Fireheart 2768 Share Posted May 26, 2019 Good evening morning. For some reason forums decided to not auto post this on the schedule placed on it so apologizes for the like twelve hour delay. As promised in my previous post we will be throwing out this centralized post for people to give their thoughts and opinions on several topics. The two specific topics for this thread are the follow: - Fortification criterias (what is and what isn't a PvP fort). - Fortification edits (what is a minor edit, what is major, et cetera). To break it down and to give context to how it currently has been handled most of this is under moderation discretion. Some questions to think about and answer when giving your input and feedback could be… Are you for or against modifications in the middle of a war? Should players be allowed to create giant 100 block tall forts over the timespan of a day or two or should it be restricted to something smaller? For sieges; what would constitute fair defensive modifications? Are there specific types of traps or building structures that should be outlawed for not being realistic or friendly to our roleplay atmosphere? ...and many more beyond that. I look forward to hearing people’s thoughts on the topic and remember that suggestions do have to fit within a rule set so detail and accuracy is appreciated! p.s. I hope Med loves me now since this post isn’t locked ❤️ 5 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sky 0 Share Posted May 26, 2019 Honestly, just turn off all ability to touch the world and have all edits (fort additions included) made by the fabulous world developers. 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hiebe 2475 Share Posted May 26, 2019 2 minutes ago, Sky said: Honestly, just turn off all ability to touch the world and have all edits (fort additions included) made by the fabulous world developers. You forgot the /s 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Medvekoma 1966 Share Posted May 26, 2019 A repeated complaint in regards to wars on LOTC is how each of them seem to be declared to exterminate a playerbase. If we have more battles, more warclaims and warclaims that aren’t against capitals with the risk of playerbase-destruction, then does not that not benefit the server? More sieges & battles could be further enhanced if sides in a war could enforce peace after winning some sieges. EG, take this land, this title, instal this claimant, etc. All limited, of course, just to promote the winning side enforcing something else than complete destruction of the loser. I can only see a benefit in more forts popping up. As long as they aren’t ridiculously excessive, I don’t see any other argument against them than the below: “I seek to exterminate this nation as quick as possible, and as cheap as possible. Thus, I want as few sieges between me and my end-goal as possible.” 5 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
argonian 12836 Share Posted May 26, 2019 11 minutes ago, Medvekoma said: A repeated complaint in regards to wars on LOTC is how each of them seem to be declared to exterminate a playerbase. If we have more battles, more warclaims and warclaims that aren’t against capitals with the risk of playerbase-destruction, then does not that not benefit the server? More sieges & battles could be further enhanced if sides in a war could enforce peace after winning some sieges. EG, take this land, this title, instal this claimant, etc. All limited, of course, just to promote the winning side enforcing something else than complete destruction of the loser. I can only see a benefit in more forts popping up. As long as they aren’t ridiculously excessive, I don’t see any other argument against them than the below: “I seek to exterminate this nation as quick as possible, and as cheap as possible. Thus, I want as few sieges between me and my end-goal as possible.” so just build 20 forts and drag a war out for a year 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Ricktador 1394 Share Posted May 26, 2019 A lot of mental gymnastics went into this to avoid asking the community if Renatus should be allowed to keep their fort. Impressive. 8 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gaurdman 60 Share Posted May 26, 2019 3 minutes ago, shoahinsnowyfields said: so just build 20 forts and drag a war out for a year In the current rules, you have to pay minas for your forts to be valid Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Medvekoma 1966 Share Posted May 26, 2019 5 minutes ago, shoahinsnowyfields said: so just build 20 forts and drag a war out for a year Okay and what’s bad about that? Force nations to pay increasing war upkeep and sooner or later one will fold under bankruptcy. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
argonian 12836 Share Posted May 26, 2019 6 minutes ago, Medvekoma said: Okay and what’s bad about that? Force nations to pay increasing war upkeep and sooner or later one will fold under bankruptcy. just keep voting? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Medvekoma 1966 Share Posted May 26, 2019 1 minute ago, shoahinsnowyfields said: just keep voting? Do you understand what increasing means? 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fireheart 2768 Author Share Posted May 26, 2019 1 minute ago, Medvekoma said: Do you understand what increasing means? 2 minutes ago, shoahinsnowyfields said: just keep voting? What Med is suggesting is that the price multiples on itself so that it is not sustainable forever. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
argonian 12836 Share Posted May 26, 2019 1 minute ago, Medvekoma said: Do you understand what increasing means? it’s more expensive for the attackers Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elennanore 2712 Share Posted May 26, 2019 >on renatus side >renatus fort is ass >should have never been approved >bad GMs Anyways, I'll edit this response later and give a very detailed essay on LotC build standards regarding forts. 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chaotikal 2236 Share Posted May 26, 2019 Nerf treb damage if you don’t want Fort Loches, dumb.... The war equipment and the war is like league of legends, a metagame. There’s good options, strong options, players will always go for the strongest options. In the current plugin structure, Fort Loche like structures, very wide, very tall cubic forts is the best. this is how castles were designed irl, they were designed as the strongest thing they could build, and these “PVP” forts is what is best in minecraft PVP, and LoTC warfare. Change the meta, change the castles. It’s simple. Nerf Treb Damage, allow it not to do a lot of damage to walls, and you’ll get better looking castles again. - A MessyMedieval Builder. @Fireheart 8 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
func_Soap 409 Share Posted May 26, 2019 +1 Been working on a build, the patron arrives to inspect & first thing he says is “these walls aren’t siege proof.” Indicates to me there is a problem with how sieges are done. Perhaps make trebs more expensive? Introduce proper siege ladders or battering rams as cheaper alternatives. Dismantle the treb-&-charge meta. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts