Goblin Squad Member
|
Xeen, in spite of his horrible delivery, is trying to ask a simple question: can a player make a viable living in Pathfinder Online as a player killer?
I think, and I hope, my answer for him is correct. Yes, you will be able to play the role as a murdering outcast. However, Goblinworks will make this a challenging path. Am I right?
This gives meaning to being a true murderer, if you want to go the path less traveled you better be a boss and get ready for some hard times. I mean, even in Ultima Online "PKs" had it rough but the real players who wanted a challenge did it anyhow and were respected and feared. Don't be a wuss ;)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
And if I understand Tork and Cheney correctly: if it's considered a criminal act by the locals, you will get a criminal flag and a chaos hit. If you can escape with your criminal flag, the settlement takes a corruption hit.
I do think that outposts will also be major targets in feuds - they're easier to find than a company and the outpost won't log off.
Well depends on the player then. I'm personally very willing to be labeled as a criminal or chaotic because of a raid against a non-war target. I think lawful-good will be a very hard role to play for anyone not wishing to be seriously straight-jacketed in terms of PvP.
Personally I'm going to raid any group that kills or robs Brighthaven members, but I don't care to feud every last one if them.
Just be careful not to do so too proactively. We do not need unnecessary wars falling at the doorstep because we get a little over-eager. I imagine Brighthaven as a Spiked Shield. It's primary purpose is not to be a weapon, but it is certainly effective as one if you make us bash you with it.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Xeen, in spite of his horrible delivery, is trying to ask a simple question: can a player make a viable living in Pathfinder Online as a player killer?
I think, and I hope, my answer for him is correct. Yes, you will be able to play the role as a murdering outcast. However, Goblinworks will make this a challenging path. Am I right?
This gives meaning to being a true murderer, if you want to go the path less traveled you better be a boss and get ready for some hard times. I mean, even in Ultima Online "PKs" had it rough but the real players who wanted a challenge did it anyhow and were respected and feared. Don't be a wuss ;)
Being a Player Killer is acceptable. It will not get you banned. However, it is not one of the paths towards true progression in the game. The purpose is that a significant PK population in a game actively chases off non-PK friendly players. By driving PvP oriented players away from simple PK mindsets and towards greater purpose-driven mindsets, the notion is that the PvP will be more meaningful. And that non-PK players will be more open to conflict arising from meaningful events. PK is still allowed to provide a sense of unpredictability and danger, but funneled into mechanical disadvantage to prevent it from becoming the overwhelming play style it does in other open world PvP games.
This should create a PvP-rich game that caters to a wider audience than other open world pvp games. As has been said, there are already a lot of open world PvP games. It is easier to carve out new audience segments than it is to try to steal players from those established games.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Xeen, in spite of his horrible delivery...
I certainly agree that the delivery is horrible. In part I don't really understand the point either.
Goblinworks is going to make the game they want to make, and it is shaping up to have intended drawbacks to certain types of player versus player conflict. The best way to address that would be to see what new role best suits what you want to do (given those limitations).
If that is not an option you could be the stated content. That is not necessarily a bad thing. After all your target is your content. Working from a mechanically disadvantaged position might be difficult, but that in itself would present a new challenge level.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I think, but may be wrong, that Bludd's prediction is that those other forms of PvP will become 'sanctioned' and that only griefing will ultimately be penalized.
You are not wrong, that is exactly what I'm saying. That is the trend that GW has been following these past few months. They have done nothing but add to the types of PVP activities that would be sanctioned or consequence free.
Really? To me it feels like PvP itself is becoming more and more "Unsanctioned". That being said, WHY NOT make it so that all PvP is fair game except for griefing?
You kill someone one time, no rep loss. You kill that same person again within 20 minutes, 500 points rep loos, again; 1500 points rep loss, again, 4000 points rep loss or something. Just make corpse camping extremely hard.
What other forms of griefing are there? Fill me in.
Just catching up on the forums so please ignore if already stated.
The issue with this, while would hinder corpse camping, what about war where people at assaulting (or defending) a settlement or POI and die, respawn and return to keep fighting? Chances are you (or your group) will kill the same person at least 2 or 3 times each "20 mins." Should a "war target" be exempt from this "time limit?" But how does that prevent people from, limiting their griefing to "war targets?" Just some thoughts to further develop this idea. I do like the idea, just needs tweeked to prevent non-griefing from being punished as griefing.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I think, but may be wrong, that Bludd's prediction is that those other forms of PvP will become 'sanctioned' and that only griefing will ultimately be penalized.
You are not wrong, that is exactly what I'm saying. That is the trend that GW has been following these past few months. They have done nothing but add to the types of PVP activities that would be sanctioned or consequence free.
Really? To me it feels like PvP itself is becoming more and more "Unsanctioned". That being said, WHY NOT make it so that all PvP is fair game except for griefing?
You kill someone one time, no rep loss. You kill that same person again within 20 minutes, 500 points rep loos, again; 1500 points rep loss, again, 4000 points rep loss or something. Just make corpse camping extremely hard.
What other forms of griefing are there? Fill me in.Just catching up on the forums so please ignore if already stated.
The issue with this, while would hinder corpse camping, what about war where people at assaulting (or defending) a settlement or POI and die, respawn and return to keep fighting? Chances are you (or your group) will kill the same person at least 2 or 3 times each "20 mins." Should a "war target" be exempt from this "time limit?" But how does that prevent people from, limiting their griefing to "war targets?" Just some thoughts to further develop this idea. I do like the idea, just needs tweeked to prevent non-griefing from being punished as griefing.
I would assume under the premise being in one of the "states" would exempt you from the penalties.
The problem I see with the premise is that it only stops what is classically labeled griefing. I get the impression GW wants to lesson instances of ganking as well, specifically "newbe ganking".
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Just catching up on the forums so please ignore if already stated.
The issue with this, while would hinder corpse camping, what about war where people at assaulting (or defending) a settlement or POI and die, respawn and return to keep fighting? Chances are you (or your group) will kill the same person at least 2 or 3 times each "20 mins." Should a "war target" be exempt from this "time limit?" But how does that prevent people from, limiting their griefing to "war targets?" Just some thoughts to further develop this idea. I do like the idea, just needs tweeked to prevent non-griefing from being punished as griefing.
You won't be taking alignment or rep hits from feud, war, or faction targets, so they're sort of exempt, if I understand what you're saying.
Could you hold a piece of ground and kill the same guy 16 times because he persists in coming back to the outpost you're raiding with a feud? Yup. He's actively seeking out the PvP, I think, by any definition.
The purpose of war in a Pharasma-marked world will be to drive your enemies off or break their gear so bad they leave you to your plunder.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
After finally reading the posts and getting caught up, I just wanted to add that I kinda agree with Andius in that "roaming groups of murderers" will be in game, and will be content for many of the bounty hunter and "good" guys. Those are some of the types that are the danger of going into the woods, and that keep those seeking the "mercenary guard force" play style in business. The UNC will do that from time to time, but not to the point as to drive our rep into the ground. We will be known, and will be feared (if we do it right) by all, and maybe even respected.
Side note: I don't think many people will be on the forums much once EE hits, simply because why be on the forums when the game when have been eagerly waiting for is able to be played? Time spent on the forums is time better spent in game. At least that is my view. I might pop on here and there to post something I think needs adjusted or something like that. After all, EE is still a time for tweeking and polishing. Feedback is important, though I really hope for an in game feedback method. I would like to type something up while I am in game, probably as it is happening or just happened.
I think, but may be wrong, that Bludd's prediction is that those other forms of PvP will become 'sanctioned' and that only griefing will ultimately be penalized.
You are not wrong, that is exactly what I'm saying. That is the trend that GW has been following these past few months. They have done nothing but add to the types of PVP activities that would be sanctioned or consequence free.
Really? To me it feels like PvP itself is becoming more and more "Unsanctioned". That being said, WHY NOT make it so that all PvP is fair game except for griefing?
You kill someone one time, no rep loss. You kill that same person again within 20 minutes, 500 points rep loos, again; 1500 points rep loss, again, 4000 points rep loss or something. Just make corpse camping extremely hard.
What other forms of griefing are there? Fill me in.Just catching up on the forums so please ignore if already stated.
The issue with this, while would hinder corpse camping, what about war where people at assaulting (or defending) a settlement or POI and die, respawn and return to keep fighting? Chances are you (or your group) will kill the same person at least 2 or 3 times each "20 mins." Should a "war target" be exempt from this "time limit?" But how does that prevent people from, limiting their griefing to "war targets?" Just some thoughts to further develop this idea. I do like the idea, just needs tweeked to prevent non-griefing from being punished as griefing.
'
I was talking about what was formerly known as "Unsanctioned" PvP. Wars and feuds wouldn't count.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Looking at this from a different angle: What playstyle do you want that you need a CE character for? What are you trying to achieve?
Before the flag changes I HAD to be CE, C to use SAD and E to use assassin skills. Since that has changed I have SOME flexability depending on how the SAD and Assassin will be handled now.
To add something more as I was just talking with Bludd on TS. Let me ask this way.
Ambushing is part of a Bandit's MO, a part of his "tools of trade." You ambush the guards of a caravan and then SAD the vulnerable merchant. After all, if your the merchant of a caravan, and you hired PC guards (or maybe with NPC guards as well) why would you pay a SAD if your guards are still standing? They are there to protect you from "us" right?
So the question is, if we Ambush the guards, THEN SAD the caravan "merchant", do we lose the rep? (and alignment but if I am CE, the alignment is already there so disregard) And if we do, do we "gain it back" when we SAD, accepted or not? We are providing meaningful PVP and content (the dangers of traveling with a caravan) but are not just running around RPKing everything we see. Would we gain more than we lose? I ask as this would be a means to obtaining and maintaining a high rep.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
You won't be taking alignment or rep hits from feud, war, or faction targets, so they're sort of exempt, if I understand what you're saying.
Could you hold a piece of ground and kill the same guy 16 times because he persists in coming back to the outpost you're raiding with a feud? Yup. He's actively seeking out the PvP, I think, by any definition.
The purpose of war in a Pharasma-marked world will be to drive your enemies off or break their gear so bad they leave you to your plunder.
The point is, what we are looking for is the confirmation that other types of PVP, outside of feuds, wars, factions, bounties, assassinations will also be sanctioned (Rep Consequence Free)
It appears that Outpost and POIs will also fall within this category, and that is excellent news.
Caravans would complete (at least for now) my hopes for sanctioned (Rep Consequence Free) targets.
All we are asking for is the use of a Bandit's or Raider's main class features without suffering Reputation loss.
Bandit's don't just SAD their targets, we ambush targets. Why should bandits be the only class that loses reputation for using its primary class tactic / feature?
* Note I'm not considering Alignment shift as a consequence. Alignment is a feature of role playing. A Bandit will be Chaotic "Something", and I don't care which variant I end up.
Final side note: Economic PVP, is still PVP. When you engage in a larger scale of economic activity, you are participating in the Settlement vs. Settlement competition.
Caravans
Outposts
POIs
Settlements
Feuds
Wars
Factions
Assassinations
Bounties
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The point is, what we are looking for is the confirmation that other types of PVP, outside of feuds, wars, factions, bounties, assassinations will also be sanctioned (Rep Consequence Free)You won't be taking alignment or rep hits from feud, war, or faction targets, so they're sort of exempt, if I understand what you're saying.
Could you hold a piece of ground and kill the same guy 16 times because he persists in coming back to the outpost you're raiding with a feud? Yup. He's actively seeking out the PvP, I think, by any definition.
The purpose of war in a Pharasma-marked world will be to drive your enemies off or break their gear so bad they leave you to your plunder.
I was answering "The Goodfellow"s specific question about multiple attacks in war. I think I answered it accurately.
It appears that Outpost and POIs will also fall within this category, and that is excellent news.
Highlight added. I've said it elsewhere, but will repeat it here: at this point in time, Goblinworks has not told us how attacks on POIs will work. Anything we imagine about attacks on POIs at this point is probably supposition.
All we are asking for is the use of a Bandit's or Raider's main class features without suffering Reputation loss.
Now I'm really confused. Is "Bandit" or "Raider" a PF prestige class? Or is just the way you want to play your character, not really a class?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
So the question is, if we Ambush the guards, THEN SAD the caravan "merchant", do we lose the rep? (and alignment but if I am CE, the alignment is already there so disregard) And if we do, do we "gain it back" when we SAD, accepted or not? We are providing meaningful PVP and content (the dangers of traveling with a caravan) but are not just running around RPKing everything we see. Would we gain more than we lose? I ask as this would be a means to obtaining and maintaining a high rep.
It sounds like you want to attack some fraction of the party and SAD the other part. I don't think we've gotten anything at all on group vs. group flags, alignment effects, or rep effects, so I have no idea how it might work.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Now I'm really confused. Is "Bandit" or "Raider" a PF prestige class? Or is just the way you want to play your character, not really a class?Bandit Archtype - Ultimate Combat Guide
Cool, thanks.
|
CEO, Goblinworks
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Your making the assassination mechanic, which requires you to be evil... but you dont want assassins in the game? Or is it you dont want assassins who assassinate people in the game?
Assassination, as a game mechanic, is different than randomly killing a target. It is a mechanic related to degrading the capabilities of a Settlement by targeting individuals key to that Settlement's operation. Assassination is not a simple killing. It implies a supernatural component, which is why the penalty for being Assassinated will be worse than simply being killed.
It is also a corner case system that will not be implemented for a long time. It won't be introduced until there is a robust Settlement warfare mechanic in the game, which implies a very large feature set. It will be something viable when the population is very large, when territorial warfare is common and players can benefit from super-specialized characters.
We have not even designed this system yet. The "design" is the first paragraph, and nothing more.
The only reason it's been discussed is that I knew people would ask about the concept and be curious, and it is better to have some answer than none.
Why will it be hard to be CE and not be a jerk?
Why does CE have to be consistent with low reputation?
A social norm requires two components: The transgressor needs to know they have transgressed; and the community needs to know who the transgressive person is.
Simply inflicting pain on the individual can be negated easily especially by people with a high tolerance for pain. In MMOs that usually means boredom. But giving the community a way to restrict the individual's interaction means that the penalty is out of the control of the transgressive person. Merely being "bored" long enough will not fix the problem.
To make it easy for people to know they have transgressed, and for the community to know who the transgressors are, we use two overlapping systems. Part of the functioning of that system is that it be simple. It's simple for the two systems to respond in tandem to the set of behaviors we seek to control.
Small gang roams, we would roam around low sec and 0.0 looking for enemies and anyone else we came across. Some we would kill, all enemies we would kill... Including taking on larger gangs whenever we saw them... the most fun
Probably chaotic evil. I say probably because there's a debate to be had in Crowdforging about the presence of anything-goes territory. If we decided to have that kind of territory, then in that territory, your actions would have no mechanical effect on your character.
Contextually, the play you describe could run the gamut from "awesome" to "banned for griefing".
That play style becomes socially harmless and mechanically beneficial if it is done in the context of territorial control. If you operate in a war zone and your targets are war targets, you're playing the game as intended.
If you do it in territory controlled by someone you're not at war with, you'll suffer mechanical penalties.
If you do it in territory we're trying to make safe via NPC control you'll suffer those penalties quickly.
If you target a player or players and seek to continuously inflict distress for no meaningful in game reason, you may be disciplined out of game.
Probably chaotic evil. I say probably because there's a debate to be had in Crowdforging about the presence of anything-goes territory. If we decided to have that kind of territory, then in that territory, your actions would have no mechanical effect on your character.
Monster hexes and Wilderness hexes. How 'bout it?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Looking at this from a different angle: What playstyle do you want that you need a CE character for? What are you trying to achieve?Before the flag changes I HAD to be CE, C to use SAD and E to use assassin skills. Since that has changed I have SOME flexability depending on how the SAD and Assassin will be handled now.
So from a game perspective, you want to be able to rob and kill anyone you run into. This means you're a CE bloodthirsty killer that most likely only hangs out with other CE bloodthirsty killers. You have a mechanical/playstyle advantage over all other alignments in that they cannot both SAD, kill or assassinate at will. As individuals, they can use any amount or type of force they want, but as a balance, CE have a disadvantage with respect to their settlements.
NB: This is not a shot at you, just a view of the CE debate going on in this thread.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Monster hexes and Wilderness hexes. How 'bout it?You do realize that that's ~90% of the map, right?
added: Settlements are about 1 in 10, then there's NPC hexes, and everything else is wilderness of monster hexes. There's just 4 types.
The world is a dangerous place. :-)
@ryan Your part about assassination. Are you saying that you can't put a contract out on just anyone, it has to be "characters key to settlement operations?" That is fine, but I was thinking it was a different, more expensive version, of a bounty. If that is the case, then I guess I will be doing a lot more banditry then anticipated. Again, no issue here just looking for clarification.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The purpose of war in a Pharasma-marked world will be to drive your enemies off...
This brings a thought: if the respawn-point of a settlement under siege is outside that settlement, the defenders won't be able to get back inside if the attackers have blockaded effectively. This means that if the attackers kill each defender once, while maintaining the security of their blockade, there'll be no more defenders inside the settlement...end of siege.
Correct?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...there's a debate to be had in Crowdforging about the presence of anything-goes territory.
One possibility is that anything-goes territory is one of those ideas you've brought up before: everyone thinks it's cool, then no one goes there...or at least no victims do :-). We could end up with a portion of the map that's just not economically viable to visit.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Bandit's don't just SAD their targets, we ambush targets. Why should bandits be the only class that loses reputation for using its primary class tactic / feature?
That's nonsense. The devs have spelled out very clearly that if paladins (the class I want to play) run around smiting evil characters who aren't flagged, I'm going to get flagged, and if I kill them, take alignment and rep hits.
Same with rogues who want to kill people and take their stuff--you should get the appropriate alignment and reputation hits.
And you'll get flagged as low-rent scum.
And I'll hunt your character down and kill you.
A lot :)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...there's a debate to be had in Crowdforging about the presence of anything-goes territory.One possibility is that anything-goes territory is one of those ideas you've brought up before: everyone thinks it's cool, then no one goes there...or at least no victims do :-). We could end up with a portion of the map that's just not economically viable to visit.
Another possibility is just sticking to the oft-repeated concept: good and evil and law and chaos are not subjective in Golarion. They are absolutes. Why would the rules not apply anywhere in Golarion?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If they stick with the alignment ties of SAD and Assassination, then any chaotic can SAD, and any evil can be an Assassin. If they don't then anyone who trains those skills can use them. They might be considered chaotic/Evil acts so when you use them maybe you gain a few points of the respective rep "hit" so lawful could use SAD, but would take chaotic hits for it, and same with a good assassin. Just because your CE and can do both, doesn't mean you will kill any and everyone you come in contact with. Sure you have the option and will/should suffer penalties for that. "The Goodfellow" does not support RPK. That being said, sometimes you just wanna kill the first green hat wearer you see. In that case you suffer appropriate penalties.
I think there is a confusion with the ability to do so and the desire to do so. I personally am ok with penalties vs RPKing and the "wondering band of murderers." I am not ok with CE = suck at life.
The Bandit issue bludd and I brought up is different. Read the entry link bludd posted. It makes sense. It isn't RPKing, it is making a tactical strike on a caravan. I know we don't have all the details of caravans and mechanics surrounding them, but I really hope the Devs consider this. I just really don't think caravans will be attacked very much if those doing the attacks will suffer penalties for it. (wars/funds aside) The banditry play style will fade.
Also, if there is "wild lands" I think those should be "rule free" and "enter at your own risk" type lands. It will make them potentially dangerous and risky ventures, but yield the greatest treasures and harvest nodes. Not for the solo adventurer. Maybe make it where if it isn't PC or NPC controlled, it is lawless and therefor penalty free? Just throwing around ideas. This would satisfy those desiring a "0.0 space" area to do as they please in, and those who don't will stay away or bring a large group.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Bandit's don't just SAD their targets, we ambush targets. Why should bandits be the only class that loses reputation for using its primary class tactic / feature?
That's nonsense. The devs have spelled out very clearly that if paladins (the class I want to play) run around smiting evil characters who aren't flagged, I'm going to get flagged, and if I kill them, take alignment and rep hits.
Same with rogues who want to kill people and take their stuff--you should get the appropriate alignment and reputation hits.
And you'll get flagged as low-rent scum.
And I'll hunt your character down and kill you.
A lot :)
It isn't non sense. There is an easy fix to limit it so we can't "ambush" everyone at anytime. (If this is the concern) When caravans are put into a game, make it something like a special group or mode or flag or something. Then bandits can only ambush those considered a caravan. If we "ambush" a random group of adventurers, or travelers, then we take the normal rep/alignment hits? How does that sound? That sounds fair to me.
Monster hexes and Wilderness hexes. How 'bout it?You do realize that that's ~90% of the map, right?
added: Settlements are about 1 in 10, then there's NPC hexes, and everything else is wilderness of monster hexes. There's just 4 types.
The world is a dangerous place. :-)
@ryan Your part about assassination. Are you saying that you can't put a contract out on just anyone, it has to be "characters key to settlement operations?" That is fine, but I was thinking it was a different, more expensive version, of a bounty. If that is the case, then I guess I will be doing a lot more banditry then anticipated. Again, no issue here just looking for clarification.
While I don't know where Urman's post is, I do know that is ~90% of the map, yes. That's exactly why I suggested it.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Yeah it went away right after I quoted it LOL. Not sure what happened but no biggy. It will live on as my quote :-)
Basically, my post on that "lawless land" idea was simply, any hex not controlled by either PC or NPC would be subject to "nature's law" of survival of the fittest and anything goes. However, while this would be a large portion of the game to start, as players start to claim hexes and settlements grow, these hexes will shrink and there will be less and less lawless lands and places for those who want to reside in "0.0 space".
As more PCs grab up land and subject their laws and rule, there will be less "free PVP" and more meaningful PVP. Traveling the wilds is rewarding but very dangerous. Once lands become claimed, trade routes will spring up and patrols will be making rounds. Traveling will be "less" dangerous as laws can be enforced and penalties begin to apply more often, discouraging some play styles. That is the concept I had anyway.
|
CEO, Goblinworks
|
@ryan Your part about assassination. Are you saying that you can't put a contract out on just anyone, it has to be "characters key to settlement operations?"
That is the current design, such as it is. We don't expect to have people in general living in fear of being assassinated. If it was something anyone could do to anyone else, we'll rapidly degenerate into any character of any note being a target and therefore acting in bizarre ways to reduce risk.
|
CEO, Goblinworks
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The game design assumes that people in caravans are the targets of people who want to stop the caravan and/or rob it. They are each-others content. We'll work out systems so that engaging in that activity doesn't have the same implications as being a jerk.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
That play style becomes socially harmless and mechanically beneficial if it is done in the context of territorial control. If you operate in a war zone and your targets are war targets, you're playing the game as intended.
That's why I hope there will be plenty of settlement conflict so there is pretty much always a war or two going on where people can get their PvP kicks.
Want to PvP all the time? Join a mercenary group and go wherever there is conflict.
I hope and expect to see some guilds declaring sometime down the line that they will play aggressive military expansionists in the game.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
So, let's say I'm a murderer, I love the kill. Is there a certain amount of innocent kills that "permanently" flag my character as a murderer? If so, is this a lifelong flag or is there a certain number of hours I have to wait till I am considered an innocent? And whilst I'm labeled a murderer can anyone attack me?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Apart from the drop in reputation from killing innocents, the longest flag discussed in earlier blogs was the "murderer" flag that would last for 24 hours.
Anyone killing a character with Attacker does not suffer reputation or alignment loss.
Attacker is removed if the character is killed.
The Attacker flag lasts for one minute after combat ends.
If the character gets the Attacker flag he gets an Aggressor buff that lasts for 24 hours that has no effect besides being a counter. Each time he gets Attacker increases the stack of Aggressor by one.
If the character gets a high enough stack of Aggressor, determined by his Reputation, he gets the status Murderer, which lasts 24 hours and does not disappear on death. It acts the same as Attacker, allowing repeat offenders to be hunted down for longer periods of time.
We have been told that the early plans for the flag systems have been reworked, no word on the Murderer flag specifically.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Guards aside do you see any reason mechanically players might choose not to rob caravans such as flagging, bounties, or alignment drift?
I'm reminded of a time I walked up to the booth in the subway, and I asked the clerk to purchase a ticket for a round trip. She looked at me like she was annoyed and pointed to the machine that sold tickets. I said to her, "If everyone uses the machine, you won't have a job".
@ Andius
Why do you want the machine?
As someone who says you want to protect the weak, you should be lobbying as vigorously for the means to do that, as I do for the means to rob them. You should be screaming, "I don't need no stinking mechanics to do what I can do for the community."
If there is no machine, the people will turn to you. So when you ask, "aside from the guards".... You ARE the GUARDS!!! Even I would rather you ask Ryan, "What tools will you give merchants and their guards, to fight back against those filthy bandits?" That is meaningful reasons for PVP. That is meaningful consequences for PVP. That is a meaningful balance of risk vs. reward.
I would hope that the forces of good can muster enough support to protect at least some of the merchants on the road. Just as we bandits have to summon up enough support to hit as many targets to make a difference in our pockets.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...is this a lifelong flag or is there a certain number of hours I have to wait till I am considered an innocent?
Ryan's made several comments implying the fall can be swift and the climb to redemption long. He wants to drive people who treat killing "casually" out of PFO through sheer boredom.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
"Anything goes hexes" - I personally do not mind this idea. However, I would favor them being a Minority of available hexes. I would also favor avoiding adding reasons to force people into them. Though I would be in favor of incentivising people into them. Do not put different rewards in them, but increase the quantity of the rewards. I would still favor Alignment consequences in these zones, but would forego reputation consequences.
Let's say I am looking for Rare Mineral X. Some of the best "Normal Rules Wilderness and Monster Hexes" for this resource have a pool of 25 units. That anything goes hex over there might have a pool of 100 units, with a 10% higher chance of striking a Motherlode. I can still play the game at "Normal Risk" and get what I need. Or, I can take the Big Risk and potentially come out with a bigger reward. The exact chances of striking it big in such a region can be manipulated as needed to find the right balance to get enough folks to take the risk. Perhaps there is also a way to adjust a number of Elite Enemy NPCs/Monsters in such a hex to keep the danger levels high when there are no players doing so. That way you don't get folks just trying to find the "quiet time".
I would not want all of them in such a zone, but it might also be interesting to put an 'Open World Dungeon' in such a zone. Themed towards Rovagug or some other wild and destructive force to give flavor to the chaos of the region.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Why do you want the machine?
As someone who says you want to protect the weak, you should be lobbying as vigorously for the means to do that, as I do for the means to rob them. You should be screaming, "I don't need no stinking mechanics to do what I can do for the community."
If there is no machine, the people will turn to you. So when you ask, "aside from the guards".... You ARE the GUARDS!!! Even I would rather you ask Ryan, "What tools will you give merchants and their guards, to fight back against those filthy bandits?" That is meaningful reasons for PVP. That is meaningful consequences for PVP. That is a meaningful balance of risk vs. reward.
I would hope that the forces of good can muster enough support to protect at least some of the merchants on the road. Just as we bandits have to summon up enough support to hit as many targets to make a difference in our pockets.
The way you word what Andius should hold as a world view is extremely selfish. You are telling him that he should want to discard all protections from other players so that they HAVE to rely SOLELY upon him and others like him. The machine is efficient. The machine is always on and doesn't need to sleep like people do. It is also telling that you try to sell the stance which reduces your personal risk.
Personally, I thought the question Andius had asked was already well known. Aside from the guards, the bandits have to worry about alignment hits and bounty contracts. Though what I think Andius is really wanting to request is a form of contract that can be taken out for "Getting My Stuff Back". Personally, I think this falls under Bounty.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The game design assumes that people in caravans are the targets of people who want to stop the caravan and/or rob it. They are each-others content. We'll work out systems so that engaging in that activity doesn't have the same implications as being a jerk.
Ryan, what's the content for LG paladins and clerics?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Ok, so let's say I've killed enough people and I am flagged as a murderer for 24 hours. If an innocent player attacks me and I slay him, do I get a hit on my rep, etc? Or is this considered defending myself?
As far as I understand it, once someone attacks you for any reason, they are flagged as an attacker to you, and you can attack them to defend yourself with no further rep loss. However, if they kill you while you have the murderer flag, they will receive no rep loss/alignment loss, meaning they risk less for attacking you.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
i hope that all effort towards weakening a playstyle really brings all the ramdom carebears complainers to at least try the game, because this safrifice is mainly for them.
I don't get it, there are already 2-3 games out there that cater to what you want. If it's so awesome why aren't you playing those games instead of lurking around this one?
There is a market for people who like open PvP with limits. Go look at Age of Conan, a PvP game if there ever was one and in its twilight days the PVE server with limited PvP areas is the one that's full.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I would much prefer temporary "anything goes-territories" to be created due to player actions, like warzones, end stages of certain escalations etc., to permanent ones. (If they need to be in the game at all).
If there are to be permanent ones, the best way to draw people into them is by having the best resources/mob spawns in those zones. Then what you end up with is a PVE/softcore-PVP game until you progress to a certain point when you'll want to visit the "anything goes-territories" for your tier 57 resources and BANG!, welcome to a hardcore FFA PvP experience that is nothing like the game experience you've had up until now.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Why do you want the machine?As someone who says you want to protect the weak, you should be lobbying as vigorously for the means to do that, as I do for the means to rob them. You should be screaming, "I don't need no stinking mechanics to do what I can do for the community."
If there is no machine, the people will turn to you. So when you ask, "aside from the guards".... You ARE the GUARDS!!! Even I would rather you ask Ryan, "What tools will you give merchants and their guards, to fight back against those filthy bandits?" That is meaningful reasons for PVP. That is meaningful consequences for PVP. That is a meaningful balance of risk vs. reward.
I would hope that the forces of good can muster enough support to protect at least some of the merchants on the road. Just as we bandits have to summon up enough support to hit as many targets to make a difference in our pockets.
You know what Bludd, I think you actually get it. You understand that there are going to be tons of PvP options within the system, you understand that there will be a "moral mathematics" to taking the rep/alignment hits and you already know how you are going to do it.
Why don't you spend a little more time explaining to your cohorts what's up so they aren't so dang lost and a little less time fighting with us?