SEPTEMBER Patch Warnings

[Mazavalt]

Why not replacing braziers with soldiers..... with salary to be paid and to introduce Hounds in game to protect the player from bear .

[KruskDaMangled]

Why not replacing braziers with soldiers..... with salary to be paid and to introduce Hounds in game to protect the player from bear .

Played other games with mercenaries and followers as a fixture, not sure if it fits our vision, etc. Even if you do have to go through some nuisance to obtain and armor them, and if they constantly bother you with petty demands for meat and stuff. The biggest issue was really the market, frankly. So you could have a security team that would potentially shred or deter other players or even groups of players... (At the cost of WEEKS of serious grinding as a retainer) or you know, the guys with the minimal possible hiring price because they were THAT bad. (So bad in fact, that spending your money on the normally gougey NPC merchants for bottom tier equipment was a better use.)

[Feone]

This would/could be the deterrent to raiders carrying braziers. Raider keeps getting hit by the brazier, maybe even for more to the point destroying would be better. Just tossing it out there. After all, we are talking about a burning pot. Sure, you got insulation, but can anything dating from that period really insulate against 500-600+ degrees? (Probably more like 1100-1200 as a charcoal fire can be pushed hot enough to melt lead and copper and forge iron.)

Yea picking up a lit brazier seems like a terrible idea.
Oh this burning thing is hurting me, gimme a hug burning thing!

Being able to move braziers does make some sense, if implemented it should be a waste crime though. It should probably also be really, really slow and impossible if they are lit. (If an enemy picks one up it'd catch fire causing it to be dropped immediately.)
Not sure if it would have other implications other than making base design slightly more forgiving.

[ImpalerWrG]

Why not replacing braziers with soldiers..... with salary to be paid and to introduce Hounds in game to protect the player from bear .

Played other games with mercenaries and followers as a fixture, not sure if it fits our vision, etc. Even if you do have to go through some nuisance to obtain and armor them, and if they constantly bother you with petty demands for meat and stuff. The biggest issue was really the market, frankly. So you could have a security team that would potentially shred or deter other players or even groups of players... (At the cost of WEEKS of serious grinding as a retainer) or you know, the guys with the minimal possible hiring price because they were THAT bad. (So bad in fact, that spending your money on the normally gougey NPC merchants for bottom tier equipment was a better use.)

The one Advantage I could see to some kind of NPC guard (and a dog would actually make the most sense) is that would give it some kind of way point loop so it will patrol around, this is flexible for the defender and fun for the attacker as they go all metal-gear solid in your base.

[JohnCarver]

Ok how about a nice warning today:

*Don't Bother spending too much time or hassle ripping stuff down prior to patch. AFTER patch the claimowner can destroy items without having to worry about soak values.

[Kandarim]

Ok how about a nice warning today:

*Don't Bother spending too much time or hassle ripping stuff down prior to patch. AFTER patch the claimowner can destroy items without having to worry about soak values.

and there was much rejoicing!

[Procne]

Ok how about a nice warning today:

*Don't Bother spending too much time or hassle ripping stuff down prior to patch. AFTER patch the claimowner can destroy items without having to worry about soak values.

How does that work with pclaims overlapping vclaims? Will pclaim owner, assuming he's not the vclaim owner, be able to destroy stuff without soak?

[KruskDaMangled]

Ok how about a nice warning today:

*Don't Bother spending too much time or hassle ripping stuff down prior to patch. AFTER patch the claimowner can destroy items without having to worry about soak values.

Good change, etc.

Rationally I know it's good you did it, and you had other things, although I did briefly experience chagrin and a sick feeling in my stomach remembering a few earlier missteps with fencing this year due to me being sleep deprived, and the resulting travails as though I was cleaning the Augean Stables just to deal with a stupid tile or two of mislaid fence.

[lachlaan]

Mwahahahaha, this is a nice change for encouraging people to use their mains, or at least not half-assed alts for claim ownership.

[JohnCarver]

How does that work with pclaims overlapping vclaims? Will pclaim owner, assuming he's not the vclaim owner, be able to destroy stuff without soak?

Pclaim over-rides Vclaim, quite simply.

You have Town Management that allows you to regulate if members can make and extend Pclaims on your V-claims. There should be little opportunity for general shennanigans with this. Again, only the owner of a claimstone may negate through the soak of things on his claim that he destroys.

Mwahahahaha, this is a nice change for encouraging people to use their mains, or at least not half-assed alts for claim ownership.