Goblin Squad Member
|
By requiring merchants to fly a flag in order to run a caravan that's just what you are doing. It has nothing to do with the Outlaw Flag.
My suggestion was that in order to unlock the use of a caravan, you had to use a PVP flag to do it. Just as, in order for a bandit to unlock the ability to issue a SAD, they have to use a PVP flag to do it.
No one is forcing you to unlock the use of the caravan, just as no one is forcing a bandit to unlock their ability to SAD. It is a choice that adds risk, but also could lead to greater reward. I fail to see why these should be different.
Edit: You can be a merchant without being at the head of a caravan. I can not be a bandit without opening myself up to PVP combat. You still have a more PVE option than I do.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I had mentioned this earlier, there should be a chaotic version of the of the Enforcer. There also needs to be an Evil version of the Champion Flag.
BTW, the evil version of the Enforcer Flag is not the Outlaw Flag.
I'm just not sure that we need a mirror image of every flag. Enforcer is a long-term flag designed to deal with one short-term flag, Criminal. So a chaotic Anti-enforcer long-term flag would deal with criminals, too?
I think chaotics - by their nature, in their core - are not Lawful. Being a criminal hunter is not sought after, it's not high rep for them. Killing criminals can be done, and will be done by chaotics, but it isn't an honored role. It's something anyone can do. They, by their alignment, don't want lawmen, and are loathe to become lawmen. I don't think they need an Anti-enforcer.
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
The ability to extort is not granted by the mechanic that changes the reputation effect of doing so. Anyone can make the demand "Your GP or your HP!"; the purpose of the SAD is to encourage people who want to make that demand to fly the Outlaw flag by proving better reputation.
It might make more sense to keep the incentives consistent (reputation) rather than make mass-transportation essentially impossible without the appropriate flags, but banditry only be low-reputation and somewhat harder.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I can not be a bandit without opening myself up to PVP combat.
We're all always exposed to PvP combat. But someone can be a bandit with very limited flagged time. They can either attack from an unflagged state, and if they attack flagged targets they don't even gain the attacker flag. Or if they're chaotic, they can flag as an Outlaw in about 30 seconds before attacking/demanding SAD. Either way, after the attack is over, they can drop their PvP flag after the attacker/involved flag expires (one minute). If the SAD is accepted the Outlaw can drop his flag immediately!
The bandit only has to flag himself for PvP when he is sure he can win; he can gain rep from a SAD with a very short flag exposure. The other flags need to be worn for at least an hour to get any rep bonus.
I think those people at GW have actually balanced it pretty well. It's subtle, I think - I don't see a lot of this until we look at particular circumstances.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The bandit only has to flag himself for PvP when he is sure he can win; he can gain rep from a SAD with a very short flag exposure. The other flags need to be worn for at least an hour to get any rep bonus.
I think those people at GW have actually balanced it pretty well. It's subtle - we don't see a lot of this until we dig into the weeds.
By flagging and unflagging, you never get the full benefits of the 10 hour stack, but I have a new thought.......and your last point is good advice. I'll leave my idea of a Caravan Flag where it stands. It will ether see th light if day or it won't.
@DesiousBrutus,
You suggestion is to make mass transportation easier and safer, and banditry low reputation and harder?
How is that balanced?......
Anyway I was moving on to another topic in another thread. The question of PvE options for bandits came to mind, curious if that can have any legs for discussion.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...like an EVE gate camp.
I pray there'll be incentives...or something...designed to discourage gate-camping--or equivalent behaviour--as that's what led me to quit EVE, which I was otherwise enjoying quite a bit. Supposedly gate-campers charge tolls somewhere in the game, but I only ever ran into the shoot/kill/pop-the-pod-too/giggle/repeat crowd.
The need to play only at particular times of day, so that friends are available for escort, limits the ability to make certain games one's only game.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
..."Anyone can kill me for free"...
Some of Ryan's quotes lead me to believe that he's looking forward to some players saying "Come kill me! I dare you!" after having racked up lots of bad rep and alignment loss. I don't see how non-griefing play is going to incur disciplinary action.
Many of the comments in this thread and others seem not to be thinking of alignment and rep as measures that will change both up and down, as players decide "what do I want to do today?". Sometimes you'll have been on an orgy of killing yesterday, so today you're going to go rescue puppies from a burning building.
Nothing says players are required to behave only one way ever; that feels as if it could become stale. I'll bet GW will look for ways to make us think "oh Lord, too many good choices".
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Many of the comments in this thread and others seem not to be thinking of alignment and rep as measures that will change both up and down, as players decide "what do I want to do today?". Sometimes you'll have been on an orgy of killing yesterday, so today you're going to go rescue puppies from a burning building.
I don't see lots of ways to gain Good and Law if I'm CE. I can gain rep by not getting rep penalties for the day, or by SADing successfully as an outlaw. But if I start my day as a CE, I can't flag Champion (not that Champion normally earns good - it just doesn't gain evil) and I can't flag Enforcer. So how do I gain Good or Law if my core and active alignment are CE?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
So how do I gain Good or Law if my core and active alignment are CE?
Completing contracts, regardless of the type is considered a lawful act. You could also counter escalation cycles, fighting the goblin hordes, and gain good alignment shift.
In EvE, if you grew tired of being the galaxies most wanted, you spent a few months grinding NPC pirate kills to get yourself back to respectability.
The escalation cycles is probably a faster ticket to redeeming your alignment and reputation.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The escalation cycles is probably a faster ticket to redeeming your alignment and reputation.
Weren´t you advocating no reputation gain/loss through PvE?
also if you are -rep CE, it might be hart to get a contract.So a chaotic Anti-enforcer long-term flag would deal with criminals, too?
I think chaotics - by their nature, in their core - are not Lawful.
To this i´d like to say: i am Batman! ;)sorry
so vigilante should be a flag.
If you are a vigilante, you:
Value the justice delivered by your own hand.
Are motivated to punish criminals(that includes people who set slaves free if slavery is legal were you come from).
Disregard laws to bring about your own justice, and are, therefore, often a wanted individual.
(mostly quoted from the pathfinder srd)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The escalation cycles is probably a faster ticket to redeeming your alignment and reputation.
Weren´t you advocating no reputation gain/loss through PvE?
also if you are -rep CE, it might be hart to get a contract.
1. I am, but that was not the question. Under the current system, I believe the best or quickest way to regain lawful, good and reputation are through contracts, and escalations.
I remain hopeful that reputation and PvE are separated.
2. CE characters who have - reputations may still receive bounty contracts, mercenary contracts, assassination contracts or even guard duty contracts from individuals or settlements that are not as concerned with the reputation of their associates.
I have had conversations with some potential settlement leaders that will actually be open to visitors with quite low reputations.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I wish we could have some information, in general terms, what "revamps" the devs are thinking about?
Are they adding more flags?
Will there be Good / Evil flags that mirror each other? (ie. will there be Evil Champions?)
Will there be some balance, where using any flag, grants reputation for extended use, not just for Travelers, etc.. ?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Resurrecting this thread to suggest another Evil flag, one with hourly rep gains:
Bravo (Evil)
Bravos are common features in fantasy tales. They are dangerous men and women with hard eyes and weapons close at hand. They demand respect and are quick to take offense; their victims are left bloodied and humiliated. The flag allows - in fact requires - the Bravo to attack a small number of unflagged targets to maintain a reputation as a character not to be messed with.
While the flag is active:
- The player earns reputation at the end of each hour this flag is active. The award increases each hour up to a set maximum. This count resets whenever the bonuses from the flag reset.
- The Bravo can attack up to 3 unflagged targets each hour without reputation loss. The Bravo does gain the Attacker flag and Aggressor buffs for these attacks, as well as criminal penalties.
- The Bravo *must* attack at least 1 unflagged target each hour. If the Bravo does not attack an unflagged target, he gains no reputation that hour and the flag counter is reset.
- Characters that have been attacked by a Bravo will gain a Victim flag, which lasts for 8 hours.
- Flagged Victims and FTP characters (not subscribing or gaining skill) are invalid targets for a Bravo's rep gain. Attacking such targets will not achieve the hourly requirement. The Bravo could take a reputation loss for such a kill if he exceeds his 3 kills for the hour.
- Wearing the Bravo flag can be designated as a crime depending on the locale.
Possible resultant gameplay
To use the Bravo flag to gain reputation, a group will either need to rotate members between Bravo and Victim (resulting in regular but reduced rep gain) or the most dangerous Bravos will force less dangerous ones to unflag and become victims. I think these might be the LE and CE approaches, respectively. There may also be a tendency for each Bravo to surround himself with a pool of potential victims, and guard this pool jealously. Settlements favoring Bravos will have lax laws regarding assault and murder, or will selectively enforce the laws they do have, letting their own Bravos walk free despite their crimes.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
*shrug* Maybe I have a deep misunderstanding then. Or maybe I just am willing to accept some bypass in order to give evil a method to gain rep by playing domination games within their own settlements.
If you have any ideas on a system that might mechanically encourage evil infighting, I'm all ears. What's most problematic about the Bravo?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
*shrug* Maybe I have a deep misunderstanding then. Or maybe I just am willing to accept some bypass in order to give evil a method to gain rep by playing domination games within their own settlements.
If you have any ideas on a system that might mechanically encourage evil infighting, I'm all ears.
I did not assume that the Bravo flag was meant to be an encouragement for evil vs. evil infighting, but for evil to fight good with some if the same functionality of the Champion Flag.
Evil vs. Evil is "Evil Light", similar to the failure that was City if Villains.
I would like to see beneficial flags for evil to actively fight good.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Was the Bravo intended to only gain Rep from killing unflagged evil characters? The way it was written it seems to encourage killing the new players by providing +rep for doing so.
It doesn't mention just to be used against Evil characters. Nor does it suggest that it will be used against new players either.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@ Bludd Yes, it would also encourage evil to get out of their camps to fight good. I think the reality of many PvP games is that people just hunker down in their own territory. A Bravo or similar flag would require the flagged person to either get out and prey on people, or if they hunker in their own settlement they'll need to prey on their own for rep.
Note the numbers - with the 8 hour cooldown, an evil settlement is only able to pull a fraction of the rep of a good settlement if they are "eating their own". They'll have to get out of their own lands if they hope to gain rep from others. Now, the 8 hours is just a placeholder, as is everything else. So evil settlements won't become high-rep with this flag unless they're very aggressive in going out and getting exposed to counterattack.
While there is some bypass of the rep system, I think the Outlaw with SAD also bypasses the rep system. It's a trade-off to encourage interaction.
@ Decius The intent was that they would gain hourly rep *only* if they killed someone that hour that was unflagged (ie, they acted evilly). If they kill more than 3 in an hour, they start taking rep losses. Now, 3 is just my arbitrary position. It could be 1, 2, 5, whatever. The Bravo is somewhat controlled - there's a line between threatening and psycho, and they might lose more rep than they gain once they go over the line.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Based on a discussion I had with Lhan, in TS, he had what I consider to be an excellent idea for the revamp of the Champion Flag. I will also add my own to it. For the purpose of discussion here is the original:
Champion (Good)
Champion is for players who want to proactively take the fight to the forces of evil. It allows players to more easily engage evil characters and earn reputation. As long as you limit your kills to evil characters, you get increasing benefits, but killing neutral or good characters ends your benefits; you still can suffer reputation and law vs. chaos loss for attacking evil characters. This flag is automatically disabled by gaining the Attacker or Heinous flag.This flag cannot be activated while the Attacker or Heinous flag (or their 24-hour versions) is active.
While Champion is active:
Attacking unflagged evil characters gives the player the Involved flag instead of Attacker.
The player gets a bonus to Perception and Crit Resistance that scales up each hour they remain flagged.
The player does not lose good vs. evil for killing unflagged evil characters (but will still lose law vs. chaos if the attack is a crime, and will lose proportional reputation, so don't go abusing the evil characters who aren't much involved in PvP; just because you're a crusader against evil, it doesn't give you license to be a jerk).
The player earns extra good vs. evil for each character with Heinous killed up to a daily max.
The player earns reputation at the end of the first hour this flag is active. This award increases each hour up to a set maximum. This count resets whenever the bonuses from the flag reset.
Lhan's idea was to change this flag from its focus of being "Anti Evil Character" to Anti Low Reputation Character.
I believe we both agreed that this change would then allow for the Champion Flag to be used by Good, Neutral or Evil characters.
"But wait, how can a Neutral or Evil character be a Champion, you might ask?"
Any aligned character can be a "Champion" of defending the player base from player-characters that behave with disregard for the Reputation System.
Who are the "Defenders of the Faith"?
Another good question... Since I am so anti hypocrisy, a defender or Champion of the Reputation System, must be one who has good standing within the Reputation System.
Therefore my suggestion is that a minimum of +5001 (of the +7500) Reputation should be required in order to activate the flag.
"For Whom the Bell Tolls"?
On the reverse side, my suggestion is that a player-character with a Reputation Score of -5001 or lower, is the target of the Champion.
There are a few other improvements for this revamp idea:
1. No false positives, reputation is a known factor, so you will never attack the wrong person.
2. It encourages and rewards the acquisition and maintenance of a high reputation, granting access to all with a high reputation.
3. It eliminates the alignment unbalance between good vs. evil found in the old flag.
4. It gives players of all alignments the ability to police the community and play an active and meaningful role in doing so.
In the event that Champions find that they are not seeing the opportunity to use the flag, isn't that what we are hoping for?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I could support that. Ultimately if there are good aligned people abusing other players (And hopefully anything that lowers your reputation falls into the category of exploitation or abuse) I'd love the chance to crack down on them just as hard or harder than evil aligned players doing the same.
The mechanic would have to be put across in a way that makes sense in terms of roleplay though.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
For effectively flying 'good vs. evil' flags or vice versa, you need a way of telling your target's alignment. I would prefer to have alignments hidden under normal circumstances because it makes sense and allows for interesting interactions (evils pretending to be good). A while back I remember reading that GW planned to hide alignment and display reputation.
Don't know if that plan still stands.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I think that any Flag that encourages players to attack unflagged characters, or that removes the consequences for doing so, is broken. Yes, that means I think the Champion Flag as it was described is broken, as well as Outlaw as described.
The Flags should serve as a way to encourage players to Flag up and expose themselves to more PvP in exchange for in-game benefits to the other, non-PvP things they're doing. For example: faster travel, greater harvest ability, etc. Even then, flying a Flag should not remove all consequences for being attacked. I think it will revert to meaningless PvP if Paladins can freely attack a Traveller, kill his guards, and steal his goods, all without any consequences just because the targets were flying Flags.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think that any Flag that encourages players to attack unflagged characters, or that removes the consequences for doing so, is broken. Yes, that means I think the Champion Flag as it was described is broken, as well as Outlaw as described.
The Flags should serve as a way to encourage players to Flag up and expose themselves to more PvP in exchange for in-game benefits to the other, non-PvP things they're doing. For example: faster travel, greater harvest ability, etc. Even then, flying a Flag should not remove all consequences for being attacked. I think it will revert to meaningless PvP if Paladins can freely attack a Traveller, kill his guards, and steal his goods, all without any consequences just because the targets were flying Flags.
I concur 100% with this. Paladins attacking a traveler may not lose rep, but could still get alignment dinged - which may affect some of their abilities.
Evil vs. Evil is "Evil Light", similar to the failure that was City if Villains.I would like to see beneficial flags for evil to actively fight good.
I think both of these statements fundamentally miss what it means to be Evil in this nature of game. Evil is not a faction. There are Evil factions, yes, but evil itself is not.
Good is the motivation to make life better for as many as possible. Often sacrificing from yourself to make that happen. Therefor the Good vs. Evil alignment struggle is fighting against those who would harm others for selfish gain in order to make life better for the most people.
Evil is the motivation to make life better for yourself, regardless of who gets hurt and maybe even better because others get hurt. Evil vs. Everyone is more appropriate. Evil does not care if you are Evil or Good. All Evil cares about is whether you stand between itself and what it wants.