Goblin Squad Member
|
@Gedichtewicht
Nicely summed up.
Currently there is not a fame system and trust can be derived from reputation to some degree.
The alignment and reputation system seem to already cover the concerns from which a fame system was suggested for and currently fame is far more likely to be an entirely meta concept.
Regarding contract prices, the advent of contract escrows renders the involvement of reputation nearly moot. The question primarily becomes do you even want to do business with this person in the first place.
Either way, you have your basis from which to decide whether you believe they are likely to hold up their end of the bargain. These additional systems appear to be redundant or close enough to what exists already.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Breaking a contract is Chaotic. It is also considered undesired behavior. These are separate calculations. One can just as easily maintain CE alignment and high reputation as CE with low rep, it all depends on how they play.
Nothing involving programming is muddy (unless you get into loosely typed languages, then it can be). Things always happen in a specified order, follow that order and you have your answer. ;)
If low chaotic alignment rating can be achieved without breaking contracts, then if I'm a trader considering trading with you, all I know is that you are a risk - not if you're a reliable trader or not. Hence if that is the case, C-L axis is indeed a muddy measurement with which to make a judgement:-
Is that intentional for the devs to ensure in certain areas your chaos rating will impact in other areas as a cost whether in that specific area it's warranted or not? For eg you could be a dastardly fellow, breaking laws but an impeccable trader who always honors their contracts in the realm of commerce. From that point of view the Chaotic system is blind aka muddy measurement. I have not tabulated all the chaotic actions and calculated what they might add up to doing certain actions and never breaking a contract, but that is the conclusion I draw atm. Even more so for Good-Lawful axis which is measuring a lot more of your character as well as you the player: Am I dealing with curently "in character" or just as a player?
Hence reputation is a higher level system rating closer to the player's actions for a more critical system: pvp which needs to be less opaque and more focused on that one area, contrast. But even that is "sanctioned pvp" as this whole thread has been discussing (ie those 5 q's bludd posed).
Using reputation as bar on settlement access is again a good way of linking heavy-handed pvp behaviour with real repercussions, but atst if you are using aggregate Reputation:
I do not know if this is how they plan it, but if your base reputation rating for another player is acquired from your associates, it stands to reason that a settlement as a whole would also judge it so, perhaps with weight given to those in charge. You would be able to specifically set that if the average rep of a person among all of your settlement's inhabitants is not >= 2500, they are not welcome.
You're measuring what sort of pvp'er (Reputation) the player is in the above (which suits the devs); not, their popularity in the settlement asides from that. Popularity aka fame could be a rating given to players for: Jokes, organisation, some 'out of game work', some intangible in game work that is perceived by the community - and anything with the effect of giving "high rating" Fame TRUST or permission levels. If GW intend to provide permission levels based on politics it's already somewhat in the game, but perhaps more crudely or at least only based on what voting system and political system is used at polling time - not so much on sentiment - though political canvassing sounds fun(!). Reputation is the devs way of shutting off players even if their friends would welcome them in a settlement for high pvp aggression in a certain light as well as a direct "How nature says "beware" (cue: spikes, stripes, claws, teeth etc!); alternatively how well players adhere to sanctioned pvp and the benefits that implies.
I'm fine with Reputation atm, but another social system that allows members to rate and also discuss players might be useful for the political side or just for the community to self-select levels of permission to various things? What could be in that case (if beneficial and not maechavellian) popular merit. It might be more flexible than holding polls regularly or may end up being the same system?
=
Ok back, I had to run off just now... so train of thought is gone, and quick response then adieu,
@Gedichtewicht: I skimmed your post and seem to agree mostly on what you summarize. I need to re-read later and reply again. ;) But I think what you say is spot on in terms of the levels and how they work from game to player to social constructs. :)
@Darcnes: The above escrew maybe goes someway in helping contracts; good call.
As both^^ say, atm we deal with the current systems, but there is space for growing these into more complex beasts, I think, is at least an interesting result?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Gedichtewicht
Nicely summed up.
Currently there is not a fame system and trust can be derived from reputation to some degree.
yes, i know, didn`t point that out in my post though so thanks.
The alignment and reputation system seem to already cover the concerns from which a fame system was suggested for and currently fame is far more likely to be an entirely meta concept.
-But, unless i got a lot of what i´ve read wrong, what some people are proposing is a localiced system, under direct player control as opposed to the globalised system that reputation is.
And i think that has a lot of potential.For example: imagine a bandit(i`m taking one because they seem to be the main opposition) that goes to work in a few hexes, but lives in one ore a few others.
with the fame system he might have a low rating in his "work"hexes, but a high one in his living hexes because the ratings are set by the local playerbase. so, cn or evil PC wouldn`t have to be exclude from visiting a good settlement, if he doesn`c**p where he eats, if i may say so.
Regarding contract prices, the advent of contract escrows renders the involvement of reputation nearly moot. The question primarily becomes do you even want to do business with this person in the first place.
ok, i see your point.
Either way, you have your basis from which to decide whether you believe they are likely to hold up their end of the bargain. These additional systems appear to be redundant or close enough to what exists already.
i think that additional system actually might lead to more meaningful playerinteraction ;)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
And remember, being a "con man" is as valid a role PF and the River Kingdoms as being a bandit, it even has iconic characters from fiction...just like banditry. So, if successfully robbing someone else is "play as intended" and raises a bandits reputation (aka trust), then there might eventually be mechanics to allow people to create contracts with dubious or lopsided (yet hidden so) rewards/tasks. Similarly, just as a bandits "job" is to steal from you, a con mans "job" is to cheat you; it is their "play as intended". They should get rep+ for cheating you with the contract system.
If you are going to allow and encourage bandits, why not con men? Now how much is reputation a measure of trust? Reputations only purpose is to push people to perform acts GW has deemed favourable. I think that is a great and necessary thing, but it does not help my society push for what we feel is favourable acts.
EDITED to fix errors.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
And remember, being a "con man" is as valid a role PF and the River Kingdoms as being a bandit, it even has iconic characters from fiction...just like banditry. So, if successfully robbing someone else is "play as intended" and raises a bandits reputation (aka trust), then there might eventually be mechanics to allow people to create contracts with dubious or lopsided (yet hidden so) rewards/tasks. Similarly, just as a bandits "job" is to steal from you, a con mans "job" is to cheat you; it is their "play as intended". They should get rep+ for cheating you with the contract system.
If you are going to allow and encourage bandits, why not con men?
I can`t say i really like were this is going, but it is a good point.
Now how much is reputation a measure of trust? Reputations only purpose is to push people to perform acts GW has deemed favourable. I think that is a great and necessary thing, but it does not help my society push for what we feel is favourable acts.
second that.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And remember, being a "con man" is as valid a role PF and the River Kingdoms as being a bandit, it even has iconic characters from fiction...just like banditry. So, if successfully robbing someone else is "play as intended" and raises a bandits reputation (aka trust), then there might eventually be mechanics to allow people to create contracts with dubious or lopsided (yet hidden so) rewards/tasks. Similarly, just as a bandits "job" is to steal from you, a con mans "job" is to cheat you; it is their "play as intended". They should get rep+ for cheating you with the contract system.
If you are going to allow and encourage bandits, why not con men? Now how much is reputation a measure of trust? Reputations only purpose is to push people to perform acts GW has deemed favourable. I think that is a great and necessary thing, but it does not help my society push for what we feel is favourable acts.
EDITED to fix errors.
To be fair, the above is a slippery slope argument which is a logical fallacy. Another point made via illustration is valid and still stands, reputation is tool for GW to encourage certain behaviours...to push roles into actually playing those roles a certain way. It is only a measure of trust in so far as you can trust others to play a role as intended. For this reason I have no doubt GW will automate the reputation based restrictions.
(Although I can totally see a con man role being added. The contract system should be just as ripe for gaming as any other aspect of the game)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It seems like what people desire is a thumbs up/down or like/dislike button. I just cannot get behind this.
@Gedichtewicht
Pretty sure rep is only globalized insofar as everybody you know can contribute to your character's view of another. The idea of a settlement restricting access based on a statistic could be soundly accomplished with the existing reputation system, depending of course on how the dev team is implementing it.
All this talk about fame and rep and global and localized makes me wonder if a player will be able to control the depth of influencing reps. Ie. 0: no other players influence how you view another player, 1: people you know influence your views, 2: those players' CCs and Settlement aggregates would influence your views .. or if it is going to be a simple: this demographic of players, as related to your character is what influences your character's views on others.
While it seems like that could solve a lot of issues in customizing how an individual/company/settlement calculates reputation, it perhaps may be a bit needlessly complicated.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I guess I don't see the complexity issues. It is a simple system. Each person can voluntarily assess a +/- for another individual. Each social group has a fame score which is the aggregate of their member's assessments.
When I look at another character, I see my personal assessment (if I added one), the total assessments of my CC members (if anyone gave them one), the total assessment of my settlement (if anyone gave them one). I am free to do what I want with that information. Also, each social group can decide to limit access to their facilities using that aggregate.
Everything else so far proposed (including alignment and reputation) is entirely automated (and not player driven), how is this too complex?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Reputation and active alignment change over time; the player can game them to a degree. Flags can certainly be gamed; they expire after 24 hours or less.
The game is going to make trade information visible, either locally or at some distance with certain skill. Could it also automate information about characters?
Say I've played the game for 6 months. I've been involved in 24 pvp fights. I've flown the Champion flag for 8 days, and the last time I used it was 7 days ago. I've flown the Outlaw flag for 3 days and the last time was 107 days ago. Could that be available to a player, perhaps with certain skills, to make judgements of my character's history?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Reputation and active alignment change over time; the player can game them to a degree. Flags can certainly be gamed; they expire after 24 hours or less.
The game is going to make trade information visible, either locally or at some distance with certain skill. Could it also automate information about characters?
Say I've played the game for 6 months. I've been involved in 24 pvp fights. I've flown the Champion flag for 8 days, and the last time I used it was 7 days ago. I've flown the Outlaw flag for 3 days and the last time was 107 days ago. Could that be available to a player, perhaps with certain skills, to make judgements of my character's history?
That's the avenue I've been thinking of. Using the flags as the "public information".
I don't see how you can build a game around alignment as a behavior mechanic and then take its power away with a host of side systems that also score behavior patterns.
Don't get me wrong I could see Reputation and some of these suggestions working way down the road. I just think it should all grow around Alignment.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It seems like what people desire is a thumbs up/down or like/dislike button.
basicly, yes.
@Gedichtewicht
Pretty sure rep is only globalized insofar as everybody you know can contribute to your character's view of another.
lets take our example bandit again. he plays as intended, so no automatic repp-loss. some people he pvp´s will think it´s grat and increase his repp, some people will not like it at all, and reduce his repp.
regardless of his actual score,what exactly does his repp-score tell me about his behaviour towars my settlement?
The idea of a settlement restricting access based on a statistic could be soundly accomplished with the existing reputation system, depending of course on how the dev team is implementing it.
maybe they will make it as you say, till we know for sure, we may as well continue to discuss alternativ aproaches, it`s still a long time till we will know for sure, and how knows, the might like one sides arguments;)
All this talk about fame and rep and global and localized makes me wonder if a player will be able to control the depth of influencing reps. Ie. 0: no other players influence how you view another player, 1: people you know influence your views, 2: those players' CCs and Settlement aggregates would influence your views .. or if it is going to be a simple: this demographic of players, as related to your character is what influences your character's views on others.
still thinking wath to answer here, apart from my bandit example above
While it seems like that could solve a lot of issues in customizing how an individual/company/settlement calculates reputation, it perhaps may be a bit needlessly complicated.
i think it would be easier to insert a new system aka fame or gossip or wathever then to try to achieve the same with the repp system. Espescially without losing the original intention of repp, as in channeling pvp behaviour into the wanted vs the unwanted kind
Don't get me wrong I could see Reputation and some of these suggestions working way down the road. I just think it should all grow around Alignment.
Isn`t alignemt still invisible? to others at least?
After reading this forum, the level of PVP that is going to be used means I am highly unlikely to support it, play it or spend money on it. Many of my friends feel the same way. Unless there is a way to flag or unflag PVP or at least set up "no PVP" servers then it is a deal breaker to me. Not every one enjoys PVP and most of the time I have played in mmo's that included it there were always griefers out there that kill players just for the sake of killing them, no matter what the level difference, no matter if it gained them nothing. Most of the time these types of players ruin the fun I have when in a mmo.
I'd love to support a Pathfinder MMO, but unfortunately PVP ruins it for me.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
After reading this forum, the level of PVP that is going to be used means I am highly unlikely to support it, play it or spend money on it. Many of my friends feel the same way...
I, sadly am not amongst the people that can quote every relevand blog or forum post to you.
But, there will be ony one server, and as the economy of the game will be based on wath the players do it wouldn`t make much sense.A lot of people felt like you in the beginnig, and every now and then another one shows up like you just did:)
all i can say to you is, you`re point of view might chage if you reada bit of what the devs have planed, and how the community is.
I´m from the no-pvp side initially too, but i let the vision of the game convince me to give it a try anyway.
One think i could recommend though would be the blog to live & die in the riverkingdon
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Don't get me wrong I could see Reputation and some of these suggestions working way down the road. I just think it should all grow around Alignment.
imo, the #1 use for reputation will be to determine (1) if someone is being a nuisance and (2) has the person been enough of a nuisance that even a paladin character can gank him without much downside. I think current reputation needs to be visible for this reason.
I think active alignment shouldn't be known without detection means. Core alignment shouldn't be known without high level divination abilities.
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
After reading this forum, the level of PVP that is going to be used means I am highly unlikely to support it, play it or spend money on it. Many of my friends feel the same way. Unless there is a way to flag or unflag PVP or at least set up "no PVP" servers then it is a deal breaker to me. Not every one enjoys PVP and most of the time I have played in mmo's that included it there were always griefers out there that kill players just for the sake of killing them, no matter what the level difference, no matter if it gained them nothing. Most of the time these types of players ruin the fun I have when in a mmo.
There have been several people who started out with bad opinions of PvP from other games that have come to believe that meaningful PvP (as intended in PFO) will not be as bad.
Are you willing to discuss why you dislike PvP, and be open to reasons why it might not be as bad as you think in PFO?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
And remember, being a "con man" is as valid a role PF and the River Kingdoms as being a bandit, it even has iconic characters from fiction...just like banditry. So, if successfully robbing someone else is "play as intended" and raises a bandits reputation (aka trust), then there might eventually be mechanics to allow people to create contracts with dubious or lopsided (yet hidden so) rewards/tasks. Similarly, just as a bandits "job" is to steal from you, a con mans "job" is to cheat you; it is their "play as intended". They should get rep+ for cheating you with the contract system.
If you are going to allow and encourage bandits, why not con men? Now how much is reputation a measure of trust? Reputations only purpose is to push people to perform acts GW has deemed favourable. I think that is a great and necessary thing, but it does not help my society push for what we feel is favourable acts.
EDITED to fix errors.
I'm not the dev quotes guy, but I'm pretty sure GW is not going to tolerate contract scamming as a valid form of gameplay.
After reading this forum, the level of PVP that is going to be used means I am highly unlikely to support it, play it or spend money on it. Many of my friends feel the same way. Unless there is a way to flag or unflag PVP or at least set up "no PVP" servers then it is a deal breaker to me. Not every one enjoys PVP and most of the time I have played in mmo's that included it there were always griefers out there that kill players just for the sake of killing them, no matter what the level difference, no matter if it gained them nothing. Most of the time these types of players ruin the fun I have when in a mmo.There have been several people who started out with bad opinions of PvP from other games that have come to believe that meaningful PvP (as intended in PFO) will not be as bad.
Are you willing to discuss why you dislike PvP, and be open to reasons why it might not be as bad as you think in PFO?
In many of the games I have played PVP has runined my level of fun for the following reasons
a) I'm not that great at it, I have limited use in one hand makes complex gaming difficult at best.b) I don't enjoy spending hours trying to gain materials and items only to be killed by some random pvp'er that just basically wants to off someone for doing nothing but walking across a zone.
c) I don't enjoy losing progress because some random person want to camp my body after killing me just so he can do it again. or respawn somewhere with most of the work I have accomplished nul and void.
d) I don't enjoy PVP and really don't like it pushed on me in game.
e) I game to have fun, pvp is just not fun to me.
Give me proof that PVP will not ruin my fun and that I will have the same level of progression with out pvp being pushed on me and I will consider playing.
Prove to me that a starting character will be able to wander around and complete quests/missions with out being ganked all night because someone decided he wanted to ruin someone else's fun.
I'm willing to give it a shot and willing to listen reasons. My main problems are abusive pvp'ers and sorry to say it I have yet to play an MMO that supported PVP that did not have a large amount of abusive PVP'ers
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Realmwalker
This particular thread and many others discuss particularly worst case eventualities. We are trying to assist in making the game as rich of an experience for everyone as possible. That means introducing an element of risk, as it is believed that something that can be taken away holds that much more value for still having it.
If you really have any interest in what this game could offer you, as suggested you should absolutely read the blog. From start to finish if you have the time, it explains in a far more complete manner the nature of the game than the rather grim view you seem to have picked up here.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Realmwalker:
You get xp based on real time, regardless of whether you are logged in or not. So no matter what happens in game you still gain XP at the same rate.
Also, link to the goblinworks blog which is updated every Wednesday.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I hope this doesn't come across as aggressive:
From what you have said, Realmwalker, PFO seems not to be the game for you. So It may be best if you play a game that is more up to your specifications.
On a side note:
Give me proof that PVP will not ruin my fun...
demanding negative proof is a logical fallacy.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I'm willing to give it a shot and willing to listen reasons. My main problems are abusive pvp'ers and sorry to say it I have yet to play an MMO that supported PVP that did not have a large amount of abusive PVP'ers
If you're willing to give something a shot where you feel there could be the possibility of something working for you even though you currently think it v unlikely and/or that if the slim possibility it does work it will then be worth taking that shot, then we're onto something.
With the ability to form your own settlement community, I think PFO provides a basis for players looking for a similar play style / game experience to be able to "work" together to achieve that. If you are out gathering, ensure you go out with a group of your settlement, who may have guards on board too, and in an area that is "lawful" or otherwise high probability of risk to low reward for pvp'ers. Find a niche in the game that promotes that type of gameplay for you. Ideally in a sandbox not everyone has the same ideas about how to play the game, but equally not one game style breaks the others, which occurs mostly in other mmorpgs ie rampand FFA pvp. The devs have explicitly said, there is open pvp but they think it's an area that has large room for improvement.
This might be of interest if you did not already read it:
If you are one of those people who doesn't like the idea of PvP we ask for you to keep an open mind. We're well aware of the kind of non-fun experiences that PvP has created in some games, and we think we have lots of ideas on ways to keep misbehavior under control in Pathfinder Online. We think that you'll find that the heightened sense of meaning that comes from knowing that you're up against not just scripted AI monsters but wily, creative, motivated human opponents will deliver some of the most exciting and memorable gaming you've ever experienced.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
After reading this forum, the level of PVP that is going to be used means I am highly unlikely to support it, play it or spend money on it. Many of my friends feel the same way. Unless there is a way to flag or unflag PVP or at least set up "no PVP" servers then it is a deal breaker to me. Not every one enjoys PVP and most of the time I have played in mmo's that included it there were always griefers out there that kill players just for the sake of killing them, no matter what the level difference, no matter if it gained them nothing. Most of the time these types of players ruin the fun I have when in a mmo.
This game will not be to everyone's taste. This is not good and it is not unfortunate, it is just a reality.
I wish you luck in your search for a game that is to your liking.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@realmwalker: also, have a look at the Nihimonicon
;) or the list of helpful links.
there is a list of guilds amongst other things, and nearly all of them, espescialy the big once, have antigrieving policies.
or, if you don`t have to time to read that much right away, maybe listen to the gobocast
;) i can recommed everyone of them.
if you want to hear a lot about griefing in other mmo`s and why this one will be different, i would like to point you specifically towards Andius`s interview,but really they are all great to listen too.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
... have a look at the Nihimonicon
I like that! Awesome name! Wish I'd thought of that :)
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
In many of the games I have played PVP has runined my level of fun for the following reasons
a) I'm not that great at it, I have limited use in one hand makes complex gaming difficult at best.
b) I don't enjoy spending hours trying to gain materials and items only to be killed by some random pvp'er that just basically wants to off someone for doing nothing but walking across a zone.
c) I don't enjoy losing progress because some random person want to camp my body after killing me just so he can do it again. or respawn somewhere with most of the work I have accomplished nul and void.
d) I don't enjoy PVP and really don't like it pushed on me in game.
e) I game to have fun, pvp is just not fun to me.Give me proof that PVP will not ruin my fun and that I will have the same level of progression with out pvp being pushed on me and I will consider playing.
Prove to me that a starting character will be able to wander around and complete quests/missions with out being ganked all night because someone decided he wanted to ruin someone else's fun.
I'm willing to give it a shot and willing to listen reasons. My main problems are abusive pvp'ers and sorry to say it I have yet to play an MMO that supported PVP that did not have a large amount of abusive PVP'ers
Addressing those points in order:
A) The current paradigm for gameplay in general is to make knowing what to do hard, but using the interface to do it easy. A lack of manual dexterity may or may not be severely impacting, and there may or may not be hardware solutions which mitigate the problem for you.B) Transporting goods and interdiction of transported goods are both major gameplay elements. If you are paying attention to the reasons, nothing about them will be 'random'.
C) Corpse-Camping is one behavior that has been noted as griefing and which will result in the offender being removed from the game.
D, E, unlabeled statements: It seems like you want/expect PFO to be a sandbox adventure RPG that is basically a single player game where many players play alongside each other. That isn't what it will be; the player factions wealthy enough to offer lots of 'missions' will be opposed to or allied with each other in a complicated manner, and working for one of them will involve opposing their rivals and enemies indirectly. The pure PvE content will be sparse and probably repetitive.
I think that PFO will be nothing like you expect, because of the design decision to make the player interactions the content, rather than player interaction with the developers.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@realmwalker
there is a list of guilds amongst other things, and nearly all of them, espescialy the big once, have antigrieving policies.
Realmwalker's problem is not with griefing, although I'm sure he would be greatly bothered by it. I'd also venture a guess that his definition of griefing has a very low threshold by the comments he has made.
Realmwalker stated his issue is
Unless there is a way to flag or unflag PVP or at least set up "no PVP" servers then it is a deal breaker to me.
Yes, he can flag or unflag PvP but not being flagged for PvP does not protect you from being the victim of a PvP attack. It just means that the attacker will incur the negative hit to reputation and possibly to alignment ( depends on the alignment of the attacker).
As Realmwalker says, if there is no PvE only server, then it is a deal breaker for him. Well we all know there won't be, so the deal is in fact broken. No amount if reading will change those realities.
So, I say to Realmwalker, this is an Open World PvP Sandbox MMO, that will have just one server and no complete way to shield yourself from unwanted PvP. If you are unwilling to change and play in a game with those facts, you are best served to continue your search elsewhere.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm willing to give it a shot...
I encourage you to check out Nihimon's Community Thread, where you can read various threads that the community's found useful and important. One in particular, started by Ryan Dancey, A couple of comments about PvP / Griefing, includes the comments:
"...there's no hard & fast definition of "griefing" that will satisfy everyone. For some, any limit to their activities is too restrictive, and to others, any non-consensual interaction is too permissive. Where you fall on that continuum is really a matter of personal choice, not definition.
I can tell you that in Pathfinder Online you will be involved in non-consensual interaction with other players on a regular basis.
That is not to say that unlimited poor behavior will be tolerated."
and
"It is not our intention to create an "anything goes" world where players are subjected to endless scams, ganks, and immersion breaking behavior.
It is our intention to apply some of the real world lessons learned in our major cities by focusing on "broken windows" - that is, stopping minor transgressions of our social behavior policies before they escalate out of hand. It is my opinion that doing so will reduce antisocial behavior substantially. People who want to be anonymous jerks will not get much pleasure out of being quickly and unceremoniously silenced, booted, or banned. Without the ability to encite "rage & tears", those folks will have no good reason to haunt Pathfinder Online."
I'll let you read the rest of his comments, and the entire thread, yourself. Several people before you liked what they saw there enough to've stuck around, while others have decided PFO's not for them and moved on to other games.
EDIT: yes, I'm not the first to recommend the Nihimonicon, but ah, if only I'd typed faster... :-)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Realmwalker's problem is not with griefing...
?is that so?
Prove to me that a starting character will be able to wander around and complete quests/missions with out being ganked all night because someone decided he wanted to ruin someone else's fun.
... My main problems are abusive pvp'ers and sorry to say it I have yet to play an MMO that supported PVP that did not have a large amount of abusive PVP'ers
somehow i read that differently o_0
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I know a lot of people who refuse to play PvP. I am convinced it's because of the horrible way PvP is usually implemented. I have high hopes that I will be able to lure some of these anti-PvP people to PFO, but I don't expect to be able to do that until PFO is up and running and has already proven that they can accomplish their goal of allowing meaningful PvP while quashing meaningless griefing.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Nice find Jazzlvraz: This in particular according to preferred playstyles:
I'm secondarily concerned with ensuring that people who choose a low risk / low reward course of play are able to do so without regular interruption by those seeking to gain enjoyment from interfering with them as they go about their business.
To add some interpretation: The above refers to economic reward vs pvp risk (you loose items or your cargo to bandits for eg). For players that are not fond of pvp but are interested in the sort of atmosphere The River Kingdoms might possess, then I think the above is also a good description of being able to enjoy that side to gaming in an online 3d graphical world ie smell the roses, do some quests relatively safely with cooperative friends etc. Ie there's little reason in such context to ambush you, unless your settlement/kingdom is at war with the other. And if you were hit by a player for some reason, then a bounty would be perfectly within your rights on their head.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I think it's going to be common for people to think of "open PvP" in terms of getting ganked by someone much higher level while they're out trying to complete quests to level up. That entire paradigm is so far from what PFO is all about that it's going to be hard to communicate with them unless they take the time to learn about PFO's unique take on each of those aspects of MMO game play.
Perhaps we can put together a short list of blogs and dev posts. I'm off to a meeting right now, but may find time later today. I would certainly appreciate any help.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Don't get me wrong I could see Reputation and some of these suggestions working way down the road. I just think it should all grow around Alignment.imo, the #1 use for reputation will be to determine (1) if someone is being a nuisance and (2) has the person been enough of a nuisance that even a paladin character can gank him without much downside. I think current reputation needs to be visible for this reason.
I think active alignment shouldn't be known without detection means. Core alignment shouldn't be known without high level divination abilities.
Can't the player just gain a long term heinous flag if they do too much ganky stuff? I still don't see the need for Reputation. Alignment shouldn't be visible but there is a pretty complicated group of flags that has been proposed that should be.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
That entire paradigm is so far from what PFO is all about that it's going to be hard to communicate with them unless they take the time to learn about PFO's unique take on each of those aspects of MMO game play.
Perhaps we can put together a short list of blogs and dev posts. I'm off to a meeting right now, but may find time later today. I would certainly appreciate any help.
i was thinking about that too, when i read realmwalkers post yesterday ;) another page of not-so-forbidden-lore for the Nihimonicon
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Perhaps we can put together a short list of blogs and dev posts.
I think the work you've already done will fill the bill, and goodness knows we'll need a straightforward FAQ or something similar. As PFO gains more visibility, we'll have MANY more people showing up with the "usual view" of open PVP.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Realmwalker's problem is not with griefing...?is that so?
somehow i read that differently o_0Prove to me that a starting character will be able to wander around and complete quests/missions with out being ganked all night because someone decided he wanted to ruin someone else's fun.
... My main problems are abusive pvp'ers and sorry to say it I have yet to play an MMO that supported PVP that did not have a large amount of abusive PVP'ers
Ganking != griefing.
Basically, the crux of Realmwalkers issue is 'abusive' PvP. That however, is a very nebulous term.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I wonder if part of the concern/hesitancy with making sticky's of the stuff herein is that a lot is subject to modification or change. If you sticky up a bunch of things that you have to alter later, many folks wandering through will get the, possibly, false impression that they are hard, set fact/features.
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
Without speaking for anyone else, the typical implementation of PvP in a MMO is to have a single-player or cooperative game where players fight static PvE content, then allow players to attack players.
The expected result is that the only players that attack are those who expect to win, not those who expect a fair fight. The risks and rewards are all inconsistent, and all of the bad opinions of PvP in MMOs form based on the asshats who form the typical experience; that one guy who comes into the noob zone and ganks away.
The prerequisites for that behavior simply aren't present; the areas for learning how to play are either perfectly safe or within the response area of the marshals, and there's a commitment to stopping griefers when they do show up.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Nihimon:
Directly on this subject, the 2 above posts from Ryan:
Kickstarter Community Thread: Player vs. Player Conflict
A couple of comments about PvP / Griefing
From the website FAQ:
Will PvP (player-vs.-player aggression) be allowed?
Characters will be able to attack rival characters in most parts of the game world. In many circumstances, though, unprovoked aggression may carry severe in-game penalties.
Blog weekly player-asked questions FAQ:
Many characters will be able to pursue very rewarding careers that don't involve fighting monsters or other players. A basic range of noncombat activities will be available almost immediately in early enrollment, and as the game development continues throughout this period, more and more noncombat functions will be fully deployed. Noncombat-focused players should be able to:
Gather and harvest components from the world
Refine and craft using those components
Trade and speculate using the markets (or face-to-face)
Scout and spy to provide useful information to organizations
Build and manage settlements and points of interest
Engage in meaningful inter-organization diplomacy
We have additional ideas for systems to support social conflict and enhance roleplaying that will become more fully developed later if prioritized by crowdforging.
I think the best place to start: Is from the blog: To Live and Die in the River Kingdoms
Death, and the penalties a character suffers for dying, impact a surprisingly large part of the Pathfinder Online game design. Goblinworks has been studying systems used in other MMOs, and we've been thinking about how we can make our own system interesting, and how it can reinforce our design goals. We've noticed that theme park MMOs have evolved toward increasingly minor penalties for character death, while sandbox games have tended toward harsher penalties.
Life During Wartime
Characters will die in Pathfinder Online, and die with regularity. If they died and were removed from the game forever that might be an interesting simulation, but it would make for a very empty and unwanted game. Your character will survive death—it's only a temporary setback.
Many Shades of Grief
One thing that we're deeply committed to at Goblinworks is building a game that has a low tolerance for "griefing." Loosely defined, griefing means taking actions within the game that are designed to harass another player to elicit bad feelings without any other reasonable purpose.
Our Philosophy of Fun
You can see that we're trying to avoid some of the problems that afflict other sandbox MMOs while still retaining open-world PvP, providing the risks that make your fellow players meaningfully dangerous, and thus a great source of stories! Pathfinder Online is going to be a place where law-abiding characters who just want to focus on PvE and chaotic berzerkers and highwaymen can all follow their destinies.
Death is a setback, not a final rest. The amount of risk you accept in the event of your character's death also determines the glory and rewards the character can potentially find as they explore, develop, adventure and dominate in the River Kingdoms!
This sets the tone very well imo.
At the end of the day, if you're killing other players that are uninterested in PvP for no benefit, we want to make the costs significant enough to convince you to do something else, as that's the kind of thing that drives players away. However, if they know they have something valuable and fighting or fleeing from you is the price of profit, suddenly it's worthwhile for everyone. And those opportunities should be worth risking the consequences.
NPC-controlled territory
Player-controlled territory with strong laws
Player-controlled territory with weak or no laws
Uncontrolled territory
GM Appeals
The last line of defense for players of Pathfinder Online is appealing to game moderators. If the systemized controls for managing PvP are insufficient to keep a player from being "griefed," that player can always appeal. GMs are given a wide leeway to interpret whether behavior counts as griefing, and to punish the offender. There are no hard and fast rules that players can cite to get out of punishment on a technicality. The GM will have discretion to determine if sanctions are warranted in the best interests of the game. Remember the basic rule of behavior in Pathfinder Online: Don't be a jerk.
Obviously, GM time and attention is likely to be limited, so a lot of effort is involved in making the other systems reduce the benefit of griefing behavior in the first place. However, players that ignore all the other consequences and still decide to get their entertainment from ruining the fun of others will face the likelihood of human intervention.
They Flew the Colors, They Began to Fight
While the PvP window is closed, the settlement is defended by a large number of NPC guards from one of the major alliances in the game: Hellknights for LN, LE, NE, and TN towns, Knights of Iomedae for LG, LN, NG, and TN towns, or the League of the Wood for CN, CE, and NE towns.
I Shot a Man in Reno Just To Watch Him Die
Through the reputation system, we want to reward some behaviors while punishing others. For example, we want to punish the deaths of new players, repeated griefing, unsportsmanlike behavior, etc. that produce an overall negative amount of fun for the game as a whole. While almost everyone likes being the wolf, very very few people like being the sheep without rest or respite, and sooner or later, no matter how powerful you think you are, you will all be the sheep. Thus Reputation works to punish these behaviors by limiting people who partake in them from building particularly good settlements, being allowed in highly developed settlements, etc., in addition to bounties, death curses, and other mechanics.
=
There's a few quotes, some more applicable than others. There's a possibility space here for skeptical players. But it also depends on the attitude of the curious questioner. If cautious (ie I cannot accept x1 pvp) then by all means "wait and see". But if a player likes pathfinder and worries about poor pvp from previous mmorpgs, then attitudes can easily adapt especially if some aspect of the game upholds resoundingly for that player and pvp merely becomes a minor interference to their preferred game play space.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Realmwalker's problem is not with griefing...?is that so?
somehow i read that differently o_0Prove to me that a starting character will be able to wander around and complete quests/missions with out being ganked all night because someone decided he wanted to ruin someone else's fun.
... My main problems are abusive pvp'ers and sorry to say it I have yet to play an MMO that supported PVP that did not have a large amount of abusive PVP'ersGanking != griefing.
Basically, the crux of Realmwalkers issue is 'abusive' PvP. That however, is a very nebulous term.
@ Gedichtewicht:
You did read it differently, and wrong. His issue is not griefing. You have avoided this in your reading:
"Unless there is a way to flag or unflag PVP or at least set up "no PVP" servers then it is a deal breaker to me."
You can not have the issue of griefing in a non PVP environment. Once he states that he is opposed to any non consensual PVP and states that "at the very least" have non PVP servers, greifing is not the issue, PVP is.
As Jiminy pointed out, Realmwalker will consider any instance of non consensual PVP to be unfun and a deal breaker.
I stated to Realwalker:
Yes, he can flag or unflag PvP but not being flagged for PvP does not protect you from being the victim of a PvP attack. It just means that the attacker will incur the negative hit to reputation and possibly to alignment ( depends on the alignment of the attacker).
As Realmwalker says, if there is no PvE only server, then it is a deal breaker for him. Well we all know there won't be, so the deal is in fact broken. No amount if reading will change those realities.
So, I say to Realmwalker, this is an Open World PvP Sandbox MMO, that will have just one server and no complete way to shield yourself from unwanted PvP. If you are unwilling to change and play in a game with those facts, you are best served to continue your search elsewhere.
Is there anything abusive, dishonest or misleading in what I have written to Realwalker? Of course not, I told him the truth.
You are trying to convince him that PFO is something that it is not, or what he does not like, will not exist here. You are not doing him or PFO a service by wasting his time or by trying to convince him his fears will not be realized in PFO.
His fears will be realized the first time he is SAD'd or attacked when he is outside the NPC starter city (and even there you are not completely safe from unwanted PVP).
@ Realwalker
You are considering to play PFO, which is an Open World PVP Sandbox MMO. There is no way for you to avoid all non consensual PVP. There are measures that you can take to mitigate the possibility of it happening, but not complete protection from it.
You could have a bounty placed on you, or an assassin's contract against you. Your settlement could end up going to war. All of these things can lead you to non consensual PVP. You can travel outside of the city gates and into the wilderness, and be assailed by bandits or other characters Hell bent on murder, and not all of these cases will be "random", "greifing" or even "ganking". They are just an important part of the culture that the Devs have envisioned for PFO.
If you still want to give the game a try, that is your choice and I welcome you to it. But, don't expect the game to be any different than what I have written.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
You did read it differently, and wrong. His issue is not griefing.
It is entirely reasonable to believe that Realmwalker real issue is with griefing - especially given his statement to that effect - and that the only solution he sees to that problem is to avoid PvP altogether.
It is also reasonable to try to point out to Realmwalker that much of his prior experience with non-consensual PvP in other MMOs isn't applicable to PFO.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Bluddwolf: maybe i`m just too tired to think clearly, but isn´t
being ganked all night because someone decided he wanted to ruin someone else's fun
the same as repeatedly being killed by the same person for no other reason then to cause distress?
isn`t that something that was defined as griefing?
Ok, maybe not, but it clearly is something that is defined as
Behaviors we don't want:
-PvP conflicts where the death of the target means no gain for the attacker, i.e. randomly killing people for no reason.
-Abuse of new players.
...There are other behaviors aside from these, but this hopefully gets you the idea.
You can not have the issue of griefing in a non PVP environment
true, and he would like that because,
... My main problems are abusive pvp'ers and sorry to say it I have yet to play an MMO that supported PVP that did not have a large amount of abusive PVP'ers
so what you are seeing is a person who doesn`t want pvp, end of argument.
i`m seeing a possible new player who has worries because of bad experiences, who finds it hard to imagine a different outcome, because noone else has done it before.Is there anything abusive, dishonest or misleading in what I have written to Realwalker? Of course not, I told him the truth.
You are trying to convince him that PFO is something that it is not, or what he does not like, will not exist here. You are not doing him or PFO a service by wasting his time or by trying to convince him his fears will not be realized in PFO.
i didn`t attack you, so i don`t know what this is about, i simply stated that i read his post differently, and didn`t get your point.
what i did say to him was that his point of view might change if he read a bit of what the devs have planed, and how the community is.
I´m from the no-pvp side initially too, but i let the vision of the game convince me to give it a try anyway.
and then pointing him towards the blogs and potcasts.
so, how am i "not doing him or pfo a service by wasting his time or trying to convince him his fears will not be realized in pfo" exactly?
-if you want to make it easy for yourself by saying this is not the game for you have fun somewhere else, why do you have to stick in that topic?
-i find this to be "not doing PFO a favour"
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I think we can clear this up if Realmwalker clarifies his point.
@Realmwalker
Are you ok with being killed in PvP at all? Are you seeking complete safety from it, or if you got killed and/or robbed blind from PvP say once a month would you be ok with it?
If PvP is never acceptable, then he clearly should keep looking. Because as blood said he will never completely shield himself from PvP. If he did it would be extreme pure dumb luck.
Now if he joins one of the larger player organizations, and always has plenty of protection when he does go out, and limits how often he goes out by being a crafter or working the market or assisting in settlement management, Then he could probably greatly reduce his chances of even getting involved in PvP. However small that chance is though, it is never 100%. At the very least he could get killed (even with protection) by an overwhelming force between cities, or if the settlement gets invaded or infiltrated.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
"Unless there is a way to flag or unflag PVP or at least set up "no PVP" servers then it is a deal breaker to me."
Is there?
Has anyone else told him the correct answer to his request is "No"?
Has anyone else but me told him, that he will suffer at some point in time PVP that he does not consent to?
I'll wait to see what Realwalker decides in his next post. he will either accept the realities that PFO will thrust him, unwantedly into PVP at times, and decide he will be OK with that. Or he will say, no that is still a deal breaker for me.
I won't ask him to read 20 articles including fragmented Dev Blog posts, Dev Blogs, and conjecture when the simple thing to tell him is:
* Yes, you can flag or unflag PvP but not being flagged for PvP does not protect you from being the victim of a PvP attack. It just means that the attacker will incur the negative hit to reputation and possibly to alignment ( depends on the alignment of the attacker).
* No there will be no PvE only server.
* This is an Open World PvP Sandbox MMO, that will have just one server and no complete way to shield yourself from unwanted PvP. If you are unwilling to change and play in a game with those facts, you are best served to continue your search elsewhere.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
* Yes, you can flag or unflag PvP but not being flagged for PvP does not protect you from being the victim of a PvP attack. It just means that the attacker will incur the negative hit to reputation and possibly to alignment ( depends on the alignment of the attacker).
* No there will be no PvE only server.
* This is an Open World PvP Sandbox MMO, that will have just one server and no complete way to shield yourself from unwanted PvP. If you are unwilling to change and play in a game with those facts, you are best served to continue your search elsewhere.
All true.
I would also add:
* PvP in PFO will be significantly different than any PvP experience you've had in other MMOs.
* Goblinworks is making great efforts to ensure that players in PFO are not subjected to griefing.