When a red has a FH, the mayor of the node could declare the red an 'enemy of the state' then every citizen of the node could kill the red. It would be like having many Bounty Hunters in the area of the FH constantly.
When a red has a FH, the mayor of the node could declare the red an 'enemy of the state' then every citizen of the node could kill the red. It would be like having many Bounty Hunters in the area of the FH constantly.
Nah, even more strictness on owpvp isn't necessarily the answer. And the corrupted could be corrupted from killing outsiders unbeknownst to the mayor
The mayor should get the info from the game. Maybe the info could be more or less accurate depending on the level of some administrative buildings. Enforcing that action could also cost resources which would otherwise go toward building the city defense.
I mean, the flip side is a mayor allowing free range of corrupted players right? I don't know, I feel like for how much of a milestone a freehold is, sieges and taxes should be it's only upkeep. And how would you deal with other players utilizing that freehold. Or I wonder if a corrupted can take refuge in their families freehold.
I'd also want to know if corrupted are barred from their guild hall?
Either way. The more I talk about it, the more I feel corruption may be too restricting to allow for much PvP. I just really really need to test it out
1
Options
RavicusMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
When a red has a FH, the mayor of the node could declare the red an 'enemy of the state' then every citizen of the node could kill the red. It would be like having many Bounty Hunters in the area of the FH constantly.
When a red has a FH, the mayor of the node could declare the red an 'enemy of the state' then every citizen of the node could kill the red. It would be like having many Bounty Hunters in the area of the FH constantly.
Nah, even more strictness on owpvp isn't necessarily the answer. And the corrupted could be corrupted from killing outsiders unbeknownst to the mayor
The mayor should get the info from the game. Maybe the info could be more or less accurate depending on the level of some administrative buildings. Enforcing that action could also cost resources which would otherwise go toward building the city defense.
I mean, the flip side is a mayor allowing free range of corrupted players right? I don't know, I feel like for how much of a milestone a freehold is, sieges and taxes should be it's only upkeep. And how would you deal with other players utilizing that freehold. Or I wonder if a corrupted can take refuge in their families freehold.
I'd also want to know if corrupted are barred from their guild hall?
Either way. The more I talk about it, the more I feel corruption may be too restricting to allow for much PvP. I just really really need to test it out
As it stands now, if you are a corrupt player and you are a mayor, you cannot buy or sell from your own npc's or access storage, even if you own the freehold lol, unless I am missing something.
What if you role played an evil necromancer and you owned a freehold that you wanted to have evil themed. I guess there is only good in this game haha, no bad guys for us!!
Honestly it just needs to be tweaked enough. Just enough to prevent griefing, but not too much as to making killing a couple greens make every player resource unavailable to you. This is why I keep recommending corruption has variables, even levels of corruption.
2
Options
RavicusMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Honestly it just needs to be tweaked enough. Just enough to prevent griefing, but not too much as to making killing a couple greens make every player resource unavailable to you. This is why I keep recommending corruption has variables, even levels of corruption.
yes, I think corruption works fine, its the lack of personal storage or trading that is just bad. I have stated the reasons and it is just not feasable to even play with those restrictions. I guess I was hoping for being that the open sea has a different ruleset that they might lax the trading storage on the open seas. With no fast travel it would be hard to be a person who pk's on land to make constant runs to the sea to re-equip fast, but at least it could be done. I just see this as a huge black eye on pvp exept for open sea warfare where no one is red i guess. I still wonder about if boats will have storage or not. I guess we will find out. Hopefully they are open to feedback during alpha 2. Maybe I am totally wrong on this and they have a plan, I hope so.
Comments
I mean, the flip side is a mayor allowing free range of corrupted players right? I don't know, I feel like for how much of a milestone a freehold is, sieges and taxes should be it's only upkeep. And how would you deal with other players utilizing that freehold. Or I wonder if a corrupted can take refuge in their families freehold.
I'd also want to know if corrupted are barred from their guild hall?
Either way. The more I talk about it, the more I feel corruption may be too restricting to allow for much PvP. I just really really need to test it out
As it stands now, if you are a corrupt player and you are a mayor, you cannot buy or sell from your own npc's or access storage, even if you own the freehold lol, unless I am missing something.
What if you role played an evil necromancer and you owned a freehold that you wanted to have evil themed. I guess there is only good in this game haha, no bad guys for us!!
yes, I think corruption works fine, its the lack of personal storage or trading that is just bad. I have stated the reasons and it is just not feasable to even play with those restrictions. I guess I was hoping for being that the open sea has a different ruleset that they might lax the trading storage on the open seas. With no fast travel it would be hard to be a person who pk's on land to make constant runs to the sea to re-equip fast, but at least it could be done. I just see this as a huge black eye on pvp exept for open sea warfare where no one is red i guess. I still wonder about if boats will have storage or not. I guess we will find out. Hopefully they are open to feedback during alpha 2. Maybe I am totally wrong on this and they have a plan, I hope so.