R38 Post Mortem Missed Questions

Lol! Awesome!

It should have it's own cult and you need a monocle.

 

DarkStarr said: ↑
Randbo: Can we get 3 bind locations instead of just one?
No
Love it.

Hate it. ahha

 

Thanks for answering my questions! Some great answers ! Thanks for all the hard work guys.

 

You seem to be forgetting/overlooking the $2M stretch goal from Kickstarter, which was met. Here is the relevant bit from Update #19:

So there were promises for a castle building/town, ownable by guilds and distinct from houses, which includes castle merchants with unique merchandise and castle defense scenarios.

 

Looks like a ton of fun stuff in there in various met Kickstarter goals...look forward to seeing what Portalarium brings us!

V/R Brickbat

 

22,322 backers pledged $1,919,275 to help bring this project to life.

 

One of the updates at the end of the Kickstarter said they included PayPal funds through the website to meet that goal, and it is shown as checked on the stretch goal image. I'll see if I can find the text in the update.

Edit: It was in Update #25:

 

Not to mention they received fife times more by now and a lot of stuff that wasn't planned made it in.

 

That would be what is described by Darkstarr - Fighting over a castle. It seems to be that Darkstarr is using building as a verb, in that you cannot build a castle. There will be a buiding, which is a castle, that you can fight over as per Darkstarr. You will not be able to build a castle however.


1. Castles & Keeps effectively a new “Town Type”, where the structure is ownable by players or guilds
Coming. Though ownable could mean for 10 minutes or 10 hours or 10 weeks.
2. Guilds can declare war against other guilds
Got it.
3. Guilds can declare as full time PVP
Got it.
4. Guilds can earn a guild house and guild bank
Got it? I mean you can declare lots to be guild houses and you can earn said houses via grinding and purchasing from other players.
5. Guild Tabbard/Shield/Flags useable by all members
One day.
6. Minimum of 5 castle types added to the game
Presumably this just means they will have minimum of 5 castle towns as they expand if it's related to the town type in (1), or perhaps it refers to the numerous castle-like homes.
7. Castle merchants with unique merchandise
Super easy once they have castles to add some unique merchandise. This could even be COTO merchants selling items that are not available on other COTO vendors. Or anything.
8. Castle defense scenarios for most castles which can be played offline as well as online
Presumably will come. Darkstarr said there will be castles scenarios with Catapults etc.


I don't think anything is being forgotten here - perhaps delayed, or not as per the expectations of some (or many?) backers. All that I read into Darkstarr statement was that nobody promised you could build castles. Maybe I'm the one misreading it though.

They declared the 2M goal met however with donations from the website.

Edit - as stated by others before I hit post.

 

If your interpretation is correct (and that's what it is, an interpretation) this would be the most terrible described stretch goal I ever saw.
Because what you say isn't really what is written in the goal.

 

Eeeeeehhhhh..
And i feel like that interpretation is why so many people get mad.

*guilds can declare guild wars*
Got it? Except thered 0 difference between doing that and having all your members flag.
*guilds can declare open pvp*
Ya.. because thats the poor excuse for *guild wars*

Im all for the having a keep capture and hold defend/attack scenario for guild wars. Even if thats 1 keep to hold like king of the hill. Or 1 keep each, win by taking theirs or something.

But sometimes these interpretations being used for defense is the same as them adding a toy rocket decoration you can hold, and claiming theres space ships in the game, and that you and your friends csn get together and travel the world with them. ( picture my character running around an empty field holding a toy making noises, with a buddy next to me.).

Anyways, im glad the guild wars r coming. And im glad for a keep to fight over. Or cap or w.e. hopefully its so well done, people paw after them to add more features, and we end up with more stuff.

 

In his way to read it guild banks are either chests or a shared bank remote access

 

Well it ties in with * Guilds can Earn... * with the massive amount of skill, dedication and hard work, of buying from the store! A guild house heh.

They can do better then hiding behind weak interpretations.
And frankly their answer to the question tells me they are going to at least try.

Im happy about that for sure. Once its in, we can hassle about any shortcomings. But till then at least its confirmed on way.

 

Before you crucify me - all I wanted to say was in simplified way it existed or would exist - and yes, expanded on. And in need of improvement.

There is obviously many of those features that are not here. Guilds declaring pvp is not really the same as declaring war on another guild. Though stating only pvp guilds can declare war is possible, it would also be nice if you could have a private war with another guild.

Really the main reason I responded (and got sidetracked) was Darkstarr said it was not promised that players could build castles. He did not say he was skipping out on the stretch goals.

 

I suppose, you did just remind me of something tho.
@DarkStarr

Any way you can implement a way for party leaders to deem a *truce* for their parties?
Example: i run 16, 2 groups of 8 guildies for an event or open pvp or w.e, can we get a way to extend the no hostilities to multiple parties? Otherwise you can never have organized pvp outside of 8v8.
Already ran into this issue a couple of times, having to have people sit out, due to friendly fire.

Dont need the other groups health bars to show up or anything even, nor exp sharing. But simply the eliminating them as hoztile when everyones flagged would encourage larger pvp group fighting. At this stage of the game.

 

Well I am of course aware what you wanted to say but the PvP topic only taps into the sarcastic part of me off late.
And of course my example is blown out of proportion.
But posts like this make it too easy for the devs to agree with your point of view.
If it doesn't make it in as said per KS that's OK. I just want to know if or if not. And not get feeded vague statements that close to release.

 

This is really dis-enheartening to hear. Not everyone has the ability to group with people of their appropriate level every time they get on. Saying that a player must group up or else farm at a rate 3x lower than their peers when they can't get a group together, is neither fun nor engaging. I feel this is contrary to both the selective multiplayer checkbox, and to the general playability checkbox.

While I could understand there being some reward for multiplayer and parties (which you already have via the party exp bonus system), having a 3x or more(at lower skill/levels) exp gap is too much, and gives the impression that selective multiplayer of any kind, or just hunting alone, is both frowned upon and discouraged.

 

Sorry I misread his question as a verb in the sense of "building a building". I rewrote my answer and edited the OP.

 

Thanks for the detailed response @DarkStarr - Can I assume that eviction due to a POT reset (biome change) would be considered a new scene, and hence much further away on the roadmap? Or would that be like moving to a new lot inside the same scene?

Thanks

 

ahhh, this is sounding good..

thanks for all the answers. fwiw, I think this was the best hangout I've seen yet..
my bones be tellin me it's coming together
thanks for taking the time to answer all those questions

rock on!

-sol