Losing hope... and faith


#41

It really should follow a real life flow where you vote in mayor, and there is a reelection ever few months. And during that time that mayor is able to accept or decline new beacons as being part of the city. And even have like a settlement vote system to remove a citizen from the city. Sure it will be chaos on some cities, but that’s the risk of “moving into a dangerous neighborhood”


#42

I’d hate to try and join a settlement but it has a perma-afk leader who won’t accept though. It’s nice being able to just build and say I live here now. It’s not nice to build a ruby tower and say I own your town now. But I’m not as bothered by that as most people.


#43

Indeed, I do consume settlements… who have gotten too close. If they don’t wish to be part of it, they shouldn’t have built so close. I also enjoy the prestige game.

Not intended? How do you figure? You’re telling me nobody saw this as a possibility? That people would build into other people? C’mon now. I’m guessing it WAS intended.

Two big game mechanics that aren’t intended? Then why allow it in the first place? Why would they have prestige? Why would prestige control owner of the settlements? It had to be coded. It wasn’t an accident.

I’d be willing to bet myself and others who appreciate these aspects of the game are among some the people spending money, supporting the game.

Hm. Well, I guess we’ll see where this all goes. I’m not here to argue, threaten or troll. I just hate to think I’ve wasted this much time and money because they’ve had a change of heart.


#44

Tbh many voiced concerns. I was one of many. But I feel like we didn’t have enough data to back our claims I guess. Or devs has some ideas in motions, but they were pushed back for some other content that they prioritized. Ever since joining the forums I’ve been all over settlements and themed cities.

I started my own and joined others. I voiced many ways I though would help the game.

As with any other content out there, one voices what they feel would make a better game for them, some give it more thought than others when it comes to being good for the game, what ends up being good for oneself and good for the game can be the same or totally different things. I give my opinions with the hope of what I gave a minute to think about is actually something with some worth attached, so that devs can use it in some form, they might take it or completely deny it. But that’s why I trust them.


#45

Yep, the Berlyn road incident was almost effectively a prestige nuclear war. It was averted before any serious Gleam bombs were dropped. I remember a forum post (I’ll have to find it now. It was hilarious.) where a certain party (lol @Havok40k) issued a cease-and-desist or they would nuke the offending settlement from orbit. It was amazing.

Then of course there was the Boundless Charter. The attempt to form an actual no-joke “government” composed of five Viceroys, separating land into geographic districts and writing a Bill of Player Rights. Trust me, whatever you might think, we were not just twiddling our thumbs in EA. Those were some very interesting times indeed.

EDIT: I meant to respond to @wolfpack2012. @Havok40k already knows about these incidents, considering he was directly involved.


#46

That is the reason the settlement bridging algorithm exists. Also the reason for the first gleam prestige nerf, though personally could do with another.


#47

Bet u wish u had an atmo pie right now :yum:


#48

I didn’t followed the beta much. I regret it because the game ended quite a mess and is far away from what most backers paid for (they abandoned the game by thousands)

Basic sample:
We did a survey around 3 years ago (4000 people get the mail)
Only 9% of them wanted a mmo (refresh my memory if I am wrong) …and look at the game now… WTF happened I have no idea.


#49

I think this is probably true, but I think it is as true as the people that are spending money to buy plots to build their own settlements that do not want to be merged or involved in a prestige war.

As stated by @jtanner28 we did have some issues with the merging and prestige in EA and the developers did take action to curtail it, so to say they are not interested in at least limiting or controlling this activity is probably not true (You did not say this just making the point). Do they want merging to be possible? Yes to your point they coded it and even if they are tweaking it, they are not removing it. Do they want prestige measured for the planet vicerory? I would again say yes. It is coded and even with the comments by @James on changing the prestige calculation, they are not removing prestige and seem to want it to continue to be part of the game. While I understand the proposed changes do modify game mechanics in a way that will affect how some players are playing the game (which is currently within the CoC so the players are not doing anything wrong), I do think the developers are trying to take a relatively new release and make sure the game fits the way they want it to be played with some input from the players. I believe the developers are trying to give us a game that has long term play potential and can appeal to enough of the player base that they can make a decent return.

I will not be happy and have not been happy with some of the changes they made or will make. If they add the protection zones and refine prestige calculations I am sure there are people that will be happy and people that will be unhappy. At the end of the day we will all have to decide if the game is right for us and how we want to play it.


#50

Because it was already an mmo before then? And because onlky 9% wanted an mmo doesn’t mean they were or were not going to get it?


#51

fun:
we need a new word for the complainers, how about
BJW (Boundless Justice Warriors)

topic:
that the game is going forward is ok, games change and thats just how it is.
you cant make it fit for all, and some design decisions that looked cool at the begin or in EA now turned out to be not the best solution with a bigger playerbase and stuff.
so its ok if they change that, even when im also not a fan of some of the new concepts.
the beacon perimeter thing for me sounds like a terrible thing i.e
and it just happens because ppl complaining about having a neighbor that dont fit theyr wishes, while not being able to just claim a perimeter by themself.

so in this particular case its snowflake managing where i would prefer to see new features, mobs, props, items etc. stuff that attracts more ppl instead of trying make some minority happy that where not able to see a given ruleset and just use that one. (i.e. just claim abit more land around theyr stuff if they dont want a neighbor)


#52

I would be interested to know how you determined this is a minority? I find it interesting that the polls provide a different picture of people that would like to see the change than would not. I will also acknowledge that the participation in the poll did not encompass all the players in the game. However, with no other data than what we have in the forums I think there is no evidence to support a claim of a vocal minority. Maybe I am missing something?

Based on the posting by James, I do not think they are ignoring new content. As he stated they have been working on network reliability and bug fixes and are moving onto more content now. They are adding a new creature (not something I want, but I know some hunters that are very excited), body paint (again not something I value but others do), the winter event (we will see what this is), messaging, the guilds and are talking about farming. Out of these I am probably most interested in Guilds, but will see what the others add to the game.

edit: for clarity


#53

I find this train of though funny, as it’s functionally a No True Scotsman. “Any player that REALLY plays this game doesn’t have these problems, so your opinion doesn’t matter.” Maybe you are the real snowflake if someone having a different opinion about the game triggers you?


#54

So … you are worried that they are trying to curb toxic players? They would be the reason the game dies… Maybe i’m missing something


#55

I’m worried the game I paid for will no longer be the game I paid for going forward. Toxic? You mean I play the game in the boundaries of the mechanics put before me, and don’t value the same gameplay as you? Correct. Why would the features be there and coded in such a way if not to be used? Much like people wanting a certain move removed from a character in a fighting game. Rather than use it themselves, or find a way to counter, they complain and want it removed. Imagine if some Civilization players suddenly wanted takeovers removed.

I suppose bomb mining was “toxic”, as well? Not that I would know, as I never used bombs to mine. I get things will be tweaked here and there, but why code the game to do certain things if you don’t want people doing those things. Some things may be an oversight, but taking over settlements? Pretty big @&$?!&@ oversight if that’s the case. Prestige controlling the warden? Another HUGE oversight. Not to mention, altering/removing the game mechanics I was sold, is taking away from development time of added content.

If we are talking what you consider “morals”, here, then perhaps the devs should refund ALL my money spent, as that would be the moral thing to do. Regardless of what any of the EUA might say, because nevermind rules (just like gameplay mechanics) they need to do what’s right, else it’s toxic. I’ll be more than happy to get all my money spent on micros back if they are willing to do the morally correct thing, since the product would no longer be what I was sold.

Edit: I got a bad feeling about the longevity of this game. I’m outta’ here.


#57

and thats now a strawman? i never said anywhere that there are ppl “Really” playing this and others not.
you even citet me wrong lol, young turks around here in forums aswell?
so you want to play scepticts ™ now and use all that words that let ppl feel like they are real good in having a discuss just because the threw in some “___mans” just because i made a joke?

you might be right here, well the ppl that get vocal and pointing out the issue was a minority, that after the polls then more ppl was ok with that idea is another paper.
i still find it a bad idea because it wont solve the problems, it will just shift the problems to a bigger scale.

but i wont leave the game because of that, still love the game and just think the devs try to find solutions for such problems, and thats cool!

if im not a fan of that solutions than this is my fault, running around and demant a payback for the money is just hilarious.


#58

Lol as with all mmo’s that anyone buys into… you expect constant game updates. In WoW player classes got nerfed and buffed for pvp all the time. In the Division set bonuses get tweaked or eliminated entirely. In Destiny certain guns are tweaked because of statistics that the company monitors.

This isn’t a single player game. The company will watch what is working and what is not then they will make a decision on what is best for the game. You spend money KNOWING this dude. If you didn’t know this then you are not a bad person or an idiot. You are merely ignorant of modern gaming. I don’t mean that as an insult. You cannot expect to play ANY modern game thinking nothing will change ESPECIALLY core systems that affect a community.