Spif wrote: » I think the fact that the people running the caravan are risking everything, and the people attacking the caravan risk nothing means that the caravans are breaking the risk/reward ratio. But back to the original question. IIRC the rule of thumb is that a mule carries 10x what a player does, and a caravan carries 10x what a mule does. So a caravan holds 100x of a player inventory. If a player gathering takes 1 hour to fill their inventory, then a caravan could hold 100 player-hours worth of crafting mats. That's an insane risk. If a player takes 15 min to fill their inventory (way too short IMO), then a caravan could hold 25 player hours worth of inventory. Still a *lot* to lose. While a caravan is likely to hold several player's stuff, that's just spreading out the risk. In comparison, you just gathered for 3 hours straight (loading up a mule) and get ganked while green. You drop a % of your gathered stuff. Lets say 1 hours worth. That's nothing compared to what you could lose on a caravan. The rewards for getting a caravan through safely had better be huge.
Arya_Yeshe wrote: » How about this? Criminals will have debts! If the damages caused by individuals amount to 1,000,000 gold, the debt will be shared among the attackers. In the case of 5 attackers, each one will have a debt of 200,000 gold. If bounty hunters eliminate the attackers in the future, they will receive payment in gold proportional to the value of the damages inflicted on the attackers' equipment. The gold would come from the criminal's wallet, if the criminal has no gold then the next time he receives gold then the gold would be instantly transfered to the bounty hunter. Gold could be split among the bouty hunter's party + victim, the victim will receive little in the end, if the victim wants to receive in full then he will have to go by himself in a solo hunt. Debts would expire in 30 days. Voilá! A better system is born, a system which could even be used on corrupted players Tell us your opinion about this, @NiKr!
Arya_Yeshe wrote: » @Mag7spy if you are not caught, you pay nothing! then the debt expires
Arya_Yeshe wrote: » Voilá! A better system is born, a system which could even be used on corrupted players
Arya_Yeshe wrote: » Tell us your opinion about this, NiKr!
Mag7spy wrote: » Arya_Yeshe wrote: » @Mag7spy if you are not caught, you pay nothing! then the debt expires You are missing the point I'm getting at, i go over it in another post above. Creative more incentive to defend as well as ways to make it so it's not as obvious where they go so they aren't easily camped. Using debt for everything is boring and does not drive fun.
NiKr wrote: » Arya_Yeshe wrote: » Voilá! A better system is born, a system which could even be used on corrupted players Yeah, this might work, if the only other penalties remains as just gear decay and progression system stuff. I could maybe see a problem of avoiding gold all together by just trading through a mediary, but we don't know enough about the game to say for sure if that's possible. Arya_Yeshe wrote: » Tell us your opinion about this, NiKr! Just so you know, edited pings never ping people. You seem to like adding them post factum, but no one gets pinged with those.
Azherae wrote: » NiKr wrote: » Arya_Yeshe wrote: » Voilá! A better system is born, a system which could even be used on corrupted players Yeah, this might work, if the only other penalties remains as just gear decay and progression system stuff. I could maybe see a problem of avoiding gold all together by just trading through a mediary, but we don't know enough about the game to say for sure if that's possible. Arya_Yeshe wrote: » Tell us your opinion about this, NiKr! Just so you know, edited pings never ping people. You seem to like adding them post factum, but no one gets pinged with those. For this to work, it would imply that the game's economy can determine the cost of repairs consistently. I'm not saying you can't build a system that does that, even with what Intrepid seems to want, but I am saying that it is inconsistent and open to some relatively easy manipulations while adding some complexity to their 'World Economy Tracker' or heavily simplifying gear repair costs. I've tried this one before. It's not really understandable to most players, so it tends to get a negative reaction.
Azherae wrote: » For this to work, it would imply that the game's economy can determine the cost of repairs consistently. I'm not saying you can't build a system that does that, even with what Intrepid seems to want, but I am saying that it is inconsistent and open to some relatively easy manipulations while adding some complexity to their 'World Economy Tracker' or heavily simplifying gear repair costs. I've tried this one before. It's not really understandable to most players, so it tends to get a negative reaction.
NiKr wrote: » Azherae wrote: » For this to work, it would imply that the game's economy can determine the cost of repairs consistently. I'm not saying you can't build a system that does that, even with what Intrepid seems to want, but I am saying that it is inconsistent and open to some relatively easy manipulations while adding some complexity to their 'World Economy Tracker' or heavily simplifying gear repair costs. I've tried this one before. It's not really understandable to most players, so it tends to get a negative reaction. I've considered that at first, but then read the suggestion as just "whatever caravan value was - that's the lost cost", no repair costs or anything of the sort. Shoulda mentioned that this probably wouldn't work for PKers, unless we purely calculate the loot costs (median within the node of the killing). And considering that some mats from the caravan will just be deleted on destruction, the attackers would pay out more than they got. Though considering that I'd probably keep to the "BHs can only track high ranking caravan attackers".
Azherae wrote: » I really don't like making posts that are just 'this doesn't work either' here, so forgive me for this one.
Arya_Yeshe wrote: » The game is stuck in this paradox of having consequences or not, and risk x reward How will the game ever have such things if the destruction or gear damage is not measured in any way?
