New POT Questions Based on Latest Update on POT's

I start this thread to discuss the design questions generated by the scope change: limited POT's to limitless POT's. (https://www.shroudoftheavatar.com/?p=51875#comments)

Let's be clear, though. This is another change to the scope of the project. Another injection of uncertainty into the way the project comes together. Now, I'm not saying that it's a bad thing, but I hope someone is thinking about these things...

1) Can POT's be nested? You have to travel from the overland map to one, then another, then another before you can get to it?

2) How will some settlements accommodate exits to POT's? Take for example, Ardoris. Can someone choose to have an exit there? There isn't a lot of real estate for exits.

3) How many exits to POT's can a settlement have? What if 20 choose Owl's Head? Will we be able to find our way out to the overland map again?

4) Can someone place a mountain/snow biome POT right next to a swamp POT and in no relation to what's on the overland map? Or will biomes be limited based on the settlement they are attached to?

5) How many entrances and exits does a POT get? Take for example, a cluster of five that all have entrances and exits with multiple connections. Also, can it connect to both a POT and an NPC town? For example, someone might suggest a cave biome that transports you between places. (Far-fetched perhaps, but someone will ask.)

6) When is the cut off for buying a POT? Furthermore, how will this impact the rarity of housing which is why a lot of people made pledges?

Add your own questions.

 

7) Tick all valid POT connections:

[_] regular PRT like Ashhaven or Merriston
[_] "important" PRT like Soltown or Braemar
[_] regular NPC cities like Solania or Kingsport
[_] "important" NPC cities like Ardoris or *gulp* Brittany
[X] other POTs connected to the overland
[_] other POTs not connected to the overland (aka nested POTs)

8) actual POT owners can declare themselves uninterested in overland access and free up one overland-connected POT "slot"?

 

Answer
1. no you do NOT have to travel overland to visit connected POT's..I know that several POt's that are online NOW will have connected POt's that will not have Overland access.

As of this Posting, no more POts that are purchased will have overland access.

 

I assume players will be able to buy PoTs in-game with in-game gold. Are they reserving a certain number (half) of the total expected # of PoT placements for in-game gold purchases? (like they are with lot deeds)

How can anyone look at this 'nested towns' idea and with a straight face say Shroud towns are not instanced? The disconnect from the world we travel on is making 'limited', 'unlimited'. Is that what they promised/we want? From an immersion point of view, I say no. I don't recall entering any of the dual-scale Ultimas and having to find a whole town by going through another town to get to it (unless it didn't exist in the world) Are they saying these towns don't really exist in the world? Because that's what it feels like.

I feel that the hex grid will have to be scaled again, to make more hexes span across Novia, in order to fulfill the current allotment alone. I hope that is still an option in their planning. I can't imagine running through the world, never seeing where several people live, because their town is 'instanced from only another town'.. that's too far disconnected from the world. All the island towns, i thought would have a place on the map, just only accessible by boat when we meet that stretch goal.. I really don't like this having towns that aren't represented on the overworld map (or underworld map if it's an underground town).

Hope it doesn't sound like I'm ranting. This is my first impression hearing this news, and I felt it needed to be voiced here. Thanks for listening.

 

I'll be surprised if they are available in-game for gold at least in episode 1.

If they are available the cost in gold would be astronomical.

 

Yes, buying a city should be. Perhaps Episode II or III should be the first chance for such in-game purchases. In fact, in-game, it may take more than just a purchase, but perhaps completing a huge quest line to endear yourself to the populous of a particular region's culture. It might even take a King to grant you lordship of a new township, which should be quite the prestigious reward, only a limited number could possibly achieve.

 

I like the idea of needing to complete a grand quest to be granted petty nobility (a requirement in most feudal societies to own land) that would allow you to purchase a PoT with in-game gold. However, we already have testers over level 80 and accruing even a million in game gold would not be difficult for guilds to do. So, even if half of the lots are held back, there will likely be a call for in game buying much sooner than many of us would expect. And so, Miracle's idea of limiting the quests, or at least limiting the number of those who could complete it might delay the problem long enough that E2 could introduce more land.

As for instanced towns, this only makes any sense if the towns are subterranean. The thought being that each town is simply on a different level of some grand mine complex. And then it might make sense you have to go through one to get to another and none of this is visible on the surface. For normal, above ground towns, the problems are obvious. And even so, I would still rather have teleportation hubs that transport you to "virtual" towns in varied and sundry places than have the entire overland map packed with PoTs.

 

Thank for writing and responding, but that doesn't get at the heart of the full issues around Q#1. In my example I talked about nesting more than 1 time - and if that's possible - how far can it go?

 

Can POTs be private? If so, will they lose that option if they are hosting an entrance?

 

I would simply guess that the security is handed down, Parent-Child style. Just like with any lot on a Player Owned Town, you are forever at the whim of the Town Owner.

 

The towns within towns was something we always wanted and asked for (PaxLair) as we envisioned several towns acting as burroughs that make up one large city.

 

So the POT connected to other POT idea... I would ask for some clarifications:

Can a POT be cross-connected to another POT other than its primary connecting POT in the same mesh (mesh being something like the PaxLair or Port Phoenix mesh of towns)? If so, what are the caveats?

Will a POT that is in a mesh be able to designate an exit from its POT to the Overworld map?

If, upon all this new news of NPC city connected POTs, is a town owner able to leave a mesh to become a Overworld connected POT?
Does this bump any later purchased POT to a NPC city connected status if now > 230?

I also edited my posting in Spoon's thread with some NPC city connected questions there...

Thank you for reading all this.

 

The last we heard when the POT application first arrived was a DLMB from DarkStarr that only 'adjacent' POTs could be connected, if not meshed. With the clarification that islands can be adjacent over water, so an archipelago of POT islands could cross connect.
But this new update seems to contradict some of that info, since back then it was also clearly stated that NPC/Story towns would have a DMZ vs POTs. Which seems to be no longer the case.

 

Since both PaxLair and Port Phoenix have connected island POTs, it was more of a clarification if the island POT could connect between two or more of the other POTs in that same mesh.

 

We hope so but have no confirmation yet. Other than the POT form which asks which towns (plural) you want to connect to.

 

[9] The update says there's a limited room for accessing POTs from overland map. I agree that POTs (and in general, scene) entrances cannot surpass a certain density, but there's nothing against density of exits.

In other word, can we have a POT not directly accessible from the overland map, but having a direct exit from the POT scene to the ovm?

 

That is the plan for 3 or 4 of the PaxLair boroughs that are land based. Only entrance in would be thru PaxLair, with each having an exit to overland map so no backtracking needed. That will place 3 or 4 as nested within PaxLair with no overland access. One of our islands will also have an underground scene, which will only be access from that island

Our vison is PaxLair (and possibly Lockbriar) on Overland map, with 4 ships off the coast of PaxLair to get to our island towns.
We are also hoping for ships in the towns, on the docks as an internal means to get to each borough. if those boroughs have water access.

That's our base plan. We'll see.

 

I would hope that island towns would show up on the map when boat travel is added. Underground towns having entrances inside above-ground towns makes sense to me, but any other 'nesting' is going too far. Unless the nested zones are specifically designed to nest together... and feel like different parts of the same whole.

How will a town within a town within a town go under siege? (getting attacked by dragons or what-not) and how will adventurers become aware of this activity if there's no visual representation on the overland map? Will just all the nested towns always be 'attacked' if the parent is under attack?

I don't see how anyone buying a PoT would appreciate being so connected to another random town, that they must ask their customers to go through the other town to get to them, and must suffer all attacks the parent town suffers.

What if a PvP town is nested a couple layers under non-PvP towns? How will that affect PvP guild warfare? It's all feeling muddled at the moment for me. If this level of complexity s required, I hope it can be done right, so that it functions well in all situations.

 

Our inner towns are/will be designed to fit the overall PaxLair city idea. All of our ideas have been made with what the overland map there looks like.

There is nothing random about requesting this type of connection.
All of our owners are aware of our limitations in considering PaxLair as a city, each makes up PaxLair as a whole. As with building our first scene, we are subject to whatever decisions the Devs make. We adjust as more becomes clear. That is one reason we promote slow growth.

Oh and just to qualify...PaxLair has no customers, everyone of the players that already have permanent housing with us understand how we want it to work. They are all citizens of our city and will all help determine the course of PaxLair as we march thru each Epsisode.

PaxLair charges no fees, taxes, whatever.

 

Yes, I wasn't questioning PaxLair and it's city-cluster setup. But what about everyone else? Not every city will be like PaxLair. And not every cluster will be made up of town owners who even know each other, (but just happen to want to live in the same biome).