Life is Feudal Official Forum

[Monco]

...

At this point I don't even think it's worth keeping up this conversation because you're either drunk when typing or maybe you have problems in understanding english or i don't really know what else.
First of all you continue to contradict yourself multiple times and you don't even realize it, for example you're in favor of the alignment system yet you say something like this "Loss of Progress is a Surefire way to make People leave the Game."
Second what is the grind for then if not to arrive to the real "endgame" by game concept, sieges and PvP related activities, grind for the sake of grinding?
Maybe you should read all the 12 pages of THIS TOPIC so you can really get an idea of what people want from this game, and what were and still are the main problems. You will see that even since the start of JANUARY people were complaining that once their guild castle was up they simply stopped playing because the game was limiting the supposed endgame (PvP related stuff) too much back then since the removal of barkboxing and boosting at the end of december which was what allowed raiding and roaming to be a thing.
Also getting to sieges was even way more hard and limited to what we have now, IB damage was minor and you had to use the influence zone to siege.
I can't really take you seriously i'm sorry, just the fact that you believe that the main problem of this game IS PvPers scaring away the population, something which doesn't even happen in this game.
I would say that the main problems are stability, lag, non working economy, horrible new player experience and lack of population in a huge map.
One more thing when i was saying about why they don't advertise their game with massive protections, limited and conensual PvP and indestructible castles i didn't mean to say that was a thing in the game, (even if that actually is in Epleland for example)that was just an example but I guess you need a functioning brain to understand that. I was just supposing that if they would advertise their game like that, it wouldn't be appealing to most players, only to those who would enjoy grinding for the sake of grinding. Grinding for nothing basically.
Also i'm telling you again I don't really know if we're playing the same game because if you think that the central city is the only safezone then I guess you didn't even build a claim because literally town claims with a building that has a door are "pocket safezones" a safezone which you can have almost wherever you want, and when boosting and barkboxing was disabled the safezone was so big that it literally destroyed roaming and raiding.
Read those 12 pages trust me, maybe you will change your carebear mindset and maybe you can really realize what is wrong with the current state of the game and not blame it on "angry merciless PvPers"

[Sunleader]

...

At this point I don't even think it's worth keeping up this conversation because you're either drunk when typing or maybe you have problems in understanding english or i don't really know what else.
First of all you continue to contradict yourself multiple times and you don't even realize it, for example you're in favor of the alignment system yet you say something like this "Loss of Progress is a Surefire way to make People leave the Game."
Second what is the grind for then if not to arrive to the real "endgame" by game concept, sieges and PvP related activities, grind for the sake of grinding?
Maybe you should read all the 12 pages of THIS TOPIC so you can really get an idea of what people want from this game, and what were and still are the main problems. You will see that even since the start of JANUARY people were complaining that once their guild castle was up they simply stopped playing because the game was limiting the supposed endgame (PvP related stuff) too much back then since the removal of barkboxing and boosting at the end of december which was what allowed raiding and roaming to be a thing.
Also getting to sieges was even way more hard and limited to what we have now, IB damage was minor and you had to use the influence zone to siege.
I can't really take you seriously i'm sorry, just the fact that you believe that the main problem of this game IS PvPers scaring away the population, something which doesn't even happen in this game.
I would say that the main problems are stability, lag, non working economy, horrible new player experience and lack of population in a huge map.
One more thing when i was saying about why they don't advertise their game with massive protections, limited and conensual PvP and indestructible castles i didn't mean to say that was a thing in the game, (even if that actually is in Epleland for example)that was just an example but I guess you need a functioning brain to understand that. I was just supposing that if they would advertise their game like that, it wouldn't be appealing to most players, only to those who would enjoy grinding for the sake of grinding. Grinding for nothing basically.
Also i'm telling you again I don't really know if we're playing the same game because if you think that the central city is the only safezone then I guess you didn't even build a claim because literally town claims with a building that has a door are "pocket safezones" a safezone which you can have almost wherever you want, and when boosting and barkboxing was disabled the safezone was so big that it literally destroyed roaming and raiding.
Read those 12 pages trust me, maybe you will change your carebear mindset and maybe you can really realize what is wrong with the current state of the game and not blame it on "angry merciless PvPers"

If you need to resort to Personal Attacks instead of Arguments its usually a good sign you should admit defeat and get out mate



And Mate.
To me it would seem your the one having trouble with English.

Because I think I explained this a few Times already.
But if your Right. Then this Games Intended Endgame Design.
Is Effectively the End of the Game.

Your Idea of Endgame being about Guilds Sieging each other and Destroying each others Castles.
Means that the Game Basicly is over after that.
Because Building up a proper Castle is Months of Work in this Game.
Once its Destroyed the Vast Majority of the Losers Leaves the Game.
And if you want more than 1 Fight per Month.
Then you also have to have More than 1 Loser per Month.


I am saying it Again Mate.
YOUR IDEA OF ENDGAME CONTENT WOULD KILL THE GAME.
Your Idea of Endgame Content works for a Small Life is Feudal Your Own Server.
Because there the Speed of Building up Stuff is very Fast. So everyone Builds up his Castle in a Week or Two.
Then Runs a Big Ragnarök Wartime for a Month.
And after that the Server will Wipe and Start a new Round.


But this CANNOT work for the MMO.
The MMO has to actually Stay Permanently.
And if 1 out of 10 Players Stay in the Game after losing a Castle they took 3 or more Months to Build.
Then thats an Extremely Tenacious Player.
And an Extreme Rarity.


Showing it to you again.
Mortal Online.
https://steamcharts.com/app/287920

That Game is Exactly what you Demand Life is Feudal to be.
And that Player Number is exactly where such a Game Ends.


And Erm No.
Seriously No.

The 12 Pages here are running across several different Versions of the Game.
They are pretty much not Up to Date.

If you want to Know what Players actually Want.
You just need to get an Idea why the Devs made 3 Green and only 1 Red Server.
Or Simply Check what Server Players Play on after being Given Free Choice to Change Servers at will.
The Fact is about 70% of the Players Decided to Play on Green Servers. While only 30% Play on Red Servers.

Take a Guess why the Vast Majority of Players is on Green Servers where their Assets are Safe.
Instead of going to Red Servers where everything including entire Guild Claims can be Destroyed

[WestArcher]

You keep bringing up mortal online, but almost unanimously people praise it for it's open world pvp + full loot with exception to frustrations with blueblocking.

What killed MO is it's developers and their disgustingly corrupt GMs, not to mention databreach hacks being pretty regular, or the ddos attacks on rival guild members. For 8 years people have been running around with GM console and duping items and those issues are still not fixed. The devs simply add a new spell or furniture to the game and call it progress. There are still lore skills in the game for creatures that do not exist, most of the game functions on client side so duping and all sorts of cheats are still prevalent.

The developers killed MO, severe flaws in game mechanics and game breaking bugs that keep on adding up, You STILL need to drop all your items and pick them back up to remove the invis item bug.

Why don't you look at an alive full loot pvp game instead.
https://uogateway.com/index.php?p=1&orderby=susers
Private servers for a game made in 1997 often tote better numbers than we do and with a far smaller game world to boot.

[DiddlyDale]

I am wondering if the devs have finally woken up or is it still double down on total nonsense and hope it works land?

I mean seriously there is a way to please everyone here as we have around 50 empty servers yet they still insist on head banging the wall meanwhile the game is clearly dead, devs when are you going to realise the people who would leave the game over losing a castle will leave anyway

[Torneach]

Take a Guess why the Vast Majority of Players is on Green Servers where their Assets are Safe.

I play on a green server because the politics on Buyan are a shitshow and I want nothing to do with it. That and every guild I talked to was well-established and just wanted another warm body for their armies. And the removal of personal claims wholesale (instead of penalizing those abusing them) was another reason to stay away.

On topic - a few points about the design philosophy I'd prefer to see:

1) Nothing should ever be 100% safe, but nothing that took weeks to build should be able to be destroyed in a matter of hours.

Attacking a heavily fortified town claim with castle walls should be an undertaking that takes intense preparation and dedication, while attacking a town with wooden palisades should be much easier.

Captured outposts should be held for a week or so before they can be destroyed.

2) There need to be opportunities for conflict and battles that sit somewhere between total war and random encounters between small groups in the wilderness.

Instanced Battles and their claim damage systems are a poor stand-in for open world, mid-level conflict.

The bark-box-over-walls system is trash design and would be an exploit anywhere else, but it exists because there's no way around its necessity due to a lack of game mechanics. Give us ropes and ladders or something, usable only during JH. Then remove some of the protections town claims inherently have so they can be properly raided.

3) There need to be incentives for peaceful interactions as well as hostile ones.

Regional resources are a start, but the guilds you trade with are oftentimes miles away and you generally wouldn't fight them anyway.

Once you're established there's not much reason to interact with your neutral neighbors peacefully. They become either a nuisance to be removed or PvP content to be farmed. Perhaps implement a system to force-vassalize a guild and a system to handle tribute demands. You'd have warrior guilds with crafter guilds as vassals under their protection.

You can't lament a player culture that preys on the weak when there's no reason not to.

4) Furthermore, the servers and server line transitions must be improved ASAP. This might be more important than adding content.


Just a few thoughts from a long-time lurker and Sandbox MMO enthusiast.

[sunleader]

You keep bringing up mortal online, but almost unanimously people praise it for it's open world pvp + full loot with exception to frustrations with blueblocking.

What killed MO is it's developers and their disgustingly corrupt GMs, not to mention databreach hacks being pretty regular, or the ddos attacks on rival guild members. For 8 years people have been running around with GM console and duping items and those issues are still not fixed. The devs simply add a new spell or furniture to the game and call it progress. There are still lore skills in the game for creatures that do not exist, most of the game functions on client side so duping and all sorts of cheats are still prevalent.

The developers killed MO, severe flaws in game mechanics and game breaking bugs that keep on adding up, You STILL need to drop all your items and pick them back up to remove the invis item bug.

Why don't you look at an alive full loot pvp game instead.
https://uogateway.com/index.php?p=1&orderby=susers
Private servers for a game made in 1997 often tote better numbers than we do and with a far smaller game world to boot.

1.
Mate.
Let me tell you a little Story.

One Day in the Teamspeak we suddenly got a Roll Call.
*Grab your Gear and get Ready for a Siege. Who can stay they Night*
After Organizing Squads and moving out.
The Story was simple.
One of our Guys Killed the Leader of another Guild and got Access to their Gate.
We moved in and took the Fort.
The Enemy Guild stood no Chance in a Fight. They tried to recruit Mercs but not really useful since there was nobody really powerful enough to do anything about us.
They called a GM claiming we bugused or whatever trying to make the GM move us out of the Fort.
But we didnt so the GM just watched for a bit and then denied them.

A day later their Castle was Ruins.
For more than 2 weeks they cried about corrupt GMs (even longer on reddit)
And within 4 weeks 32 out of 36 of them Quit the Game.
Rest became Griefers/RPKs only logging in now abd then to harass players.


What Ruined Mortal Online was that the Game had no asset protection and unrestricted PvP.
The *Corrupted GMs* bullcrab only came because whatever clan lost their assets each and every single time caused a big crabstorm about how the others cheated or had GM help or whatever.
And almost all of em Quit.
So yeah take a guess.



As for UO.
Then maybe Check UO.
You cant do crab to my House in UO.
Only asset that can be taken is on seperate Siege Shards.
Which is practically what Life is Feudal did with Green and Red Servers.
Fun Fact. UO restricts PvP alot more than Life is Feudal.
Entire Zones are bSicly no PvP areas and RPKs are BLOCKED from going there.
Criminal stagus holds much longer and you cant log out while its active.

So sorry.
But UO is nowhere even close to the demands you make here.
If you ever played it that is lol.

[sunleader]

Take a Guess why the Vast Majority of Players is on Green Servers where their Assets are Safe.

I play on a green server because the politics on Buyan are a shitshow and I want nothing to do with it. That and every guild I talked to was well-established and just wanted another warm body for their armies. And the removal of personal claims wholesale (instead of penalizing those abusing them) was another reason to stay away.

On topic - a few points about the design philosophy I'd prefer to see:

1) Nothing should ever be 100% safe, but nothing that took weeks to build should be able to be destroyed in a matter of hours.

Attacking a heavily fortified town claim with castle walls should be an undertaking that takes intense preparation and dedication, while attacking a town with wooden palisades should be much easier.

Captured outposts should be held for a week or so before they can be destroyed.

2) There need to be opportunities for conflict and battles that sit somewhere between total war and random encounters between small groups in the wilderness.

Instanced Battles and their claim damage systems are a poor stand-in for open world, mid-level conflict.

The bark-box-over-walls system is trash design and would be an exploit anywhere else, but it exists because there's no way around its necessity due to a lack of game mechanics. Give us ropes and ladders or something, usable only during JH. Then remove some of the protections town claims inherently have so they can be properly raided.

3) There need to be incentives for peaceful interactions as well as hostile ones.

Regional resources are a start, but the guilds you trade with are oftentimes miles away and you generally wouldn't fight them anyway.

Once you're established there's not much reason to interact with your neutral neighbors peacefully. They become either a nuisance to be removed or PvP content to be farmed. Perhaps implement a system to force-vassalize a guild and a system to handle tribute demands. You'd have warrior guilds with crafter guilds as vassals under their protection.

You can't lament a player culture that preys on the weak when there's no reason not to.

4) Furthermore, the servers and server line transitions must be improved ASAP. This might be more important than adding content.


Just a few thoughts from a long-time lurker and Sandbox MMO enthusiast.

1.
Agreed and that is currently the case.
A small Town can be Destroyed fairly easily by placing your own monument tvere and getting it into influenze.
Even on Green Servers.
On Red the smaller Towns can even be destroyed just like that in JH.

But you need to also make sure that Guilds can actually Build UP.
It takes long to Build Stone Walls.
So you need to give enough protection even to simple Pallisades that they can actually reach the stage of Stone Walls.
Otherwise New Players never get a foot in the Door.


On Outposts I actually made a Suggestion.
suggestion-on-outpost-mechanics-t45279/



2.
NO!
Compensating for Lack of Players by Frustrsting the existing Players even more NEVER WORKS.
The only result you get from such actions is that you will get even less Conflict because even more Players Leave thus there being even less People around.

Conflict should always be about gaining something.
Not to prevent losing something.
Because if its about gaining something the Winner is Happy the Loser is Hungry for more actions to also get something.
If its about preventing loss. The Winner is Hungry for more and the loser is Frustrated and leaves the Game.

Thats why there should be incentives for battlegrounds.
For example.
Regionals could fetch high prices if sold in the capital.
Thus creating caravans that can be plundered for profit.
No big loss for the loser some actually useful goodys for the winner.

Outposts as they produce Regionals would gain alot of value to fight for this way as well.


3.
Agreed.
But this requires most of all content.
Right now there is no reason for trade because guilds just do everything themselves.
Thats why we need natives and other content like bandits and zombies so people have a reason to sometimes work together.

But also better trade systems with buy orders instead of sell orders.
So Guilds can specialize in something and get ressources from others.

Most of all however we need more NPC Traders.
There should be shops that sell useful stuff not top of the game gear but medium gear and consumables as well as ressources.
Worker contracts or even Guard Mercs that stand on a tower and attack Hostile Players and NPCs if they come too close.
So Money has a value for everyone causing large guilds to move towards rather producing only high grade stuff to max their money income and buy ressorces rather than produce everything themselves.


4.
No joke on that one....
The Server Nodes really need work.....

[Hodo]

Actually Mortal Online died for other reasons... but that is a different topic altogether.

And please stop with the "Mate" calling all it makes you sound like is a wannabe eurotrash stereotype.

Next lets look at Eve Online, THE most successful indie developed MMO sandbox out there. Running for 15 years solid on ONE server. There was a battle just at the beginning of this month (August) that had over 6k players involved in it. It caused the loss of TRILLIONS of isk of stuff (or several hundred thousand REAL LIFE dollars).

Not including the man hours to make all of it. And you know what... people didnt suddenly rage quit... quite the opposite. It drew in MORE people AGAIN.

People WANT action, they WANT to have something to risk. They WANT to be part of something or make history. They dont want to just make pretty screen shots and then move on to the next building simulator. ((well some may want that))

Right now LiF-MMO is dead due to bad choices and going in the opposite direction of the original intent of the game.

[Sunleader]

Actually Mortal Online died for other reasons... but that is a different topic altogether.

And please stop with the "Mate" calling all it makes you sound like is a wannabe eurotrash stereotype.

Next lets look at Eve Online, THE most successful indie developed MMO sandbox out there. Running for 15 years solid on ONE server. There was a battle just at the beginning of this month (August) that had over 6k players involved in it. It caused the loss of TRILLIONS of isk of stuff (or several hundred thousand REAL LIFE dollars).

Not including the man hours to make all of it. And you know what... people didnt suddenly rage quit... quite the opposite. It drew in MORE people AGAIN.

People WANT action, they WANT to have something to risk. They WANT to be part of something or make history. They dont want to just make pretty screen shots and then move on to the next building simulator. ((well some may want that))

Right now LiF-MMO is dead due to bad choices and going in the opposite direction of the original intent of the game.

No Mate.
Mortal Died exactly for the Reasons I stated.
The ones complaining about the other Reasons are the Guys which are STILL THERE.
The Guys which complained about RPKing and Loss of Assets ALL LEFT.
Thats why its got like 50 People Online Average.




And Mate.
In EVE Online.
Player Stations ARE UNDESTRUCTIBLE.
There is not even a JH or something.
You Simply CANNOT Destroy another Players Station....
NEVER.
Player Owned Stations are 100% Safe.


As for the PvP System.
Well then Lets Check.
EVE is actually Seperated into Zones.
In High Security Zones if you Activate ANY Offensive Modul on another Player you will be Flagged Criminal.
If your Criminal you will be Unable to use Gates, you will be Unable to use Warp and you will be Hunted by NPCs as well as being Attacked by NPC Structures and Stations.
Needless to say your also Free Game for any other Player.
In Low Security Zones you can Warp and dont get Hunted down.
Rest still Applies.

Moreover in EVE Online since Stations cannot be Destroyed.
You can only lose your Ship and Goods.
Which also means for any Higher Risky things you can just store the Expensive Stuff and only use Cheap Stuff.




So Hey.
I am ALL FOR IT.
Lets Adopt the System of EVE Online.

We get NPC Cities which are Safezones all over the Map.

All Personal Claims and Guild Claims are 100% Safe and cannot be Destroyed in any Way.
You can take Control of Sectors by being the Dominant Power in the Sector.

If you Attack someone in the 9 Servers around the Capital you get Criminal Flagged and are not allowed to leave these Servers and will constantly have Royal Guards in Heavy Armor Spawning to Kill you until your either Dead or your Criminal Timer Runs out.

Outside these Tiles you will get Criminal as well.
If you Enter any of the 9 Servers around the Capital the same as above applies.
Otherwise you will be allowed to go free except for any NPC Cities will immediately have their Guards Attack you if you come into Sight.



As I said.
Lets do it.
I am all fine with that



Guys Seriously.
Have you actually Played these Games you constantly come up with ????
Or do you just hear about them here and there ???
Oh yeah UO was so Hardcore.
Oh yeah EVE Online so much Money was Destroyed in that Battle.

Sure thats all True.
But there is alot of Protection and Safety in these Games.
UO was Hardcore mostly because the Consequences you got when doing things really mattered.
And in EVE Online sure alot of Money was Burned in Battles.
But these Losses were stuff that was actually Bought to Battle by the Participants and was actually Risked.

Needless to say that in many cases where Big Assets like Ships were lost.
It not only Resulted in the Players Leaving the Game.
But even resulted in Major Death Threats to other Players.



Wanna know why EVE worked anyways ?
Because in EVE you can Earn REAL MONEY.


Sure make Life is Feudal so that you can actually Sell the Stuff in the Game for Real Money.
And guess what.
Sure People will Play it.
Not because its Fun.
But because they will use it to Earn Money by Grinding Stuff and selling it to others.

[Torneach]

Ignorant nonsense about EVE.

Hoo boy.

First of all, player-built stations are able to be destroyed now (Citadel Expansion). Assets inside them are placed into "asset safety" after destruction and players have to pay 10% of the value to get them back. Except in J-Space (wormholes) where there is no asset safety at all. But losing a station is still an event that will put a corporation back by many man-hours of resourse gathering.

Yes, EVE has high security space, which is actually far more dangerous than any other class of space because player groups can't establish any kind of control over it. Yes, transgressors are punished severely, but they can still do a lot of damage before they're vaporized by the police.

Any safety in EVE has been established by player groups establishing dominance over a certain area. Best analogy is a guild building a great big wall around their claim and guarding it during JH. Speaking of JH, in EVE's low and null security space, you don't even need a declaration of war to trash somebody's station. You can just do it.

And no, there are no NPC safezones "all across the map" in EVE. It's literally just the center. And, by the way, as mentioned above - you are NOT SAFE there. The police in hisec are purely retributive and not protective.

Wanna know why EVE worked anyways ?
Because in EVE you can Earn REAL MONEY.

Also false, unless you're involved in RMT which is a violation of the EULA. You can put real money in via PLEX but cannot take money out. Ever.

Have you actually Played these Games you constantly come up with ????

Yes. Clearly you have not.

[Sunleader]

Ignorant nonsense about EVE.

Hoo boy.

First of all, player-built stations are able to be destroyed now (Citadel Expansion). Assets inside them are placed into "asset safety" after destruction and players have to pay 10% of the value to get them back. Except in J-Space (wormholes) where there is no asset safety at all. But losing a station is still an event that will put a corporation back by many man-hours of resourse gathering.

Yes, EVE has high security space, which is actually far more dangerous than any other class of space because player groups can't establish any kind of control over it. Yes, transgressors are punished severely, but they can still do a lot of damage before they're vaporized by the police.

Any safety in EVE has been established by player groups establishing dominance over a certain area. Best analogy is a guild building a great big wall around their claim and guarding it during JH. Speaking of JH, in EVE's low and null security space, you don't even need a declaration of war to trash somebody's station. You can just do it.

And no, there are no NPC safezones "all across the map" in EVE. It's literally just the center. And, by the way, as mentioned above - you are NOT SAFE there. The police in hisec are purely retributive and not protective.

Wanna know why EVE worked anyways ?
Because in EVE you can Earn REAL MONEY.

Also false, unless you're involved in RMT which is a violation of the EULA. You can put real money in via PLEX but cannot take money out. Ever.

Have you actually Played these Games you constantly come up with ????

Yes. Clearly you have not.

1.
Played EVE for Years.
Albeit for Fairness said before the Expansion.

Then again.
a 10% Rebuy instead of a Loss is still quite the thing.

Putting that into EVE would Still mean that if you Destroy a Castle they would get 90% of the Buildings back unscathed.

Assets Placed into Safety also means that you would get all Containers and Furniture etc back untouched.

So Sorry but Still FAAAR more Protection than anything Life is Feudal Offers.


And well that explains why EVE Dropped so hard that they had to go Free to Play.
Guess People werent to Happy that others could just Trash their Station while they are offline.
Even if its just a 10% Rebuy with no Asset Loss.


2.
High Security Space being more Dangerous is Bullcrab.
Sorry Mate. But I played for Years and I got Killed like 2 Times by RPKs. In High Security Space.
Both times when Flying a Fairly Small Ship.
And Both times chances are that they Died a short time later.

Which is not Surprising. Because unlike Life is Feudal where the Skills are way more Importand.
In EVE the Ship and Stuff you use is way more Importand.
And RPKing in High Security Space Runs a Fairly High Risk of losing this Stuff. So People are Deterred from it.

Retribution is a very Protective Thing Mate.
If I can Kill you but will be Killed 3 Seconds Later then the Decision to Kill you has quite a bit of Weight.
And unless you did something that warrants someone saying "worth it" chances are nobody touches you.

Of course. Your among the People Arguing that it should be allowed to RPK and Grief other Players and Destroy their Stuff for no Reason.
So chances are that you in EVE as well had a Clantag that alot of People saw and tought "Oh Yeah even if I get killed afterwards Killing that ***** is worth it" *gg*


Also
No Offense.
But Player Groups in EVE always tended to be Pricks.
Its nice that your Protected from Random guys but entirely at the Mercy of the Ruling Clan.
If your part of such a Clan or an Alliance thats a Nice Thing.
If like me and many others your Part of a small Unaffiliated Group or Solo. Then this Territory is often a complete No Go Area.



3.
The Good thing about such EULAs is that they are not Legally Binding in most Countries.
So Just like in most Countries if you got Banned for Whatever Reason or even without any Reason you cannot do anything about it and wont even get a Refund.
They cant really do anything about you Violating their EULA outside the Game.

Ah it was Fun Times when on Ebay you got such Funny things like.
"Selling Piece of Paper with 2 Names Written on it"
If you Buy it I.ll give you 50k Cash in Game X ^^



4.
Sorry Mate.
But if you Claim that EVE is less Protected than Life is Feudal than your the one who didnt Play it.

I could also say a piece about Only the Center has Safezones.
But thats a different Story and would take a bit too long *gg*

EVE is an entirely Different System.
Destroying other Peoples Stuff is pretty Limited and as you yourself said you only really lose a 10% Rebuy apparently.
(Pls note I never played after that so I dont know this system honestly back when I played Stations were simply undestructible)

And more Importand. There is Immense Risks involved when doing crab.
Because losing your Ship means its gone.
And a Ship in Eve aint a 5 Minute Crafting Production like some Armor and Weapon in Life is Feudal.

Imagine that each time you Initiate an IB on another Guilds Claim you have to Risk half your entire Guild Claim on it.
Because thats the scale of Risk you take in EVE when you attack others.

[Torneach]

Like I said earlier, the Instanced Battles system is trash. So don't think that I'm defending it.

And no, building a ship and fittings in EVE is far more than a 5 minute task. It takes many hours. And once it's destroyed, the hull is always lost and the modules have a high chance of being destroyed as well. Unlike LiF where everything can be looted.

And the 10% rebuy is just for assets one has in a station and is meant as a protection for personal assets. The station is still very, very dead. And you can't "trash the station while someone's offline", the defender chooses the timers.

And I guess you missed the part where I said that it should take a long time to raze a castle and that we need some kind of conflict that rests somewhere between total war sieges and random killings? And did you miss the part where I said that the game needs to incentivize peaceful interactions as well as hostile ones?

Obviously you come here looking to just argue for the sake of argument and don't actually seek to reach any kind of conclusion. As such, your posts are a complete waste of time to read and write and I would encourage you to please stop. Your ignorance is painful.

[Sunleader]

Like I said earlier, the Instanced Battles system is trash. So don't think that I'm defending it.

And no, building a ship and fittings in EVE is far more than a 5 minute task. It takes many hours. And once it's destroyed, the hull is always lost and the modules have a high chance of being destroyed as well. Unlike LiF where everything can be looted.

And the 10% rebuy is just for assets one has in a station and is meant as a protection for personal assets. The station is still very, very dead. And you can't "trash the station while someone's offline", the defender chooses the timers.

And I guess you missed the part where I said that it should take a long time to raze a castle and that we need some kind of conflict that rests somewhere between total war sieges and random killings? And did you miss the part where I said that the game needs to incentivize peaceful interactions as well as hostile ones?

Obviously you come here looking to just argue for the sake of argument and don't actually seek to reach any kind of conclusion. As such, your posts are a complete waste of time to read and write and I would encourage you to please stop. Your ignorance is painful.

I answered your other post already.
Your the one who barged in here and took side with the people which want a Castle to be Destroyable in one or two Battles.
So dont complain to me if your lumped together with them.

Also make some effort.
I said that Ships in EVE are much more work than EQ in LiF.
Thats why in EVE the Risk for the Attacker is tremendously bigger than in LiF where Attacker only risks some EQ that he can replace the same day.

[Hodo]

No Mate.
Mortal Died exactly for the Reasons I stated.
The ones complaining about the other Reasons are the Guys which are STILL THERE.
The Guys which complained about RPKing and Loss of Assets ALL LEFT.
Thats why its got like 50 People Online Average.




And Mate.
In EVE Online.
Player Stations ARE UNDESTRUCTIBLE.
There is not even a JH or something.
You Simply CANNOT Destroy another Players Station....
NEVER.
Player Owned Stations are 100% Safe.


As for the PvP System.
Well then Lets Check.
EVE is actually Seperated into Zones.
In High Security Zones if you Activate ANY Offensive Modul on another Player you will be Flagged Criminal.
If your Criminal you will be Unable to use Gates, you will be Unable to use Warp and you will be Hunted by NPCs as well as being Attacked by NPC Structures and Stations.
Needless to say your also Free Game for any other Player.
In Low Security Zones you can Warp and dont get Hunted down.
Rest still Applies.

Moreover in EVE Online since Stations cannot be Destroyed.
You can only lose your Ship and Goods.
Which also means for any Higher Risky things you can just store the Expensive Stuff and only use Cheap Stuff.

Hmm... sounds like someone who doesn't play Eve but has played Eve ONCE... a LONG LONG LONG time ago.

Let me catch you up...

Just at the beginning of the month the Imperium attacked in the north, destroying SEVERAL player built Keepstars WHICH are stations.

https://zkillboard.com/kill/71751615/

Just for your information.

Then there is Mortal Online.

Being a Block B beta player from that game and having played up until a few years ago, I can say that the game had a LOT of flaws that lead to its failing. Much like this one. Any ONE thing is not true. It was a combination of factors that killed Mortal Online, and one player who continually hacked the game.

So please stop acting like you know everything because you like John Snow know nothing.

[Monco]

I feel like RED worlds should have a more high risk - high reward system, town claims should be completely lootable during JH or at least weekend JHs.
The current system is low risk - low reward or, in some cases, low risk - high reward.
You have low risk - low reward in case of realm claim raids or outpost battles to control / destroy them.
In some cases you have low risk - high reward, basically when there is a T1 guild monument which can be destroyed.
I feel like the main problem with the current system is the fact that "attackers" are always in a state of low risk and can afford to leave their bases empty during JHs because they are overprotected by game mechanics.
This systems promotes the movement of massive zergs across the map to target even a single place because basically all guilds from an alliance can afford to leave their base without the danger of losing anything.
The system also promotes the creation of multiple 100% safe "Town claims only" bases around the map because once you build them you don't actively need to defend them since they are already protected by game mechanics.
If the game would dismantle those limitations and allow at least to have Town claims to be LOOTABLE during JHs people would be encouraged to build on realm claim because they would need to keep an eye only on one place instead of having to watch multiple town claims at the same time.
It would also discourage zerg attacks in one place only, something that we are currently seeing in the game even with the current low population and the result is that servers get terribly laggy and unplayable.
Basically with the current system what we see is that once a "faction" manages to get an enemy "faction" guild monument to T1 and they get to the siege phase they bring everyone available to that location to help with the siege without having to worry about leaving their bases empty. Low risk - High reward.
So basically the result is that all of the 2 factions' population is concentrated in one place at the moment of the siege causing the server to be massively laggy and leaving players with a bad experience.
Now if Town Claims would be lootable during JHs, the "siege phase" would become a high risk - high reward scenario because the "attackers' claims" would still be vulnerable to some extent and "defenders" or even a third "faction" or simply random raiders could have people roaming around the "attacker" territory causing some trouble and damage thus having the "attackers" to be forced to leave some people behind to watch over their territory, promoting the fact of having more people in more different places at the same time, discouraging a full zerg tactic and having servers to be less loaded due to the fact of not having everyone concentrated in one place.
That is why i think it is very important for RED servers to have a system of HIGH RISK - HIGH REWARD, a system that would imo balance itself.



In short words for RED WORLDS ONLY, make TOWN CLAIMS LOOTABLE DURING JH, a system which would promote spreading of players during JH, discourage a full zerg tactic during sieges and having a proper HIGH RISK - HIGH REWARD system in place instead of the low risk - low reward or low risk - high reward systems that we currently have.

[Sunleader]

No Mate.
Mortal Died exactly for the Reasons I stated.
The ones complaining about the other Reasons are the Guys which are STILL THERE.
The Guys which complained about RPKing and Loss of Assets ALL LEFT.
Thats why its got like 50 People Online Average.




And Mate.
In EVE Online.
Player Stations ARE UNDESTRUCTIBLE.
There is not even a JH or something.
You Simply CANNOT Destroy another Players Station....
NEVER.
Player Owned Stations are 100% Safe.


As for the PvP System.
Well then Lets Check.
EVE is actually Seperated into Zones.
In High Security Zones if you Activate ANY Offensive Modul on another Player you will be Flagged Criminal.
If your Criminal you will be Unable to use Gates, you will be Unable to use Warp and you will be Hunted by NPCs as well as being Attacked by NPC Structures and Stations.
Needless to say your also Free Game for any other Player.
In Low Security Zones you can Warp and dont get Hunted down.
Rest still Applies.

Moreover in EVE Online since Stations cannot be Destroyed.
You can only lose your Ship and Goods.
Which also means for any Higher Risky things you can just store the Expensive Stuff and only use Cheap Stuff.

Hmm... sounds like someone who doesn't play Eve but has played Eve ONCE... a LONG LONG LONG time ago.

Let me catch you up...

Just at the beginning of the month the Imperium attacked in the north, destroying SEVERAL player built Keepstars WHICH are stations.

https://zkillboard.com/kill/71751615/

Just for your information.

Then there is Mortal Online.

Being a Block B beta player from that game and having played up until a few years ago, I can say that the game had a LOT of flaws that lead to its failing. Much like this one. Any ONE thing is not true. It was a combination of factors that killed Mortal Online, and one player who continually hacked the game.

So please stop acting like you know everything because you like John Snow know nothing.

Erm Mate.
You do Realize that you Basicly just said that I am absolutely right do you ???

[Sunleader]

I feel like RED worlds should have a more high risk - high reward system, town claims should be completely lootable during JH or at least weekend JHs.
The current system is low risk - low reward or, in some cases, low risk - high reward.
You have low risk - low reward in case of realm claim raids or outpost battles to control / destroy them.
In some cases you have low risk - high reward, basically when there is a T1 guild monument which can be destroyed.
I feel like the main problem with the current system is the fact that "attackers" are always in a state of low risk and can afford to leave their bases empty during JHs because they are overprotected by game mechanics.
This systems promotes the movement of massive zergs across the map to target even a single place because basically all guilds from an alliance can afford to leave their base without the danger of losing anything.
The system also promotes the creation of multiple 100% safe "Town claims only" bases around the map because once you build them you don't actively need to defend them since they are already protected by game mechanics.
If the game would dismantle those limitations and allow at least to have Town claims to be LOOTABLE during JHs people would be encouraged to build on realm claim because they would need to keep an eye only on one place instead of having to watch multiple town claims at the same time.
It would also discourage zerg attacks in one place only, something that we are currently seeing in the game even with the current low population and the result is that servers get terribly laggy and unplayable.
Basically with the current system what we see is that once a "faction" manages to get an enemy "faction" guild monument to T1 and they get to the siege phase they bring everyone available to that location to help with the siege without having to worry about leaving their bases empty. Low risk - High reward.
So basically the result is that all of the 2 factions' population is concentrated in one place at the moment of the siege causing the server to be massively laggy and leaving players with a bad experience.
Now if Town Claims would be lootable during JHs, the "siege phase" would become a high risk - high reward scenario because the "attackers' claims" would still be vulnerable to some extent and "defenders" or even a third "faction" or simply random raiders could have people roaming around the "attacker" territory causing some trouble and damage thus having the "attackers" to be forced to leave some people behind to watch over their territory, promoting the fact of having more people in more different places at the same time, discouraging a full zerg tactic and having servers to be less loaded due to the fact of not having everyone concentrated in one place.
That is why i think it is very important for RED servers to have a system of HIGH RISK - HIGH REWARD, a system that would imo balance itself.



In short words for RED WORLDS ONLY, make TOWN CLAIMS LOOTABLE DURING JH, a system which would promote spreading of players during JH, discourage a full zerg tactic during sieges and having a proper HIGH RISK - HIGH REWARD system in place instead of the low risk - low reward or low risk - high reward systems that we currently have.

2 Things.

1.
I dont care if you want to Kill Red Worlds.
So despite knowing for sure that a System like you Suggest would Kill Red Worlds for Good.
And despite knowing perfectly well that NOTHING ever balances itself.
I dont care at all. And wont bother arguing about it since I am a Green World Player.
So if you want to Kill Red Servers. Go ahead suggest what you want.

2.
Your System would not be High Risk, High Reward.
In Fact your System would simply not work at all aside from allowing Griefers to Glitch over Walls and Steal Stuff.

Because here is the thing.
Town Claims being "Lootable" does not actually result in any Real Fight.
The Town Claim is Surrounded by a Pallisade or other Wall with a Gate.
And Containers will be inside Houses or the Castle.
Meaning that a Guild that wants to go Looting will just keep all their own Stuff behind Closed Doors where you cant reach it as you can only Loot not Open Doors or Destroy Stuff.

But you cant exactly allow others to just Open Doors of Defensive Structures.
Because then these Defensive Structures would be Stupid

You might get away with opening Normal House Doors.
But even if the Guild has no Castle where it can put all its stuff.
It can Simply Build 2 Stone Gatehouses and put their Stuff into the
Room created between the 2 Stone Gatehouses Gates.
Where you cannot get to it at all.

Even worse.
RPK Guilds wont have anything in their Town Claim at all.
They will just keep Gold and other Stuff in Capital City Warehouse and Feed the Monument which is basicly a Town Claim with just Pallisades etc surrounded and nothing of value inside it.

Thus being able to just go around Pillaging while Risking absolutely Nothing themselves.
But being allowed to just Take everything from other Guilds.
Of course there wont be much because with this System most Guilds will simply not actually bother having stuff to loot for others because nobody is interested in having Guards Posted everywhere during each Single JH just to make sure no Thieves Sneak in and Steal Stuff.



Told you in the other Topic already.
If you think People are Crafty at exploiting and circumventing Protection Systems.
Just how Crafty do you think they get when these Systems aint getting in their Way lol

[Monco]

2 Things.

1.
I dont care if you want to Kill Red Worlds.
So despite knowing for sure that a System like you Suggest would Kill Red Worlds for Good.
And despite knowing perfectly well that NOTHING ever balances itself.
I dont care at all. And wont bother arguing about it since I am a Green World Player.
So if you want to Kill Red Servers. Go ahead suggest what you want.

2.
Your System would not be High Risk, High Reward.
In Fact your System would simply not work at all aside from allowing Griefers to Glitch over Walls and Steal Stuff.

Because here is the thing.
Town Claims being "Lootable" does not actually result in any Real Fight.
The Town Claim is Surrounded by a Pallisade or other Wall with a Gate.
And Containers will be inside Houses or the Castle.
Meaning that a Guild that wants to go Looting will just keep all their own Stuff behind Closed Doors where you cant reach it as you can only Loot not Open Doors or Destroy Stuff.

But you cant exactly allow others to just Open Doors of Defensive Structures.
Because then these Defensive Structures would be Stupid

You might get away with opening Normal House Doors.
But even if the Guild has no Castle where it can put all its stuff.
It can Simply Build 2 Stone Gatehouses and put their Stuff into the
Room created between the 2 Stone Gatehouses Gates.
Where you cannot get to it at all.

Even worse.
RPK Guilds wont have anything in their Town Claim at all.
They will just keep Gold and other Stuff in Capital City Warehouse and Feed the Monument which is basicly a Town Claim with just Pallisades etc surrounded and nothing of value inside it.

Thus being able to just go around Pillaging while Risking absolutely Nothing themselves.
But being allowed to just Take everything from other Guilds.
Of course there wont be much because with this System most Guilds will simply not actually bother having stuff to loot for others because nobody is interested in having Guards Posted everywhere during each Single JH just to make sure no Thieves Sneak in and Steal Stuff.



Told you in the other Topic already.
If you think People are Crafty at exploiting and circumventing Protection Systems.
Just how Crafty do you think they get when these Systems aint getting in their Way lol

The system would allow gates to be damaged to a point where the gatehouse breaks (half durability) to prevent double gate 100% safe loot rooms.

Your carebear mindset simply can't understand the fact that people in the red server would like a more "dangerous" type of gameplay, people like to feel the risk, people there want a more "active"
gameplay.

Just look at the damage the removal of "boosting and barkboxing" caused back then, not only it killed roaming and raiding completely but it also removed that sense of "danger", that feel of risk while crafting and being around in your own claim.
A feature that should be standard for a game which promotes itself as a survival one aswell.
If you look at posts back then from january and february in this topic you would see tons of people complaining about the fact that there was no feel of "danger" anymore whatsoever, contributing to make the game even more boring and limited.

The current system has proven multiple times that it simply doesn't work for a RED server, maybe for a "yellow" one, a standard ruleset server but certainly not for a PvP one.
It has massive flaws, it promotes massive zerg attacks simply because the "attacker" just doesn't feel any risk in leaving their base empty because it's already overprotected by game mechanics.
This game was advertised as an open world PvP sandbox, huge limitations and overprotecting game mechanics will never ever make the game succeed because they just kill parts of the game itself.
Each time a sandbox gets limited, even with small changes, you can create massive damage to potential content.
Easy example, the removal of barkboxing and boosting, supposedly a small change but it turned out to be a massive limitation which damaged terribly the PvP aspect of the game just because roaming and raiding were basically possible just due to that simple mechanic.
Those limitations and overprotections terribly contributed to the general game and population decline, because they contributed to limit the already scarce content that the game offers and massively limited potential player made content aswell, something that the game relies on to work properly.

IF protections have to be implemented to maintain a sustainable game and gameplay in the long term they have to be as minimal as possible to prevent the exploit of protection and to limit the gameplay, potential content and player made content as less as possible, something which we have already seen multiple times with different mechanics (private monuments, spam of town claims, drying frames walls as good as castle ones...) .

[Sunleader]

2 Things.

1.
I dont care if you want to Kill Red Worlds.
So despite knowing for sure that a System like you Suggest would Kill Red Worlds for Good.
And despite knowing perfectly well that NOTHING ever balances itself.
I dont care at all. And wont bother arguing about it since I am a Green World Player.
So if you want to Kill Red Servers. Go ahead suggest what you want.

2.
Your System would not be High Risk, High Reward.
In Fact your System would simply not work at all aside from allowing Griefers to Glitch over Walls and Steal Stuff.

Because here is the thing.
Town Claims being "Lootable" does not actually result in any Real Fight.
The Town Claim is Surrounded by a Pallisade or other Wall with a Gate.
And Containers will be inside Houses or the Castle.
Meaning that a Guild that wants to go Looting will just keep all their own Stuff behind Closed Doors where you cant reach it as you can only Loot not Open Doors or Destroy Stuff.

But you cant exactly allow others to just Open Doors of Defensive Structures.
Because then these Defensive Structures would be Stupid

You might get away with opening Normal House Doors.
But even if the Guild has no Castle where it can put all its stuff.
It can Simply Build 2 Stone Gatehouses and put their Stuff into the
Room created between the 2 Stone Gatehouses Gates.
Where you cannot get to it at all.

Even worse.
RPK Guilds wont have anything in their Town Claim at all.
They will just keep Gold and other Stuff in Capital City Warehouse and Feed the Monument which is basicly a Town Claim with just Pallisades etc surrounded and nothing of value inside it.

Thus being able to just go around Pillaging while Risking absolutely Nothing themselves.
But being allowed to just Take everything from other Guilds.
Of course there wont be much because with this System most Guilds will simply not actually bother having stuff to loot for others because nobody is interested in having Guards Posted everywhere during each Single JH just to make sure no Thieves Sneak in and Steal Stuff.



Told you in the other Topic already.
If you think People are Crafty at exploiting and circumventing Protection Systems.
Just how Crafty do you think they get when these Systems aint getting in their Way lol

The system would allow gates to be damaged to a point where the gatehouse breaks (half durability) to prevent double gate 100% safe loot rooms.

Your carebear mindset simply can't understand the fact that people in the red server would like a more "dangerous" type of gameplay, people like to feel the risk, people there want a more "active"
gameplay.

Just look at the damage the removal of "boosting and barkboxing" caused back then, not only it killed roaming and raiding completely but it also removed that sense of "danger", that feel of risk while crafting and being around in your own claim.
A feature that should be standard for a game which promotes itself as a survival one aswell.
If you look at posts back then from january and february in this topic you would see tons of people complaining about the fact that there was no feel of "danger" anymore whatsoever, contributing to make the game even more boring and limited.

The current system has proven multiple times that it simply doesn't work for a RED server, maybe for a "yellow" one, a standard ruleset server but certainly not for a PvP one.
It has massive flaws, it promotes massive zerg attacks simply because the "attacker" just doesn't feel any risk in leaving their base empty because it's already overprotected by game mechanics.
This game was advertised as an open world PvP sandbox, huge limitations and overprotecting game mechanics will never ever make the game succeed because they just kill parts of the game itself.
Each time a sandbox gets limited, even with small changes, you can create massive damage to potential content.
Easy example, the removal of barkboxing and boosting, supposedly a small change but it turned out to be a massive limitation which damaged terribly the PvP aspect of the game just because roaming and raiding were basically possible just due to that simple mechanic.
Those limitations and overprotections terribly contributed to the general game and population decline, because they contributed to limit the already scarce content that the game offers and massively limited potential player made content aswell, something that the game relies on to work properly.

IF protections have to be implemented to maintain a sustainable game and gameplay in the long term they have to be as minimal as possible to prevent the exploit of protection and to limit the gameplay, potential content and player made content as less as possible, something which we have already seen multiple times with different mechanics (private monuments, spam of town claims, drying frames walls as good as castle ones...) .

1.
This would make Defenses Useless in any Siege.
Because for this to Work a Gatehouse would need to be so Weak that it can be Damaged so Fast that in a Single JH it can be Damaged and Opened.
Meaning that any actual Defenses in General would be completely Meaningless because you never need to bother with them anyways as you can just Break the Gate fast and then Ignore all other Defenses.

If you make the Gatehouse so Strong it cannot be Damaged and Opened by normal means in a Single JH however your System becomes meaningless again.
Because then the Guilds can just Repair it in between and dont need to bother Defending during JH.

The only thing you would Achieve here is that you would either Completely Ruin Sieges because Defensive Structures would become Meaningless as you can just Breach the Gates in a short time.

Needless to say even then I would not care. I would simply Build 3 Gatehouses on each Side of my Boxes so even if you make Gates so Weak that they become entirely useless in a Siege they will still be time consuming enough to protect my stuff from JH Looting.

Then there is other Options.
I can simply use a Cheap Pallisade and Build it all around my Boxes without an Opening.
Outside JH I just Destroy 1 Pallisade.
Then before JH just Build it up again.
And your entire Plan goes into the Drain because have fun getting into that small Enclosure without getting stuck inside etc.


2.
Your RPK/Ganker/Griefer Mindset can apparently not understand that People dont like being Frustrated and that not everyone is a Sadist like you and gets Enjoyment out of it when he causes Grief to others.
But most of all it seems you fail to understand that there is alot of different People in such Games.
And the small Niche you want to cater to brings Games to the Size of Playerbase that Mortal Online has.


3.
Look at all the People which came to the Forum to Complain about Griefers using Barkboxes to get into Claims all Day around and Start Griefing People there.

I just need to Check Steam Reviews and will immediately get Negative Reviews of People which Quit because People somehow Exploited themselves over the Walls of a Town etc.

Yet the only Complains I saw about their Removal was the same 3 Griefers that I already had Discussions with Half a Year Earlier and which are still in the Game complaining about how they aint allowed to Rape and Pillage everything.

So Yeah Great Damage.
Steam Charts Show that Bark Boxes did not really change anything to be honest.
Game kept losing 20-30% of Users throughout the entire time.
Until the Big Update in July.
Before that no Change has changed the Numbers enough to make a Dent.


4.
Your System has even more Flaws.
People will Exploit anything they can.
And your System is so badly tought out that I can come up with Exploits right away to render it completely meaningless and abuse it to hearts Content.

And given that you didnt even try to address the other ways I mentioned to abuse your System.
Like simply not having anything in the Town Claim and thus going around Pillaging like Crazy.
And People who dont care just going thiefing and gltiching for loot instead of fighting any battles

Its fairly Obvious that you yourself know that your System can be abused.

So either you dont care because you wanted to make Defenses useless to start with.
Or you are simply so ignorant that you closed your eyes and ignored it.



5.
Mate just Listen to yourself.
As Minimal as Possible to prevent them from being Exploited ????

The more Minimal they are the more they will be Exploited and Abused as well as Circumvented.


In your System you Suggested above.
Things would either not Change at all.
Or Defenses would end up 100% useless and thus nobody would Build any.
Needless to say that alot of people would not build any anyways and just have an Empty Claim while going out to Pillage and Raid without taking the slightest Risk.

[DiddlyDale]

Sunleader the game is dead, your system that is in place right now is not working except for a few players, the rest of the world however isn't even taking one look at this game.

I think you are also full of it, every argument you make is incoherent nonsense and I am surprised a mod hasn't asked you to tone it down, ill give you an example.

This would make Defenses Useless in any Siege.
Because for this to Work a Gatehouse would need to be so Weak that it can be Damaged so Fast that in a Single JH it can be Damaged and Opened.
Meaning that any actual Defenses in General would be completely Meaningless because you never need to bother with them anyways as you can just Break the Gate fast and then Ignore all other Defenses.

If you make the Gatehouse so Strong it cannot be Damaged and Opened by normal means in a Single JH however your System becomes meaningless again.
Because then the Guilds can just Repair it in between and dont need to bother Defending during JH.

The only thing you would Achieve here is that you would either Completely Ruin Sieges because Defensive Structures would become Meaningless as you can just Breach the Gates in a short time.

Needless to say even then I would not care. I would simply Build 3 Gatehouses on each Side of my Boxes so even if you make Gates so Weak that they become entirely useless in a Siege they will still be time consuming enough to protect my stuff from JH Looting.

Then there is other Options.
I can simply use a Cheap Pallisade and Build it all around my Boxes without an Opening.
Outside JH I just Destroy 1 Pallisade.
Then before JH just Build it up again.
And your entire Plan goes into the Drain because have fun getting into that small Enclosure without getting stuck inside etc.

The first two paragraphs are literally you battling with yourself lol it makes no sense except you discussing with yourself what a weak and strong wall means.

Then you go on about defences being meaningless because they can be destroyed in a short space of time as a one point of view but then fail to express the opposite reasoning (that you would either Completely Ruin Sieges) or?

Then you talk about making 3 gates to protect your boxes? I mean wtf are you on? And then about deleting wall spaces and repairing them.

There is no way of having a conversation with somebody this mental, I am sorry but if this is who the devs listen to no wonder their game is fucked.

Everything you talk about is semantics to the next level, you find holes in holes in holes, and anyone looking in probably thinks the LiF community is a bunch of insane people.

You also lie a lot buddy, it's not good when you quote things that are clearly untrue, type bark boxing into the advanced search on the forums.

Then the steam reviews and walls, let me help you, go here https://steamcommunity.com/app/700030/n ... 5_reviews_

Scroll as long as you can till you get to the "No more content. So Sad." bit which means you have reached the bottom of all reviews that you want to investigate, in this particular case I wanted to investigate "Most Helpful" "Negative Reviews".

So lets do a headcount first shall we type "Not Recommended" which gives us 711, okay so we have 711 Not Recommended reviews present with a small number of false positives, Now "Wall" at which point you have 89.

The most common word prevalent as decided by the filter god is "Server", followed up by "Pay" and the next is "PVP", did you know "PVE" is lower than "Chinese" lol.

My images for those interested of my own research, I always advise doing your own to double check findings.













Now before you start jumping up and down like a happy potato stating "PvE isn't the issue then!" no most people don't think it is and never really will except in the formalities of enriching it.

PvP however is boring and not very indepth even to the standards of an MMO that considers itself a sandbox.

Lets take a look at what people have to complain about and I will just copy paste what they said, from the top the first 10 reviews, summarised to the PvP bit.

Spoiler

Jakkus

If PVP aspect sound alluring for you don’t let you guard down. This game is not PVP “friendly” even on PVP servers. Devs constantly work to take care for their player base don’t kill each other which is usually good think – however it greatly reduces and diminishes PVP.

Raido

BUT after all the PvE people want to do some PvP too, which is a total catastrophe.

JackW2As

If you like PVP don't buy this game. PVP isn't that fun(mostly a lag fest right now), and your going to get massive penalties on death(Unless you spend hours preying to the Gods). This game isn't Rust or Ark.

[EU] Ananas-Koi

Problem:: The skill-cap is restricting my gameplay and making us not competitive in a PVP surrounding.

The Majestic Space Duck

the server I was on, the standard, vanilla server as it was, was turned into a PvP server.

Hallegra

When you have a group of 30 people and every single one of you crashes out during PVP events, it's horrible.

Garbage Jukes

1) Severe lag. This ranges from full lockups when entering certain areas (generally with lots of trees) to desync on players' hitboxes, resulting in excruciatingly frustrating PVP.

(VS)Stark

I fell in love with the idea bobik promised, a niche hardcore pvp game. I'm horrified, but not surprised, at the 180 the devs have done to make money.

-HoK- Dalix Khan

Then....came the PvPer. All they want to do. Battle in small skirmish, war declaration with no consequence whate-so-ever... the dream of having a heavy political / strategy game was gone the moment they put emphasis on combat with no end.

';..;'

but due to most forms of PvP not working, all a group can do is taunt another group in the official discord. If you ever beat a group while you are roaming in the MMO, don’t expect them to ever fight you again if they can help it as their walls will protect them for as long as sieges aren’t in the game.

There first ten reviews that popped up for me, there was one person that wanted less PvP in that list, the rest had multiple issues and you can do this multiple times just clicking the down arrow and reading what people think.

Walls I did the same but I am not even going to bother, it was such a mixed bag that you can't really get a rhythm with what people are feeling about it, people talked about exploits, sleeping bags, paywalls (haha), the old drying wrack meta and the inability to get over walls (again old meta in red servers).

So Yeah Great Damage.
Steam Charts Show that Bark Boxes did not really change anything to be honest.
Game kept losing 20-30% of Users throughout the entire time.
Until the Big Update in July.
Before that no Change has changed the Numbers enough to make a Dent.

This sentence makes no sense, the bark boxing changes came in the big update?

And that was when we saw some small rise in players? But nothing that could be attributed to any part of the update because it encompassed both PvP and PvE updates, nothing was really drastic enough to pull in one or the other.

In fact we could say that on average the update contained nearly 90% PvE updates, with PvP bolt-ons that were re-added from before, or PvP systems that don't actually add anything to the open world gameplay.

Your System has even more Flaws.
People will Exploit anything they can.
And your System is so badly tought out that I can come up with Exploits right away to render it completely meaningless and abuse it to hearts Content.

Yes, and?

And given that you didnt even try to address the other ways I mentioned to abuse your System.
Like simply not having anything in the Town Claim and thus going around Pillaging like Crazy.
And People who dont care just going thiefing and gltiching for loot instead of fighting any battles

Its fairly Obvious that you yourself know that your System can be abused.

So either you dont care because you wanted to make Defenses useless to start with.
Or you are simply so ignorant that you closed your eyes and ignored it.

Why would he? I can give you ways to abuse a system, it's called hacking, guess what the devs have to build systems against it so just naming an exploit as a trump card is completely pointless because nobody wants exploits.

The devs are the only people responsible for exploits in their game, nobody else is responsible and making one up and going "see there! An exploit HMPGFFF" doesn't validate your argument, it just makes you sound like you haven't got a clue.

Arguing about a system in place should be about the system, abusing the system should be discussed from a gameplay perspective, glitching isn't a gameplay perspective as we all agree it's wrong.

And any gameplay issues you might have clearly need to be addressed, the one you put

Like simply not having anything in the Town Claim and thus going around Pillaging like Crazy.

So what you are saying is that an undefended empty town claim is defeating a fully manned town claim? Yeah let me think about that one for a bit lol.

Mate just Listen to yourself.
As Minimal as Possible to prevent them from being Exploited ????

The more Minimal they are the more they will be Exploited and Abused as well as Circumvented.

I wouldn't agree, games that have minimal system preventing PvP are failing on steam, PvP should be controlled but by natural harmonisation of the internal systems.

For example with Ark: Survival Evolved you can raid at any point in time, however to do so you must have lots of materials, tames/imprinting.

It takes a long time to build/get those things in quantities large enough to take out a serious alpha clan on another server, and battles can last around 12/24 hours easy for one base which is considerably longer than Life is Feudal even with it's JH's you can kill a base outside of IB's in around 1 hour (and IB's are only 20 min max).

Just a note but I played Eve for two years in null/low sec, you are very misinformed or you played for like 2 minutes lol.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Games/comments/1huhvv/eve_online_player_loses_most_expensive_ship_to/

In your System you Suggested above.
Things would either not Change at all.
Or Defenses would end up 100% useless and thus nobody would Build any.

Defenses are never 100% useless, they are however 100% useless if the people on them are !00% useless, I've never known a game that has defences that aren't used especially survival types.

Needless to say that alot of people would not build any anyways and just have an Empty Claim while going out to Pillage and Raid without taking the slightest Risk.

So how would they get the required stuff to do anything to you then?

You need logic in your life "mate".

[Sunleader]

Bunch of Insults and incoherent bullcrab

Not going to Bother Reading this.
No Offense intended. I actually tried reading it.
But there is a limit too hiw many Personal Attacks I overlook before disregarding Peoples Posts as Buthurt Gibberish Posted in Rage.
And your Post crossed that Threshold before even your Second Paragraph was done.

I dont mind some Snide Comments against my Person when people are Arguing for something.
But I am not going to look for Arguments in a Post that Offends me 5 times before I even feach the third paragraph.


Greetz

[DiddlyDale]

Bunch of Insults and incoherent bullcrab

Not going to Bother Reading this.
No Offense intended. I actually tried reading it.
But there is a limit too hiw many Personal Attacks I overlook before disregarding Peoples Posts as Buthurt Gibberish Posted in Rage.
And your Post crossed that Threshold before even your Second Paragraph was done.

I dont mind some Snide Comments against my Person when people are Arguing for something.
But I am not going to look for Arguments in a Post that Offends me 5 times before I even feach the third paragraph.


Greetz

Yes run away please, my post probably hits a bit hard as it's the truth, and trust me after reading your posts for the last few days I just had to put something down on paper.

And it's very ironic that you think my posts are incoherent bollocks.

[Sunleader]

Bunch of Insults and incoherent bullcrab

Not going to Bother Reading this.
No Offense intended. I actually tried reading it.
But there is a limit too hiw many Personal Attacks I overlook before disregarding Peoples Posts as Buthurt Gibberish Posted in Rage.
And your Post crossed that Threshold before even your Second Paragraph was done.

I dont mind some Snide Comments against my Person when people are Arguing for something.
But I am not going to look for Arguments in a Post that Offends me 5 times before I even feach the third paragraph.


Greetz

Yes run away please, my post probably hits a bit hard as it's the truth, and trust me after reading your posts for the last few days I just had to put something down on paper.

And it's very ironic that you think my posts are incoherent bollocks.

Not Running Away anywhere
I.ll stay right here *gg*

Tell me if you want to argue about the Game instead of posting a wall of Personal Attacks.

[Monco]

I think that at this point we can basically all agree that the current Town claim / Realm Claim system just doesn't work and is heavily exploited.
Also to still have 4 EU servers makes no sense with low population and goes against the original concept and promises of 1 server per region (1 EU 1 NA).
Pleasing everyone made this game basically LIF YO bigger version, where you have multiple servers supposely for different playstyles.
That's a big problem imo because it splits the already not big population too much and limits potential interaction and content between players.

A good solution would be to have all servers merged into 1 or the creation of a new server with a new map, an expandable / adjustable one would be the best option.
That ONE SERVER would be DIVIDED INTO different regions (GREEN, ORANGE, RED) and QUALITY of items would be CAPPED DIFFERENTLY between DIFFERENT REGIONS:
GREEN ------> 25
ORANGE ----> 50
RED ---------> NO CAP
Maybe you could also add a BONUS ON QUANTITY from production aswell, GREEN HALF quantity, ORANGE STANDARD quantity and RED DOUBLE OR THREE TIMES quantity, or even a different action speed or mats required for buildings with the same concept in mind.
Different regions would also have different ASSET PROTECTION aswell:
GREEN ---------> CURRENT EPLELAND level of protection
ORANGE -------> CURRENT system of AVALON (current red server) or a "pay for protection" monument upkeep system, based on the amount of buildings / stuff you have in the town claim or on the amount of town claim tiles you want to have
RED ------------> TOTAL ASSET VULNERABILITY during JH
Some minor changes would also help to improve the system, regarding outposts for example no option to build them on green server, ability to capture them 24/7 on red server (with 2x or 3x production rates if you want an outpost in the RED zone you would have to actively defend it, so they would also actually become true player made hotspots as from original concept).
If the alignment system don't want to be abandoned, kills on green server should give double or triple alignment penalty if not in war standings, standard penalty in orange and no penalty in red. Also skill loss upon death should be changed to 5% or 10% in red, 50% in orange, standard in green (percentages based on the current system) to promote different playstyles.
I really think this system would be way better then what we currently have and would be less exploitable.
Possible flaws which i can quickly think about:
-red zone could become a "mainly outpost only zone", an easy fix would be to give the opportunity to build them there only if you currently own a base in the red server or to cap the amount you can place there based on the zone of the base you place them with (green claim 1 outpost in red, orange claim up to 5, red claim no cap)
-bank claims in the green zone with higher quality stuff taken from the orange or red zone, this can be considered both a "flaw" and an improvement at the same time because people would actually need to move the stuff from the red or orange zone to the green zone and would be at risk to be attacked on the way, promoting both travelling and possible PvP interactions
-inopportunity to enable direct trade from player made trading posts between different regions (green,orange,red) to prevent exploits such as same guild, different bases in different regions trade to get easy safe hq mats moved from red or orange to green

I think what would happen with this system is that most guilds would have a main base on Orange, and a backup or "rp" base on green.
Strong guilds and PvP oriented groups would have bases in red to get red zone benefits.

The system I proposed is not new and can be found in other games but it would obviously function way better then the current one we have, would it completely fix economy? No but it will improve trading between different regions due to quality cap and different quantity outcomes. Would it completely fix lag issues? No but it would promote a more "spread" world with different players that have different playstyles located in different positions but with the option to still interact with each others.

[Sunleader]

I think that at this point we can basically all agree that the current Town claim / Realm Claim system just doesn't work and is heavily exploited.
Also to still have 4 EU servers makes no sense with low population and goes against the original concept and promises of 1 server per region (1 EU 1 NA).
Pleasing everyone made this game basically LIF YO bigger version, where you have multiple servers supposely for different playstyles.
That's a big problem imo because it splits the already not big population too much and limits potential interaction and content between players.

A good solution would be to have all servers merged into 1 or the creation of a new server with a new map, an expandable / adjustable one would be the best option.
That ONE SERVER would be DIVIDED INTO different regions (GREEN, ORANGE, RED) and QUALITY of items would be CAPPED DIFFERENTLY between DIFFERENT REGIONS:
GREEN ------> 25
ORANGE ----> 50
RED ---------> NO CAP
Maybe you could also add a BONUS ON QUANTITY from production aswell, GREEN HALF quantity, ORANGE STANDARD quantity and RED DOUBLE OR THREE TIMES quantity, or even a different action speed or mats required for buildings with the same concept in mind.
Different regions would also have different ASSET PROTECTION aswell:
GREEN ---------> CURRENT EPLELAND level of protection
ORANGE -------> CURRENT system of AVALON (current red server) or a "pay for protection" monument upkeep system, based on the amount of buildings / stuff you have in the town claim or on the amount of town claim tiles you want to have
RED ------------> TOTAL ASSET VULNERABILITY during JH
Some minor changes would also help to improve the system, regarding outposts for example no option to build them on green server, ability to capture them 24/7 on red server (with 2x or 3x production rates if you want an outpost in the RED zone you would have to actively defend it, so they would also actually become true player made hotspots as from original concept).
If the alignment system don't want to be abandoned, kills on green server should give double or triple alignment penalty if not in war standings, standard penalty in orange and no penalty in red. Also skill loss upon death should be changed to 5% or 10% in red, 50% in orange, standard in green (percentages based on the current system) to promote different playstyles.
I really think this system would be way better then what we currently have and would be less exploitable.
Possible flaws which i can quickly think about:
-red zone could become a "mainly outpost only zone", an easy fix would be to give the opportunity to build them there only if you currently own a base in the red server or to cap the amount you can place there based on the zone of the base you place them with (green claim 1 outpost in red, orange claim up to 5, red claim no cap)
-bank claims in the green zone with higher quality stuff taken from the orange or red zone, this can be considered both a "flaw" and an improvement at the same time because people would actually need to move the stuff from the red or orange zone to the green zone and would be at risk to be attacked on the way, promoting both travelling and possible PvP interactions
-inopportunity to enable direct trade from player made trading posts between different regions (green,orange,red) to prevent exploits such as same guild, different bases in different regions trade to get easy safe hq mats moved from red or orange to green

I think what would happen with this system is that most guilds would have a main base on Orange, and a backup or "rp" base on green.
Strong guilds and PvP oriented groups would have bases in red to get red zone benefits.

The system I proposed is not new and can be found in other games but it would obviously function way better then the current one we have, would it completely fix economy? No but it will improve trading between different regions due to quality cap and different quantity outcomes. Would it completely fix lag issues? No but it would promote a more "spread" world with different players that have different playstyles located in different positions but with the option to still interact with each others.

1.
We Cant agree on that.
We dont agree on that.
And no its not abused and exploited that much.

Pls dont go around speaking for others attempting to claim a Majority you do not have.


2.
No Its not too many Servers.
And merging them into one will not increase Population.
It would KILL the Population.

A.
More than half of the People losing their Claims will Leave the Game immediately.
B.
If its a Green Server you lose Tons of Red Players.
If its a Red Server you lose Tons of Green Players.

In Total you would end up going from currently 850 average online to like 350 average online.


3.
The Suggested System for that Server would mean you lose even more Players cuz nobody will play Green Area thus you Lose ALL PVE Players from Green Worlds.
And the Red Area is so extreme your likely even losing current Red World Players.

If this System ever comes you will be down to the Playernumbers of Mortal Online within 3 Months.

Listen Mate.
I know your a Ganker/Griefer/ROK and want targets.
But you wont get any Targets by trying force Players into your Targeting Area.
They will simply leave the Game for Good.


4.
The System you suggest doesnt work anywhere.
I dont even know a Game working even remotely like that.
Which is not surprising because the System is a Guaranteed Population Killer where the Game would be dead in less than a Year.




But Thanks for Showing your True Colors.
This Suggestion Shows Perfectly that you never cared about the Game or about Fairness on the Red Server.
All you want is to Force People into a Place where you can RPK and Grief them and destroy their Stuff for no Reason.

[WestArcher]

I think that at this point we can basically all agree that the current Town claim / Realm Claim system just doesn't work and is heavily exploited.

Also to still have 4 EU servers makes no sense with low population and goes against the original concept and promises of 1 server per region (1 EU 1 NA).
Pleasing everyone made this game basically LIF YO bigger version, where you have multiple servers supposely for different playstyles.
That's a big problem imo because it splits the already not big population too much and limits potential interaction and content between players.

A good solution would be to have all servers merged into 1 or the creation of a new server with a new map, an expandable / adjustable one would be the best option.

Yes I agree, however the entire server should just have one single ruleset that is brutal instead of dividing the map into sections with different rulesets.
There's no reason why a tiny group of players should be able to build and keep a base. the notion is absurd. I'm not going to say complete building destruction for town, but a system where you'd have to chew your way through structures or points on each tier of claim in order to get to the next? Possibly a type of realm keep or fort that while alive disables town claim damage?
I don't know, I hate IBs due to instancing, they're fun but the instanced aspect is lame imo.

and don't get started on "but people will leave if their base dies"
in my experience the only people whom have actually left as a result of pvp were the chinese whom nearly completely destroyed SQL on NA but never actually managed to take the monument. They failed the attack and left the game, not the other way around. There are many other guilds being bullied to hell on buyan but instead of leaving they put up new bases, transfer their stuff and keep on fighting.

A proper base/claim really should only be for those whom are able to defend it, solo players or small groups of players that are unable to defend deserve to get run over in my opinion, and playing into that.

Solo / small group player experience needs a massive boost.
Solo players need things to do, in most games they're going to be the bulk of your playerbase. GM town and mechanics behind it need to be expanded, I would even go so far as making the town itself its own server region + the addition of another 2 GM towns one in the south and one in the north. New players should be able to choose which one they spawn in instead of spawning in the middle of who knows where alone naked and confused.
Honestly when it comes to all the solo/small group player stuff really should just copy everything you can from pre-trammel UO possible.
That goes from treasure hunting (cartography), npc/pvm content/dungeons to transforming your character into a vendor/renting a vendor stall.

Spoiler

honestly there was nothing more fun than the excitement of running a dungeon/champ spawn in UO combined with the danger that anyone could come in and kill me for all the loot I'm carrying at any moment

While a solo/small group should not be able to feasibly build a base and defend it against a large group, there's no reason why they can't succeed, have fun, and participate in the world.

Large guilds need money sinks, not in the form of claim maintenance, but in the form of items or something to remain competitive if the IB system is sticking around having totems cost money is an option to consider, the economy in this game is a joke and needs a ton of work as well .

Solo/ small player experience needs a boost everywhere possible.
Even something as small as adding primitive weapons and clothing to artisan/natlore/hunting.

[Monco]

1.
We Cant agree on that.
We dont agree on that.
And no its not abused and exploited that much.

Pls dont go around speaking for others attempting to claim a Majority you do not have.

The majority of players actually believes that the current system doesn't work properly and as intended, I bet you could even ask Bobik and he would tell you that the system isn't working as originally intended, it's actually town claims only spam with no usage of Realm claim whatsoever, not even for trees, just because it's meta.

2.
No Its not too many Servers.
And merging them into one will not increase Population.
It would KILL the Population.

There obviously are too many servers, only fools would deny that, take what Bobik himself said about some servers for example:
Bobik08/04/2018
When such worlds were created we had bigger population and expected a lot of players from CIS region with a help of mail.ru
It didn't work
We need to consolidate worlds, but that will result in some players in some worlds losing their bases

Literally the only one who can't realise that is you, but i'm not surprised judging by your replies in many posts, someone who believes that the main issue in the game even at the current state are "merciless PvP players" and can't see real major problems.

If its a Green Server you lose Tons of Red Players.
If its a Red Server you lose Tons of Green Players.

The server would be Green, Orange and Red at the same time in different zones. If the objective is still to cater to different kind of players and playstyles it is the best solution to attract as many people as possible.
Life is Feudal MMO is a COMPLETELY PLAYER DRIVEN game, a good POPULATION is FUNDAMENTAL to sustain long term gameplay, because players are and make their own content, less players less everything, less trading, less PvP interactions, less "working economy".
That's why i'm telling you once again that having too many servers is bad and is splitting the not big enough population.
The decision to open more servers was probably taken in a rush back then due to technical limitations, to help reduce general lag.
What they didn't think was that most people would have left anyways eventually after the general launch hype and they proceeded on opening more and more leaving us with what we have today, 4 dead servers in EU.
Iriy for example was a complete failure and correct me if i'm wrong but i'm sure it never even managed to get a thousand players at the same time online in the server.

3.
The Suggested System for that Server would mean you lose even more Players cuz nobody will play Green Area thus you Lose ALL PVE Players from Green Worlds.
And the Red Area is so extreme your likely even losing current Red World Players.

The suggested system is and has been already working on other games for multiple years, PvE players would still play in the green zone if they are not interested in PvP scenarios. Those who would be against the implementation of a new system with a wipe or a merge would only be those too attached to their castles in a dead game, quite the minority i would say, and if that's the mindset the game will never ever improve and be open to changes (we're still in beta so changes are to be expected).
The Red zone would not be too extreme, your carebear or general bad player mindset simply can't get the fact that in a PvP environment people want competition more then anything else.

Anyways the concept of Life is Feudal MMO was to bring all players TOGETHER, what we have now is Life is Feudal YO, bigger version, different servers with different rulesets with no population, we had segregation of players in a completely player driven mmo, i'd almost define that as a potential game killer.

Listen Mate.
I know your a Ganker/Griefer/ROK and want targets.
But you wont get any Targets by trying force Players into your Targeting Area.
They will simply leave the Game for Good.

I may be a ganker, a griefer, a carebear, a communist, a fascist a pornstar or whatever else you may think but I don't really care.
Players wouldn't be forced in the orange or red zone but they would be incentivated to go there if they want better quality or quantity.
If you want the best stuff, you should compete with other players to have it.
If they are not interested in PvP scenarios they can simply avoid them as much as possible by staying in the green zone.

Life is Feudal MMO is an open world sandbox which is completely player driven, player's decisions are the core of the game and those decisions should face consequences, you decide to venture into the red zone? You face consequences, it's as simple as that.
That was the original game concept, player's decisions above everything else, you decide to ally with x coalition and to have them as you protectors? You face consequences from that choice, whether they would be good or bad.
With the opening of too many servers with too many different rulesets this game basically became a bigger LIF YO version.
New servers should have been opened only in case of not sustainable technical issues in the long term but not with different rulesets or you would literally end up competing with LIF YO.

4.
The System you suggest doesnt work anywhere.
I dont even know a Game working even remotely like that.
Which is not surprising because the System is a Guaranteed Population Killer where the Game would be dead in less than a Year.

The system i suggested is very similar to systems in places in some games, some of which you actually said to have played.
That system would be way better then the segregating one we currently have which literally comes from a lif yo perspective.
You are just too narrowminded and too attached to the current one, which is obviously not working and has ALREADY proven to have massively helped to kill the game population aswell.
I saw your replies in the economy post from SonofKitt and they just confirm the fact that you're too attached to the current system and you feel it's perfect and can't realise the massive problems it has.
Sometimes i get the feel to be replying to a donkey instead of an actual person just by looking at the level of stubbornness.

But Thanks for Showing your True Colors.
This Suggestion Shows Perfectly that you never cared about the Game or about Fairness on the Red Server.
All you want is to Force People into a Place where you can RPK and Grief them and destroy their Stuff for no Reason.

I do care about the game, that's why I'm still here proposing new suggestions and alternatives to non-working system which we currently have in place.
Red zone doesn't need fairness since PvP players want as less protection as possible and they want to be in a competitive environment. If they fail to establish there they can try again from the green or orange zone.
I'm telling you once again, your carebear and bad player mindset simply cannot realise that, I bet you must be really bad at videogames in general.

With that system in place people wouldn't be forced in the Red or Orange zone, they could go there to gain some benefits but that's up to them.
If you want to make a RP castle in green with your 4 man group and feel like a true RPKING you're free to do it. I wouldn't consider it a good way of playing the game and would totally be against the general game concept but if you legit just want that from this game, why not, with that system the game still gives you the option to do so without using hq resources which should truly require competition to acquire.

[Monco]

Yes I agree, however the entire server should just have one single ruleset that is brutal instead of dividing the map into sections with different rulesets.
There's no reason why a tiny group of players should be able to build and keep a base. the notion is absurd. I'm not going to say complete building destruction for town, but a system where you'd have to chew your way through structures or points on each tier of claim in order to get to the next? Possibly a type of realm keep or fort that while alive disables town claim damage?
I don't know, I hate IBs due to instancing, they're fun but the instanced aspect is lame imo.

and don't get started on "but people will leave if their base dies"
in my experience the only people whom have actually left as a result of pvp were the chinese whom nearly completely destroyed SQL on NA but never actually managed to take the monument. They failed the attack and left the game, not the other way around. There are many other guilds being bullied to hell on buyan but instead of leaving they put up new bases, transfer their stuff and keep on fighting.

A proper base/claim really should only be for those whom are able to defend it, solo players or small groups of players that are unable to defend deserve to get run over in my opinion, and playing into that.

Solo / small group player experience needs a massive boost.
Solo players need things to do, in most games they're going to be the bulk of your playerbase. GM town and mechanics behind it need to be expanded, I would even go so far as making the town itself its own server region + the addition of another 2 GM towns one in the south and one in the north. New players should be able to choose which one they spawn in instead of spawning in the middle of who knows where alone naked and confused.
Honestly when it comes to all the solo/small group player stuff really should just copy everything you can from pre-trammel UO possible.
That goes from treasure hunting (cartography), npc/pvm content/dungeons to transforming your character into a vendor/renting a vendor stall.

Spoiler

honestly there was nothing more fun than the excitement of running a dungeon/champ spawn in UO combined with the danger that anyone could come in and kill me for all the loot I'm carrying at any moment

While a solo/small group should not be able to feasibly build a base and defend it against a large group, there's no reason why they can't succeed, have fun, and participate in the world.

Large guilds need money sinks, not in the form of claim maintenance, but in the form of items or something to remain competitive if the IB system is sticking around having totems cost money is an option to consider, the economy in this game is a joke and needs a ton of work as well .

Solo/ small player experience needs a boost everywhere possible.
Even something as small as adding primitive weapons and clothing to artisan/natlore/hunting.

I agree with basically everything you're saying, I'd prefer a brutal system aswell but Bobik seems very far from that since he's still attached to his "Wolf and Sheep" theory, a theory which i don't even think actually exists in life is feudal mmo. That's why i proposed a green zone aswell but with very low q mats and quantity from production.

I didn't really try to think about a solution to fix the non-working economy, SonofKitt tried that with a very interesting post which I think should get more credit
feedback-economy-scarcity-trader-posts-transport-hotspo-t43847/page30/

I also agree with the new, solo and small groups facts you stated and improving their experience at least at the beginning should be priority alongside with fixing economy, second only to lag and stability issues.
To have a proper functioning game, especially in the long term, you need proper foundations, if those are weak the game will simply never ever succeed.

[Sunleader]

I think that at this point we can basically all agree that the current Town claim / Realm Claim system just doesn't work and is heavily exploited.

Also to still have 4 EU servers makes no sense with low population and goes against the original concept and promises of 1 server per region (1 EU 1 NA).
Pleasing everyone made this game basically LIF YO bigger version, where you have multiple servers supposely for different playstyles.
That's a big problem imo because it splits the already not big population too much and limits potential interaction and content between players.

A good solution would be to have all servers merged into 1 or the creation of a new server with a new map, an expandable / adjustable one would be the best option.

Yes I agree, however the entire server should just have one single ruleset that is brutal instead of dividing the map into sections with different rulesets.
There's no reason why a tiny group of players should be able to build and keep a base. the notion is absurd. I'm not going to say complete building destruction for town, but a system where you'd have to chew your way through structures or points on each tier of claim in order to get to the next? Possibly a type of realm keep or fort that while alive disables town claim damage?
I don't know, I hate IBs due to instancing, they're fun but the instanced aspect is lame imo.

and don't get started on "but people will leave if their base dies"
in my experience the only people whom have actually left as a result of pvp were the chinese whom nearly completely destroyed SQL on NA but never actually managed to take the monument. They failed the attack and left the game, not the other way around. There are many other guilds being bullied to hell on buyan but instead of leaving they put up new bases, transfer their stuff and keep on fighting.

A proper base/claim really should only be for those whom are able to defend it, solo players or small groups of players that are unable to defend deserve to get run over in my opinion, and playing into that.

Solo / small group player experience needs a massive boost.
Solo players need things to do, in most games they're going to be the bulk of your playerbase. GM town and mechanics behind it need to be expanded, I would even go so far as making the town itself its own server region + the addition of another 2 GM towns one in the south and one in the north. New players should be able to choose which one they spawn in instead of spawning in the middle of who knows where alone naked and confused.
Honestly when it comes to all the solo/small group player stuff really should just copy everything you can from pre-trammel UO possible.
That goes from treasure hunting (cartography), npc/pvm content/dungeons to transforming your character into a vendor/renting a vendor stall.

Spoiler

honestly there was nothing more fun than the excitement of running a dungeon/champ spawn in UO combined with the danger that anyone could come in and kill me for all the loot I'm carrying at any moment

While a solo/small group should not be able to feasibly build a base and defend it against a large group, there's no reason why they can't succeed, have fun, and participate in the world.

Large guilds need money sinks, not in the form of claim maintenance, but in the form of items or something to remain competitive if the IB system is sticking around having totems cost money is an option to consider, the economy in this game is a joke and needs a ton of work as well .

Solo/ small player experience needs a boost everywhere possible.
Even something as small as adding primitive weapons and clothing to artisan/natlore/hunting.

If this was done the Game would be Dead in less then 3 Months.

[Sunleader]

Yes I agree, however the entire server should just have one single ruleset that is brutal instead of dividing the map into sections with different rulesets.
There's no reason why a tiny group of players should be able to build and keep a base. the notion is absurd. I'm not going to say complete building destruction for town, but a system where you'd have to chew your way through structures or points on each tier of claim in order to get to the next? Possibly a type of realm keep or fort that while alive disables town claim damage?
I don't know, I hate IBs due to instancing, they're fun but the instanced aspect is lame imo.

and don't get started on "but people will leave if their base dies"
in my experience the only people whom have actually left as a result of pvp were the chinese whom nearly completely destroyed SQL on NA but never actually managed to take the monument. They failed the attack and left the game, not the other way around. There are many other guilds being bullied to hell on buyan but instead of leaving they put up new bases, transfer their stuff and keep on fighting.

A proper base/claim really should only be for those whom are able to defend it, solo players or small groups of players that are unable to defend deserve to get run over in my opinion, and playing into that.

Solo / small group player experience needs a massive boost.
Solo players need things to do, in most games they're going to be the bulk of your playerbase. GM town and mechanics behind it need to be expanded, I would even go so far as making the town itself its own server region + the addition of another 2 GM towns one in the south and one in the north. New players should be able to choose which one they spawn in instead of spawning in the middle of who knows where alone naked and confused.
Honestly when it comes to all the solo/small group player stuff really should just copy everything you can from pre-trammel UO possible.
That goes from treasure hunting (cartography), npc/pvm content/dungeons to transforming your character into a vendor/renting a vendor stall.

Spoiler

honestly there was nothing more fun than the excitement of running a dungeon/champ spawn in UO combined with the danger that anyone could come in and kill me for all the loot I'm carrying at any moment

While a solo/small group should not be able to feasibly build a base and defend it against a large group, there's no reason why they can't succeed, have fun, and participate in the world.

Large guilds need money sinks, not in the form of claim maintenance, but in the form of items or something to remain competitive if the IB system is sticking around having totems cost money is an option to consider, the economy in this game is a joke and needs a ton of work as well .

Solo/ small player experience needs a boost everywhere possible.
Even something as small as adding primitive weapons and clothing to artisan/natlore/hunting.

I agree with basically everything you're saying, I'd prefer a brutal system aswell but Bobik seems very far from that since he's still attached to his "Wolf and Sheep" theory, a theory which i don't even think actually exists in life is feudal mmo. That's why i proposed a green zone aswell but with very low q mats and quantity from production.

I didn't really try to think about a solution to fix the non-working economy, SonofKitt tried that with a very interesting post which I think should get more credit
feedback-economy-scarcity-trader-posts-transport-hotspo-t43847/page30/

I also agree with the new, solo and small groups facts you stated and improving their experience at least at the beginning should be priority alongside with fixing economy, second only to lag and stability issues.
To have a proper functioning game, especially in the long term, you need proper foundations, if those are weak the game will simply never ever succeed.

The thing he is attached to is his Game.
The Devs got way more Detailed Meta Data on what People Play like and after what kind of Events they left the Game forever.

Thats why the Devs know for a Fact that using the System your Suggesting would destroy the Game forever.

The Choice to have 3 Green and only 1 Red Server.
As well as the Decision to Increase Protection of Claims in Green Servers was not done Randomly.
It was done due to the Data the Devs gathered over the Year.