What Kind of Walls For Non-Keep Guilds?

[lord_yoshi]

Earlier in the Discord Q&A, Henrik mentioned looking into what kind of defensive structures non-keep guilds should have access to. While almost everyone can agree that every house being walled off was not good for MO1, there is less of a consensus for how to limit house defenses. I personally think that houses should have some way of restricting access, but also prevented from completely gating off their area. I also think that tall vision-blocking walls should be limited to keeps only.

 

[Necromantic]

Non-keep guilds not getting walls and gates and shit would completely destroy the idea of player and guild built cities, so any restriction of that kind is just stupid.

Not to mention it doesn't keep keep-owning guilds from blocking shit off.

Come up with better solutions than the easy route of taking all peoples freedoms away because some people abuse features. This is the essence of freely player built content.

 

[Piet]

Non-keep guilds not getting walls and gates and shit would completely destroy the idea of player and guild built cities, so any restriction of that kind is just stupid.

Not to mention it doesn't keep keep-owning guilds from blocking shit off.

Come up with better solutions than the easy route of taking all peoples freedoms away because some people abuse features. This is the essence of freely player built content.

They are limiting even keep walls so it does stop people from blocking.

You must not have been there before TC. People didn't just be like we don't have walls so houses are useless. You can still defend your city and maybe even have guards for when offline but can't just hide in a wall and be completely safe.

 

[Truthshower]

hahahaha

good.

people who plopped houses down and had access to all kinds of walls was stupid and killed the game. anyone who says "but muh safety" have you not heard of blue towns?? can also still put down npc guards so idk why people complain lol. stop building if you're not willing to accept the consequences. npc cities had griefers, why shouldn't yours have them? maybe do a better job of keeping it clean and patrolled.

how can you make a true city if its just walled off for only your guild, such stupid logic

 

[Bernfred]

make the houses big with much HP and a priest inside the house so you can live inside and regear in case of an attack with upgradable rooftops and multiple doors per house.

non keep owners should be able to build basic walls or pallisades but without gates just to stop mounted roams from full charging and to have some foot fighter playground. that should also count for player cities.

the walling of area for keep owners should be very limited to the area around the keep to stop blocking of content and make sieging (siege camps) interesting.

EDIT: crafting banks outside the house

 

[Teknique]

hahahaha

good.

people who plopped houses down and had access to all kinds of walls was stupid and killed the game. anyone who says "but muh safety" have you not heard of blue towns?? can also still put down npc guards so idk why people complain lol. stop building if you're not willing to accept the consequences. npc cities had griefers, why shouldn't yours have them? maybe do a better job of keeping it clean and patrolled.

how can you make a true city if its just walled off for only your guild, such stupid logic

qft

 

[Teknique]

I can't even fathom the lack of empathy and selfishness it takes to support walls.

Imagine having 0 concept what so ever of what makes a game even playable for all parties beyond "But I died and I don't like it, I think the game would be better if I didn't die".

If you want to play a game you need to run the risk of being out played otherwise it isn't a game, and no manganons don't count.

 

[Bernfred]

no walls at all would just make the game mounted combat only.
if you add mounted combat stopping walls with gaps, you will have a super fun mounted and foot fighter combat.

 

[Turbizzler]

Walls aided in killing MO1. It was implemented horribly.

Everyone and their aunt had walls. 85% of the walls being used weren't even for player built towns or cities, but for farming outposts and drop off points. So people didn't need to transport as much, and could just process what ever they farmed safely. It also looked atrocious having the landscape filled with walls with a single house plopped in the middle.

I preferred when Keeps were only allowed walls compared post TC update of everyone allowed walls. Gave more reason for keeps to be utilized and sought after.

Now putting aside my bias, walls in a limited capacity, outside of keeps could work if done right.
- Make guilds have to invest in a building like a "Manor house" which would be something like 75% the cost of a keep in coin, materials and upkeep.
- Free placement building zone very limited in size.
- Only available walls are basic wooden palisade.
- Manors with a max guild stone can only place a palisade.
- Manor can not be built within 200m of another manor(avoids clustering settlements to create a super settlements and keeps landscape clean)

Give keeps access to certain buildings only, larger free placement build radius, more territory options and it could balance out. People would have to invest largely for a town outside of owning a keep and still not have the full capabilities of a keep.

 

[Piet]

no walls at all would just make the game mounted combat only.
if you add mounted combat stopping walls with gaps, you will have a super fun mounted and foot fighter combat.

Foot can beat mounted. Walls have nothing to do with that.

 

[Piet]

Walls aided in killing MO1. It was implemented horribly.

Everyone and their aunt had walls. 85% of the walls being used weren't even for player built towns or cities, but for farming outposts and drop off points. So people didn't need to transport as much, and could just process what ever they farmed safely. It also looked atrocious having the landscape filled with walls with a single house plopped in the middle.

I preferred when Keeps were only allowed walls compared post TC update of everyone allowed walls. Gave more reason for keeps to be utilized and sought after.

Now putting aside my bias, walls in a limited capacity, outside of keeps could work if done right.
- Make guilds have to invest in a building like a "Manor house" which would be something like 75% the cost of a keep in coin, materials and upkeep.
- Free placement building zone very limited in size.
- Only available walls are basic wooden palisade.
- Manors with a max guild stone can only place a palisade.
- Manor can not be built within 200m of another manor(avoids clustering settlements to create a super settlements and keeps landscape clean)

Give keeps access to certain buildings only, larger free placement build radius, more territory options and it could balance out. People would have to invest largely for a town outside of owning a keep and still not have the full capabilities of a keep.

Everyone would have a manor and it's not about the strength of the walls unless they are literally weak enough to not be worth having anyways any wall means safety and will cause the same issue as mo1.

 

[ElPerro]

I'd be ok with walls for non keep guilds ONLY if we can climb them with siege ladders. If not then its a big no from me dawg

 

[Turbizzler]

Everyone would have a manor and it's not about the strength of the walls unless they are literally weak enough to not be worth having anyways any wall means safety and will cause the same issue as mo1.

You have to remember, MO1 was plagued with duped materials and gold. Farming gold was also made extremely easy and this aided in the super aids that was Myrlands landscape of walls. It's how everyone could afford their bob the builder projects.

Far stricter limitations, higher investment, limited utility and something like a Manor could work. Gold and materials wont be plenty, unless SV make the same mistakes as MO1.

 

[Bernfred]

Foot can beat mounted. Walls have nothing to do with that.

look, when you have no objects that are stopping mounteds then everyone will run full mounted build because you can show up fast and you have no chance in general if you dont want to team up with your mates 24/7 in a turtle formation. so you chase the single player whos not 10 meters away from the house door. thats pretty lame.
you want a half secured base so the mounted group needs to dismount or is very limited in movement.

 

[Teknique]

look, when you have no object that stop mounteds then everyone will run full mounted build because you can show up fast and you have no chance in general if you dont want to team up with your mates 24/7 in a turtle formation. so you chase the single player whos not 10 meters away from the house door. thats pretty lame.
you want a half secured base so the mounted group needs to dismount or is very limited in movement.

Even though it’s in the op this is pretty much a completely different subject.

It really depends how good mounteds are in general and there’s no reason why you can’t make choke points with other structures anyway.

 

[Piet]

You have to remember, MO1 was plagued with duped materials and gold. Farming gold was also made extremely easy and this aided in the super aids that was Myrlands landscape of walls. It's how everyone could afford their bob the builder projects.

Far stricter limitations, higher investment, limited utility and something like a Manor could work. Gold and materials wont be plenty, unless SV make the same mistakes as MO1.

Everyone can earn enough gold eventually and it really wasn't that hard. I could farm the gold and even be in myriland and it only take me like a week for a house in mo1. Say you do it your way say it takes a month instead to earn that gold people will still do it for the safety. Buildings with a house surrounded by walls will again spot the landscape and again no one will be out able to fight against. Can't farm in your walls be right outside farming and run when you see the slightest hint of danger. Just keeps for walls is the only way to keep them in check.

 

[Bernfred]

Even though it’s in the op this is pretty much a completely different subject.

It really depends how good mounteds are in general and there’s no reason why you can’t make choke points with other structures anyway.

no i think this is the only good reason to add some form of walls. just a house a stable and a sniper tower adds nothing to pvp and all that will happen is that a roaming guild shows up, farms the 2 players who are afk on the stable or crafting and ride away.
you want some basic structures to make every base interesting and better to defense. the attacker can choose his number and style but the defender not.
i dont think about normal walls, these walls must be very low and climbable by foot fighters.

 

[Piet]

look, when you have no objects that are stopping mounteds then everyone will run full mounted build because you can show up fast and you have no chance in general if you dont want to team up with your mates 24/7 in a turtle formation. so you chase the single player whos not 10 meters away from the house door. thats pretty lame.
you want a half secured base so the mounted group needs to dismount or is very limited in movement.

At this point that is speculation till we see what mounted is like soon. I get your point and I wouldn't mind no gate or low walls that can be climbed over or something as long as it wasn't safe but at very least we can agree that full walls with gates like mo1 would be an obviously massive mistake that would destroy the game.

 

[Bernfred]

At this point that is speculation till we see what mounted is like soon. I get your point and I wouldn't mind no gate or low walls that can be climbed over or something as long as it wasn't safe but at very least we can agree that full walls with gates like mo1 would be an obviously massive mistake that would destroy the game.

ofc walls+gates killed alot. also it doesnt matter how good mounteds will be, they wont be super trash and i want that a base is some sort of pvp spot for foot fighters. the wilderness is the kindgom of mounteds and the base should be a big part of foot fither pvp beside mountains and dungeons.

 

[Turbizzler]

Everyone can earn enough gold eventually and it really wasn't that hard. I could farm the gold and even be in myriland and it only take me like a week for a house in mo1. Say you do it your way say it takes a month instead to earn that gold people will still do it for the safety. Buildings with a house surrounded by walls will again spot the landscape and again no one will be out able to fight against. Can't farm in your walls be right outside farming and run when you see the slightest hint of danger. Just keeps for walls is the only way to keep them in check.

You could farm gold in MO1 when the world was empty and SV made things like MA too good for ez farming. Persistent release, everything is going to be contested. Mob spawns, herb spawns, dungeons, towns, land. From what I've seen, there's going to be a lot of people jumping into MO2 for persistent release. Gold is only going to be for the ones able to assert dominance.

Like I said, I prefer keeps just having walls, but I'm not going to just close the doors on potential ideas that could work. Not everyone is going to have gold, not everyone is going to have materials. Gold and materials is going to be more limited compared to MO1, not only for the aforementioned reasons, but also because most people will have only 1 - 2 characters.