Hi Hobbs! I wasn't gone, and I'm not back. I don't think the moderation policies at these boards are well-thought out or effective, and so I don't choose to generate content here. I'm hoping we get new boards soon, so that I can contribute my little 2 cents in a useful way :) Generate content. lol.
Well said Valkenr. PvP also increases the danger of gathering and transporting resources... with increased danger, you have more valuable resources, and thus, you can earn more money from them... enough to hire the honest protection you need from honourable mercenaries/protectors. It's a nice feeling going through a dangerous area surrounded by people who're protecting you. It gives the non-PvP'ers a fun sense of danger... and, since they're gathering resources, they can afford to hire the help while providing jobs for those who wish to PvP on the side of light, (or the side of honest profit, as the case may be).
A WHOLE THREAD TO BAG ON UNC?? QALLZ THE INSATIABLE DEMANDS MOAR PVP!!!
Ragnar Danneskjold
220 settlements is certainly a few more than 15... If my calculations are correct, then yes, it is.
It's just that that 220 number seems really high to me, for the map area that we have seen. Maybe it's just because the perspective of the fly-over was weird. They broke each hex on that map into 7 hexes. Edit: See Harad's Unofficial map above. Pretty good.
<click> darn, premature click.
OAR: Observe And Report
lol. It must be true! Congrats Nihimon, on your dedication. No one has dug up more quotes than you certainly. You make us all look lazy. lol ;P
I'll stick around and try, because I like some of your ideas and points, not always the way that you debate them, and I think it would be a loss if you were perma banned. This is the part of your post which I'll choose to focus on, and, I feel the same way about you. And when I say let's get productive again, I think it's time to get back on track. Some threads are more productive than others, and I'm not opposed to some threads just being pointless fun.
Whoa... dude! LOL
The flags aren't there to shape gameplay, they're there to make the choices meaningful. You could paint the reputation system with the same brush, couldn't you? Are you saying the Rep system isn't there to influence gameplay, but only to "make choices more meaningful"?
Let me help to settle this new SAD debate. As someone who will probably be on both sides of the SAD system, I think I have a rare opportunity here to offer an objective opinion. - The problem with the flagging system, is that after someone attacks someone a few times in a row, they get the respective 24-hour flag (the Mass Murderer, for instance). Making someone open to PvP for a few hours, or especially for 24 hours after a SAD would strongly discourage this form of gameplay, and essentially, the SAD'er would receive treatment akin to that of a very Low Rep character. This would strongly discourage bandit-style play, and, quite frankly, if we're going to do that, we might as well remove the SAD system entirely. - However, I think a big part of Andius's debate, is that if he SEES someone SAD'ing someone else, he should be able to attack them, and that seems pretty reasonable to me. So how to solve it then? Instead of the normal flag system, just make it so that people who SAD are flagged as (whatever) and open to PvP for a SHORT duration after each SAD (say, 90 seconds). This would be regardless of how many people they SAD'd previously, and would never stack, only reset (if they managed to SAD someone else within that 90 second time-frame). This would give people a window in which they can attack SAD'ers after each SAD (as if they had witnessed it), while not consistently making Bandits fair game for anyone who wants to kill them. Further, people who're SAD'd should be able to receive justice by putting a bounty on the SAD'er, in the same way that people who are killed in a way that causes Rep loss can do it. So, there's two ways to get revenge on a SAD'er now: 1) Right place, right time... actually catching them in the act, and attacking them a short while later. 2) Someone getting pissed off after getting robbed, and placing a bounty on the robber (which can be done regardless of whether the SAD was successfully completed, or if it was turned down, and the person was killed). Does that make everyone happy? I don't really care, but it's a great system imo
Maybe we should have a "Fight Club" thread where you two can go to duke it out, so you aren't detracting so much from the actual thread content. If there's going to be a Fight Club thread, you already broke the first two rules of it.
Nobody takes their New Year's Resolutions seriously. lol
Yea, I have a feeling the formation will form up about 50-100 years outside the Settlement walls.I'm in favor of long sieges but seems a tad excessive. ;) I meant Lightyears, not years. Lightyears are a unit of distance.
Because developer time is fixed, and if they spend time on features that don't add anything valuable then some other feature suffers.Since there's almost certainly going to be the Red and Blue CCs or settlements, and nobody can explain what the OP would do other than create the ability for certain people to play a FFA PvP game using the same software as PFO, /thread. I'm glad to hear that's the argument you're going with. It takes about two seconds to add in an Opt-In PvP flagging system which I described in the OP. Simple ruleset changes, that's all. Making emotes, or allowing people to sit in chairs... WAY more time-consuming.
I just assumed people here knew me well enough to assume that I would never suggest people should be allowed to opt-out of PvP entirely. lol
They certainly have. Aeioun's recent "Who let all the carebears in?" is proof of that (even though I haven't been here as long). Without you and the good folks at UNC, these forums would certainly make me feel pretty lonely as a PvPer. Definitely glad we have you all around. Best,
Interesting. You...Also, the merchant has the ability to reject the offer and attack without consequence already. Why do you keep on going back to that? I don't see anything in Bludd's post that hasn't been confirmed, except for: "1. SAD is issued and accepted. No crime, no attack, both parties depart on agreed upon terms." I assume an accepted and agreed upon SAD will still be a crime for the SAD'er in most places (aside from Evil and/or Chaotic-controlled Settlement/Wilderness hexes, where it's not a crime, or Monster hexes). Everything else he said has been confirmed at one point or another, though I doubt option 3 will happen too often (though it will happen). Once the SAD is rejected, both parties will be Red to one another, and then all bets are off. Unless both parties truly feel it's an even fight, and don't want to risk it, usually a SAD will end in either a completion or a fight. Of course, people will own or hire "Victimized Bots" to go around and SAD people and then give them their money back, and since that flag lasts for 20 minutes, I don't see staying Victimized for long journeys as being too much of a problem, so SAD's will probably be a rare occurrence anyways. I think people will either be Opt-In PvP, or they won't be, and if they're not, there won't be anything anyone can do to attack them without digging their out of a Rep-hole for the next 3-4 months, on account of enjoying one rep-draining kill.
Oh, Andius, the PvP-loving carebear. What ever shall we do with you? And anyways, I was saying that they should have a right to defend their entire hex when the PvP window is Open, and, as I said in that post, anyone who's hostile and going crazy within the hex will likely quickly be destroyed. People are going to set up seige engines and begin formations further away from the settlement, but within the same hex, it's unreasonable for a settlement to have to sit there, watch, and wait for them to slowly make their way over to their settlement.
Whoa, a free blog post.
Should he be banned from the forums? Well, let's put it this way... the guy makes ME look good. Take from that what you will.
I have a feeling UNC will still be roaming PAX territory. Just with more ppl to rob, amiright?
All this, simple stuff which can be fixed with a quick bit of code implementing /stick and /face commands.
Why do I feel like we're sitting in chairs again? I'm actually laying in bed, writing from my laptop, which reminds me... Will we be able to lay in beds???
CU is focusing on doing one thing very well: RvRvR with Keeps. Very true. The RvR game is most of it (though crafting will be unique, and will matter a lot too). One thing that intrigues me a lot about CU is the building vs. PFO. The building style, while both are very sandboxey, are very different. PFO will feature stock, pre-made buildings which will be put in designated location in the middle of settlements, and will likely go untouched for years at a time (while the outposts and POI's will be under fire). CU on the other hand has a unique building system, based off of Minecraft, though instead of "blocks" the players will be given very different "cells" (basically like the blocks from Minecraft, but of all different shapes/sizes) and will be able to build VERY unique buildings of all different sorts that way, and will likely have more freedom on where to put them (as opposed to having to put them in the middle of a Settlement hex). The resulting structure can then be put into a blue-print to easily be rebuilt if it gets torn down. Players will have the choice between destroying their enemies buildings, or capturing them as well, with different pros/cons. Also by capturing/building in a certain area, you can expand out to have guards patrolling around the buildings, and then patrolling the area as a whole, which I think is one very unique feature in this MMO. Basically, the whole building system seems more unique, and more customizable to me for CU. But, I still can't get over the whole player-factions thing, even though I do love RvR.
Druids do it like a beast. Btw, Druids do it with an Animal Companion.
To start us off, here's my tiny list... Lifetaps- Love 'em. LT DoTs, Regular DD LT's, AoE LT's, you name it. Pathfinder/D&D really don't have anywhere NEAR enough of these (basically just Vampiric Touch, are you kidding me?). Mez/AoE Mez - A mez was a form of CC that basically put someone to sleep until they were attacked in some way. Insta-cast PBAoE Mez - Self-explanatory, great if you get surrounded. Mob Domination - Basically allows you to turn an NPC, like a goblin for example, into a pet. If you can snag a healing or caster gobby, even better. PBAoE DD - Pretty self-explanatory, high risk, high reward (and reward is paid out in damage). Stuns - Again self-explanatory Wall of Force - Everyone should know what this is. Roots - Target's movement speed is dropped to 0, but can still attack. Snares - Target's movement speed is reduced... should also be AoE/GTAoE/PBAoE versions of these two. Healing Effectiveness Debuff - Single target or AoE, reduces the effectiveness of heals on an enemy by a certain %. Ability Score Debuffs - Duh Polymorphs/Shapechange Power Drain/Endurance Drains - Similar to the Lifetap, but drain Power or Endurance instead. Invisibility Raising Undead from Corpses Mage Armor/Short Duration Armor buffs - basically something that lasts a long time, and gives a small bonus to AC, and a short duration with a huge bonus to AC. Spell Resistance Buffs Saving Throw Buffs Blink - Like what the Mage is famous for in WoW. Damage Shield - Absorbs X amount of Damage Dimension Door - Longer distance than Blink but shorter than a full teleport. Teleport (for very high level and dedicated Wizards/Sorcs) Mount summoning Globe of Invulnerability - All level 4 spells and below are automatically resisted Enervation/Energy Drain - Temporary Negative levels Stoneskin/Barkskin - Famous from D&D. They offer Damage Resistance up to X # of HP. GTAoE DoT - You place it on the ground, anyone who remains in it takes damage over time Light Spells - To allow players to see further away at night) Speed Buffs - Both long duration and short duration bursts (which are much faster). Wall Climb Fly (Oh how I would love to see it) Mirror Image - Duh Unwilling Shield - Similar to Shield Other, but your enemy takes 50% of the damage you take. Undead Anatomy - Polymorphs caster into Undead, in PF TT, Undead Anatomy IV is the highest version of this, and allows player to turn incorporeal (how cool would that be?). Fear Spells - Single Target/Cone/AoE/PBAoE versions Temporary Hit Points (Like False Life in D&D and PF TT) Nearsight - Modifies how far someone can see (so archers can't shoot as far, casters can't cast as far, etc). 1-Hit Absorb - Buff that fully absorbs the damage of caster's next hit (helps a lot when an archer or rogue gets the jump on you, you can recover faster). Confuse - NPC's attack eachother or anyone at random, players are forced to switch targets at random, and can attack teammates. Damage Shields - Anyone that hits target takes X damage Attack Speed Debuffs - Target isn't able to attack as often DD/Snare - Both damages the target and drops movement speed
Or you could just eat the M&M's.
I wasn't originally going to ask this question, because I thought there weren't enough DAoC'ers here to answer it, but, seeing as how there are quite a few of us, I wanted to ask, if you're choosing PFO over CU, then why? This is obviously a very valid question, because for people who dedicated a lot of time to DAoC, we know the special place it holds in our hearts and obvious, even though CU isn't an exact clone (as Mark has said many times) it does resemble DAoC very closely (and is headed up by Mark and other former Mythicans). So, that being the case then, why choose PFO over CU? Or have you made that decision yet? While I can say I haven't fully chosen PFO over CU, I'm definitely leaning much more towards PFO at this point (even though I know CU is likely to be the slaughterfest typically desired by us DAoC'ers). Why? Well, I spent a lot of my time on Mordred, and, the big appeal there was that the alliances and factions were guild-based, not set in stone like in RvR (though one of my big regrets from DAoC days is not RvR'ing enough). I guess I was just trying to capture the whole "player created factions thing" which I didn't really get much of on Mordred, as people usually just stayed out of the Frontiers and killed each other in the more populated towns at the foot of Camelot and Tir Na Nag (Cots, Mag Mel, the works)... So, a big reason I'll most likely be choosing PFO over CU is the idea of these player-created factions that are so meaningful in this game (the whole game is based around them). Also, D&D was the first Fantasy fandom which I'd fallen in love with (DAoC being the second), so there's always that. But, CU has a lot of similarities with PFO... Players are the content, Crafting matters (no big mob drops), similar sandbox elements, etc. I guess at the end of the day, I just love the intrigue of the ebbs and flows of player-kingdoms, and player-created factions (with their contracts, alliances, betrayals, wars/feuds) more than the joy I got from killing faceless enemies in RvR (and I do mean it, it was a joy). So, those are my reasons, what are yours?
Absolutely not. Pathfinder is a brand that they are using to sell us the game so yes we have every right to expect some things from the table top. If they wanted a clean slate, they shouldn't have chosen an established brand. My point is this: Pathfinder is a world, a fandom... NOT a set of rules. You are getting Pathfinder... you're getting the world, the races, the classes (sort of), the monsters, the same general "feel"... THAT stuff is Pathfinder. All the game mechanics, or how much RP'ing there is or isn't, is TT stuff. Because this is basically the first real venture outside the TT, all people have to go on is the TT, so they're having a hard time separating what's "Pathfinder" (The Fandom), from "Pathfinder the Table Top game". I know you'll probably say "But Pathfinder the TT IS PATHFINDER, IT'S ALL THERE IS OF PATHFINDER". And I would say: No, that's just all there is so far, because they've yet to really branch out. You're getting the world of Golarion... the rules, the mechanics, the game's focus (Raiding, PvP, RP'ing, etc)... all that isn't "Pathfinder". The world is Pathfinder... the rest is Pathfinder Table Top. This. Having a Pathfinder game without roleplaying is like having a Harley-Davidson game without motorcycles. This analogy is quite a stretch, but we have is more like having a Harley Davidson game WITH motorcycles, but saying "I don't want a racing game, or I don't want a Road Rash type game, because most people use Harley's for longer trips, as they're cruiser bikes". I just want to be able to cruise around for really long distances, like I do in real life.
Crowdforging Time... So, in the recent blog post, it sounded to me like there will be 6 dedicated or "mandatory" weapon slots, for weapon abilities. For someone who plans to play a Sorcerer, Wizard, Cleric, etc, you will probably want to dedicate these slots to thinks like "Cure Light Wounds" or "Fireballz". So, casters... how do you feel about that, and wouldn't you prefer to be able to put some more spells into these slots. 6 slots is a pretty heavy percentage for a full-caster to be forced to dedicate ALL of them to weapon, as opposed to being able to slot spells there, don't you think so? Perhaps as a "Dedication" bonus, as a Wizard gets higher in level, he can put more and more Wizard spells in these slots, and as a Cleric gets higher in level, he'd be able to put more Cleric spells in these slots. What say you to that?
Awww. ;( Edit: Still, you can see where he got that.
I'm just Goblin up some popcorn as I sit here and read these. HAHA. That was awesome man nice one.
I'm just Goblin up some popcorn as I sit here and read these.
Yea. The 8-man was Perfect.
Still think the soldier is most important? Yeah
Oh, she's so quirky...
Yea, that sounds pretty sweet. I need to have Chinese food and vintage video games Friday for these types of things.
jip jip yeehah So that's what the fox says?
I think it'd also be really cool to give solo players and small groups the ability to mess with formations in a sort of "guerrilla warfare" style combat.Wouldn't that sort of undo the point of meaningful choices? You choose to excel at soloing, AND you can counter the choice of others to invest in group work? No, right there's the very definition of MAKING a meaningful choice.
I think it'd also be really cool to give solo players and small groups the ability to mess with formations in a sort of "guerrilla warfare" style combat.
Because we're discussing how to make a game that will be fun for all sides out of game?You might be interested in a game that will be fun for all sides. Do you think everyone is? Me, I'm not sure everybody is. Every game that's ever tried to be everything to everybody has failed. Miserably. It's all about going small, and going Niche. PFO is a PvP-Focused Sandbox MMO, btw. If that's not your cup of tea, then keep looking. EQN is coming out for people who like a PvE-focused Sandbox. Want a PvE-focused theme park? WoW is at your disposal. Can't think of a PvP-focused Theme Park atm, but I know they're out there. DAoC was to some extent, at least it wasn't Sandboxey by today's standards, though it was for 2001. I always group games into those 4 primary categories. Are they PvP-focused or PvE (determined by what the endgame is, really). Are they Sandbox or Theme Park? Those are the two biggest factors. If a game developer isn't sure how to answer those two questions, that's a sure Tortanic on the way.
Yes, putting on a pair of pants should be a simple click while defeating a dragon should require knowledge, tactics and skill. I think putting on pants should take skill, otherwise everyone would be wearing pants.
My favorite game for a lot reasons was DAoC... I'm in love. <3 Lol, srysly tho, there has been a LOT of requests for DAoC-style combat. It's widely considered the best PvP system of all time, both on a macro (large scale systems AKA RvR) and micro level ("we have to go in there, hand to hand")
The whole "it can be abused" thing is a terrible argument. 1- This abuse can be prevented. AKA, you kill someone's alt once, you get a bit of rep. You kill it again within 24 hours... no rep. Within 7 days 50% rep. Within 1 month 25% rep. Etc. 2- It can be detected. GW can look at statistics and have something pop up if a character is killing the same person to gain rep over and over. 3- It can be made to not be viable. By implementing #1, and GIVING more rep for a REK (Rep-Earning Kill) than you take away on an RDK, then you're preventing abuse because people will be better off killing a variety of people normally rather than wasting time logging on alts and having their friends log alts on for minimal gains. The more you kill the same character over and over, the lower the rep. You can also lower the rep gains by account. So if someone logs off and on 10 different characters, after the 2nd or 3rd one, your cut off, and GW is pinged on account of your suspicious behavior. This system of Reputation is all about PROMOTING desired PvP and PUNISHING less than desirably PvP, so if people are punished for partaking in undesirable PvP, then why should they not be REWARDED for enjoying desired PvP?
|
