You are right, but they still have to test this in practice. Nobody would go to war if they lost weeks of gameplay on their favorite character.

To keep a war dynamic, people would like to continue the battle until it's either won or lost. It's not realism, it's a game.

I have played Diablo II on hardcore. Once a fight started, people were camping at the gates and only took shots at the other if he was brave/stupid enough to walk in the open. And it didn't even cost them money, just the character.

I don't think you're going to be able to zerg back into the battle after the first death if that's what you're worried about... long recovery times after getting coup de grace, you'll likely need to rest and recuperate before you have any chance in a fight.

Just a giant debuff after you die until you get somewhere safe, eat, sleep, maybe catch some entertainment to rejuvenate your morale.

Losing 4x on the first death is fine, but not losing anything later is completely stupid, some people that have time on their hands would just go in, take a kill maybe, die, repeat... First time it should be maybe 2x and then lose 1x after that

Posted By MisticniCofi at 10:07 AM - Tue Sep 19 2017

Losing 4x on the first death is fine, but not losing anything later is completely stupid, some people that have time on their hands would just go in, take a kill maybe, die, repeat... First time it should be maybe 2x and then lose 1x after that

Its fine as long as they can't repeat because of debuffs for a certain amount of time after they die... we don't need zerg battles.

I think what was implied from that post about war and the death multiplier is that the initial death has the multiplier on it and every death after is treated as a normal death. Not great at making links but Caspian said that it may work on a multiplier based on proximity to royalty and nobility, starting at a smaller multiplier for being in a war and if you fight near the king/queen it could jump to a x10 penalty for your first death. After that first death in the war however your death penalty is brought back down to normal.

If someone could link the post he made to correct/confirm me I'd appreciate it.

do not forget 3 things:

• once dead you are sent to the spirit realm, each time you go there you have a chance not to comeback, even if you have time left

• it takes time to come back from the spirit realm

• while dead your body can be looted, coming back disarmed on a battle field might be a fast way to go quickly check if anything changed in the spirit realm.

Posted By markof at 8:17 PM - Tue Sep 19 2017

do not forget 3 things:

• once dead you are sent to the spirit realm, each time you go there you have a chance not to comeback, even if you have time left

• it takes time to come back from the spirit realm

• while dead your body can be looted, coming back naked and disarmed on a battle field might be a fast way to go quickly check if anything changed in the spirit realm.

Yes, CdG is allowed in war.

Let's consider warfare in its entirety.

First, not everyone will have the same amount of fame. Even common soldiers might also own lands or have fame from previous campaigns. At the bare minimum, an unknown, untested soldier will lost 8 RL days of play (4 x 2 days) for their first death. Seems like a fair exchange to spend the next 10 hours battling fearlessly. But we'll come back to that in a moment.

If you happen to be the leader of your squad, a particularly capable soldier, a veteran of past campaigns, an officer or aristocrat, or perhaps a reserve troop who's day-job is owning and managing a lot of land you will most certainly have a higher fame. That makes the first death far more costly. From 12 days at renowned ( 4(1.5x2) ) to 32 days at famous ( 4(4x2) ) . To a baron, officer or champion soldier that is a significant loss for a single death. If the less-famous troops get overrun in order to absorb the penalty early, that exposes the higher-ranked, more famous troops to a huge loss. Your officers are likely to be more conservative out of necessity.

Even so, 10 hours is a long time to wage a battle consequence free, right? But is that a long time in terms of battle length?

In medieval times, the most common type of conflict was the siege. These could drag on for months or even years. (For reference, the longest siege in human history lasted 26 years and there are many examples of sieges nearing a decade long). In Elyrian terms, that means an army could be in the field wearing down the defenses of a well-defended settlement for a month in real time easily. Your OPC will be there, night and day, week in and week out. Possibly dying several times while you are logged off.

Now consider that ten-hour window. Over a month's time with continuous battle if a common soldier took a soul penalty every 10 hours they would lose 576 days of play ( (72 x 4)(2) ). Obviously no soul can absorb such a shock. You would reach permadeath in under 20 days. And the problem only grows worse if you are successful and manage not to die, as you will certainly gain fame on the battlefield. A baroness can permanently die on the battlefield in 4 days, if she is killed every 10 hours.

In the end, I think this system works fine. It is unlikely people will die as often as I cite above, but it gives us a good idea of what the maximum penalty would look like. People will need to be cautious in battle. Even rank-and-file soldiers will need to be careful, as they form (in-part) a protective barrier against the death of their leaders who are far more susceptible to permanent death on the battlefield.

EDIT: Changed rate for battlefield loss to 10 hours. Good catch, @Zirfith

This alters the number of days in battle to about 20 on the low end and less than 5 for officers and barons.

Apologies for the mistaken numbers.

Posted By Hellhound_40k at 7:59 PM - Tue Sep 19 2017

I think what was implied from that post about war and the death multiplier is that the initial death has the multiplier on it and every death after is treated as a normal death. Not great at making links but Caspian said that it may work on a multiplier based on proximity to royalty and nobility, starting at a smaller multiplier for being in a war and if you fight near the king/queen it could jump to a x10 penalty for your first death. After that first death in the war however your death penalty is brought back down to normal.

If someone could link the post he made to correct/confirm me I'd appreciate it.

That's somewhat similar to how the bloodlust feature has been explained, but you can read the actual mechanic in detail written by Caspian here.

Posted By Dekul at 6:53 PM - Tue Sep 19 2017

I don't think you're going to be able to zerg back into the battle after the first death if that's what you're worried about... long recovery times after getting coup de grace, you'll likely need to rest and recuperate before you have any chance in a fight.

Just a giant debuff after you die until you get somewhere safe, eat, sleep, maybe catch some entertainment to rejuvenate your morale.

It might be worth noting that at the moment - with subject to change - spirit walking is seen as a period where the body can rest and regain it's strength. After returning to your body you'd be well rested with high values in vitality and energy:

"BW: Mobius asks “Besides spirit loss, after coming back to the body, will the player suffer some kind of debuff, something to keep them weak like rez sickness.”

Caspian: No and we’ll actually have the opposite, so when you are spirit lossed and roam the astral plane, while you work your way back to your actual body it’s in this kind of rested state, kinda a coma state, and when you return to your body, you become hyper-vigilant after having been rested at that deep level for so long a time. So chances are good, not only are you going to have more energy than you had before hand, but you might also as I said, be slightly faster, slightly stronger than you were before you were incapacitated or coup de gra’d."

from an old Q&A session

Posted By Bombastus at 11:46 AM - Tue Sep 19 2017

Let's consider warfare in its entirety.

First, not everyone will have the same amount of fame. Even common soldiers might also own lands or have fame from previous campaigns. At the bare minimum, an unknown, untested soldier will lost 8 RL days of play (4 x 2 days) for their first death. Seems like a fair exchange to spend the next 2 hours battling fearlessly. But we'll come back to that in a moment.

If you happen to be the leader of your squad, a particularly capable soldier, a veteran of past campaigns, an officer or aristocrat, or perhaps a reserve troop who's day-job is owning and managing a lot of land you will most certainly have a higher fame. That makes the first death far more costly. From 12 days at renowned ( 4(1.5x2) ) to 32 days at famous ( 4(4x2) ) . To a baron, officer or champion soldier that is a significant loss for a single death. If the less-famous troops get overrun in order to absorb the penalty early, that exposes the higher-ranked, more famous troops to a huge loss. Your officers are likely to be more conservative out of necessity.

Even so, 2 hours is a long time to wage a battle consequence free, right? But is that a long time in terms of battle length?

In medieval times, the most common type of conflict was the siege. These could drag on for months or even years. (For reference, the longest siege in human history lasted 26 years and there are many examples of sieges nearing a decade long). In Elyrian terms, that means an army could be in the field wearing down the defenses of a well-defended settlement for a month in real time easily. Your OPC will be there, night and day, week in and week out. Possibly dying several times while you are logged off.

Now consider that two-hour window. Over a month's time with continuous battle if a common soldier took a soul penalty every 2 hours they would lose 2,880 days of play ( (360 x 4)(2) ). Obviously no soul can absorb such a shock. You would reach permadeath in only 4 days. And the problem only grows worse if you are successful and manage not to die, as you will certainly gain fame on the battlefield. A baroness can permanently die on the battlefield in just one day, if she is killed every two hours.

In the end, I think this system works fine. It is unlikely people will die as often as I cite above, but it gives us a good idea of what the maximum penalty would look like. People will need to be cautious in battle. Even rank-and-file soldiers will need to be careful, as they form (in-part) a protective barrier against the death of their leaders who are far more susceptible to permanent death on the battlefield.

Lol, that siege of Cueta sort of shows the futility of besieging a coastal city without a navy to blockade supplies coming in... 30 years of wasted time.

rip, I'm guessing combat medic is a no then if a CDG means your full hp/stats/everything. Tbh imo that really degrades medical professions in general to reset injury on CDG. That means that only players that escape or are incapped and somehow escape need medical help but once you die it's irrelevant cas reset.

also, why do devs word things so multi-sided. If what he meant was that additional deaths would only incur the regular spirit loss, why not flat out say it? I get why devs are vague but there is a line between vague and misleading. The original write-up and QnAs on the write-up for toll caps imo lead you into believing that no additional spirit loss means no spirit loss. Being vague implies that you are not offering leads to any direction.

Saying "additional spirit loss" can be taken multiple ways as their is no reference to what the base is. For something to be added there needs to be a base to add to. Leaving it unclear what the base is means that the reader has to infer based on what they know what the base is most likely to be. A lot of people think the base is 0 meaning "no additional loss" = 0 spirit loss, the base. However with his new comment it is looking more like the base is your regular modifier without any war/blood-lust modifiers.

If what was said truly is that they retain spirit loss just not ADDITIONAL LOSSES provided by war/blood-lust I am okay with the system as is. If they mean 0 spirit loss after initial death I may be more tilted than usual.

Definitely needs to be tested in practice, but I share your concerns. The toll cap should be there to give you the opportunity to decide whether or not you're going to stay fighting or run.

The current idea seems like it'll just guarantee that everyone dies at least once every battle.

Posted By Bombastus at 2:46 PM - Tue Sep 19 2017

Even so, 2 hours is a long time to wage a battle consequence free, right? But is that a long time in terms of battle length?

I dont know how to set quotes perfectly but they said that they are capping it to one toll per 10 hours.

It seems like the usefulness of archers severely declines though. Assuming that arrows only incapcitate you can just have a medic get them up fairly quickly. If arrows do just CDG then by firing a volley of arrows your just creating berserk warriors for the enemy.