seige weapons

[Vandel]

The mechanics, for such a thing to happen would require major amounts of models, huge amounts of redesign on existing models.  It\'s insane enough to let people build castles, or even the prospect.  This game should have been built in topgraphic/isographic tiles.  So much of this would have much easier to implement.  It\'s great to dream, I\'ve set out over the years to try such things myself, but when it all comes down to implementing the design, you kick yourself for not keeping it simple.  This would be one of those major sidetracked ideas, that\'s already grossly frowned upon.

The effects this would have on other players is unimaginable.  It could result in the eventual death of the entire world.  A collapseable economy is hard enough to think about.  Those issues are already brought up abounds in other threads.

I have to ask.  Why would you want to seige a town? What would be the effects of say laying seige to Hydlaa Plaza (SP?).  The against side on this one has some serious pull, despite going against a Senior Dev.

The creatures aren\'t even large enough to warrant siege equipment.  The implementation of physics, skills required, and what an imbalance it would create.  I think this response violates the basic laws that govern PS.  This would require an entire rewrite of rules, and how characters are permitted to interact with the environment.  Mainly PKing.  What good is attacking a town, when you have to \'challenge\' each character to see if they accept it or not.  That\'s unheard of.

Like in already brought up posts in this thread, that would be like the final battle in Lord of the Rings:The Two Towers when all the orcs, assembling have to ask each of the elves, and inhabitants if it\'s okay to fight.  The inhabitants decide no it\'s not okay, despite the blatant superiority at the time.

I\'ll have to side with no go people on this one...  Or a serious overhaul on rules.  And I think PKing should be implemented.  But in certain areas, which might make seiging totally viable.  After all 2 realeases at least, could be 20 years from now.

[zkin]

If we are to put a \"siege\" system into this game (which I must admit is an appealing idea for me, if difficult to implement), I think a good place to start would be to create some objects (wall, doors, ect.) that can be destroyed, and allow mages access to spells specifically designed to destroy fortifications/items/the big, expensive sword your opponent is holding (I.E. \"Sunder\")).  It seems to me a good (and currently realistic) way to start, and we can improve from there.

  (Hmm... Mages get \"greater mass sundering\", Fighters get \"light catapult of maiming +12\"... sounds good to me... :])

[Neryam]

Lol hehe Yes I really like this idea. It would indeed be extremely cool. However, I don\'t think permanant game towns such as hydlaa or ojadeva should be able to be seiged. I mean, those towns are everybody\'s towns. What would be better would be to have wars between guild buildings/castles and guild towns, that would only allow wars between guilds powerful enough (And wealthy enough) To build those things. Only those towns would have potential to be in a guild war, so yo can only buy guild/town war seige things to be bought in those towns. That way you dont have to be in a war to \"gear up for a war\".



Oh and about the over-time 3 day war thing? That would work well because any large guild has a bunch of people on at all times and so members could be destroying a town continuously fighting for days at a time.. Until every opposing character is driven out! I don\'t think you would be waiting for the enemy to run out of supplies tho.. You would be knocking down the walls, poisoning things sold in stores and sending diseased cows over the wall immediatlely I should think.

[Externals]

Well where to start.. ah yes, iv played many and by many i mean MANY games that have siege. Its usually at a set time every week by GM\'s.

- In some games it may be for taking control of a castle. (The castle would have the benefits of controlling the taxes which you would get if people bought items in town)

- People would look in respect to you as you had the castle in control.

- You would have to defend the castle every week. It wouldnt necesarily have to be for days, but could take for 1 hour. Its never gonna be real enough in a game.

- As for the siege weapons, Venge already gave the heads up in 2 releases.

- Finally, personally i think its possible.

[dying_inside]

ok im just thinking from an ingame pint of view here but ...
seeing as you have to have an almighty amount of ram to play this game now   and it still hasnt got everything in it ... how the hell do you think a damn seige is going to affect this ?  

the lag monsters will tear apart the ground and drag both sides down into the hell they came from.

range < distance < all < lag


so unless somthing can be done to kindaspeed thegame up a bit and have  it less laggy than im not sure how good a seige idea is.  
agreed it would be so damn fun * thinks of the manic 64 player wars( catapults and all)  on savage * but in this instance im not sure howgood an idea it is.

savage was built around that style of thing so  it is meant to handle wars and lots of players, which it does  very well indeed. But im not sure if planeshift is up to the job.

[Externals]

Lag is actually pretty minimal on my computer when I run PS on it and its about 3 years old. I cant imagine how well it would run if I was to buy a new one next year or something. Maybe upgrade an individual part of my comp or something.

[zkin]

What he means by lag is, I think, that there is a half-second transmission delay between the U.S. and Europe.  While Planeshift is designed to compensate for this quite well, in a siege, half a second can make the difference between being able to dodge the catapult stone or not.  
However, I expect that by the time a full siege system is put into Planeshift, the \"Internet 2\" project will be finished, and between that and the global satellite network delays will probably become less than 1/8 of a second.  In fact, FTL communications could even be developed well within the next 100 years!  (I\'m talking split-photon comms)
As for making primary towns immune, I definitely agree with that idea.  I also think that a \"portal\" system would not hurt, so that players can get around cities under siege, but that the \"king\" of a city should be able to block entry through the portal in his city (but not escaping players, and if he blocks entry, nothing should be able to come through, for good or for bad).
I think that one way of making main towns immune would be not to prohibit sieges, but to give the towns \"force shields\" that block all damage and some truly devastating and wide-effecting weapons (All AI or GM controlled).

[Externals]

Oh I see what you mean. Split second whatever.. must really suck cause I dont have that hehe. But i do definetly wana upgrade from DSL which is fast to Cable which is even faster. Plus i need a new computer. But i mean, the comp im running on is so awesome it was like top of the line 3 years back so really im having no trouble with it.

[dying_inside]

Originally posted by Externals
Lag is actually pretty minimal on my computer when I run PS on it and its about 3 years old. I cant imagine how well it would run if I was to buy a new one next year or something. Maybe upgrade an individual part of my comp or something.

yeah i dont get lag on my computer. it only in hyddalla. and there its just insane...
but im just thinking that that would make evrything a whole lot more prone to lag.

[Neryam]

Yeah it might lag when there\'s fireballs flyign everywhere and 50 players on each side running around and blowing up catapults and mages flying on pteausaurs and burinating puny archers on the castle walls who are shooting down the invading swordsmen and

But don\'t worry, 2 releases later we\'ll all have diffrent computers that are no more than 3 years old which we will buy a few years from now.... If you get what I mean so everybody\'s computers should be a lot more powerful.

Yeah I don\'t think anybody wants to see Hydlaa a smoking ruin because of a guild war between say, the Dragon Council and the Klryos of Fury..

[Externals]

Hehe, yea but i think most people want the guild wars and sieges to take place outside the main main areas of the game so they wouldnt all be a big wreakage.

[Neryam]

I don\'t think the Guild towns/castles/buildings should be built in a main area anyway, too obstructive and.. you know.. Land value is too high

Okay mabye you can but 1,000,000 tria per square meter. Anyway, those things should be out of the way anyway, in hills or feilds or mountains designed for player buildings and towns and whatevers.

[zkin]

Hey, there\'s a thought: How much, precisely, should such a castle cost?  
Personally, I think that any guild with more than, oh, 20 or 200 players should get a *basic* castle for free.  Any *upgrades* they should have to pay for themselves.  However, smaller guilds or powerful players should also have the opportunity to build their own castles, be it at some huge price.
Another line of thought might be that, if the price ends up too high, players may ignore the castle system altogether in favor of better arms and armor.  The price needs to be prohibitive to single players, but not too expensive for guilds or groups.
Another idea I had: If Planeshift is to have guild castles, then those guilds are also going to need treasuries with which to build and maintain them.  I think that guilds should be given a member taxation system (with the limit that they may not tax more than 5 or 10% of the players income).  This will both allow for money with which to improve a castle, but also allow there to be a vault in each castle that can be raided.
On further note, I can imagine that players would be upset if some very powerful player just went around capturing other player\'s guilds.  Thus, I think that really powerful players should be prevented from raiding other players that are considerably weaker than them.  I also think that capturing a castle should be temporary, expensive, difficult, or maybe even impossible.
Another possibility might be that you could make a siege expensive, so that players will avoid doing it unless the gains will be greater than the costs, or they have a vendetta against their target.

Whew!  (pant, pant, pant...)

[yayoo]

If this idea is possible and from wot i hear it is then we should do it

[Neryam]

@zkin: Or the castle would be so prohibitively expensive that nothing but a large guild pooling all of its member\'s money would be able to afford it.. like, say, 1-2 million tria? (Hey, for a guild with 50 active members 1 mil is only 20k per person!)

Sure, there could be a vault to act as the guild bank. Also say only guilds can buy seige weapons inside their twn or an allied guild\'s town and so the powerful player would have no access to these weapons.. and anyway a guild with only weak players deserves to be taken over anyway but as someone earlier said, a castle or town would be impossible to take over without some seige weapons cause they would have far too much health..

Yeah, seiges should be expensive in equipment, time and life.. :]