and for it to have Tindrem or Khurite guards w/e, that would be slightly different, but I still oppose it. Shows how dead MO has really become because in MO1 all the pvpers were raging against guards.

At some point, they just need to accept this is gonna be a small pop game and balance it for that. They could at least make a respectable niche game, but even TC seems like a fakn joke.

I kind of realize the game is just gonna be trash. I wanna play for my free month, but hehhhh, dunno if I can hold on.

Bad / janky / buggy game is one thing, but bad mechanics on top of that?

If they get TC and sieging right it will help MO2 avoid becoming a small pop game tremendously. Most PVP players coming from other full loot sandbox games like Albion Online, ARK, Rust etc expect some kind of properly fleshed out TC and sieging mechanics and will be turned away when they see what a janky mess it is in MO2 currently.

I think there is a sweetspot to be found where the PVP siege enjoyers can feasibly get regular PVP siege content in highly contested areas while more casual players can chill and RP peacefully in less contested areas. GK area should be popping off with daily sieges instead of a weird stalemate where enemies just build on top of each other to the detriment of everyone else.

MO2 has a huge map and I think that is part of the solution, sieging should be more about controlling strategically valuable territory (by having advantages of TC structures without completely restricting area access to other players) and denying control of it from your enemies than for material gain. They have the second part right in that with the high cost to siege nobody is doing it for material gain since nobody will probably ever loot more from a sieged building than they spent sieging it. They're just missing the first part to incentivize guilds to siege each other over the highly contested hotspots despite the high investment and likely net loss from sieging.

 

[Emdash]

If they get TC and sieging right it will help MO2 avoid becoming a small pop game tremendously. Most PVP players coming from other full loot sandbox games like Albion Online, ARK, Rust etc expect some kind of properly fleshed out TC and sieging mechanics and will be turned away when they see what a janky mess it is in MO2 currently.

I think there is a sweetspot to be found where the PVP siege enjoyers can feasibly get regular PVP siege content in highly contested areas while more casual players can chill and RP peacefully in less contested areas. GK area should be popping off with daily sieges instead of a weird stalemate where enemies just build on top of each other to the detriment of everyone else.

MO2 has a huge map and I think that is part of the solution, sieging should be more about controlling strategically valuable territory (by having advantages of TC structures without completely restricting area access to other players) and denying control of it from your enemies than for material gain. They have the second part right in that with the high cost to siege nobody is doing it for material gain since nobody will probably ever loot more from a sieged building than they spent sieging it. They're just missing the first part to incentivize guilds to siege each other over the highly contested hotspots despite the high investment and likely net loss from sieging.

Yeah, the problem is mathematically it has to make sense to build them knowing they may get sieged. It's almost like those areas should have things you conquer (?!?!) that are similar. That's what I was talking about w/ TC a long time ago, they should have template stuff that can be adjusted in certain places.

It sucks that MOMAP has all of the valuable stuff NE instead of in the center of the map. haha. I def think there are casuals who wanna jump in fights, too, but when you gotta go 1 hour to get in on it... @fartbox wanted good fights, and a lot of people talk about having to roam to find good fights, but if there was a place where people were fighting that was more accessible.

I dunno how to make it NOT a shitshow with being able to siege and loot and gain, cuz I think that should be a thing, too. It's like the idea of opening up the flag system, I believe eventually things would even out.

They could have a debuff to building in areas like GK to make it easier to siege.

But still, the only people contesting should be players, not guards, not walls.

There is also the second part of TC that never happened (or rarely) : the non-combat building shops and cities and such. There is a lot to balance, so SV having trouble with it makes a lot more sense than the other systems they are failing.

In Civilization 5 (haha) there is a system that makes people angry at you the more you siege. You become known as a warmonger. Again, if you could get some kind of time-lasting debuff kind of like murder counts are for players, so you didn't just go siege crazy and only hit prime targets... cuz I have no problem with people sieging for profit. The two day thing is not hardcore. But there needs to be something to keep it from just a blow up everything game.

 

[Teknique]

Guys the game is balanced around silver 2 -1000 elo players that cry to Henrik about “what feels bad”. EVEN IF a half way decent change ever came (which there have been a few). It will get immediately reverted by the horde of bots crying. There is no hope here

 

[Emdash]

Guys the game is balanced around silver 2 -1000 elo players that cry to Henrik about “what feels bad”. EVEN IF a half way decent change ever came (which there have been a few). It will get immediately reverted by the horde of bots crying. There is no hope here

Yeah, but there are two sides. There is the 'fun to live in, interesting world' and the 'system that is I'd want to put time into mastering, that would allow me to prosper.' They have managed to fail at both. It's grind for no life / most people/ guard rails to keep people from loss. That's not the formula of MO.

 

[Teknique]

Yeah, but there are two sides. There is the 'fun to live in, interesting world' and the 'system that is I'd want to put time into mastering, that would allow me to prosper.' They have managed to fail at both. It's grind for no life / most people/ guard rails to keep people from loss. That's not the formula of MO.

Oh, hard agree. Not only is the world, class design, and item balance horrificly bad, but so is the combat.

 

[Doom and Gloom]

Yeah, but there are two sides. There is the 'fun to live in, interesting world' and the 'system that is I'd want to put time into mastering, that would allow me to prosper.' They have managed to fail at both. It's grind for no life / most people/ guard rails to keep people from loss. That's not the formula of MO.

Exactly, I would have spent ages on mastering the mechanics if I felt that their design justified that, but because it is so obvious to anyone to see how bad the mechanics are, I have had no interest in trying to master them. I'd honestly love to train beast mastery, but I haven't even bothered to start it or even go get the skills, as it is a huge grind away and from the non-beast mastery combat I have clearly seen the entire pet mechanic is a shitshow, and ofc I read and saw others experience who bothered the grind. Same with magic too rly, I'm not gonna grind for the books when I know the mechanic is going to be uninteresting, unbalanced, and nightmare to utilise in almost any scenario that i'm interested in playing the game in.