ChipsAhoy007 wrote: » DarkTides wrote: » . Vaknar wrote: » TheWolfofGar wrote: » I think another important thing to consider is you only need to caravan if your are moving your materials from point a to b, in most instances people will likely start gathering and focusing on resources centralized to their primary node, meaning they wont need to caravan at all. FastLoaf wrote: » My biggest worry is caravans in general. It seems like the economy is very important in AoC and caravans are going to be the main driver behind it. From what I understand players could theoretically stunt a nodes growth or inhibit a siege by stopping caravans. I fear that this will cause the game to become a caravan babysitting/camping game, or that everyone will find it so tedious they will just ignore the system all together. When you want to make a merchant run given the lack of fast travel you will be making the journey from a-b regardless so using the caravan and timing it with a few friends or mercs will be a part of the rp aspect or you can brave it alone. I don't think there will be many instances when you will be simply sending caravans across the world unattended and if you are you accept that risk, unless you are gathering far from home and stockpiling in a nearby node, but even then it would make sense to escort the resources home when you are done your gathering. As for raiding caravans to prevent a node leveling or important siege equipment from arriving I think that is actually a tactic that should be encouraged. imagine 4/5 metropolis have been made and you and another t5 node are nearing the final stretch it would be silly to simply let resources get to your rival city have supplies arriving consistently you should be actively working to undermine them. For sieges it seems obvious to me that you would need to defend those en route, why would I let someone bring a trebuchet to my doorstep when I can destroy it in open pvp with no corruption risk. As well as undermine the enemy siege in the process. I think caravans will likely be far less frequent then you fear I think well likely see early on smaller caravans then as nodes develop people organize larger scheduled caravan runs which promise safety and consistency, as well as smaller runs which try to out race these large slow runs. Or see guilds take on the role of Caravan Guard where for a fee they'll escort your goods if you need to keep gathering or working away from home This is a great comment! Like others have said, it's hard to make a judgment until it can actually be played and experienced first-hand. As this comment states, there are plenty of reasons for the system to exist and thrive. The example of two nodes battling for supremacy is a great example of why the caravan system adds fantastic depth to the node system. Really, they complement each other well. Of course, once we get feedback on the system during testing, there are elements to it that may adapt and change ^_^ 100% I can't make a judgement until I see it and experience it. I love the idea of caravans, what they bring to the game and value a well thought out implementation. At present, and based on what's been shared, I can only speculate what may or not happen, given all the moving parts. Id say most of the concern likely revolves around the use of personal caravans, as that, on the surface, results in the largest direct personal loss to a player, perceived as a loss of time invested. If not done so already, it is a mecessity to figure out how to create a need for caravans to be used as opposed to not, in a manner that is useful and fun, and to generate scenarios where there is a need to raid caravans, also useful and fun. I can come up with many from whats been shared, although I think some tweaks are required. I personally feel capturing a caravan and hauling it off for your own is a better alternative than destroying it and getting a portion of the loot. Now the guy who's caravan was attacked has a chance to retake it.... I also feel the goods being transported, should the caravan be destroyed, should remain where they are, requiring another caravan to arrive to pick it up, with a percentage of goods being destroyed. Furthermore, if you intend to fully destroy whats on a caravan, you should have the option to burn the loot pile afterwards. The wiki states caravans have ONE HUNDRED times the carrying weight of a person. Now my guess is they have fine tuned the system well enough that you are going to need to transport 100 times the carrying weight of a person to another node quite frequently to progress it. The alternative is using 10 mules or 100 people. I think it's very possible people will opt into using mules and people instead of caravans most of the time, given the likely usual dramatic decrease in loss if some shitheads decide to come raid your supply line. Given of course that your mules or people all take different paths. I do really like the Idea of being able to capture a caravan though, I think that ones a no brainer. And with a 100 times the carrying weight of a person, the things dropped from a destroyed caravan will naturally require a caravan to pick up, or 10 mules, or a 100 players, or 1 player making a 100 trips, or 2 players... you get the point lol.
DarkTides wrote: » . Vaknar wrote: » TheWolfofGar wrote: » I think another important thing to consider is you only need to caravan if your are moving your materials from point a to b, in most instances people will likely start gathering and focusing on resources centralized to their primary node, meaning they wont need to caravan at all. FastLoaf wrote: » My biggest worry is caravans in general. It seems like the economy is very important in AoC and caravans are going to be the main driver behind it. From what I understand players could theoretically stunt a nodes growth or inhibit a siege by stopping caravans. I fear that this will cause the game to become a caravan babysitting/camping game, or that everyone will find it so tedious they will just ignore the system all together. When you want to make a merchant run given the lack of fast travel you will be making the journey from a-b regardless so using the caravan and timing it with a few friends or mercs will be a part of the rp aspect or you can brave it alone. I don't think there will be many instances when you will be simply sending caravans across the world unattended and if you are you accept that risk, unless you are gathering far from home and stockpiling in a nearby node, but even then it would make sense to escort the resources home when you are done your gathering. As for raiding caravans to prevent a node leveling or important siege equipment from arriving I think that is actually a tactic that should be encouraged. imagine 4/5 metropolis have been made and you and another t5 node are nearing the final stretch it would be silly to simply let resources get to your rival city have supplies arriving consistently you should be actively working to undermine them. For sieges it seems obvious to me that you would need to defend those en route, why would I let someone bring a trebuchet to my doorstep when I can destroy it in open pvp with no corruption risk. As well as undermine the enemy siege in the process. I think caravans will likely be far less frequent then you fear I think well likely see early on smaller caravans then as nodes develop people organize larger scheduled caravan runs which promise safety and consistency, as well as smaller runs which try to out race these large slow runs. Or see guilds take on the role of Caravan Guard where for a fee they'll escort your goods if you need to keep gathering or working away from home This is a great comment! Like others have said, it's hard to make a judgment until it can actually be played and experienced first-hand. As this comment states, there are plenty of reasons for the system to exist and thrive. The example of two nodes battling for supremacy is a great example of why the caravan system adds fantastic depth to the node system. Really, they complement each other well. Of course, once we get feedback on the system during testing, there are elements to it that may adapt and change ^_^ 100% I can't make a judgement until I see it and experience it. I love the idea of caravans, what they bring to the game and value a well thought out implementation. At present, and based on what's been shared, I can only speculate what may or not happen, given all the moving parts. Id say most of the concern likely revolves around the use of personal caravans, as that, on the surface, results in the largest direct personal loss to a player, perceived as a loss of time invested. If not done so already, it is a mecessity to figure out how to create a need for caravans to be used as opposed to not, in a manner that is useful and fun, and to generate scenarios where there is a need to raid caravans, also useful and fun. I can come up with many from whats been shared, although I think some tweaks are required. I personally feel capturing a caravan and hauling it off for your own is a better alternative than destroying it and getting a portion of the loot. Now the guy who's caravan was attacked has a chance to retake it.... I also feel the goods being transported, should the caravan be destroyed, should remain where they are, requiring another caravan to arrive to pick it up, with a percentage of goods being destroyed. Furthermore, if you intend to fully destroy whats on a caravan, you should have the option to burn the loot pile afterwards.
Vaknar wrote: » TheWolfofGar wrote: » I think another important thing to consider is you only need to caravan if your are moving your materials from point a to b, in most instances people will likely start gathering and focusing on resources centralized to their primary node, meaning they wont need to caravan at all. FastLoaf wrote: » My biggest worry is caravans in general. It seems like the economy is very important in AoC and caravans are going to be the main driver behind it. From what I understand players could theoretically stunt a nodes growth or inhibit a siege by stopping caravans. I fear that this will cause the game to become a caravan babysitting/camping game, or that everyone will find it so tedious they will just ignore the system all together. When you want to make a merchant run given the lack of fast travel you will be making the journey from a-b regardless so using the caravan and timing it with a few friends or mercs will be a part of the rp aspect or you can brave it alone. I don't think there will be many instances when you will be simply sending caravans across the world unattended and if you are you accept that risk, unless you are gathering far from home and stockpiling in a nearby node, but even then it would make sense to escort the resources home when you are done your gathering. As for raiding caravans to prevent a node leveling or important siege equipment from arriving I think that is actually a tactic that should be encouraged. imagine 4/5 metropolis have been made and you and another t5 node are nearing the final stretch it would be silly to simply let resources get to your rival city have supplies arriving consistently you should be actively working to undermine them. For sieges it seems obvious to me that you would need to defend those en route, why would I let someone bring a trebuchet to my doorstep when I can destroy it in open pvp with no corruption risk. As well as undermine the enemy siege in the process. I think caravans will likely be far less frequent then you fear I think well likely see early on smaller caravans then as nodes develop people organize larger scheduled caravan runs which promise safety and consistency, as well as smaller runs which try to out race these large slow runs. Or see guilds take on the role of Caravan Guard where for a fee they'll escort your goods if you need to keep gathering or working away from home This is a great comment! Like others have said, it's hard to make a judgment until it can actually be played and experienced first-hand. As this comment states, there are plenty of reasons for the system to exist and thrive. The example of two nodes battling for supremacy is a great example of why the caravan system adds fantastic depth to the node system. Really, they complement each other well. Of course, once we get feedback on the system during testing, there are elements to it that may adapt and change ^_^
TheWolfofGar wrote: » I think another important thing to consider is you only need to caravan if your are moving your materials from point a to b, in most instances people will likely start gathering and focusing on resources centralized to their primary node, meaning they wont need to caravan at all. FastLoaf wrote: » My biggest worry is caravans in general. It seems like the economy is very important in AoC and caravans are going to be the main driver behind it. From what I understand players could theoretically stunt a nodes growth or inhibit a siege by stopping caravans. I fear that this will cause the game to become a caravan babysitting/camping game, or that everyone will find it so tedious they will just ignore the system all together. When you want to make a merchant run given the lack of fast travel you will be making the journey from a-b regardless so using the caravan and timing it with a few friends or mercs will be a part of the rp aspect or you can brave it alone. I don't think there will be many instances when you will be simply sending caravans across the world unattended and if you are you accept that risk, unless you are gathering far from home and stockpiling in a nearby node, but even then it would make sense to escort the resources home when you are done your gathering. As for raiding caravans to prevent a node leveling or important siege equipment from arriving I think that is actually a tactic that should be encouraged. imagine 4/5 metropolis have been made and you and another t5 node are nearing the final stretch it would be silly to simply let resources get to your rival city have supplies arriving consistently you should be actively working to undermine them. For sieges it seems obvious to me that you would need to defend those en route, why would I let someone bring a trebuchet to my doorstep when I can destroy it in open pvp with no corruption risk. As well as undermine the enemy siege in the process. I think caravans will likely be far less frequent then you fear I think well likely see early on smaller caravans then as nodes develop people organize larger scheduled caravan runs which promise safety and consistency, as well as smaller runs which try to out race these large slow runs. Or see guilds take on the role of Caravan Guard where for a fee they'll escort your goods if you need to keep gathering or working away from home
FastLoaf wrote: » My biggest worry is caravans in general. It seems like the economy is very important in AoC and caravans are going to be the main driver behind it. From what I understand players could theoretically stunt a nodes growth or inhibit a siege by stopping caravans. I fear that this will cause the game to become a caravan babysitting/camping game, or that everyone will find it so tedious they will just ignore the system all together.
akabear wrote: » Breaking the caravan threat down, say: 2-3min for player and/or caravan to travel between nodes Random spawn starting position to give head start 30sec to1min for pvp group to find a caravan providing a group is out there on the ready already. Then the window for pvp will be 90sec to 2min before the caravan reaches its final destination Short event Does not sound like much of a gauntlet run.. If any of above is even vaguely close, it feels like it will be luck rather than good management that a group out to take out a caravan will be around in time.
Steven wrote: um while moving from node from the center of a node a to let's say node B if you were mounted it would take you roughly uh three and a half minutes or so, I'm sorry, actually, take you five minutes from Center to center, from side to side it would take you about three and a half minutes
Tyranthraxus wrote: » I'm just worried that caravans won't be useful ENOUGH to be a common occurance. I mean, cities/nodes need certain ones for maintenance/upkeep/advancement - but how often can we really expect to see them, otherwise? How often will it be that vital for a merchant to pick up THAT BIG of a stack of materials in one town that it will be worth the risk of running a small caravan to move the goods to their home town, as opposed to making several trips with a smaller load on your back?
Warth wrote: » akabear wrote: » Breaking the caravan threat down, say: 2-3min for player and/or caravan to travel between nodes Random spawn starting position to give head start 30sec to1min for pvp group to find a caravan providing a group is out there on the ready already. Then the window for pvp will be 90sec to 2min before the caravan reaches its final destination Short event Does not sound like much of a gauntlet run.. If any of above is even vaguely close, it feels like it will be luck rather than good management that a group out to take out a caravan will be around in time. your math is off @akabear it takes 3.5 Minutes Mounted from side of a node to side of a neighbouring node it takes 5 Minutes Mounted from center of a node to center of the neighbouring node Considering, that they hinted at mounts being 50-70% faster than you are on foot and the caravans being as fast as people on foot or slower (judging from past videos). It would take between 5 and 5.67 Minutes for a caravan to travel from the edge of one node to the edge of the neighbouring node (which might be built out or not). The information on the wiki is incorrect, in case you have used that values. Source:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4XLJelgfO3g 55:45 - 56:05 Transcript: Steven wrote: um while moving from node from the center of a node a to let's say node B if you were mounted it would take you roughly uh three and a half minutes or so, I'm sorry, actually, take you five minutes from Center to center, from side to side it would take you about three and a half minutes
akabear wrote: » Ah.. was hoping someone would step in with fuller info.. now if the potential engagement period extends to min 5 ish min.. then still short but more of a risk/reward venture
