Caravans: dynamic drop/sunk rates

Dynamic drop rates:

Initially, the drop rates are split evenly between loot drops and items that are sunk. The ratio is 50/50.
If there are no wagon kills in the route within 6 hours, then the rates will be adjusted to +10/-10. This means that you will have a 60/40 split between dropped and sunk items, which can go up to a 100/0 split.
Each wagon that is destroyed will result in a change of rates by -10/+10. If enough wagons are destroyed, the drop rate will become 0/100 for dropped and sunk items.

If the route becomes a popular target for attacks, eventually no loot will be dropped and everything will be sunk. However, if the route remains quiet, the drop rate will gradually reach 100% drop / 0% sunk.

This system is designed to account for the fact that some attackers may simply aim to harm their economic competitors, and that those seeking loot will need to search for routes with higher drop rates. Harming others economically is fine.

People aiming for loot will have to scout, travel and go somewhere else, where the loot drop is high.

Makes sense?

edit: in the map people would be able to hover the mouse over a region and check how high is the raiding activity, so raiders looking for look would have to travel somewhere else instead of over raiding the same area

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Azherae

Economic effect probably good, player enjoyment effect somewhere between bad and 'utter chaos'.

The sort of idea that I ask for alternatives for first before seriously considering.

I don't see what real effect it would have other than causing caravan attackers to be more coordinated and creating a 'hit' to immersion.

You're applying a band-aid to the 'flaws' of the hauling system as currently described, but from the perspective that it's broken at the base premise, aren't you?

Arya_Yeshe

Azherae wrote: »

Economic effect probably good, player enjoyment effect somewhere between bad and 'utter chaos'.

The sort of idea that I ask for alternatives for first before seriously considering.

I don't see what real effect it would have other than causing caravan attackers to be more coordinated and creating a 'hit' to immersion.

You're applying a band-aid to the 'flaws' of the hauling system as currently described, but from the perspective that it's broken at the base premise, aren't you?

The intention behind this concept is not to address a particular issue. Rather, I believe that the system should have been implemented in this manner from the outset, prior to any potential problems arising.

Similar to Steven's repeated emphasis on reducing excessive player-killing and spawn kills, this could serve as a means of mitigating the issue of repetitive caravan raids along the same route.

This is about aligning this system with the same vision other systems have.

Mag7spy

It doesn't matter if there are attacks along the same route, I'm unsure why your concepts are all around removing fun from the game. Creating emphasis for people to defend and balance out the gain from attacks so it is less desired for them to do so.

Based on your concept of giving debt and also making it so players gain nothing from some attacks yes people won't attack them that much.

Instead, you will replace it with the more generic attacking certain routes that are open (higher drop rates) meaning you are pushing more of a zerg of attackers together based on system dictating where and when they should attack...

Arya_Yeshe

Mag7spy wrote: »

It doesn't matter if there are attacks along the same route, I'm unsure why your concepts are all around removing fun from the game. Creating emphasis for people to defend and balance out the gain from attacks so it is less desired for them to do so.

Based on your concept of giving debt and also making it so players gain nothing from some attacks yes people won't attack them that much.

Instead, you will replace it with the more generic attacking certain routes that are open (higher drop rates) meaning you are pushing more of a zerg of attackers together based on system dictating where and when they should attack...

If the drop rates are affected by how much raid activity there is in the route/roi, then this would disencourage over raiding.

I never said anything about suggestion where the drop rates are good, just "to force" raiders into a big "zerg".

Raiders would have to travel somewhere else if they are after loot, this by itself would help the defenders instead of creating over complicated stuff.

Mag7spy

Arya_Yeshe wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

It doesn't matter if there are attacks along the same route, I'm unsure why your concepts are all around removing fun from the game. Creating emphasis for people to defend and balance out the gain from attacks so it is less desired for them to do so.

Based on your concept of giving debt and also making it so players gain nothing from some attacks yes people won't attack them that much.

Instead, you will replace it with the more generic attacking certain routes that are open (higher drop rates) meaning you are pushing more of a zerg of attackers together based on system dictating where and when they should attack...

If the drop rates are affected by how much raid activity there is in the route/roi, then this would disencourage over raiding.

I never said anything about suggestion where the drop rates are good, just "to force" raiders into a big "zerg".

Raiders would have to travel somewhere else if they are after loot, this by itself would help the defenders instead of creating over complicated stuff.

You are missing the point with less places to attack do to it being raided, everyone will zerg certain areas together. Your idea heard them in such a way.

Arya_Yeshe

Mag7spy wrote: »

Arya_Yeshe wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

It doesn't matter if there are attacks along the same route, I'm unsure why your concepts are all around removing fun from the game. Creating emphasis for people to defend and balance out the gain from attacks so it is less desired for them to do so.

Based on your concept of giving debt and also making it so players gain nothing from some attacks yes people won't attack them that much.

Instead, you will replace it with the more generic attacking certain routes that are open (higher drop rates) meaning you are pushing more of a zerg of attackers together based on system dictating where and when they should attack...

If the drop rates are affected by how much raid activity there is in the route/roi, then this would disencourage over raiding.

I never said anything about suggestion where the drop rates are good, just "to force" raiders into a big "zerg".

Raiders would have to travel somewhere else if they are after loot, this by itself would help the defenders instead of creating over complicated stuff.

You are missing the point with less places to attack do to it being raided everyone will zerg certain areas together. Your idea heard them in such a way.

You are extrapolating reality, this is unreal, you are making up stuff! You have no point, you are making shit up.

Who is everyone?!?! Who is that?!! Are you going to make a character called "Everyone"?

There's many dozens of nodes, there is no visual clue of how much is the rate and where.
The rates go up and down along the hours due to activity or lack of activity.

"Everyone is going" AHAHAHAHAH
Where?!?! Where is "everyone" going?

Gospell1

Arya_Yeshe wrote: »

This system is designed to account for the fact that some attackers may simply aim to harm their economic competitors

the whole point is to completely destroy the competitor completely! 2 hostile nodes should compete like this, the strongest wins, and the losers go to another place and learn to become stronger and more cunning

Mag7spy

Arya_Yeshe wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

Arya_Yeshe wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

It doesn't matter if there are attacks along the same route, I'm unsure why your concepts are all around removing fun from the game. Creating emphasis for people to defend and balance out the gain from attacks so it is less desired for them to do so.

Based on your concept of giving debt and also making it so players gain nothing from some attacks yes people won't attack them that much.

Instead, you will replace it with the more generic attacking certain routes that are open (higher drop rates) meaning you are pushing more of a zerg of attackers together based on system dictating where and when they should attack...

If the drop rates are affected by how much raid activity there is in the route/roi, then this would disencourage over raiding.

I never said anything about suggestion where the drop rates are good, just "to force" raiders into a big "zerg".

Raiders would have to travel somewhere else if they are after loot, this by itself would help the defenders instead of creating over complicated stuff.

You are missing the point with less places to attack do to it being raided everyone will zerg certain areas together. Your idea heard them in such a way.

You are extrapolating reality, this is unreal, you are making up stuff! You have no point, you are making shit up.

Who is everyone?!?! Who is that?!! Are you going to make a character called "Everyone"?

There's many dozens of nodes, there is no visual clue of how much is the rate and where.
The rates go up and down along the hours due to activity or lack of activity.

"Everyone is going" AHAHAHAHAH
Where?!?! Where is "everyone" going?

You are adding fluff to a conversation, and making a point that doesn't matter.

So if you want to debate word semantics for whatever weird reason, you are trying to make a point on me using everyone. Even though you clearly know the current conversation is about players taking part in this type of content as the thread is talking about...

Like you literarily ignore my points say i bring nothing then make a comment like this when you know the players we are talking about?

Effectively your idea boils down to give people debt based on unknown values of the caravans they attack. And wet it so eventually you don't get drops for attacking caravans. That is not a good or fun idea, it is extremely generic.

Rather then building upon and keeping entertainment within the current system your IDEAs try to reduce the amount of content within areas. You want to punish players than think about different concepts that can fix the issue.

I have a hard time believing you can't understand my use of the word everyone under this context of everyone that chooses to do this type of content.

Arya_Yeshe

Mag7spy wrote: »

Arya_Yeshe wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

Arya_Yeshe wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

It doesn't matter if there are attacks along the same route, I'm unsure why your concepts are all around removing fun from the game. Creating emphasis for people to defend and balance out the gain from attacks so it is less desired for them to do so.

Based on your concept of giving debt and also making it so players gain nothing from some attacks yes people won't attack them that much.

Instead, you will replace it with the more generic attacking certain routes that are open (higher drop rates) meaning you are pushing more of a zerg of attackers together based on system dictating where and when they should attack...

If the drop rates are affected by how much raid activity there is in the route/roi, then this would disencourage over raiding.

I never said anything about suggestion where the drop rates are good, just "to force" raiders into a big "zerg".

Raiders would have to travel somewhere else if they are after loot, this by itself would help the defenders instead of creating over complicated stuff.

You are missing the point with less places to attack do to it being raided everyone will zerg certain areas together. Your idea heard them in such a way.

You are extrapolating reality, this is unreal, you are making up stuff! You have no point, you are making shit up.

Who is everyone?!?! Who is that?!! Are you going to make a character called "Everyone"?

There's many dozens of nodes, there is no visual clue of how much is the rate and where.
The rates go up and down along the hours due to activity or lack of activity.

"Everyone is going" AHAHAHAHAH
Where?!?! Where is "everyone" going?

You are adding fluff to a conversation, and making a point that doesn't matter.

So if you want to debate word semantics for whatever weird reason, you are trying to make a point on me using everyone. Even though you clearly know the current conversation is about players taking part in this type of content as the thread is talking about...

Like you literarily ignore my points say i bring nothing then make a comment like this when you know the players we are talking about?

Effectively your idea boils down to give people debt based on unknown values of the caravans they attack. And wet it so eventually you don't get drops for attacking caravans. That is not a good or fun idea, it is extremely generic.

Rather then building upon and keeping entertainment within the current system your IDEAs try to reduce the amount of content within areas. You want to punish players than think about different concepts that can fix the issue.

I have a hard time believing you can't understand my use of the word everyone under this context of everyone that chooses to do this type of content.

What are you talking about?
Pay attention to the thread, this thread is about something else.

Keep the discussion within the thread subject or find the right thread for that.

Ludullu

Arya_Yeshe wrote: »

There's many dozens of nodes, there is no visual clue of how much is the rate and where.
The rates go up and down along the hours due to activity or lack of activity.

"Everyone is going" AHAHAHAHAH

I was just about to write that I would only agree with this system if everyone could see the values, because it would directly play into risk/reward. You see a route that has high sunk values? - You wanna be the first one to run that route before the values change. But attacker activity in that region has been high, so maybe they're still there and are just killing everyone, so you might still lose all your shit.

And as the attacker you have choice of "do I go for a higher sunk route that would probably have juicier loot cause caravanners think they're safe, or do I go for the super high drop route, but might wait for too long cause no one runs it or might run into way too much competition".

Having it hidden would most likely just lead to some 3rd party site that tracks any and all caravan runs and tracks the success of attacks, if there were any. You don't stop the minmaxing, but you leave out the majority of your players from the activity and you remove player attention from the game.

Mag7spy

Arya_Yeshe wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

Arya_Yeshe wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

It doesn't matter if there are attacks along the same route, I'm unsure why your concepts are all around removing fun from the game. Creating emphasis for people to defend and balance out the gain from attacks so it is less desired for them to do so.

Based on your concept of giving debt and also making it so players gain nothing from some attacks yes people won't attack them that much.

Instead, you will replace it with the more generic attacking certain routes that are open (higher drop rates) meaning you are pushing more of a zerg of attackers together based on system dictating where and when they should attack...

If the drop rates are affected by how much raid activity there is in the route/roi, then this would disencourage over raiding.

I never said anything about suggestion where the drop rates are good, just "to force" raiders into a big "zerg".

Raiders would have to travel somewhere else if they are after loot, this by itself would help the defenders instead of creating over complicated stuff.

You are missing the point with less places to attack do to it being raided everyone will zerg certain areas together. Your idea heard them in such a way.

You are extrapolating reality, this is unreal, you are making up stuff! You have no point, you are making shit up.

Who is everyone?!?! Who is that?!! Are you going to make a character called "Everyone"?

There's many dozens of nodes, there is no visual clue of how much is the rate and where.
The rates go up and down along the hours due to activity or lack of activity.

"Everyone is going" AHAHAHAHAH
Where?!?! Where is "everyone" going?

The fact you say i have no point is kind of annoying since this is simple math. If there are 10 nodes around you, and 5 no longer give drops for attacking or they are just very low. Players will attack the other 5 nodes meaning rather than being spread out a larger amount of players attack those 5 nodes. Then those get lower drop rates and the zerg goes to attack the other ones again.

Mag7spy

Arya_Yeshe wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

Arya_Yeshe wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

Arya_Yeshe wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

It doesn't matter if there are attacks along the same route, I'm unsure why your concepts are all around removing fun from the game. Creating emphasis for people to defend and balance out the gain from attacks so it is less desired for them to do so.

Based on your concept of giving debt and also making it so players gain nothing from some attacks yes people won't attack them that much.

Instead, you will replace it with the more generic attacking certain routes that are open (higher drop rates) meaning you are pushing more of a zerg of attackers together based on system dictating where and when they should attack...

If the drop rates are affected by how much raid activity there is in the route/roi, then this would disencourage over raiding.

I never said anything about suggestion where the drop rates are good, just "to force" raiders into a big "zerg".

Raiders would have to travel somewhere else if they are after loot, this by itself would help the defenders instead of creating over complicated stuff.

You are missing the point with less places to attack do to it being raided everyone will zerg certain areas together. Your idea heard them in such a way.

You are extrapolating reality, this is unreal, you are making up stuff! You have no point, you are making shit up.

Who is everyone?!?! Who is that?!! Are you going to make a character called "Everyone"?

There's many dozens of nodes, there is no visual clue of how much is the rate and where.
The rates go up and down along the hours due to activity or lack of activity.

"Everyone is going" AHAHAHAHAH
Where?!?! Where is "everyone" going?

You are adding fluff to a conversation, and making a point that doesn't matter.

So if you want to debate word semantics for whatever weird reason, you are trying to make a point on me using everyone. Even though you clearly know the current conversation is about players taking part in this type of content as the thread is talking about...

Like you literarily ignore my points say i bring nothing then make a comment like this when you know the players we are talking about?

Effectively your idea boils down to give people debt based on unknown values of the caravans they attack. And wet it so eventually you don't get drops for attacking caravans. That is not a good or fun idea, it is extremely generic.

Rather then building upon and keeping entertainment within the current system your IDEAs try to reduce the amount of content within areas. You want to punish players than think about different concepts that can fix the issue.

I have a hard time believing you can't understand my use of the word everyone under this context of everyone that chooses to do this type of content.

What are you talking about?
Pay attention to the thread, this thread is about something else.

Keep the discussion within the thread subject or find the right thread for that.

I know what the thread is about and it ties to the other one. AGAIN THIS is not a strong idea. The concept of punishing players for doing concept in a area is completely silly. Based on what players want and need and value should be where content happens. If it is a high prio area expect resistance.

You want to remove human elements and have things be made in a boring way. You are trying to put a band-aid over your idea. Its going to be clear as day when you destroy a caravan and get ranked up with debt and no drops. It isn't hard to organize and make post / bots so people know where to go.

Arya_Yeshe

Mag7spy wrote: »

Arya_Yeshe wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

Arya_Yeshe wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

Arya_Yeshe wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

It doesn't matter if there are attacks along the same route, I'm unsure why your concepts are all around removing fun from the game. Creating emphasis for people to defend and balance out the gain from attacks so it is less desired for them to do so.

Based on your concept of giving debt and also making it so players gain nothing from some attacks yes people won't attack them that much.

Instead, you will replace it with the more generic attacking certain routes that are open (higher drop rates) meaning you are pushing more of a zerg of attackers together based on system dictating where and when they should attack...

If the drop rates are affected by how much raid activity there is in the route/roi, then this would disencourage over raiding.

I never said anything about suggestion where the drop rates are good, just "to force" raiders into a big "zerg".

Raiders would have to travel somewhere else if they are after loot, this by itself would help the defenders instead of creating over complicated stuff.

You are missing the point with less places to attack do to it being raided everyone will zerg certain areas together. Your idea heard them in such a way.

You are extrapolating reality, this is unreal, you are making up stuff! You have no point, you are making shit up.

Who is everyone?!?! Who is that?!! Are you going to make a character called "Everyone"?

There's many dozens of nodes, there is no visual clue of how much is the rate and where.
The rates go up and down along the hours due to activity or lack of activity.

"Everyone is going" AHAHAHAHAH
Where?!?! Where is "everyone" going?

You are adding fluff to a conversation, and making a point that doesn't matter.

So if you want to debate word semantics for whatever weird reason, you are trying to make a point on me using everyone. Even though you clearly know the current conversation is about players taking part in this type of content as the thread is talking about...

Like you literarily ignore my points say i bring nothing then make a comment like this when you know the players we are talking about?

Effectively your idea boils down to give people debt based on unknown values of the caravans they attack. And wet it so eventually you don't get drops for attacking caravans. That is not a good or fun idea, it is extremely generic.

Rather then building upon and keeping entertainment within the current system your IDEAs try to reduce the amount of content within areas. You want to punish players than think about different concepts that can fix the issue.

I have a hard time believing you can't understand my use of the word everyone under this context of everyone that chooses to do this type of content.

What are you talking about?
Pay attention to the thread, this thread is about something else.

Keep the discussion within the thread subject or find the right thread for that.

Arya_Yeshe wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

Arya_Yeshe wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

Arya_Yeshe wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

It doesn't matter if there are attacks along the same route, I'm unsure why your concepts are all around removing fun from the game. Creating emphasis for people to defend and balance out the gain from attacks so it is less desired for them to do so.

Based on your concept of giving debt and also making it so players gain nothing from some attacks yes people won't attack them that much.

Instead, you will replace it with the more generic attacking certain routes that are open (higher drop rates) meaning you are pushing more of a zerg of attackers together based on system dictating where and when they should attack...

If the drop rates are affected by how much raid activity there is in the route/roi, then this would disencourage over raiding.

I never said anything about suggestion where the drop rates are good, just "to force" raiders into a big "zerg".

Raiders would have to travel somewhere else if they are after loot, this by itself would help the defenders instead of creating over complicated stuff.

You are missing the point with less places to attack do to it being raided everyone will zerg certain areas together. Your idea heard them in such a way.

You are extrapolating reality, this is unreal, you are making up stuff! You have no point, you are making shit up.

Who is everyone?!?! Who is that?!! Are you going to make a character called "Everyone"?

There's many dozens of nodes, there is no visual clue of how much is the rate and where.
The rates go up and down along the hours due to activity or lack of activity.

"Everyone is going" AHAHAHAHAH
Where?!?! Where is "everyone" going?

You are adding fluff to a conversation, and making a point that doesn't matter.

So if you want to debate word semantics for whatever weird reason, you are trying to make a point on me using everyone. Even though you clearly know the current conversation is about players taking part in this type of content as the thread is talking about...

Like you literarily ignore my points say i bring nothing then make a comment like this when you know the players we are talking about?

Effectively your idea boils down to give people debt based on unknown values of the caravans they attack. And wet it so eventually you don't get drops for attacking caravans. That is not a good or fun idea, it is extremely generic.

Rather then building upon and keeping entertainment within the current system your IDEAs try to reduce the amount of content within areas. You want to punish players than think about different concepts that can fix the issue.

I have a hard time believing you can't understand my use of the word everyone under this context of everyone that chooses to do this type of content.

What are you talking about?
Pay attention to the thread, this thread is about something else.

Keep the discussion within the thread subject or find the right thread for that.

I know what the thread is about and it ties to the other one. AGAIN THIS is not a strong idea. The concept of punishing players for doing concept in a area is completely silly. Based on what players want and need and value should be where content happens. If it is a high prio area expect resistance.

You want to remove human elements and have things be made in a boring way. You are trying to put a band-aid over your idea. Its going to be clear as day when you destroy a caravan and get ranked up with debt and no drops. It isn't hard to organize and make post / bots so people know where to go.

I must ask you to behave yourself in the forum, that other thread is a brainstorm thread, everyone is entitled to throw ideas around and discuss

Just stop it, stop harassing people

Arya_Yeshe

NiKr wrote: »

Arya_Yeshe wrote: »

There's many dozens of nodes, there is no visual clue of how much is the rate and where.
The rates go up and down along the hours due to activity or lack of activity.

"Everyone is going" AHAHAHAHAH

I was just about to write that I would only agree with this system if everyone could see the values, because it would directly play into risk/reward. You see a route that has high sunk values? - You wanna be the first one to run that route before the values change. But attacker activity in that region has been high, so maybe they're still there and are just killing everyone, so you might still lose all your shit.

And as the attacker you have choice of "do I go for a higher sunk route that would probably have juicier loot cause caravanners think they're safe, or do I go for the super high drop route, but might wait for too long cause no one runs it or might run into way too much competition".

You have a good point about that!

My goal in this is: making bandits be like snipers and go look for good targets, instead of just over raiding the same spot and camping the same route everyday. I want people to be travelling in all directions.

Agreed!

Mag7spy

Arya_Yeshe wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

Arya_Yeshe wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

Arya_Yeshe wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

Arya_Yeshe wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

It doesn't matter if there are attacks along the same route, I'm unsure why your concepts are all around removing fun from the game. Creating emphasis for people to defend and balance out the gain from attacks so it is less desired for them to do so.

Based on your concept of giving debt and also making it so players gain nothing from some attacks yes people won't attack them that much.

Instead, you will replace it with the more generic attacking certain routes that are open (higher drop rates) meaning you are pushing more of a zerg of attackers together based on system dictating where and when they should attack...

If the drop rates are affected by how much raid activity there is in the route/roi, then this would disencourage over raiding.

I never said anything about suggestion where the drop rates are good, just "to force" raiders into a big "zerg".

Raiders would have to travel somewhere else if they are after loot, this by itself would help the defenders instead of creating over complicated stuff.

You are missing the point with less places to attack do to it being raided everyone will zerg certain areas together. Your idea heard them in such a way.

You are extrapolating reality, this is unreal, you are making up stuff! You have no point, you are making shit up.

Who is everyone?!?! Who is that?!! Are you going to make a character called "Everyone"?

There's many dozens of nodes, there is no visual clue of how much is the rate and where.
The rates go up and down along the hours due to activity or lack of activity.

"Everyone is going" AHAHAHAHAH
Where?!?! Where is "everyone" going?

You are adding fluff to a conversation, and making a point that doesn't matter.

So if you want to debate word semantics for whatever weird reason, you are trying to make a point on me using everyone. Even though you clearly know the current conversation is about players taking part in this type of content as the thread is talking about...

Like you literarily ignore my points say i bring nothing then make a comment like this when you know the players we are talking about?

Effectively your idea boils down to give people debt based on unknown values of the caravans they attack. And wet it so eventually you don't get drops for attacking caravans. That is not a good or fun idea, it is extremely generic.

Rather then building upon and keeping entertainment within the current system your IDEAs try to reduce the amount of content within areas. You want to punish players than think about different concepts that can fix the issue.

I have a hard time believing you can't understand my use of the word everyone under this context of everyone that chooses to do this type of content.

What are you talking about?
Pay attention to the thread, this thread is about something else.

Keep the discussion within the thread subject or find the right thread for that.

Arya_Yeshe wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

Arya_Yeshe wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

Arya_Yeshe wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

It doesn't matter if there are attacks along the same route, I'm unsure why your concepts are all around removing fun from the game. Creating emphasis for people to defend and balance out the gain from attacks so it is less desired for them to do so.

Based on your concept of giving debt and also making it so players gain nothing from some attacks yes people won't attack them that much.

Instead, you will replace it with the more generic attacking certain routes that are open (higher drop rates) meaning you are pushing more of a zerg of attackers together based on system dictating where and when they should attack...

If the drop rates are affected by how much raid activity there is in the route/roi, then this would disencourage over raiding.

I never said anything about suggestion where the drop rates are good, just "to force" raiders into a big "zerg".

Raiders would have to travel somewhere else if they are after loot, this by itself would help the defenders instead of creating over complicated stuff.

You are missing the point with less places to attack do to it being raided everyone will zerg certain areas together. Your idea heard them in such a way.

You are extrapolating reality, this is unreal, you are making up stuff! You have no point, you are making shit up.

Who is everyone?!?! Who is that?!! Are you going to make a character called "Everyone"?

There's many dozens of nodes, there is no visual clue of how much is the rate and where.
The rates go up and down along the hours due to activity or lack of activity.

"Everyone is going" AHAHAHAHAH
Where?!?! Where is "everyone" going?

You are adding fluff to a conversation, and making a point that doesn't matter.

So if you want to debate word semantics for whatever weird reason, you are trying to make a point on me using everyone. Even though you clearly know the current conversation is about players taking part in this type of content as the thread is talking about...

Like you literarily ignore my points say i bring nothing then make a comment like this when you know the players we are talking about?

Effectively your idea boils down to give people debt based on unknown values of the caravans they attack. And wet it so eventually you don't get drops for attacking caravans. That is not a good or fun idea, it is extremely generic.

Rather then building upon and keeping entertainment within the current system your IDEAs try to reduce the amount of content within areas. You want to punish players than think about different concepts that can fix the issue.

I have a hard time believing you can't understand my use of the word everyone under this context of everyone that chooses to do this type of content.

What are you talking about?
Pay attention to the thread, this thread is about something else.

Keep the discussion within the thread subject or find the right thread for that.

I know what the thread is about and it ties to the other one. AGAIN THIS is not a strong idea. The concept of punishing players for doing concept in a area is completely silly. Based on what players want and need and value should be where content happens. If it is a high prio area expect resistance.

You want to remove human elements and have things be made in a boring way. You are trying to put a band-aid over your idea. Its going to be clear as day when you destroy a caravan and get ranked up with debt and no drops. It isn't hard to organize and make post / bots so people know where to go.

I must ask you to behave yourself in the forum, that other thread is a brainstorm thread, everyone is entitled to throw ideas around and discuss

Just stop it, stop harassing people

Who is harassing, you literally ignored my point and uses a sarcastic insult taking out context of what I said because i don't agree with your point. And you are purposely ignoring my comments against your point and commenting on other details...

"Everyone is going" AHAHAHAHAH

Threads are not echo chambers, if you don't like i disagree with you rather than ignoring or saying things like that, explain better how your idea will work. And not limit the places most people will go to do their attacks.

Songcaller

It's the same shit, different thread. No ability to counter points, just the usual sugar and sweetness for those of the same opinion and personal attacks and vitriol to anyone who disagrees.

Noaani

So, the big problem with something like this is that the design intention for it should be based on giving players the option to pick the most profitable route. If one route has a high loss rate, you would opt to go for a different route.

Unfortunately, caravans in Ashes are not something people will have that much control over. The caravan HAS to go from where the resources are located, to where the resources are needed.

Archeage had a system where trade packs would diminish in value the more a given pack was delivered to a given zone. The thing there is - players had the option of taking any lack from any zone to any other zone, there was no specific start or end point required.

Ashes has (had? Haven't heard about them for a while) a concept similar to this with mob dropped certificates. The further you take that certificate from where it was dropped, the more coin you get. However, the more that are turned in to a given node, the lower the price in that node goes.

Players have the option of getting certificates from anywhere, and delivering them to anywhere. As such, fluctuating prices make perfect sense.

However, fluctuating drop rates on caravan route where players running those routes dont have a whole.lot of choice - thay doesnt make much sense.

Arya_Yeshe

Neurath wrote: »

It's the same shit, different thread. No ability to counter points, just the usual sugar and sweetness for those of the same opinion and personal attacks and vitriol to anyone who disagrees.

You are just a violent carebear and a stalker, if this was real life I would have called 911 on you a long time ago. You weren't even discussing on the topic and you came here just to attack me, just like your alt did

Why aren't you like other people who discuss ideas only instead of stalking people? Creepy stalker

Terrifying_Truth

Arya_Yeshe wrote: »

Dynamic drop rates:
Initially, the drop rates are split evenly between loot drops and items that are sunk. The ratio is 50/50.

If there are no wagon kills in the route within 6 hours, then the rates will be adjusted to +10/-10. This means that you will have a 60/40 split between dropped and sunk items, which can go up to a 100/0 split.

Each wagon that is destroyed will result in a change of rates by -10/+10. If enough wagons are destroyed, the drop rate will become 0/100 for dropped and sunk items.

If the route becomes a popular target for attacks, eventually no loot will be dropped and everything will be sunk. However, if the route remains quiet, the drop rate will gradually reach 100% drop / 0% sunk.

This system is designed to account for the fact that some attackers may simply aim to harm their economic competitors, and that those seeking loot will need to search for routes with higher drop rates. Harming others economically is fine.

People aiming for loot will have to scout, travel and go somewhere else, where the loot drop is high.

Makes sense?

edit: in the map people would be able to hover the mouse over a region and check how high is the raiding activity, so raiders looking for look would have to travel somewhere else instead of over raiding the same area

Makes sense, just like in that land management stream, more things should be balanced based on player activity. This is the right approach

Mag7spy

Arya_Yeshe wrote: »

Neurath wrote: »

It's the same shit, different thread. No ability to counter points, just the usual sugar and sweetness for those of the same opinion and personal attacks and vitriol to anyone who disagrees.

You are just a violent carebear and a stalker, if this was real life I would have called 911 on you a long time ago. You weren't even discussing on the topic and you came here just to attack me, just like your alt did

Why aren't you like other people who discuss ideas only instead of stalking people? Creepy stalker

Please keep it on topic and keep the insults, personal attacks and threats on other members off.

Child Item