Game Development: Criminally Thanksgiving

[Mushibag]

I like it. Thank you Jorb & Loftar for working tirelessly to improve this incredible game. While some may not agree, I think this was the best move you could have made. Previously raiders and griefers definitely had the advantage, especially against the little guys. This adds a great deal of balance, regardless of what QQing whiners say about it. As we were testing it out in the darkness, I liked the fact that we couldn't just haul everything off the claim, wait 15 minutes, drop a leanto, and take everything they owned. We were forced to be more selective while filling our inventories and moving on, and I'm sure the people raided will appreciate that very much.

[JinxDevona]

I tend to agree, when we start considering the nature of Salem, is it just a build and be destroyed game or will it have some semblance of community, politics and proper risk vrs reward aspects that ensure the game retains players.

The main intention with the crime buff (which never worked, but which this change intended to at least partially remedy) was to impose a resource limit on a single raid, so that a settlement isn't entirely broken as soon as a single wall tile has been broken, and that its internal layout matters, and that crimes have to be chosen and prioritized between.

I do agree with these statements. In the olden days (H&H), when your village was raided it was picked clean and sometimes they would even destroy all the structures. Building them took far longer than destroying it all. I personally enjoy the building of a true homestead and believe there should be a fair balance to raiding. As Mushibag mentioned, before this you could just remove everything from the claim, build a leanto and wait 15 minutes to take everything. I'm not a raider so I don't know how fair this new change is, but I know without it, it is very unbalanced. One raid should not wipe out everything. Just the opinion of a carebear.

[Darwoth]

bottom line is it should not be more difficult to loot items than it is to breach the fort to begin with, as it stands that is exactly how it is.

[Dallane]

bottom line is it should not be more difficult to loot items than it is to breach the fort to begin with, as it stands that is exactly how it is.

maybe if you [wonderful and flower-smelling creatures of true and infinite beauty] would take stuff of value rather then turkey feathers it wouldn't be a problem

[JinxDevona]

As the walls should be harder to destroy then raiding argument goes... does that mean structures should be more difficult to destroy than walls? It seems like windmills, houses and the such are not very difficult to destroy. In life one would take a few minutes to bust a fence then a window/door in not much time. However taking tons and tons and tons of stuff from the house would be very difficult and time consuming. Destroying the house would be virtually impossible without fire. I like the realism of the game, but again, I do not truly understand the consequences of raiding for I have never done it. I have been raided and would prefer it was balanced in a ways fair to both sides.

[Nordvind78]

bottom line is it should not be more difficult to loot items than it is to breach the fort to begin with, as it stands that is exactly how it is.

Well it's more easier to break a wall..But to loot a ton of items i see more harder than breaking a wall

[loftar]

bottom line is it should not be more difficult to loot items than it is to breach the fort to begin with, as it stands that is exactly how it is.

You'd have to qualify that statement for it to make sense, though. Just like it certainly is easier to loot one item than it is to break the wall, it is like harder to loot a thousand items than it is to break the wall. I think both of those extremes make sense; so are you criticizing them as premises, or the quantitative balance in between them, or something else? It really doesn't help your argument that you're just saying that it sucks, without a further enquiry into just how it sucks.

[Potjeh]

I agree and support Potjeh's vision of light vs darkness

Living in the darkness should be dangerous and bad. Even to the point that it's easier to raid darkness bases rather than harder (the transfer could be done slowly to give people a choice and time to move out). Light should be coveted and good for bases/villages. Bonuses to crop yields or maturation speeds, bonuses to wall strength, there's lots you could look at.

And then somehow tie it to player activity in an area and boom, villages won't mind their lost forageables nearly as much.

Edit: Thought. Having images of the clothes in game in the store. Better for sales perhaps? Or is it better to leave it a mystery to encourage people? Not sure honestly. Would be interesting to release two packs of similar nature (both outfits for example), one with screenies of it, one without. See which sells better.

i like this line of thinking, but i would wish for some mechanism to "tame the darkness". imo it would be better if your homestead in the darkness would slowly render over time an area of light.

It should be based on the size of the local population, so established players are encouraged to preserve their newbie neighbours rather than destroy them.

[EnderWiggin]

It should be based on the size of the local population, so established players are encouraged to preserve their newbie neighbours rather than destroy them.

I like this idea, but what will prevent people from slaughtering neighbours and then populating area with alts?

[Potjeh]

It should occur over long time spans, so it's not practical to keep them logged in. And it can measure activity variety, to thwart simple bots.