PvP play
|
Lord Humungus Posted Jun 21, 2007, 8:28 am |
I realize it's a relatively new and growing gaming community, is there room for PvP banditry (I've watched a few PvE scouts) or would I be jumping the gun to try and set up a gang of "badguys"? | ||||||
|
*viKKing* Posted Jun 21, 2007, 9:05 am |
Hmm Lord Humungus, happy to see you back, Mad Max is out for shopping ATM 
Bad guys, yes, you are welcome. Currently the only way to plan "unfriendly" actions is to use Private Messages, with a few selected guys matching your view. I'm not very Pvp oriented myself; I have hard time trying to survive in fact. Anyway, attacking traders is fully supported (and not officially recommended ? but we can always give you a hand  ? never tell anyone I said that).
When scouting you have options to select who you are going to attack, and of course attacking traders will give you a bad rep. 
|
||||||
|
*sam* Posted Jun 21, 2007, 12:55 pm |
You can also go scouting and explicitly state that you want pvp encounters. You might have to wait a while though, since there isn't a huge amount of player activity in the wilderness yet. | ||||||
|
*viKKing* Posted Jun 21, 2007, 8:10 pm |
I would recommend contacting our Italian friend, Tucano.
It seems mafia just settled at Elmsfield... |
||||||
|
*Toecutter* Posted Jun 21, 2007, 11:43 pm |
but i would wait till you've established yerself a bit...there are a few larger gangs just waiting for an excuse to go PvP 
hmmm maybe an "Enemies of Max" alliance can get going here...just need Aunty Entity lol |
||||||
|
Lord Humungus Posted Jun 23, 2007, 8:26 am |
I've noticed that traders can truce, but not bandits...Perhaps there could be a monetary value assigned to truces as well, so that PvP play could result in someone paying off the "bandit player" gang instead of having to drag it out.
Something like "Lord Humungus will accept your truce for your pump, the oil, the gasoline, and the whole compound...or for 5000 bucks..." |
||||||
|
*viKKing* Posted Jun 23, 2007, 9:10 am |
ye, Lord H., we discussed about that kind of system; namely called ransom.
We haven't decided anything yet. |
||||||
|
ISHOULDCOCO Posted Jul 14, 2007, 5:42 pm |
How do I AVOID PVP ? I always find it creepy and anti-roleplaying. 2nd scout mission out and I met a player force twice my size . This is right outside Somerset . I surrendered immediately , hoping for mercy and got none. My loss - naive fool that I am . So another 2 weeks of kiddie racing to get the $45K I just lost. Is there any way to avoid newbie predators or is that jsut the way of the world ? I aint griping, if that is how this MMPORPG is then the newbs REALLY have to stick together. Which is interesting and reflects and real world mechanism. Dog eat Dog . Maybe if there was better warnings about the dangers of the outside world , then it would ACTUALLY make the gane more exciting. Other games have synthetic mechanisms that sanitise the experience and make games Artificially Fair and therefore make all threats/perils meaningless and all associations/teamwork purely social point-scoring. What I really want is a big warning sign that says the wilderness is very dangerous and should not be entered alone. COCO (posting to www.mmorpg.com too) |
||||||
|
Alocalypse Posted Jul 14, 2007, 7:00 pm |
I guess having a highly skilled scout helps you avoid unwanted encounters, but I think you misunderstood what happened there, neither you or your opponent in this case were looking for a PVP encounter and it was just bad luck you got paired up.
The proper way to peacefully end a wilderness encounter would have been to offer a truce from the menu instead of surrendering all your cars (which will mean you will lose your cars to your opponent!) or if that doesn't work for you can always ask your opponent to let you run 350m away from them without giving chase and both parties can escape without conflict... Also I think Wolf showed interest in giving you your cars back after you logged off - maybe you should try to talk to him about it. 
|
||||||
|
*viKKing* Posted Jul 14, 2007, 9:30 pm |
Coco, thanks for reporting the real first PvP encounter!
...and yes, you are mostly right in what we are looking for the game: players cooperation. Well, I hope it will ends well for you. 
|
||||||
|
WolfEater Posted Jul 14, 2007, 10:06 pm |
1.hey coco u surrendered immedtly u should of talk about truce
2.I finded u after i scout 1 hour(realy 1 hour) yes i did scout for pvp. and all that geting around the 4 city's know that if u go out there agin and i see u i wount give u'r car back, u go to the wild to hunt but what when the hunter find u? 3.i gave u back the car's 4.never surrender so fast, this is tactic game what cant be set with force can set in speed agilty or just luck. if i was u i would use my car's as fast once, (if i a lil force) and i had 3 tank's and 1 disraptor. that mean if u could of make me meet u 1 by 1 u could of takeing me u had 2 good fast car's that could ambush my car easly. not once i finded my self with a double number of car's on my ass and it hard to make sure 4 RL 4 HMG and sevrle Car rifle shot a runing car while u'r tank's are opening them 1 by 1. but i survived and still runing very profitable day's |
||||||
|
Jansan Posted Jul 15, 2007, 7:06 am |
Seconded. But yeah just gotta offer the truce. If another player rejects your truce, it means they are jerks. Going into combat and surrendering though does mean you wanted to fight and then yielded, which confused Wolf. Most people are really nice and would probably accept you didn't want to PvP, but if someone rejected my truce especially after I explained to them I didn't want to PvP, I would be extremely angry at them. I posted concerns eariler about people forming griefing squads, but I haven't run into any problems yet. Being griefed will force people to quit, and fast. |
||||||
|
*Zothen* Posted Jul 15, 2007, 1:23 pm |
Im still wondering why people believe to understand everything without reading anything! Anyway thats the way it is and Coco is right, that new players need to be warned from the dangers of the scouts (and combats also). | ||||||
|
*Toecutter* Posted Jul 15, 2007, 11:22 pm |
woah woah, guys...going after PvP is NOT griefing....not at all but a critical element of the game that hasn't really been dealt with due to the lack of player scouting squads....
This game has ALWAYS been about PvP in some form or another, either in death races or more rarely in wilderness scouts....anti-roleplaying?? couldn't be farther from...if Wolf or anyother wants to role-play a bad guy and prey on others more power to him...obviously player villains won't be making any friends but that's their problem. I can trash NPC's all day, and I tell ya it gets a bit boring...certainly can't blame Wolf for looking for a fresh playing experience...I've been tempted myself lol. This is a Post-Apocalyptic future for goodness sake...you know:dangerous, full of bad villains, etc....no one ever said life in Post-Ap would be fair or safe. that's why we have guns lol. and wolf takes a risk too...never know if mine or Speed's or other vet gangs might just be scouting with a bunch of tanks and win the scout roll for an advantageous position. If you meet a PC that doesn't truce then RUN! lol In this game yer gonna win some and lose some....some losses may be devestating but you can always recover...there is no permanent death here....I lost 80% of my gang and resources in one fight, I rebuilt and re-hired and am sitting back up near the top...took me over a month but here I am ^^ If yer tired of Wolf (or anyother) beating up on your squads then ally with a player or two and go hunting for him. No-one is invincable and can be taken down. Just be thankful Wolf was honorable enough to offer your cars back because he was in it for the fight, not the loot. |
||||||
|
Atomic Punks Posted Jul 15, 2007, 11:33 pm |
Well said Toe.
One thing though... Is there a private chat channel in the lobby to organize scouting squads? I ask because if we are always organizing scouts in the public chat, it is real easy for a large vet gang to take advantage of that info and wait around for a scouting party to form and THEN go hunting for PVP scouts. It is like using out of character info to benefit for an in character gain. Instead of someone choosing to scout for PVP and get lucky that they found someone. |
||||||
|
*JD_Basher* jd.basher@charter.net Posted Jul 16, 2007, 12:06 am |
FANTASTIC point! There is no 'private' channel available.......unless you count the phone lines. That would be VERY expensive! You also bring up a good tactical situation that some HUGE vet gang could exploit. Maybe Sam could implement a 'fairness' quotient in the combat ratings of the gangs involved so as not to let that kind of exploitation be a viable attack on PvP scouts..... |
||||||
|
*Speedealer* Posted Jul 16, 2007, 1:02 am |
or only allow pvp scouts can play other pvp scouts? may be too limiting... | ||||||
|
*Toecutter* Posted Jul 16, 2007, 2:33 am |
private channel might be good. but is it really out of character knowledge? "hey guess what I overheard Dex's Boss. Fish Face and the Bashers will be scoutin tomorrow at noon, we kin ambush em"
|
||||||
|
Seiler Posted Jul 16, 2007, 3:07 am |
Actually there is a fairness quotient in terms of CR already implemented(Sam relayed me the info when I was trying to ambush Shark a while back). I don't know if having a good scout makes a difference in PvP roles. Newbies getting trashed vs treated fairly (not undue bonuses or benefits, but fairly) is a big one for me. It's tough enough to get people to try the game out, let alone lose people when they get hammered right off the bat. I know it seems limiting because of the small community, but perhaps Somerset should be a no PvP scout area, just as it is a weenie gang territory. I have also thought PvP would be an interesting change, but I think a new guy who wants to scout and experiment should be able to hide in a little safe zone for a few weeks and get the hang of handling his or her own cars, etc before being confronted by well funded players. And I definitely don't think Wolf was 'griefing' you, he was trying out a rarely used feature in the game, and a misunderstanding's all that seems to have occurred.
I think it is important for PvP play to develop more, especially in preparation for when camps and alliances come into play, but you'll find me hard pressed to risk 100K worth of cars and well trained members and quite possible lose several in an attempt to grab loot in what will be a much deadlier battle than some deceive and slaughter battle against the AI. Just dunno if there is potential for much profit in it yet. I like the idea of a ransom system. That brings up potential for loss/profit with limited risk to cars, for both sides, making it a desirable objective, and encouraging players to also join up and "clean out" troublemakers, but until you have a designated attack point, such as a camp, you would have to team up and try to nab the evildoer on a return encounter, which means that the tide could well turn on him. There is great potential for depth in PvP, but if I do try it I'll be using cheap cars and untrained characters
|
||||||
|
*Speedealer* Posted Jul 16, 2007, 6:17 am |
1. Wolf wanted to kick ass - he wasn't testing.
2. Awesome idea for no pvp around somerset. perfect. 3. Noobs shouldn't get the beat down by other players unless they're looking for it. 4. Funny about your shark hunt seiler.
|
||||||
|
Seiler Posted Jul 16, 2007, 7:18 am |
True, I think Wolf wanted to kick ass, but I don't think he was targeting Zoth or anyone else in particular. If it had been round two or three of newb hunting I'd have a different perspective.
And yeah, Shark had probably 300 CR worth of Vehicles, and my total was well over 1000, and the server prevented the encounter
I think overall the community is still a bit small for PvP ops, and I am hesitant about the flaming and general immaturity of the type of players PvP tends to attract, but I am hoping the community can grow into an environment that encourages it but does not force it on players, or make it too profitable. |
||||||
|
Jansan Posted Jul 16, 2007, 7:06 pm |
Agreed, brilliant!
That would almost completely eliminate any potential griefing of new-players. |
||||||
|
*Toecutter* Posted Jul 17, 2007, 3:47 am |
Yeah...i would have to totaly agree with this one ^^ | ||||||
|
*viKKing* Posted Jul 17, 2007, 12:01 pm |
I like this idea too, and coupled with Zothen's suggestion to open the wilderness combats to non subscribers, we could certainly restrict it to Somerset's area. | ||||||
|
Kelaparan Posted Jul 23, 2007, 9:35 pm |
well it came as a bit of a surprise to me that Wolf was out hunting. I was still in the process of rebuilding damn it! And he sends 4 cars against my 2 :\
Well at least he got no loot off my dead smoking carcass. If you hadn't turtled by landrunner I had you cold wolf :P |
||||||
|
*sam* Posted Jul 23, 2007, 9:37 pm |
Do you think this idea of having the Somerset environs as a pvp-free area is good, Kelaparan? | ||||||
|
WolfEater Posted Jul 23, 2007, 9:40 pm |
ya but u didnt so dont say what would be if just say what been and in this topic i allready said i hunting out not for money or car's as i got it all just to blow pvp this is great i love it and i will go to the 4 city to hunt any 1 that try to go there with a big group of cars (got great arsnal of weapon in gate way some very rare be butifull to get it to somrset) |
||||||
|
Kelaparan Posted Jul 23, 2007, 9:46 pm |
well strictly speaking I think somerset should be pvp free. Seeing how that's the first place most new players would start. You need a place to get their training wheels on. If I was out there with a new player and showing them the ropes, i think they'd be put out by a PvP slugfest that leaves no room even for loot. Right now I don't see how you could scout if someone better financed than you just camps the area and demolishes you. The setup right now favors the hunters since they can choose to go out whenever they feel like it, but can not be hunted down. They can only be hunted when they log in (don't see a way around that). You could always hunt the strongest gangs, but you can't hunt a PvP player without their consent at this point. So the non PvP player is always open from attack, while the player who wants to PvP can pick and choose if he wants to PvP or not. Dunno how to balance the PvP, but right now it forces you to head out in increasingly large bands just in case someone jumps you. Maybe that's realistic in terms of convoys, but it sure isn't fun fighting a 20 v 20 battle all the time. The current PvP system is open for a huge amount of griefing (which I don't think our regular players are into - but the potential is there) |
||||||
|
*sam* Posted Jul 23, 2007, 9:53 pm |
There is actually a balancing test made, so if your squad CR was totally out of sync with wolf's, you would not have been matched up against him. | ||||||
|
Seiler Posted Jul 23, 2007, 9:53 pm |
I believe the best solution for PVP play is to organize a party to intercept the offender on arrival, make sure you have relatively the same CR, though higher, and a decent scout, then have your buddies scout for player squads. If you dont survive, most likely your buddies will get him on the return. May not always work, but I'd try it.
And I'm not against PvP at all. I look forward to it fleshing out, and I think it will be an important part of gameplay later on. |
||||||
|
Kelaparan Posted Jul 23, 2007, 9:55 pm |
No i think the balance was fine, he had more cars and guns, but was light on armor. He managed to flip one of the tanks with his throwaway oversized engine chompers (i blew one up to the moon). I think it was fairly balanced, just those nasty RL effects rearing their ugly heads again. |
||||||
|
WolfEater Posted Jul 23, 2007, 10:22 pm |
u had u'r RL too and the tank fliped becuz of 4 gun shot it at once for 3 sec so it couldnt stayed on ground |
||||||
|
Kelaparan Posted Jul 23, 2007, 11:04 pm |
[quote=WolfEater]u had u'r RL too and the tank fliped becuz of 4 gun shot it at once for 3 sec so it couldnt stayed on ground[/quote]
well i'm not convinced about that, but yes your 4 RLs firing at me didn't help matters, plus that you were not concerned with point blank shots with your RL. you weren't going for loot since you had plenty of cash from the scouting you got bored with. can't really compete in a war of attrition when someone scouts for 5 weeks, builds a stash, then camps the city where they made all their cash. unfortunately there is no mechanism to retaliate directly, but its good to know that the combat was balanced. Best I can tell i had a lot more armor than you, the CRs came out to 230 each i would say. It was a fair fight, but the turtled car tipped it in your favor for sure. (oh yeah, i had 1 to your 4 RLs! well it sure reminded me of the days of maurader swarms :P) |
||||||
|
WolfEater Posted Jul 23, 2007, 11:48 pm |
problem is i had only 1 RL in 2 car's mean 2 RL over all u destroyed 1 car mean 1 RL left evry thing alse was HMG so dont cry about RL explosions. i made car flip with HMG also u not the first or the last |
||||||
|
Kelaparan Posted Jul 23, 2007, 11:55 pm |
okay something lost in the translation there i guess. It was a fair fight as far as I can tell based on the CRs. Getting my first car flipped ended the fight early since I lost half my guns, while you still had 2/3rds your guns. Yeah you won, but you know it was close until you flipped the car. Anyways hope you had fun. I'm pissed, but that's the way that goes. | ||||||
|
WolfEater Posted Jul 24, 2007, 11:50 am |
i realy dont anderstand why this go to the forum if u saying all was ok and u just pissed cuz u died out of luck as u say. just know from now and on i will do alot of piracy as it most lickly profitable for me. with my charcter scouting skill's and gunnery i can do some dmg. |
||||||
|
*sam* Posted Jul 24, 2007, 11:52 am |
Something that wolf suggested to me, which was suggested before I know, but which makes good sense, is the idea of ransoms.
This allows one squad in a pvp battle to buy its way out of the fight. It's a win-win really, since the chance of getting salvageable loot in a pvp battle is quite low. All I would need to do is add this to the 'offer truce' feature. wolf - what do you think about making the Somerset area free from all pvp? There's a good argument for this in terms of new players. |
||||||
|
Deathangels Shadow Posted Jul 24, 2007, 9:19 pm |
As a new player, I'd like to say that this sounds like a good idea to me. The thought of getting jumped by other players straight out of the gate when I start scouting makes me rather leery. Of course, when I start scouting I'm kind of thinking I'd be better served being a spare gun to some of the guys that are more familiar with the game until I know the ropes. |
||||||
|
*Zothen* Posted Jul 25, 2007, 1:31 pm |
Kela is absolutly right and when people who dont want to pvp are dragged into pvps they will leave this game - and so will I! Sam, a balance-test based on CR is worth nothing, because it cant balance playerskills! And I dont want to risk it to be jumped by a hard-core PVPer while I only have very rare PvP-experience. And as you see above PvP is very controverse (but not a sign of manhood, as some here try to intent... ).
Personally Ive invested time into this game to build up my garage and Im not interested to let somebody kill my cars so I have to start all over! Just a game? Maybe! But also an time-investment I pay with my life! Sam, my question is what you think to do for non-PvPers? Or should they better leave the game, because they are not interested in PvPs? (No, I dont think making Somer a non-pvp-zone will solve this, unless my subscribtion fee is lower because I cant access most parts of the world??) |
||||||
|
*sam* Posted Jul 25, 2007, 1:40 pm |
Zothen, what do you suggest?
Do you think the idea of ransoms will improve things for you? I could even impose a forced acceptance of the ransom, which would be some calculation based on your squad's CR I guess. Does anyone know what they do in games such as Eve? (I never played it, but my understanding is that it does a lot of things very well). |
||||||
|
Deathangels Shadow Posted Jul 25, 2007, 1:59 pm |
EvE I can help you with... In EvE, each solar system in space has a security rating from 0.0 to 1.0. Adjacent solar systems generally have a similar rating, up to a point. Systems with a security of 0.5 or higher are called "highsec" space, and if somebody jumps someone else in that region, then the cops immediately warp in and pound said culprit into space dust. Security of 0.4 or lower means you are on your own... or should I say pwn?
Regarding your idea for a ransom that can't be rejected, that's actually a pretty slick idea (IMO). However, I'd say an important thing would be that this should then make it so the attacker couldn't then immediately jump the guy again, make it so there has to be a certain time interval that the ransom protects a player for (at least from the same guy, though not from other players of coz). There are so many different ways to handle the PvP issue. One possibility would be to have a PvP flag. If you run cargo or missions or whatever with the flag off, then your profits are significantly smaller, making the added risk worth it but allowing those that hate PvP the safety they crave. I've also really liked the idea of making Somerset a "PvP free" zone, though this still limits the non-PvPers an awful lot. |
||||||
|
*Zothen* Posted Jul 25, 2007, 2:00 pm |
[removed the Eve-part because Deathangel was faster ]
Just to add that PvP is much dealt through guilds and alliances - you are never alone in Eve... Dont think that you can relate Eve to DW, because Eve has very much space to sneak around pirates etc. and nice scanning techs for pirates to find the sneaky mouses.. WoW has the option to stay out of the PvP-mode if you dont like it. You go into PvP-mode when you attack others or you switch PvP on. But I dont know if this is useful when players have own camps, because when they can stand out of PvP their camps might be invulnerable.. So no solution, I guess! I dont know if its a problem that PvPers can see the wilderness-events and maybe wait until it ends and then jump on the bunny?! Imo a good solution would be to make PvP-encounters more a hide-and-seek-play, but I need a bit time to get a solution for such an approach. Basicly it would be an improvement of the way scout-encounters are processed.... |
||||||
|
*sam* Posted Jul 25, 2007, 2:20 pm |
The security level idea from Eve could work in combination with ransoms. Maybe the size of the forced-accept ransom is directly related to security level? -- so the ransom will be very low in Somerset/Elmsfield and will grow larger as you go into the central regions?
Also, the reputation hit that the attacker takes could be made larger if they reject a truce in the safer areas. This could become important when I implement bounty hunter NPC gangs - these guys will kick some ass. We can't have a police force turning up immediately like in Eve, since that wouldn't fit the DW world, but the bounty hunters are more or less filling the same role. Basically what will happen is any player gang with a bounty on their heads will get attacked by these high-skilled NPC gangs, not only in the wilderness but also in arena combats. Something based on hiding/scouting etc. could work too Zothen, yes. Although that would tend to mean that new players with low scouting skill will be at a disadvantage? |
||||||
|
Deathangels Shadow Posted Jul 25, 2007, 2:25 pm |
To expand on this idea, perhaps have a PvP flag that doesn't say you can or can't be attacked, but more of an "I'm OK with being attacked." If you jump somebody with their PvP flag on, you take a much smaller reputation hit for it, or else it reduces how much the bounty hunters want you (since folks that are going to be villainous will likely still want the negative reputation). |
||||||
|
Kelaparan Posted Jul 25, 2007, 6:40 pm |
Yeah been thinking about the PvP and instantly compared it to Eve. Part of the problem for right now is that you really can't take measures to actually avoid PvP other than to avoid playing. In Eve you could take active measures to avoid PvP by plotting your jumps points (yay insta jumps!), equipping cloaks, ecm, etc. Many options as others have mentioned, but the main point here is that the player has an active role in deciding his involvement in PvP. Bounty hunter gangs would be a great addition, and another thing would be the effects of reputation on access to town resources. I don't think this is feasible until camps are placed, but I would like to see gangs with very low reputations being refused entry into towns (why would a town allow someone who has been attacking trade and inhabitants use it's resources). But using reputation like Eve uses security levels would only work well if there was things to do outside of town / safer towns. Hmm also there ought to be some kind of rep hit in causing the death of a driver in a regular race; i'm just not too thrilled by kamikaze drivers particularly now that there are no TTs. A PvP flag idea has its merits, but would probably reduce PvP to zero again since our community is so small. But at the same time it would prevent you being at the mercy of well established gangs. |
||||||
|
Jansan Posted Jul 25, 2007, 7:38 pm |
Lot of good ideas here. I hope these bounty hunter gangs are extremely elite.
That said, I still hope Somerset becomes PvP free. It's a lazy way for people to grief if Somerset is open PvP. It takes no effort to patrol Somerset, there is indeed little NPC profit and low NPC risk, so even if they don't roll players it's like "Oh well, let me just go out again." You won't find that lazy attitude patrolling for PvP outside of Badlands. I think non-consenual PvP should not be allowed near Somerset. It's not a huge issue right now, but I maintain it will become one in the future as this game grows, especially with the amount of new players I've seen recently. I also like the "I'm OK With Being Attacked" flag that says you want PvP. It's a good way for PvPers to find other people that want to PvP if they are more likely to encounter those people and don't take a reputation hit if they attack them/reject truces. It's consenual at that point. Ransom limits based on safety of area are also good (though I'd like Somerset to be a non-PvP area). I'd never pay a ransom though to someone trying to gank me, but it's a good opportunity for people who want to "play along." Some of us, like me, are playing Darkwind in-spite of the PvP, not because of the PvP. It's not like I can play Darkwind: No PvP because it does not exist. I accept it is part of the game, because I have to, but I'll grasp at straws to avoid it. Since PvP is a a core part of this game (and accepted as a travel risk), though, I'm looking for ways where I can feel safe(r) yet PvPers can have their PvP fun. To be clear: I have no problems with PvPers or PvP even though I don't participate. Those are the people who enjoy human competition and want to fight against a thinking, non-computer opponent. I can understand that line of thinking. It's like playing chess against a human vs. a computer. DeepBlue may rock, and computers have some advantages (as in the NPCs will never accidently directly shoot an ally, only splash damage), but a living thinking creature can think outside the box in ways computers really can't. However, I have a huge problem with griefers: people who intentionally and willfully ruin another player's game experience because they derive pleasure from harrassing others. |
||||||
|
Seiler Posted Jul 25, 2007, 11:24 pm |
That's a big issue, especially for new players that can hardly afford a loss of half their car fleet, and at the moment I think it's easily solved with one of a few options: ?Somerset is PvP free. If you head out anywhere else, you're taking a risk of PvP play. ?Bounty hunters hit on arrival. You get tagged by a PvPer, you radio in to MFP that a local is bagging townspeople, and they make sure he has a warm welcome. Not effective where there are no local militias though. So pretty much Somerset or Elmsfield only. Additionally, this might work well with camps, as it allows bandit wannabes a place to run to and hunt from, but they don't have much access to the town they are haunting. Maybe they get 'Villain' Status in that town that wears off over time? ?Targetted Reprisal. If a PvP is initiated (a gang rejects another's request for truce) that gang is Flagged, much as in other games. At that point, other gangs can specifically hunt for the offender's squad, much like hunting for the bigger gangs, and be guaranteed a return encounter interception, for that scout only. Not sure how the CR limitations would work out, but I'm sure it's workable. I have a hard time reducing the PvP options, mainly because I think most games limit PvP so much as to prevent access to it from anyone other than griefers. I'm for balance rather than cutting it back to a small niche environment. Plus I think It'll be cool as hell when Toecutter goes bad and tries to run down one of my Lorries with a dozen motorcycles
|
||||||
|
*Toecutter* Posted Jul 26, 2007, 4:42 am |
Still like the idea of Somerset being PvP free for the noobs...getting jumped and losing your cars that u've just spent weeks on getting and losing to some uber lifer could immediately turn most off methinks....also having one ciity PvP free isn't too limiting...once yer up to leaving somerset then yer ready to play with the "big boys" and take yer chances on the deadly highways ^^
if this still isn't enough (tho i think it shoul'd be) then extend it to elmsfield as well for trade run purposes..... |
||||||
|
Deathangels Shadow Posted Jul 26, 2007, 5:57 am |
I think what I'm liking best is the PvP-free Somerset combined with the Ransom that can't be refused idea. | ||||||
|
Kelaparan Posted Jul 26, 2007, 7:18 am |
Hmm maybe i'm misinterpreting the auto ransom thing, but I would not want to see a ransom be automatically accepted by anyone. The choice should still be left up to the persons involved; they can decide to take the risk etc. |
||||||
|
Deathangels Shadow Posted Jul 26, 2007, 7:54 am |
You are misunderstanding, I believe.
As I understand it, I get jumped. I don't want to fight, so I offer a ransom. The guy that jumped me doesn't have a choice, he automatically accepts it. |
||||||
|
*sam* Posted Jul 26, 2007, 10:02 am |
That was the suggestion, yes. The size of the ransom would be predefined, based on the 'security level' of the area you're in. It's not easy reconciling people who want pvp with those that don't |
||||||
|
WolfEater Posted Jul 26, 2007, 8:44 pm |
ok here what i think, first: of all DW is surrvale game so no free pvp zone becuz u need to learn how to surrvive on u'r own or with group up and no matter what u allways can be in town and make money fro m events. second: as some 1 said hide and seak and as i said long time befor make travle more for each like: like if i want to go to somrset from elm i pick the road pick where my scout and pick the road that u will travle on and any minute u can change. put ambush or any thing alse so make it more an game of tactic in travle. and i think as a newbie u can be succsesfull too as think of this u get an light armed fast car go with it get into pvp then run away and u get presude by the fast car of that group u puted an group of ppl to ambush any thing that will presude u and that car get ambushed and over taken then u just capture car and go on. plus if u will have that feature see what u see and hear what u hear this will be alot alot nicer as if u ambush a car take over it the enemy wount know where did u go with it. |
||||||
|
WolfEater Posted Jul 26, 2007, 8:49 pm |
doesnt it be calculated with the price of car and ETC u got with u ? like i got 1 viper and 1 landrover and i offer rensom i offer 40-60% of the total cost of the ETC. and i sow some 1 suggested flag the pvper's so u could hunt them. i think this will be stoped thing to do as if that will do why not flag evry trade that come and go, so i could ambush trader as i like and get flaged as a pvper. another thing maybe do safe mison in somrset like u take u'r own car's go to a mision and in mision u can get enemy car's(if u dont blow there engine) or ETC or any other stuff |
||||||
|
Hak Posted Jul 26, 2007, 8:50 pm |
all this pvp talk sounds good, i can't wait to build up a gang with a few cars and start venturing outside the town based leagues
|
||||||
|
Jansan Posted Jul 26, 2007, 9:15 pm |
This is kind of neat. I personally wouldn't use it, but I could see where it would be an easy money option for the PvPers.
So true. Nothing will make everyone happy. I'm personally glad to see that keeping Somerset PvP free is a popular suggestion among even most of the people who are neutral or pro-PvP. Otherwise, it's just free reign for the griefers. They have nothing to fear patrolling Somerset, and everything to gain. It will drive away new players who don't understand how to offer a truce (if the antagonizer will even accept) and who don't know what's going on. Keeping Somerset PvP free will make PvPers actually go out and take a risk rather than just farming newbies, players who just want to have a nice relaxing NPC scout, and down-and-out vets. At that point you can't even call it PvP. It really is player-farming. Or slaughter. This, of course, leads to frustration. Frustration leads to anger. Anger leads to quitting. And none of us want to see new players quit in frustration so a PvPer can steal their Alpha. |
||||||
|
Kelaparan Posted Jul 26, 2007, 9:45 pm |
This is something Seiler brought up, but another option for PvP should be the ability to ransom characters back - and perhaps even join your gang (the ability to 'recruit' based on leadership/courage of the gang leaders etc). This would be the option if the original ransom was rejected by one party, and during the fight the other player surrenders. Frankly I don't care about my cars nearly as much as my characters.
Maybe the start of a slave trade 
|
||||||
|
*viKKing* Posted Jul 26, 2007, 9:51 pm |
Hmmm, yes, a long awaited side of the game for me, as I included it in the promo text I spread in December on many sites.
|
||||||
|
WolfEater Posted Jul 27, 2007, 2:05 am |
Jansan:
but it not true game engine scouting and encounter is only will be if both squat are prety even in CR so u wount see 6 caar aginst 1 alpha |
||||||
|
Jansan Posted Jul 27, 2007, 2:20 am |
Certainly, Wolf.
But you'd be kidding yourself if you don't think you could wipe the floor 3 Chompers vs. 3 Chompers against a new player. It wouldn't even be a contest. You would demolish them. Considering what a struggle it is to get started, I could only imagine how angry and/or frustrated that person would be. In addition, Somerset is a great place for people to regroup and recover from losses. I lost a lot of cars and money a couple weeks back, and I needed to rebuild. Do you know how incredibly upset I would have been if I had just managed to scrape together my symphony car money only to have some random player destroy my stuff? I would be livid. It's bad enough when the Roadkill Ninjas do it.
|
||||||
|
ISHOULDCOCO Posted Jul 27, 2007, 9:52 am |
First time I ever went into the wilderness I managed to extrapolate the above conclusion in just under ten seconds . I was so stunned by a PVP right outside Somer ( I idiotically assumed the commuity was still too small) that the only rational reason was , that the player was very bored with NPCs and small kills. Therefore he was very very good and very very dangerous and probably was not a Marshal
I held on to the content of my bowels and surrendered in the frist turn - I didn't even know there was a truce button. I would have got smeared across the asphalt like goose fat on a frying pan......... Wolf let me go and returned my cars ( best $2 I ever spent) and I learned my lesson. DARKWIND is hard and dark and vicious - it is not 'fair' in the same way that life is not 'fair And to quote the bacsktreet bots - " I want it that way" But i still think Somerset should be PVP free COCO OUT P.s. I love the idea of slavery ( it aint like we are shooting kids in F.O. 1) i love the idea of PVP players fighting Town Heroes etc . |
||||||
|
WolfEater Posted Jul 27, 2007, 10:33 am |
ok but that is exprianced player and not that u got an atvantge of money and u make an fleet of car's that cant be detroyed cuz here high tec gunnery and armor. and that u was in shock and didnt know alot about game it is u'r problem not myne or DW, it just the way it is newbie learn from mistake's this is fastest way to learn. |
||||||
|
WolfEater Posted Jul 27, 2007, 10:37 am |
i realy thout about that somrset free zone and i get that yes it have to do some zone that u cant atk player's or at list get some bad point on it.
i suggest this if there a pvp an player suggest truce and the other not accept his squat turn flaged and u can hunt him on the way back to the town. this flag will be only till he get to town and after that it wount be aviable. |
||||||
|
Deathangels Shadow Posted Jul 27, 2007, 10:41 am |
Dude, you are missing the basic point here... Darkwind is a business. As a result, they want to make money. If the first thing a newbie experiences is getting jumped and raped, then the majority of them are going to run away screaming. Honestly, they'd be better off without your business or mine if it meant they got the business of even 2 other people for each of us. Never forget that the goal of making the game profitable must always trump everything else. If making Somerset non-PvP increases the profitability then that is the best course of action. Your opinion is most definitely not the majority. |
||||||
|
WolfEater Posted Jul 27, 2007, 10:59 am |
this is a tactic game an weak can win the strong by only choseing the trrein weapon or target. the game it self wount give me to encounter a weaker oposision so any thing i encounter if it PVP or PVE it in my strenth and his to take each other down so newbie or not he had the power and he did and could crush me but he chose to place his car 1 near another wich my RL used for and he did target all his 4 weapon on only 1 or 2 car's so it made my other car be untouchbale and very usefull fireing power. and third he atked my weaker car and he just mist the oportonty to crush me and in the last chanse he didnt atcked me even that i wasnt argnized insted he let me reorginize and reload time and only then try to atk me when he got 3 well armed car's blowing his ass in 1 or 2 turn i just took his hole armore down in 2 side's |
||||||
|
Deathangels Shadow Posted Jul 27, 2007, 11:04 am |
But even in an equal match, the more experienced player is significantly more likely to win.
When you play in a league race, everybody has the same car. However, a newer player wouldn't have a prayer of winning against Alocalypse, would they? Honestly, if they knew it would get them a hundred new subscribers to make it so folks that hate PvP would never have it forced on them, then they'd be fools not to figure out a way to make it happen. Sure, it might not be terribly realistic, but that's just business. |
||||||
|
Alocalypse Posted Jul 27, 2007, 12:25 pm |
I'm also in favour of making somerset PvP free.
I'm very much against newb-bashing and vulturing on weakened players. I don't like the idea of being ambushed at the gates after a scout when my cars are low on armor/ammo and I have the liability of looted cars, but I suppose it's part of the game too... The only idea I have for remedying it would be to reduce the max range of a PvP scout to 30-40 miles and give anyone who scouts further than that an option to evade pvp encounters (perhaps at the cost of additional fuel/time which could also be tied to the safety level of the area). The general idea would be to make it possible to evade pvp, but more profitable (profitable enough) to take your chances, it could also work vice-versa with the minimum range for pvp scouts being 30-40 miles and anyone scouting less would be safe... |
||||||
|
WolfEater Posted Jul 27, 2007, 12:39 pm |
answer to Deathangels shadow:
HMM yes i do this more expriante player got chanse to win and how did u think it can be the other way around? but what butifull in DW is that it an stratgey game expriance or not if u dont good at it u dont good at DW and the encounter's are pretty much even same as event where Apocalypse rule newbie in raceing where u got all same car's. same in wildness u wount do encounter if i got 20 car and u 1 the CR is pretty even so u cant say he is stronger as i fight aginst some 1 i had 4 car he 2 but my CR was pretty low near his CR he had full armored car's while i had only 1/3 of armor in each car so it was more fight tank aginst bounty hunter's Answer for Alocalypse: lets say i bashing newbie in somrset i refuse truce offer turn flaged and after i dealed with the newbie as i am alot exprianced then him i just get back to town and in town some town hero waiting for me and ambushed me. this is the only opsion i see that will keep DW free of law's as it an battle for survive game, and will keep newbie safe as not alot will go for this opsion. plus if sam will make range weapon/close weapon/difrane type of armor for difrante dmg of weapon/*see what u see hear what u hear/Mortars-Smoke-foot player's+ammonision car that go from car to car give light armor repair and ammo. this all will make newbie and exprianced player a very fun game as u will be able to kill any exprianced player with a regolare ambush or just weapon tactic even if u out numbered and out of alot ammo. |
||||||
|
Deathangels Shadow Posted Jul 27, 2007, 1:02 pm |
You fail to answer me... you say words, but they demonstrate a complete lack of understanding of what I am saying. Perhaps it is on purpose, perhaps it is just a failure to communicate. Let me be blunt.
What about people that are willing to pay for this game, but are not willing to engage in PvP? According to market research, approximately 90% of MMORPG players are unwilling to play a game where they are forced to PvP. So far, what I hear you say is "Too bad. You shouldn't play Darkwind then, because if you hate PvP then you are obviously no good at playing Darkwind and we don't want you." Perhaps I am misunderstanding you. |
||||||
|
jeansberg Posted Jul 27, 2007, 2:20 pm |
I'd say you're about 85 % likely to misunderstand any one of Wolfeater's posts.
|
||||||
|
*sam* Posted Jul 27, 2007, 2:50 pm |
I wouldn't strictly agree with that, it sounds very mercenary of us! Yes, we want to make a profit, but not if it means breaking the creative vision of the game. Ultimately, we want our players to enjoy the game as much as we can. That means finding a good system that balances the requirements of the pvp and the non-pvp players. Having a game that people enjoy will hopefully lead to profit, sure. But profit isn't the only (or necessary even the main) motivation. Thanks for all the discussion here btw everyone. I'm forming some decisions on this stuff and will implement it next week, I hope. |
||||||
|
WolfEater Posted Jul 27, 2007, 3:20 pm |
but wait what the real difrance with an encounter of NPC and PVP it not real difrante as it same car's same setup same weapon and all the same exapt it more intelgante like u are. |
||||||
|
*viKKing* Posted Jul 27, 2007, 4:10 pm |
That's not wrong Wolf, but no one will get mad at a computer kicking one's ass, but might against a player, feeling offended. This is human nature.
|
||||||
|
ISHOULDCOCO Posted Jul 27, 2007, 5:03 pm |
Ummm.......Okay. The real difference is that Players can learn to beat the AI , otherwise no one would suceed - the real difference is that Players fight Players becuase they are more challenging. You just don't want to have consensual melee with others......... COCO OUT |
||||||
|
Jansan Posted Jul 27, 2007, 6:48 pm |
1. In my opinion: Getting destroyed by a player first time out the gates when you're looking for NPC pirates is the fastest way to new players quitting the game. 2. I know PvP is part of the Darkwind core, but unless it is expected to be a PvP only game, there has to be flags and outs for non-PvPers. Many of the suggestions here help facilitate that. 3. I admire Sam's determination to stick with the creative vision of the game even if it means reduced profits. I would do the same if I was him. However, Deathangel is completely right: most people aren't going to go: "Aw shucks, that guy/gal wiped out all of my new cars I just spent every penny on. Guess I'll dust off my boots and run some more death-races!" They are going to go: "F*** THIS! F*** YOU! What the f*** is going on here? That f***ing as***** just ruined me! I quit!" As was mentioned, forced PvP is going to lose you people. There are, however, compromises. And arena stuff is fun, but it really doesn't compare to scouts, so you can't use that as talking point. That's like putting a Double Dragon arcade machine and a pinball machine in a room and saying, "You can play either one of those. But if you play Double Dragon Arcade, I might hit you with a golf club in the back of the head." What if I want to play Double Dragon Arcade? Pinball is cool, but I don't really want to play it right now, and overall I'd perfer Double Dragon Arcade. However, I also don't want to get hit in the back of the head with a golf club. 4. PvP is part of Darkwind. No, I don't like it, as I've freely admitted, but I accept it. Darkwind: PvE on Wheels does not exist. When I go scouting with Seiler in Badlands, I accept the risk that the vehicle I send out is in a large amount of danger. If I got PvP jumped instead, I would still be mad at the player, but not at the game. I accept it as part of the risk. Getting jumped in Somerset would get me mad at the game for not preventing it. 5. As Coco mentioned: A sentient creature can do things a computer cannot do. The opposite is always true, but the computer's main trump card has always been reaction speed, which is why FPS and Vs. Fighting Games are always so difficult (at least for me). Especially in a turn-based game, a human can easily be more challenging than a computer. Now, Darkwind NPCs do have a few trump cards: They will never engage in direct accidental friendly fire (they always know when a friendly is going to be in line of fire), they are fearless (they are willing to perform risky moves that no sane human would take), and (outside of cliffs) handle high speed combat movement relatively well. But I think most people would agree that especially in a thinking person's game like this, a skilled human opponent is a far greater threat than the AI. 6. I know Sam mentioned the bounty hunters as a deterrent for PvP, but unless they are extremely good, they are just free money for the PvPers. It'd be no different than a normal scout. I guess this is a Sam question more than a comment on PvP in general, but: Why will PvPers fear bounty hunters? People will only engage in PvP when they have the upperhand, so most PvPers will be very well equipped and knowledgable. If the bounty hunters don't have some advantage, they are nothing more than "another gang." The sneak attacks in arena is a plus, but what about in the wilderness? 7. PvP, for some people, is personal. I'm afraid that is just how it is. An NPC mindly killing you because it is programmed to is frustrating, but not nearly as frustrating when something sentient does it. When a human being is forced to do something he or she does not wish to engage in, they will most likely experience resentment. Now, I've played open PvP games before. Normally, something happens like the "Somerset Newbie Ambush Scenario" that causes me to quit within the first day. Because that's how most open PvP games are. However, I have played an open PvP game for years that I loved. You *could* attack anyone you wanted, but doing it in towns or cities meant you were arrested. There was a safe point. In addition, there were PvP rules where you could get suspended for killing the same person in a row. Poorly enforced rules, but the fear was enough to cause people to think twice about their actions. The PvPers had a lot of fun with the system, and I made a lot of enemies due to some of the jerk-offs in that game. And I got frustrated when one of them killed me. But I accepted it as part of the game because I enjoyed the rest of it and was willing to accept the compromise. That's what Darkwind needs. A safe point. And Somerset is the most logical choice. In FPS terms: No camping spawns. 
|
||||||
|
roman2440 Posted Jul 27, 2007, 7:34 pm |
Being new here let me give my opinion on this.
PvP is good when it is voluntary. Involuntary PvP when you are trying to do something completely non-pvp can and will be frustrating. I've played many a MMo, many with different styles of handling PvP. I can say that it should definately be there, but if left unchecked it will ruin the game. The idea of bounty hunters really does not work. I was there on UO when thats how they tried to deal with PvP "gangs", and while they had limited success, it did nothing to curb the hurt that a newbie feels when he loses everything he's played with so far in the game because some guy felt like being a jerk, it just happened a little less often (but still happened often). The problem has been mentioned before, the griefers can pick and choose when they go out to prey. The bounty hunters can only ply their trade when the PvPers let them. I like the idea of a safe zone for somerset. I'd also like to suggest some further risks/rewards for proper/improper behavoir. Perhaps having a reputation stat for the gang that takes a hit whenever they attack a player that isn't flagged as wanting pvp, then have towns that only let people in if they have good reps, and other towns that only let people in with bad reps. You'd have to put buildings in these towns that had usefullness that could not be exported, nor could be found elsewhere in the game. You'd gain good rep by attacking bad rep players or NPC pirates. You'd lose good rep (or gain bad rep) by attacking players with a non-pvp flag and by attacking good NPC encounters. One other thing about PvP as far as my opinion goes. PvP is all fine and dandy when you cannot lose anything out of it (ie. you lose the fight but then afterwards you really haven't lost anything, just the time it took to do the fight), however when Pvp risks losing items (read major time investments) then it can be problematic and frustrating (read bad gaming experience). As far as I can tell this game is setup as the later, that in a Pvp encounter you risk your drivers and your vehicles. If lost, these items represent a large portion of your time playing the game and especially for a newbie, represent a good percentage of your time playing the game. Think of it this way - you just spent 2 weeks of play getting some decent drivers and what you think a decent car (you may realize its not much but its better than what you started with). now you take it on the road to experience areas of the game you have yet to (since you've done most of the stuff at your first location) and a player that has been playing far longer than you jumps you. Due to his setup being built for PvP banditry and his superior level of skill, you are left with nothing. You've just thrown away 2 weeks of work. Most people I know aren't going to say "gee, lets put another 2 weeks of work in so I can try that again". What they are going to say is "Wow, I'm back to square one after 2 weeks!, F-- this, I'm going back to x game". What I'm getting at is that there should be a cap to the losses in Wilderness PvP encounters. I'd even suggest a server that had no losses in wilderness pvp at all (except failure of your mission) - of course that would only work if there were enough people on to have multiple servers on at a time. Another idea would be to let people salvage any cars they lose in wilderness pvp and reduce the repair costs - this would increase the thought that good drivers are vulnerable, but mitigate some of the cost in losses. Oooh, I had an interesting idea, how about having the option to travel with a pack of NPC cars (like an automatic revolving schedule of convoys heading between towns, maybe once per week). This would work like the existing event list. Players could freely sign up to join a convoy or they could just travel by squad (existing method). This would allow players to have a better chance of getting away from a Player bandits. Risks for abuse would be mitigated by having long durations between convoys. You could increase the length between convoys and decrease the number of AI cars as you got further away from the newbie town, and even have some towns with no convoys going to them (these you'd have to take the risk to get to). |
||||||
|
Deathangels Shadow Posted Jul 27, 2007, 10:32 pm |
Agreed... but creative vision can be modified to satisfy more people as well. I don't imagine your creative vision included allowing griefers to have everything they want. There is a middle ground here, and Wolf just kept repeating over and over again "There is no middle ground, there can be no middle ground, Darkwind wouldn't be Darkwind if I couldn't jump you indiscriminately." My argument has been that losing paying subscribers is bad. By the way, I'm not saying Wolf is a complete bleeptard griefer, either... he's stated quite clearly (for Wolf ) that he'll accept truce from newbies and I believe him. I'm not concerned about him, I'm concerned about the people that enjoy ruining other people's fun. He's just looking for a challenge and I can respect that.
This sentence illustrates my point... if it did, then Sam and Vik would probably lose some customers to this competition. At the end of the day, I'd like to see Darkwind have some compromise on PvP, and I've really liked the compromises Sam has suggested. My reason for this is not because I don't like PvP myself (Like Wolf, I appreciate a good challenge), it's because I'd like to see Darkwind become self sufficient to the point where it offered both Sam and Vik a living. How much faster could Sam tear through the list of things to do if the game fully supported his family? |
||||||
|
*viKKing* Posted Jul 28, 2007, 9:21 am |
Here is my point about PvP.
1) Players accepting to do PvP should have a check box in their gang account telling it so: "Player is accepting PvP". Hence, players not willing to, would have to uncheck the box.
2) Of course, only such PvP flagged gangs can be tracked down using the appropriate Scouting function... 3) PvP granting players are allowed to own and manage camps, as this part of the game rely a lot on PvP. Other ones will have to live into existing towns. 4) I suggest extra costs for in town living, including a few taxes for town entrance. 5) I would like the scouting system to integrate a "scout for a convoy to escort"; that would allow players to protect AI and Players convoy from AI and Players pirates. Not directly related unless attackers are Humans. I think this would be the best balance. |
||||||
|
NefariousCoal Posted Jul 28, 2007, 3:33 pm |
I'm not too keen on flagging for optional pvp. While it's not a bad idea, I would still prefer having one little pvp-free zone and having the rest quite cutthroat. The rewards should be a bit greater in the pvp enabled areas, of course.
Though it caused frustation at the time in UO when everywhere but town was PvP (and you could even trick people into it in town), I liked the possibility of getting jumped at any time. I lost plenty myself but it was very exciting. Anyway... I'd rather just have one PvP free zone around the starter town and leave the rest as open game. Of course, I haven't even been outside yet so I'm kinda FoS by judging based solely on previous game's pvp setups. 
Then again... this is a rare game in which dead is dead, so I guess that should be taken into account too. |
||||||
|
*Toecutter* Posted Jul 28, 2007, 3:36 pm |
Umm i would suggest tho that the PvP box,once checked permanently becomes so...stops people from abusing it.
Have all sorts of warnings pop up as u check the box to make really really sure that yer stepping into the big world with no possibility of parole. |
||||||
|
*viKKing* Posted Jul 28, 2007, 3:41 pm |
In fact my idea - and I forgot to mention it clearly - is that one can reverse the setup, but in the case of a camp, everything is lost.
This is to ensure, someone loosing all his stuff at a given time, can rebuild is own forces without too much troubles. NPCs are lurking around anyway
|
||||||
|
Kelaparan Posted Jul 28, 2007, 8:31 pm |
I don't know about a permanent flag, but I would like to see a flag that instantly turns you PvP, but perhaps one week or some time frame to disable. And in regards to camps, perhaps those can only be owned by people who have PvP turned on? Since part of the anticipated actions with camps is the ability to raid them etc. EDIT: somehow i missed vik's post |
||||||
|
Hak Posted Jul 29, 2007, 8:59 am |
Kel's suggestion has merit, i have seen pvp handled in a similar way before(WoW) turning on instantly, and turning off over a relatively small, yet significant period of time prevents exploitation, while allowing those who want to pvp to do so relatively uninhibited. i personally would look to a turn off period of maybe two days, i'm not sure how the wilderness/pvp mechanics go, so that could be a shrot time, but if you can get involved in pvp while not playing, one week would be too long. | ||||||
|
*sam* Posted Jul 29, 2007, 11:31 pm |
Thanks for the continued discussion here. I'm not too keen on the idea of a pvp on/off flag, since I think the safe zone idea already allows you to play without pvp if you wish, and it means we can make the rest of the world higher profit without having to give artificial 'bonuses' to the pvp gangs.
It's also true that, due to the nature of the game, a pvp player will currently not earn decent money, since they're likely to have to shoot another player's squad to pieces before defeating them. This is part of the reason I think the fixed-size forced ransom will work: it's a win-win. The ransom size needs to be decided, but I'm thinking it should be in the region of $500 per car in Elmsfield, rising to maybe $2000 per car in the most dangerous areas in the game (i.e. Badlands and Firelight). Roman: we actually have a reputation system in place, almost exactly as you describe :-) A player squad who accepts a ransom will lose rep. The idea of escorting NPCs is one that's already planned, as a mission. I.e. you get paid for escorting them, as their bodyguard. But this could be expanded, perhaps: you could pay them in order to tag along when they're travelling (as suggested by Roman). As suggested, this could be tied to a predefined timescale. Or perhaps you could pay more to actually hire NPC bodyguards who travel with you to your own schedule. Anyway, to sum up: what I'm going to implement for the moment is: a totally pvp-free region around Somerset, and an enforced fixed-size ransom elsewhere, so you can get out of a pvp attack at a cost. I will also make it so you can avoid pvp if you make a successful scouting check (this is not currently possible). This scouting check idea will further enhance the usefulness of the scouting skill, and hopefully enhance the possibility of specialist gangs offering their scouting services out to other players (traders, for example) for a price. |
||||||
|
Jansan Posted Jul 29, 2007, 11:50 pm |
Sounds great Sam.
Coming from this side of the Anti-PVP section, I personally am cool with this.
In addition, the possiblity of hiring NPC bodyguards would be AWESOME. I'd certainly use their services. Few things are as cool as minions and hired goons. |
||||||
|
Deathangels Shadow Posted Jul 30, 2007, 12:02 am |
Regarding how much you must pay for the ransom, I have an idea... perhaps make it dependent on your vehicle's CR instead of just a per vehicle charge. Say, $5 per point of CR in your squad? | ||||||
|
Seiler Posted Jul 30, 2007, 3:27 am |
I'd say it should be based on a percentage of looted value in the local town, say 25%? It's quite likely that would mean a much larger profit for the bandit than a PvP fight, and much lower losses for the one paying the ransom.
Or, it could even be a percentage based on the reputation of the bandit (rewarding negative rep), a nice limit equation maxing out at 40% or so? |
||||||
|
Deathangels Shadow Posted Jul 30, 2007, 3:43 am |
An important part of the calculation is going to be having some way that it doesn't hurt so much for a newb that they can't afford to pay it. 25% of their vehicle's value might mean they can't afford to pay it. | ||||||
|
Seiler Posted Jul 30, 2007, 4:03 am |
Well, it won't be near Somerset, so, if you can't afford it, you shouldn't have left Somerset, and you'd better run in my opinion.
Additionally, it shouldn't be easily affordable. DW is a dangerous place, and making things so new players can easily afford to avoid dangers with a few hundred or thousand bucks seems to kill the spirit. |
||||||
|
Deathangels Shadow Posted Jul 30, 2007, 4:19 am |
You're right... I wasn't thinking about Somerset being PvP free, I was focusing on each piece of the solution individually when they needed to be seen as a whole.
I agree with Seiler, I think the Ransom should be a chunk that you feel... a big enough chunk that you will actually take the fight if you think you can win it. |
||||||
|
*Speedealer* Posted Jul 30, 2007, 5:41 am |
um, pvp is player vs player right? I say let them negotiate!
It'd be like 'name that tune' (sorry, only referecne I can come up with right now), so you get 3 chances to negotiate, and if a negotiation ransom isn't reached, it's fightin time! That way, an astronomical amount wouldn't be asked for (unless you're just itchin for a fight anyway), and there should always be the threat of a beat down in Darkwind IMO.
so here's a scenario: 1. I want 30k to let you go. 2. I only have 20k. (does he or doesn't he??) 3. Make it 22k and I'll let you live. 4. Done scenario 2 1. i want 300k 2. Oh please! you're joking! 3. 10k? 4. i only have 800 dollars! spare me! 5. no. die! |
||||||
|
*JD_Basher* jd.basher@charter.net Posted Jul 30, 2007, 6:12 am |
Negotiations are better IMHO also.
300k might be a bit steep to ask for but that's why they call it negotiations! |
||||||
|
willo da car man Posted Jul 30, 2007, 7:46 am |
i dont think a big sign saying the wildernes is extremaly dangerous enter under your own risk whould be good because then i would never go in there again |
||||||
|
willo da car man Posted Jul 30, 2007, 7:51 am |
how about with the truce thing if u want to fight u can agreeif 1 person doesnt u can agree on a truce max 15k say because when its a pety little nood e.g me i dont have that. | ||||||
|
Deathangels Shadow Posted Jul 30, 2007, 9:16 am |
The goal here is to accommodate the folks that absolutely hate PvP (which make up the majority of the market, after all). If there's no forced ransom, then the griefers will never accept it no matter what. The result will be pissed off players that say "bleep this bleeping game, I'm bleeping out of here!" |
||||||
|
*sam* Posted Jul 30, 2007, 9:34 am |
Something else I forgot to mention: the ransom when paid would be allowed to take you below zero $. So you would never be forced to fight because of a lack of ransom money.
This means you'd have to recover it as quick as possible of course or your gang will start leaving on the next weekly update. But at least it puts it within your control. It will probably be necessary to put in a rule such as: you're not allowed to leave town if you have negative funds. This is to stop cheating with the above rule. |
||||||
|
NefariousCoal Posted Jul 30, 2007, 3:28 pm |
Excellent. I think it's a good balance between the two and I like some of both. |
||||||
|
Big Ron Posted Aug 8, 2007, 1:09 pm |
Won't this equate to no scouting on a Saturday if you're not rich as creosote?
|
||||||
|
Deathangels Shadow Posted Aug 8, 2007, 8:22 pm |
There aren't enough players that attack other players, at least not right now. That said, if you're pretty broke, you probably won't be scouting too far away from Somerset, where you can't be attacked by another player. | ||||||
|
pweelg Posted Aug 22, 2007, 12:55 am |
ok fairly newb here
the idea of a safe area around somerset makes a lot of sense, no one appreciates a learning curve with steep drops off either side :P but what struck me was, wouldn't gangs just settle there riffs in the arena 1 v 1 or 2 v 2 etc ? hey maybe there could be a book maker so all the other gangs could gamble some of there cash on the out come ? could be quite the occasion I know thats not what the thread is about but surely its a possible solution to those desperate for pvp ? slap me down if you think i'm way off mark....i can take it :P |
||||||
|
*viKKing* Posted Aug 22, 2007, 7:30 am |
You can do ladder challenge 1 v 1 or more (vehicles).
Check into the leagues page.
|
||||||
|
pweelg Posted Aug 22, 2007, 8:44 am |
See you learn something new every day ....!
does the victor keep the spoils ? |
||||||
|
Lord Humungus Posted Aug 24, 2007, 12:58 pm |
Noting the discussion about garage limits...
I'm still scraping by by some standards, and I certainly don't want to see my vehicles taxed out from under me, but no one minds seeing the big guy have to work to maintain what he has, and guys like me enjoy trying to take it from them. I re-read this rather popular (notorious) PvP forum thread, and sadly I think I would say it's almost irrelevent, as PvP is ridiculously hard to initiate. Not one encounter, and believe me I've tried. Not only do I have to be scouting, have a high enough level scout, and hope another player decides to scout, in the same city I am scouting from, But I have to have an undefined "similar" Combat Rating, which seems rather unreasonable. It's pretty much impossible to make any contact, and I certainly can't nab that lone Phoenix that is running supplies with any kind of proper ambush. I want to run a bandit crew, and I want to have people fear my berserkers. Not because I get a kick out of it, but because I enjoy being the bad guy in the fantasy world just as much as some enjoy being the good guy. I do not have an interest in griefing. I have no desire to destroy someone's last car... and with the way things are now, I definitely can't. If PvP does not get easier to initiate, it might as well not be an option. I understand that PvP is not popular. I am not concerned with popularity. I enjoy the challenge of playing other people. I can make you enjoy it too. Whether you want to or not. |
||||||
|
*sam* Posted Aug 24, 2007, 1:12 pm |
You certainly won't get any pvp near somerset, that was a concession to new players, and I think it's the right thing to do.
In terms of ambushing people elsewhere: the CR-based match-up is the only way I can see of doing it, otherwise everyone will need to drive around with massive squads all the time. I could certainly expand the range of CRs that will be matched up (e.g. if they have to be +/- 20% of each other right now it could change to +/- 30%). The current system should work if we had more active players. Until then, I'm not sure there's any easy way of fixing it.. |
||||||
|
Lord Humungus Posted Aug 24, 2007, 1:29 pm |
Well, perhaps you could make one small concession, that is have the CR of a squad listed in the squad information, and visible to all. | ||||||
|
Alocalypse Posted Aug 24, 2007, 1:42 pm |
I think you could make it easier for the ambushing players by adding an "auto reduce CR" option which kicks out vehicle(s) to reduce the CR of the squad if it helps getting a PvP encounter quicker so you can ambush a bigger CR range at a time which should increase the chances of an encounter (and could help make the encounters more balanced in CR). Perhaps even an option to choose which vehicles should never be auto-kicked... |
||||||
|
*viKKing* Posted Aug 24, 2007, 1:57 pm |
Very good idea Alo. I like it a lot. | ||||||
|
Lord Humungus Posted Aug 24, 2007, 2:39 pm |
Yes, that would definitely make things easier, perhaps allow a squad to have a "core" group of cars, and each additional vehicle could be used to fill CR much like the random NPC encounters. That would allow a maximum chance of encounter and a decent enough ambush range.
EDIT: Ok, that's enough forum posts for now, I'm not comfortable making public appearances without people tied to the front of my car. This is not my page, but it amuses me |
||||||
|
*sam* Posted Aug 24, 2007, 4:08 pm |
Ye, good idea alo. I'm not at all anti-pvp, but it's important not to get unbalanced combats where only one side can win (this is of course another trade-off between realism and gameplay, but then again realism isn't always fun). I'll hopefully get this 'auto remove' system implemented over the weekend.
It was also suggested that announcements are made regarding the status of squads as they go scouting. What do other people think about this? If the info. was made public, it should probably be based on the scouting skill of the squad - i.e. they would have a chance of being 'invisible' to potential hijackers. |
||||||
|
*viKKing* Posted Aug 24, 2007, 4:20 pm |
Please refer to my "intelligence" post in developper section...
|
||||||
|
Kelaparan Posted Aug 24, 2007, 6:46 pm |
From the other side of the PvP camp, I don't think I like the idea of auto squad CR balancing thing. It would definitely facilitate the gameplay that's for sure, waiting for hours for the CR to match up from a 20 pt difference is pretty harsh. However it places the advantage solely to the attacker; the attacker can customize their vehicles to match the defender. The defender has no choice. From a 'realism' perspective, how does the attacker know automatically to add a certain car?
The PvP favors the attacker way to much as it is - we need options for the squad that's trying to avoid PvP contact as well. I mean if the only option is "don't travel", there's no fun in that either. Right now if a PvP gang wants to find a fight with another player gang, they just sit there until a player gang match is made. Why isn't it treated like other scouts i.e. it increases the likelihood of a specific search for one type of gang, but still allows the possibility of finding other types. I think vik and wolf have mentioned this in this thread and the "intelligence" thread, but we do need to be able to hide the information on our car layouts, with the option to allow viewing of the car information to others in your squad / alliance. The "intelligence" skill could then be used to display the estimated CR, armor values, and weapons. At high enough levels, it should reveal enough information to allow you the kind of advantage the PvP gangs currently enjoy. This skill would also help with 'auto-balancing' by giving you an estimate of the squad that left. The system shouldn't automatically balance and drop a car until it matches. However, since this does seem like the best way to balance CRs quickly, perhaps there should be scout time penalties assessed reflecting the time taken to "send for another car" etc). Besides, wouldn't heading out in a HUGE fleet attract another hunter's attention? i.e. npc pirates etc. But this discovery of information needs to be countered somehow either with the use of the same "intelligence" skill (perhaps you can use this skill to either investigate other gangs OR act as counter intelligence against spys from other gangs, but not both at the same time with the same character). And another thing, shouldn't scouting skill be a factor in all this? Shouldn't the skill be the basis for the CR matching system between player gangs? |
||||||
|
*Ayjona* Posted Aug 24, 2007, 7:08 pm |
I am an extremely PvP-oriented player in most MMOs (not the kind that griefs others or who likes to bash newbies, but the kind who appreciated the danger of knowing others can do that to me), but even I think that newbies need a few days of peace and relative serenity and apparent safety before they are trust into a very unsafe and nasty world. However, if possible, I'd like any restrictions on PvP to be implemented with some sort of in-canon explanation. This is to maintain the suspension of disbelief. Even a bad reason for a PvP-free zone around Somerset ("the wild flowers that grow outside of the city walls lull all visitors into absolute contentment and joy") is better than an off-game limitation with no in-game reason. Call me that silly newbie immersion guy with a screwed up vision of game priorities, but maintaining suspension of disbelief is more important in MMOs than in any other game (where rules have to be made up to prevent us from doing what the game is all about to each other). In short: magical defenses are silly. Gandalf, keep out of Evan! |
||||||
|
*viKKing* Posted Aug 24, 2007, 7:10 pm |
What do have I under my hood to fill that request...
|
||||||
|
*sam* Posted Aug 24, 2007, 7:16 pm |
Kela- ah fair enough I'll defer any changes here until it's been prperly debated.
It already is 
|
||||||
|
Kelaparan Posted Aug 24, 2007, 9:16 pm |
lol that's good to know about the scouting skill. Then we were just unlucky in gaining the ambush then. |
||||||
|
*viKKing* Posted Aug 25, 2007, 9:25 am |
Here are my dog-walk thoughts (this is not official) :
1) Players (well, me too) must agree PvP is tolerated and encouraged in Darkwind. 2) Players cooperation through squads and alliances is highly recommended. I'm aware of some of the points raised by Seiler on this topic. 3) Developpers can't be blamed if you don't comply to above rules; well you can still flame us, but use an heavy flamethrower please, regular one is not warm enough.
4) Somerset is PvP free zone to encourage new comers to venture in the wild and learn without getting hammered too fast. 5) Players accepting to do PvP will have a checkbox to signal it, but it will only be limited to the Norhtern and Southern areas outside of the region known as badlands. 6) Evan's area known as badlands (central Evan region: from Gateway to Sarsfield) is PvP granted and no exception will apply - whatever you do accept PvP or not. Read it again: Badlands. 7) Automatic reduction of CR attacker as suggested by Alo will be integrated. |
||||||
|
*viKKing* Posted Aug 25, 2007, 11:23 pm |
Have I frightened everyone?
|
||||||
|
Kelaparan Posted Aug 26, 2007, 1:09 am |
Not going to comment on the other points for the time being, but there has got to be some other options than this. It seems to me like its too much of an advantage for the attacker - but then again the CRs will be balanced to an extent. I'm torn on this, as something like the auto reduction would definitely make the matchmaking work better. However, what I don't understand though is that if a player elects to go after only player gangs, why they would automatically only find players? This is not true with the other options - you still meet other types of encounters. Yeah but we do need something to help match player versus player squads - seems pretty hard to do right now. |
||||||
|
*viKKing* Posted Aug 26, 2007, 7:45 am |
oh, yes missed that. Sure it should work like others scouting options to my eyes. |
||||||
|
*viKKing* Posted Aug 26, 2007, 9:17 am |
I also think some of you are fearing PvP due to the fact human players are smarter.
But don't get fooled, we are working on fixing current AI flaws, meaning, sooner or later it will behave in a - still limited - but better way. |
||||||
|
Jansan Posted Aug 26, 2007, 10:45 am |
For me, it's a little more personal. If a computer starts wasting me, I can't "hate" them for it. They are following their programming and aren't making a decision to ruin my game and waste my money and kill off my characters. They're just "part of the game." They kill me, I lose. If a human player is doing it, he or she is making the decision to screw me over. Every extra bullet they put into my characters, each dead gang member, each destroyed engine sets me back a long time. And they know this. And what really gets me, is the people who get joy out of screwing someone else over like that. Sometimes with taunting. That's just twisted. No I haven't run into anything like that in Darkwind, thankfully. But you see it all the times in other PvP games. |
||||||
|
*sam* Posted Aug 26, 2007, 4:15 pm |
The reason it's currently like this is, otherwise you'd have virtually no chance of getting a pvp encounter. There aren't enough human squads operating to give the pvp players much chance of scouting in the correct 7-minute window. |
||||||
|
*viKKing* Posted Aug 27, 2007, 9:55 pm |
Just an idea regarding Jansan comments:
Although I clearly understand what you mean, I wonder what's different with an arena combat with opposing team of human players? Aren't they shooting at your preciousss characters too? Could one solution be to limit number of PvP events a human trader (by opposition to pirates and PvP hunters) is forced to experience. It could be limited to one per real week for example, hence limiting the "irritating" nad "unfair" feelings. |
||||||
|
Jansan Posted Aug 28, 2007, 9:06 pm |
Fair question, Vikking, and my reply is: It isn't different. They better not shoot up my precious characters. ;P My precioousssss. Haha, I generally call a truce for events my characters are running, and I pull out of events that don't have a truce. Not to sound like I'm whining, I find the current PvP situation "satisfactory." I haven't even been attacked once while scouting yet. I'm vocally anti-PvP, but I'm not unreasonable. I know this is a PvP game, so I'm not going to go on a tirade about how PvP should be ripped out. I'll just deal with it. The important thing for me is that it is "satisfactorly" avoidable. That's all I can ask for. That is important if you want PvE only people to be interested in the game.
I just want to clarify that it's not that I think the AI is easy. In fact, I think they are pretty on the ball except for the driving off cliffs part. I fear them, especially maruders and scorpions due to their rocket launchers. I just don't like PvP because I don't like being griefed. And, in general, most PvPers have a poor attitude and even worse sportsmanship. What I am thankful for, is that most of "those types" of PvPers won't touch a turn-based game (especially one with resource management) with a ten thousand foot pole. They don't have the patience or intellect to play a game like this. So I'm very happy about that.
Of course, I also support your idea 100% of limited encounters. |
||||||
|
Lord Humungus Posted Sep 26, 2007, 1:45 am |
Wanted to bring this back to the head, partially because my subscription is running out, and partially because it's an interesting topic to me.
With response to griefing, etc, I think it's pretty much impossible to intercept trade convoys of players, etc, because there is such a tiny window of opportunity for intercept. I played Car Wars against other players, not AI, and there wasn't much in the hard feelings area from that, mainly because it was pretty much accepted that that's how games were back then. I understand that there is a greater time investment in such a long term game, but don't you get bored dodging AI, having them fall off cliffs, or straight charges into 20 HMGs and Car Cannons instead of attempting maneuver and generally providing a challenge other than how many rockets they bring? |
||||||
|
*Toecutter* Posted Sep 26, 2007, 2:10 am |
my fellow Mad Max villain has hit the nail on the head...it is boring for quite a few....and this being a multiplayer game of a violent sorts then by all means PvP should be encouraged.....a concession has already been made keeping Somerset non PvP and those not willing to take the chance should just stay there You can blast NPCs to your hearts content there and if u want to experience more advanced things such as travelling between towns then u should also be willing to chance PvP encounters....otherwise the legitimate PvP inclined would find their options cripplingly limted....
|
||||||
|
Jansan Posted Sep 26, 2007, 2:44 am |
My main problem with PvP is its not often about the challenge: It's about preying on the weak. In addition, though NPCs do have weaknesses due to their inability to think like humans, they also don't make foolish human mistakes, and can instantly discern the proper course of action (as defined by the limits of their programing). You notice how the AI never wastes ammo on stupid shots, and how they never direct friendly fire with weapons? They know when to stop shooting, flawlessly, everytime.
You can beat AI by finding a hole in its patterns and behaviors, but AI doesn't "slip up" like humans do. In RTS this is very apparent, as the computer can "cheat" by operating more units than a human could possibly keep track of. Finally, if Sam wanted to, he could make the AI ten times more difficult. If its only about the challenge, making computer opponents difficult is not a problem. He could have them "Boom, Headshot!" every turn if he wanted. The problem is, the average person or people with less skill don't want that kind of difficulty. So it may be too easy for some, while just right for others, and for even others on the "too hard" edge. But that's a whole seperate argument. The point is this is a PvP game, so people who dislike PvP such as myself, just have to avoid it in game as best as possible. I do mostly stay near Somerset unless I'm scouting with friends (haven't had a chance to do that much lately unfortunately  ), or doing my trade runs. I've had zero problems with PvP so far. No ones threatened me while on the road, and I've made a pact of peace with every other player I've played with in regular events.
I agree with Lord Humungus, this game is very difficult to grief in, which is good. I'm not sure what other options could be added for the PvPers, as that's likely best decided by them. Is the concern there is not enough PvP available? Maybe the ability to agree on a wilderness battle would be a nice option in addition to the current ways of getting PvP? Kind of like a rumble? Pick the time, pick the place, and fight, no arena or rules? This might not be necessary with camps and such coming out, I don't know. |
||||||
|
Lord Humungus Posted Sep 26, 2007, 9:59 am |
My concern is that there is essentially no PvP available in the wilderness. Most scouts are run from Somerset, CR prediction is almost impossible, high level scouts avoid PvP, and if you DO manage to make contact, they pay you 3K per car and are safe. EDIT: Essentially things have moved further away from PvP instead of balance. The only encounters I've had seemed like dumb luck, one being when I randomly guessed what CR a group would have on return, and another when I read them planning out the scout in the Client, watched them add their cars, and matched them with my own. I realize I'm not on all the time, but I have logged in many times looking for opportunities when 5-6 events were running, and not been able to intercept any of them for one reason or another. |
||||||
|
*sam* Posted Sep 26, 2007, 10:21 am |
This is actually in place already: you can challenge someone else's squad to a combat. |
||||||
|
*sam* Posted Sep 26, 2007, 10:25 am |
Camps will certainly improve this. There will be no option to 'hide from pvp' if you want to operate a camp. There was also a nice suggestion (by badger I think) about signing your squad up as an NPC trader defender and then getting automatic battles with anyone attacking that trader in the vicinity when you're online. |
||||||
|
ISHOULDCOCO Posted Sep 26, 2007, 4:42 pm |
I agree with all stated above. I feel the problem with PVP in DW is that there is little to be gained. The losses incurred by just a few bouts could deciminate a gangs resources There is little room for experimentation of weapons and tactics or a chance to gain new insight - when any loss could be absolute. We cannot 'play' at PVP - we might build toward being a PVPer , but there is no profit in PVP itself apart from the challenge itself. Rewards for Trader escort will change this. I hope there will be sufficient advantage to 'Camps' to embolden players - this will trigger affliations assuredly COCO |
||||||
|
Mad Mike Posted Sep 27, 2007, 2:11 am |
If someone beat me then took my cars and killed my characters well thats just the game, I wouldnt be upset by it. | ||||||
|
Jansan Posted Sep 27, 2007, 2:54 am |
How are camps coming along, if I may? Is there an ETA for them? |
||||||
|
Mad Mike Posted Sep 27, 2007, 2:18 pm |
fought lord humongous and lost, JD was with me... that should explain it all. LOL
No... I saw from the beginning we were outgunned and he had trucks. we had a chomper, spirit, and an apache. lost all cars but can be replaced by scouting. Sure I was bit upset but hey, thats the game and promptly challenged him to an arena fight, he won the first, I the second. BTW, the heavy car rifle is very inaccurate, even in the hands of a 51 large gunner. |
||||||
|
Lord Humungus Posted Feb 10, 2008, 12:09 am |
Well, it's been quite some time since I've logged in, and it seems the community has grown dramatically.
Have any of the PvP issues been resolved? Namely, can you actually intercept anyone yet? I know there was a discussion about putting a large amount of CR in a squad, and allowing the server to match other gangs with less CR. There was also talk that camps would provide more PvP options, but after reading the forums I can see that there are people campaigning for PvP safe status in camps. Has there been any improvement in the PvP realm, or am I looking for the wrong game? |