Salem: Drunk with Power <Concord Server>

Announcements of major changes to Salem.

Re: Salem: Drunk with Power <Concord Server>

Postby yuukki » Thu Dec 28, 2017 6:19 am

JohnCarver wrote:
Judaism wrote:Are there really no changes to be expected in terms of current mechanics (cannons, soaks values, TBC's/TBF's etc) and current skills (requirements, bonuses on crafts/planting etc) ?


Now is the time to speak up. We have discussed no Stocks, TBF or TBC. Just to go back to a more 'pure' crime/combat system. Thoughts?


yes please.
⛧ Grand Witch of the Fifth Circle ⛧
User avatar
yuukki
 
Posts: 182
Joined: Sat Mar 07, 2015 10:45 pm

Re: Salem: Drunk with Power <Concord Server>

Postby nosfirebird » Thu Dec 28, 2017 6:21 am

What don't you like about cannons?
the 2 times i used cannons it fired within 45 mins brick is supposed to take around 1.4hrs with 3 bashing it or around 3.5hrs with 1 person. that was with a **** stat toon. but it would be balanced if it could be destroyed by mortars and also have a low to medium chance of blowing itself up.
nosfirebird
 
Posts: 534
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2014 2:47 am

Re: Salem: Drunk with Power <Concord Server>

Postby Judaism » Thu Dec 28, 2017 6:25 am

JohnCarver wrote:Now is the time to speak up. We have discussed no Stocks, TBF or TBC. Just to go back to a more 'pure' crime/combat system. Thoughts?


I have always liked the idea of cannons, in the last expeditions the values on the walls were not changed and it was rather easy to make plank fences early on. Raiding was therefore not possible early on, the town bells were also granted rather early when you would spend some money in the store.

Mid to late game it evolved around cannons only, they were placed during nightly hours and such to instantly blow up your pclaims/townbells. It ignored all the rules of old raiding, I recall making outer perimeters way out just to prevent getting cannon'd and lose your base in a single blow. Obviously you have already addressed the bugs around cannons by now, but yeah those also played along the frustration.

So in short, yes I very much do like cannons but in the previous expedition it bypassed most of the raiding and interaction usually gained from raiding. It shoudn't be a zerg game, so I agree that there have to be means for individuals to get stuff done but perhaps look into the cannon range and its power versus the difficulty of current raiding. The gap becomes more apparent the stronger walls you have, at what stage would you rather protect (fortify) your little cannon and take the risk of just losing that cannoneer vs multiple raid characters.

There are so many ways to deal with it, I wouldn't even dare to come up with suggestions but I very much would like to see more confrontation and options when it comes down to dealing with bases.

* just an idea about the TBC's by the way, I don't think they would be something bad at all if they were bound to ''public'' towns (so you would know who placed it). On top of that we have mortars now which should give you the means to deal with TBC's rather easy (at a certain point). So those woudn't be a big deal at all. The scent duration could be looked at (probably longer durations), alongside features such as the invulnerability of the TBC and (increased timers on actual summoning). Of course they shoudn't be walled in so easily either. (To prevent suicide in advance a bit, maybe add negative stuff when they do suicide while they commiting suicide while bound to an active TBC)

In short, if you find scents you could almost force a player or group to a confrontation with a passive playstyle, but both sides would have sufficient time to anticipate and plot.

The finalization would be up to you, but for example if you keep the cannons with the current mechanics you could make it harder to make/get, adjust the speed, add in new skills such as for example barriers which slow down a specific entry area etc. With the TBC's for example you could make mortars more accessible and cheaper etc so they'd be used more in combat.

TL;DR I am only mentioning quick examples and such but the point is that even TBC's/TBF's, cannons and the stockades etc could still work very much so granted some minor changes and adjustments for the sake of an expedition which would be slightly faste paste, more confrontated and in general a different experience to play in.
Last edited by Judaism on Thu Dec 28, 2017 6:49 am, edited 1 time in total.
JohnCarver wrote:Mortal Moments Inc. is not here to cannibalize the community or piece out the code. We are not here because we wish to institute pay to win models or PvE servers. Quite the contrary.
User avatar
Judaism
Customer
 
Posts: 3989
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2012 10:51 pm
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Salem: Drunk with Power <Concord Server>

Postby Reviresco » Thu Dec 28, 2017 6:46 am

I named the Expedition. :D


Reviresco wrote:I didn't try Popham, because I joined a year and a half ago and thought it would end by the time I had established myself on Prov, so I'll only answer two of these.

JohnCarver wrote:Discussions points in this thread:
*How Long should the next one be ideally. Keeping in my the best we will do is 'influence' how quickly someone can end it not directly end it ourselves.


6-8 months.

*What should the name of it be?


Drunks with Power
(Or just Drunk with Power)
User avatar
Reviresco
 
Posts: 1382
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2015 6:49 pm

Re: Salem: Drunk with Power <Concord Server>

Postby Hose » Thu Dec 28, 2017 6:54 am

I WANT THIS EXPEDITION!!!! I CANT WAIT OMG!!!!
My dog walks me to the park and doggy styles me, if you find that weird you're an arrogant gender-assuming bloodthirsty gun-loving cisgender bestial sexist incestuous white-previlege misogynistic biased raped privileged Nazi slave owner terrorist lesbian.
User avatar
Hose
 
Posts: 2307
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 2:39 am

Re: Salem: Drunk with Power <Concord Server>

Postby Judaism » Thu Dec 28, 2017 7:41 am

nosfirebird wrote:What don't you like about cannons?
the 2 times i used cannons it fired within 45 mins brick is supposed to take around 1.4hrs with 3 bashing it or around 3.5hrs with 1 person. that was with a **** stat toon. but it would be balanced if it could be destroyed by mortars and also have a low to medium chance of blowing itself up.


In the previous expedition you could just dump a cannon somewhere and it would blow 40+ tiles up after a certain time, it even destroyed pclaims and townbells. So no, if you fired within 45 minutes you would basicly destroy an entire base within that frame-time without any effort.

Raiding has to be somewhat on par with that, previous expedition the raiding would also require a TBF (24 hours) where a cannon did not needed that so no warning indications and it was 10+ times faster for most bases, since with raiding you would have to chop down wall by wall alongside the many crime runs and a much higher risk on stat-wise and character amounts.

So if you'd think that was fair in any way, then we simply disagree. I want interaction, things don't necessarily have to become super easy and I hate idling by protecting cannons, tbc's and tbf's etc. So please disable running into hovels/houses and such whilst during in combat.
JohnCarver wrote:Mortal Moments Inc. is not here to cannibalize the community or piece out the code. We are not here because we wish to institute pay to win models or PvE servers. Quite the contrary.
User avatar
Judaism
Customer
 
Posts: 3989
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2012 10:51 pm
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Salem: Drunk with Power <Concord Server>

Postby nosfirebird » Thu Dec 28, 2017 7:57 am

Judaism wrote:
nosfirebird wrote:What don't you like about cannons?
the 2 times i used cannons it fired within 45 mins brick is supposed to take around 1.4hrs with 3 bashing it or around 3.5hrs with 1 person. that was with a **** stat toon. but it would be balanced if it could be destroyed by mortars and also have a low to medium chance of blowing itself up.


In the previous expedition you could just dump a cannon somewhere and it would blow 40+ tiles up after a certain time, it even destroyed pclaims and townbells. So no, if you fired within 45 minutes you would basicly destroy an entire base within that frame-time without any effort.

Raiding has to be somewhat on par with that, previous expedition the raiding would also require a TBF (24 hours) where a cannon did not needed that so no warning indications and it was 10+ times faster for most bases, since with raiding you would have to chop down wall by wall alongside the many crime runs and a much higher risk on stat-wise and character amounts.

So if you'd think that was fair in any way, then we simply disagree. I want interaction, things don't necessarily have to become super easy and I hate idling by protecting cannons, tbc's and tbf's etc. So please disable running into hovels/houses and such whilst during in combat.


i wasnt around when it first started i got in after it ended to test animals. in wurm online it made houses unlock for 10 mins if you ran into a house with someone was attacking wondering if that could happen again.
i also want interaction i wanna be able to defend and attack i would personally like to see cannons removed make standing on pclaims drain next to nothing while standing on it and have the crime debuff set to 5 mins anywhere so you dont have to run 2 miles away. i would personally say tbf should be 6-12 hrs instead of 24 only with the removal of cannons or nerfed cannons
nosfirebird
 
Posts: 534
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2014 2:47 am

Re: Salem: Drunk with Power <Concord Server>

Postby JohnCarver » Thu Dec 28, 2017 8:01 am

I suppose one of my questions would be your statement about the planks going up too soon. I do seem to remember that being a bummer. But in hindsight that required board piles and their drytimes, then the additional times for oiling. Meaning that the hardest grinders are still time-gated a bit by that process. How do you feel about handheld mechanisms I.E. Sledgehammers, explosives, or other means short of a cannon to trivialize various wall types? Or better yet a siege alternative for each wall type.

Makeshift and Split rail coming down by hand.
Stone hedge coming down by sledge (wrought iron).
Plank coming down by battering ram (boards for the chasis and a fresh log)
Brick coming down with explosive

Cannon then being the end-all option for those who really anger you.

The idea being that now each wall type has a comparable 'technology' the siege player can implement to defeat it. Expedition only of course.
ceedat wrote:the overwhelming frustration of these forums and the unnecessarily over complicated game mechanics is what i enjoy about this game most.

Nsuidara wrote:it is a strange and difficult game in no positive way
User avatar
JohnCarver
Site Admin
 
Posts: 6826
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 3:02 am

Re: Salem: Drunk with Power <Concord Server>

Postby TheDuke86 » Thu Dec 28, 2017 8:09 am

JohnCarver wrote:I suppose one of my questions would be your statement about the planks going up too soon. I do seem to remember that being a bummer. But in hindsight that required board piles and their drytimes, then the additional times for oiling. Meaning that the hardest grinders are still time-gated a bit by that process. How do you feel about handheld mechanisms I.E. Sledgehammers, explosives, or other means short of a cannon to trivialize various wall types? Or better yet a siege alternative for each wall type.

Makeshift and Split rail coming down by hand.
Stone hedge coming down by sledge (wrought iron).
Plank coming down by battering ram (boards for the chasis and a fresh log)
Brick coming down with explosive

Cannon then being the end-all option for those who really anger you.

The idea being that now each wall type has a comparable 'technology' the siege player can implement to defeat it. Expedition only of course.


+1
WWJCD; What Would John Carver Do!
-The Duke
User avatar
TheDuke86
 
Posts: 234
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2016 9:32 pm

Re: Salem: Drunk with Power <Concord Server>

Postby nosfirebird » Thu Dec 28, 2017 8:14 am

JohnCarver wrote:I suppose one of my questions would be your statement about the planks going up too soon. I do seem to remember that being a bummer. But in hindsight that required board piles and their drytimes, then the additional times for oiling. Meaning that the hardest grinders are still time-gated a bit by that process. How do you feel about handheld mechanisms I.E. Sledgehammers, explosives, or other means short of a cannon to trivialize various wall types? Or better yet a siege alternative for each wall type.

Makeshift and Split rail coming down by hand.
Stone hedge coming down by sledge (wrought iron).
Plank coming down by battering ram (boards for the chasis and a fresh log)
Brick coming down with explosive

Cannon then being the end-all option for those who really anger you.

The idea being that now each wall type has a comparable 'technology' the siege player can implement to defeat it. Expedition only of course.

issue is how do you defend against it. battering ram and explosives how long does the battering ram take to take down a plank wall same with explosives. needs to take atleast 40-50 mins for brick so defenders have a chance to call people online. or better yet have tbf's like eve online where there is a set time you can attack if they get through the first set of walls they can build something that extends their attack timer.

example would be i build a tbf and set attack to 18:00-20:00 every day till the tbf is destroyed this shifts raiding from player vrs structure to player vrs player.
say i get through the first set of walls i then have to build some sort of structure that can measure the amount of walls inbetween the tbf and itself adding a hour per wall.

right now its way 2 easy to set up a tbf wall it in then wait a few days then attack when they arnt online making it pvs instead of pvp
nosfirebird
 
Posts: 534
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2014 2:47 am

PreviousNext

Return to Announcements

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests

cron