Jacopo, considering this new publishing deal are there any plans to be providing refunds as Fractured has not launched yet? Personally, I'm sorry.. I believe in you and Fractured but I cannot in good faith contribute or participate in any project associated with Gamigo or their other companies.
FYI - Backer number is in the KS confirmation email titled "You just backed".
Immortal - Early Bird Backer #94 checking in!
I like the idea that the more you have the more things cost you.
If a guild has multiple territories, resource plots, etc.. what have you.. they cost more to feed. In AO you feed territories, it's always seemed so obvious to me.. but SBI never went down that path. If you increase the maintenance costs, then things will find a balance. Guilds will determine what amount of effort they can afford. Same applies to alliances.. The more subjects aligned, the more it costs to exist. Be it food, items by value, or outright currency.. there should be scaling costs associated with growth. dynamic costs proportionate to size.
By implementing systems like this, the developers would introduce passive checks and balances to the open world.. They could tweak these variables as need be to impact the world and it's events. They could even take it a step further and intentionally impact the open world, food shortages.. natural disasters.. Spinning up the economy in different ways as time goes on to keep things interesting.. keeping players engaged.
ugh.. yet another reminder of the stain that is Trion. I used to get excited when I saw Fractured news, lately it's just disappointing.
My motivation was lasting value.. I think the Immortal package is the best value to support the game. That being said, I went Governor. I wanted to give in a way that the effect is felt for as long as the game is playable. I'm looking forward to trying my hand at running a town and I'm excited to participate in this style of game play. I'm excited to test things out through alphas and in to beta.. As I've grown older, I find equal enjoyment in economic play as I do PVP.
Small independent team.. Ask yourself, do you really want them spending time on a login screen at this stage?
Coming from Albion, I'm in full support of friendly fire. It's one of the things this type of game could really benefit from. Take a look at the large almost mindless zerg vs zerg battles from AO castle fights etc. While there is some strategy at a higher level, the majority of fighting was more about lag and mindless clicking then anything else. Friendly fire would be a great addition IMO.
Join Us On Discord: https://discord.gg/wSsBC9Eav4
Location: TBD
What is Braavos?
Braavos is home to the Braavosi and the guild Iron Bank.
What We Offer:
Join Us On Discord: https://discord.gg/wSsBC9Eav4
Congrats on the store launch, not pleased with Xsolla platform but I got my money in on KS
@Jetah Great suggestions.
Personally, I'd like to see it stay and serve some purpose.. I think it's a well designed system that has seemed to work well. The community engagement during such early design stages has far surpassed anything I've seen around other new ip or projects with similar resources.
Congratulations to all the winners, everyone showcased was extremely talented!
This is it, this is what we've been waiting for!
Raids have returned! Death markers! Aerhen love! Mage staff upgrades? Yes, one thousand times yes.
Excellent patch Dynamight!
I'd like to see the seasons eventually effect the reagent sources and their availability/drop rates.. This would allows the devs to take things in and out of focus/favor for periods of time.. adjust drop rates.. balance enchantments, etc..
Each enchant has a few "BIS" combinations, some "better" than others.. This would keep players on their toes, allow values of reagents to rise and fall with availability and keep the market exciting. It seems like the game is close with all these complimentary systems but they just need to pin in on the back of the roadmap for a later date and make this a reality.
Depth, variety, market impact, and logical complexity all packed in to an already great system.
@OlivePit said in Citizens, Farming, and trust.:
Thoughts?
Acceptable band-aid solution at this stage of development. That being said, we can't lose sight of the real changes though and need to push for them to become real sooner rather than later.
Citizen and prestige requirements put the newer towns at a pretty big security disadvantage. Even today, some of the more established towns are still suffering from greifers stealing crops and sabotaging their stability. At Braavos we never suffered from these issues, we started strong with a solid core and never needed to take in any unknown player citizens. We always try to develop our town with security and preparation for the worst in mind. IMO, newer towns are sort of sitting ducks with things the way they are..
As others have mentioned.. We need logs, we need custom user groups(guild roles/ranks), we need clipboard utilization for easy copy & pasting of groups from container to container etc. None of this appeared on the roadmap, so I doubt anyone can say when to expect this sort of stuff but these things are crucial. These features go a long way in taking care of the people who look after and provide content for the community while the game is being developed.
Fun fact, Albion officially launched like mid July 2017.. Now at that point the community had already been asking for similar features for two years already during alpha and beta stages. Asking for guild QoL improvements and other basic functionality just like this stuff mentioned in this thread. It wasn't until mid March 2018 roughly 3+ years before Sandbox interactive finally delivered their first QoL update for guilds and their management in the Lancelot update.
I hope we see some attention regarding these concerns by the team at Dynamight.. Sixteen months post-launch for SBI to take their first pass.. Over three years.
https://albiononline.com/en/news/devtalk-guild-ui-improvements
@spoletta said in Repairing? Kind of.:
That's why I proposed an alternative to the repair system, which costed only resources.
A repair system is meant to INCREASE the resource sink in the game, not decrease it.
Another game did this and switched to a currency sink due to player feedback. Ultimately it was a more of a time sink than a resource sink and players did not enjoy the mechanic. Asking the player to pick up odds and ends to repair their gear quickly became a back and forth chore.. Cherry pick the resources to place them in your inventory for repair at a station is just a big ask. The developers converted it to a currency sink and never looked back.
Repair in any form, if introduced.. must to be part of a larger economic vision. IMO.
Definitely need a safety net here.
Definitely should function the same as towns (at the very least.. if not provide more time as suggested).
I'd also suggest sending the contents of crafting stations and chests to the town marketplace claim tab. This will allow people to be away from the game for an extended time but not lose all their belongings and allow them to jump back in.
As an update, the bugged prestige is preventing us from paying our most recent upkeep.
In the screenshot you can see where we had more packages than required. I was checking on the upkeep this morning and I noticed the game had not consumed the upkeep packages. I clicked on stop decay and while prestige requirements are "disabled" it shows in the screenshot that the city needs 2600 Prestige to stop the decay. The town hall desk is currently displaying a town prestige of 1500.
At the time of writing this we have 2d 22h to stop the decay of we will be demoted to rank 14.
Personally I like the depth.. I just don't enjoy being slowed down. We want more movement not less, so my only feedback is to consider the weakness to cold and the stacks enough and not introduce the slow from weather effects.. Keep the slow for everything else, just not the cold stacks originating from the environment. At the very least consider the slowing effect from the environment at a much higher threshold we're unlikely to hit very often.
A little update: With the patch that released 05/04, discussion started about the advanced smelter fix previously mentioned by Jacopo on Discord. About a week ago on 04/27 @Prometheus had mentioned possibly having a patch that addressed this out by Friday 04/29.
Jacopo provided an update and the discussion ultimately ended with him committing to "get on it personally ASAP".
So I wanted to update the thread and contribute my own findings in the event it helps track things down. Our smelter plot in Braavos is made up of 8x basic smelters and has a row of 4x advanced smelters in the back. I had only recently placed the advanced smelters a few days ago as people mentioned having some luck with them. I had heard that the first batch always worked.. So I decided to load one up with 10x Iron ore, 3x coal, and 1x, charcoal. I loaded the ores first, finished with the fuel, and then pressed smelt. The first batch in all four advanced smelters worked fine. The second batch was also successful, it was10x tin ore and 1x coal in each, the batch was started and completed after the server restart the morning of 05/04. The third batch was going to be tin again (10x tin ore, 1x coal in each) but it bugged, similar to what @DarthJafo explained. On pressing the smelt button, the temp indicator line falls to the bottom but the temp of the fuel stays present. The fuel and ore all disappear but the smelt buttons turns in to a cancel button. One difference about my situation was the ore still read 5/5 and 5/5 but the ore is gone. The issue occurs right when you hit the smelt button, instead of the gray overlay covering the ore sockets and the timer starting.. your ore just vanishes. The timer never starts but the advanced smelter begins smoking and the cancel button remains for the full duration. At the end of the batch nothing is in the smelter.
I hit cancel on the first one and it did not return anything. I posted my results to the #debate_tavern channel on discord where we can post screenshots. Someone asked if I had tried moving one of the smelters to another place on the plot and then trying again. I decided to give it a try and it worked, the fourth batch (10x tin ore, 1x coal in each) worked. The third bugged, I moved the smelter to a free spot and then back to the original place and it successfully started and later completed a batch. After seeing this I decided to move another advanced smelter to see if it would work. This smelter had NOT consumed ore prior to me moving it but after moving it the third batch bugged and it consumed all ore. So moving an advanced smelter after it bugged a batch restored it for at least the next batch attempt.. However, moving a non-bugged advanced smelter before attempting a batch did not prevent it from bugging out the same as the others.
Hopefully this information is helpful.. We lost some ore testing this so we will not be using the advanced smelters again until an official fix is released.
