Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
I would rather have the jerkish behavior limited to one day a week, month, or year than have it present every day.
I hope that we don't need to create player-run "green hat" events to find stuff to do. I really hope that it isn't believed by many that a griefing or economic warfare strategy is a player-run event.
Goblin Squad Member
|
If it is not fun for your victim it is wrong, whether just one time, just one day, or any time it happens.
There can be no victims if the person volunteers to participate. Don't want to participate, don't wear a green hat on Green Hat day.
There can also be non violent ways to participate, as I have laid out in several posts.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If it is not fun for your victim it is wrong, whether just one time, just one day, or any time it happens.There can be no victims if the person volunteers to participate. Don't want to participate, don't wear a green hat on Green Hat day.
There can also be non violent ways to participate, as I have laid out in several posts.
You wish to place the responsibility on the victim who didn't get the memo. Bad precident. No: how about you make your own choices and pay your own bills instead?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Don't want to participate, don't wear a green hat on Green Hat day.
I could certainly get behind certain implementations of that pattern.
Don't want to be ruthlessly hunted down by characters who are better trained, better equipped, and better supported than you? Then don't be Chaotic Evil and Low Reputation :)
Which reminds me, I really hope High Reputation characters take zero Reputation hit for killing Low Reputation characters.
We already know that:
... killing a player with Reputation 0 who has no flags will cost about 500 Reputation, while killing an average low-reputation player (-5,000 reputation) will cost about 16 reputation and killing an average high-reputation player (5,000 reputation) will cost about 2,400.
Would Decius or Nightdrifter care to plot that out and let us know what kind of Rep loss that would mean for killing someone with a -7,500 Rep?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
To accomplish a way to suspend the rule set for even one day would require that system to be built discrete from the rest so it could be turned off without breaking everything else. That is certainly not MVP. It may introduce another point of security exposure. It would certainly take time and careful planning.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
But, it would be cool if settlements could have that level of control over their laws. It would allow Kryptea type events (which I would call lawful evil)...of course bound to the area controlled by that settlement.
(Not that I am advocating it...the tool could be used in other ways).
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
A rough approximation might be:
RepLoss = ((Rep + 7500)/7500)^3 * 500
Against a target with -7500 Rep there may indeed be no rep hit (I think it should be a nominal amount). Likewise a target of -7500 on good-evil scale may have no evil hit (again, I think it should be a nominal amount).
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Don't want to participate, don't wear a green hat on Green Hat day.I could certainly get behind certain implementations of that pattern.
Don't want to be ruthlessly hunted down by characters who are better trained, better equipped, and better supported than you? Then don't be Chaotic Evil and Low Reputation :)
Which reminds me, I really hope High Reputation characters take zero Reputation hit for killing Low Reputation characters.
1. No one has stated they want to be CE + Low Rep
2. No guarantee that a CE + Low Rep is less trained, equipped or supported. This is particularly true for supported, strength in numbers is the greatest factor of support.
3. With all of the ways in which to PVP without any alignment shifts or reputation losses, it may very well be a rare case that anyone is "low reputation".
But none of this has anything to do with "Green Hat Day". A single day event, that may not even involve initiating non consensual PVP, will play an insignificant role in one's overall alignment or reputation.
I certainly wouldn't worry about it, and I'm going to wear the Green Hat of the first victim I find (hope it is Hobs)sporting one.
But don't think Hobs will not enjoy this. He has to be the first martyr of Green Hat Day, in order to ascend to "Patron Saint of the Green Hat". This we have learned is just one step in his true agenda of conquering the River Kingdoms, and winning the internetz!!!
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Nihimon: it's not an exponential relationship between rep cost and target rep (plotting rep cost vs target rep and taking log of the y-axis doesn't give a straight line as an exponential relationship should).
I'll try fitting something along the lines of what Urman suggested.
Regardless of the functional form, the short answer is: 0 or something very close to 0.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Update: ran the data points through a fitting program with a functional form similar to what Urman suggested and the power and multiplicative constant allowed to float (ie. be fit).
I get results consistent with what he suggests. In that case the answer would be 0 cost for a -7500 rep target.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
the majority of people who want to directly engage in PvP will have multiple, non-toxic ways to it--t's at the core of the design philosophy. Which is great too, because those people will be just as committed to isolating tools who want to RPK. If you're serious about PvP and being competitive in PFO, there's no way you're going to let a bunch of man-babies drag you down on their trip down the CE slide onto the filth pile.Are you missing the obvious on purpose?
This is a ONCE A YEAR EVENT.... JUST ONE DAY OUT OF 365 DAYS.
Whoah li'l buddy--take it easy there! :)
I'm just agreeing with Morbis--I think the devs have been smart enough to think through a compelling PvP game framework that doesn't encourage toxic behavior.
AND...I agree with you on this. If you truly limit your RPKing, e.g. once a year, then based on what they've laid out so far, I doubt you'll end up low rep and CE.
Honestly Bluud, I think you have a stake in this game, you want to be relevant, and so you'll likely end up playing in a way that let's you have relevance. Ryan's comments in this thread are pretty illuminating:
The reputation system inflicts collective punishment for the behavior of individuals. Since the quality and nature of the structures in your Settlement is dependent on your reputation, and the abilities of your characters are dependent on the quality and nature of the structures in your Settlement, if a character is eroding your reputation and thus degrading the quality and nature of the structures in your Settlement, every character in the Settlement is affected.
So reputation will drive the collective to expel people who refuse to conform to the collective's will with regard to reputation.
The alignment system segregates players. It drives players with similar playstyles together. If we do a good job of making you make meaningful choices with regard to things like Settlement building selection and how grouping works at various scales, people who want to play an alignment in one corner of the graph will have a very hard time being in the same Settlement as people in the opposite corner of the graph.
Therefore, characters who behave in a manner consistent with CE will tend to group together. CE behavior will be consistent with low reputation. Low reputation Settlements will produce characters that are disadvantaged vs. other kinds of Settlements because the quality and nature of the structures in CE Settlements will suck.
We're creating a funnel that pushes people who act like jerks into a situation where they are stuck playing with other jerks, and one cost for being a jerk is that they are less powerful than people who are not jerks.
My guess would be that the game design will thwart your RPK inclination, and you'll end up in a N/E settlement, engaged in structured PvP and having a grand old time :) How about that? That's my prediction. Talk to you in a year about it ;)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One thing to point out is that with only 3 data points we can't conclusively say that's the correct functional form, just that it's roughly consistent. You could make a sine wave consistent with 3 data points!
Also, the blog uses the words "about 2400" and "about 500". Without a dev chiming in we can't say for sure if that means 2400 and 500 exactly or 2389 and 503.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"about" 2400 could be +/- 5% or 10%. Like you say, we can't be sure.
I'm actually more worried about the top end than the bottom end. If it's 2400 rep hit on a average high rep (+5000 R), then it might be a 4000 or 5000 point hit for killing a 7500 rep Paladin who's hiding behind being unflagged while begging for a killing with his behavior. 2400 is steep enough for the max hit, imho.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You could make a sine wave consistent with 3 data points!
I believe this is the point Decius was making when he talked about "assumptions".
... a 7500 rep Paladin who's hiding behind being unflagged while begging for a killing with his behavior...
That just seems unlikely. Especially if we're actually allowed to Reward and Rebuke other characters from our own Reputation pool.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Don't want to participate, don't wear a green hat on Green Hat day.
Unless you're kidding and I can't tell, how is this acceptable when simple--but pretty damned likely--variants such as "don't carry a sword on No Swords Day", or "don't be outside an NPC settlement of No Being Outside NPC Settlements Day" are going to be ludicrously out-of-bounds?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Divide those -2400 to -500 losses by 10 to 20 and make it so you regain an average of 25-100 points per hour and you have a good system.
I have to disagree that there will be no high rep lawful-good griefers. They will grief people with wars, feuds, and mechanical abuses. They will be a small minority, but account for a huge percentage of the toxicity experienced by newbs. Especially if wars/feuds grant kill rights inside safezones.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
You could make a sine wave consistent with 3 data points!I believe this is the point Decius was making when he talked about "assumptions".
With regards to the sine wave comment:
I was thinking more along the lines of the number of degrees of freedom available. NDF = # of data points (3) - # of parameters in your function. The more NDF the better. With only 3 data points it's hard to keep NDF above 0. Once NDF is 0 you really can't say much from the fit.
A function with 3 parameters can be made perfectly consistent with 3 data points if they're in it's domain and range (with maybe some exceptions). For example a sine wave is described by phase, amplitude and frequency. A 2nd order polynomial has 3 parameters as well, so you could easily make such a polynomial perfectly consistent with the data we have. But that doesn't mean it's correct.
With far more data points that sine wave would be a terrible fit and the 2nd order polynomial might not work (or maybe it will if that's the actual form).
Obviously the cost increases very fast with the target's rep. How fast is the question. It's not exponential. What we have been given is roughly consistent with Urman's functional form. The trend looks like 0 or something close to 0 for -7500 rep and something very large for +7500 rep. That's about all that can be said with any certainty right now.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I'll submit before and I'll say again choosing a roleplay where you kill people based on a random condition such as "anyone wearing a green hat on Tuesday" is simply killing for the sake of killing AKA RPKing with a thin disguise.This was the argument used by Goonswarm when they began their suicide ganking campaigns against Hulks ("Hulkaggeddon") They claimed that while to the outside world it looked like they were engaging in RPK, really they were "Role playing" an in-game event. Later, this morphed into their claiming that a lot of 'bots used Hulks and that they were really trying to degrade RMT and 'bot activity. (The latter may even be true; RMT and 'bots are a problem for a group that is based on throwing masses of low-level characters at problems...)
To the players who found their Hulks blown up by suicide gankers, it didn't feel like much of a worthwhile excuse.
This is the kind of corner case that we'll have to have a lot of community input on. In EVE, it was not an issue as nothing they were doing was going to illicit a response from CCP (although things like naming the leader of the effort "the Prophet Khartoon" and declaring a "jihad" struck too close to too many nerves for my taste personally...)
We might have a different approach in our game.
Actually, that is incorrect... It was not an RP event, I know as I was allied with Goons when the whole thing got started...
It was a Profiting Event.... Goons held the moons required to make mass quantities of Hulks. So they went on a massive money making grind. They made trillions of ISK off that first event.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Divide those -2400 to -500 losses by 10 to 20 and make it so you regain an average of 25-100 points per hour and you have a good system.I'm sorry, but are you insane? Do you really want to let RPKers kill an average of 4 characters per hour and still maintain max Reputation?
Sometimes I think N ramps up the hyperbole, but I think he's on the money here. I was thinking of 4 rage-filled kills per week as reasonably acceptable. With that 500 rep hit on an average rep person, it's 30 bad kills a month or 7.5 per week, if the rep bars refills in a month's time.
(But I wonder if anyone will be average; 500 to 2400 is a large step. I wonder if a squared function would be better than cubed.)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
-2400 (for killing +7500) to -500 (for killing -7500) when divided by 10-20 is -120-240 for max rep kills and 25-50 for minimum rep kills.
That allows you at a max 4 - .5 minimum rep kills per hour and .83 to .1 max rep kills per hour. Those ranges being the minimum and maximums I consider reasonable.
At 25 to 100 average points per hour of active play (25 being if you just let your alignment drift and 100 being if you are boosting it with resource or activity based gains). It would take 300 to 75 hours of active play to get from -7500 rep to 0.
I actually do agree with the idea of some kind of curve that makes it harder to hit the two extremes and easier to hit 0.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I actually do agree with the idea of some kind of curve that makes it harder to hit the two extremes and easier to hit 0.
I agree with the statement above, but not with your proposed changes. The goal could also be accomplished by decreasing the native drift as Reputation increases, making it easier to recover from -7500, but harder to reach +7500.
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
One thing to point out is that with only 3 data points we can't conclusively say that's the correct functional form, just that it's roughly consistent. You could make a sine wave consistent with 3 data points!
Great idea, put a peak at +7500, a trough at -7500, and distort the y-axis as needed to match the data we have.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Don't want to participate, don't wear a green hat on Green Hat day.Unless you're kidding and I can't tell, how is this acceptable when simple--but pretty damned likely--variants such as "don't carry a sword on No Swords Day", or "don't be outside an NPC settlement of No Being Outside NPC Settlements Day" are going to be ludicrously out-of-bounds?
Those other holidays would be poor imitations of Green Hat Day. The Green Hat is unique, in that it came about by accident and has grown into a meaningful event. There will be parades celebrating it. It's first martyr, Patron Saint and the Grand Marshall.... Hobs the Short.... Will hand out these ceremonial green hats, to each of the settlement managers. And once they all don their hats, he shall then reveal to us all.... The Master Green Hat!!!
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Hang on there, Mr. Harbinger...
I've already been cast as Simon for the PFO version of Lord of the Flies, which, if memory recalls, means I end up torn apart by my peers.
Now I'm a "martyr, Patron Saint and Grand Marshall'?
No disrespect meant, but do I detect a slight theme here...?
Somehow, your fun keeps ending with me pushing up daisies.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sometimes I think N ramps up the hyperbole, but I think he's on the money here. I was thinking of 4 rage-filled kills per week as reasonably acceptable.
Hyperbole? Moi? None taken...
Personally, I was thinking more along the lines of regaining 100 Reputation points per day, maximum, with the losses as currently defined. That means it would take over a month to work off a single kill of a Max Reputation character, and most of a week to work off a kill of a 0 Rep character.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Something along the lines of a settlement with lots of low rep people wouldn't be able to make top end buildings. So that settlement would be weaker. Settlements can also set some lower limit on rep for those entering.
The desired effect would be low rep characters wouldn't have access to the best training available from the best settlements.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Personally, I was thinking more along the lines of regaining 100 Reputation points per day, maximum, with the losses as currently defined. That means it would take over a month to work off a single kill of a Max Reputation character, and most of a week to work off a kill of a 0 Rep character.
That sounds a bit too strict to me. Then again, the idea that you can go from max rep to 0 in three kills, and then to minimum rep in another three, already sounds pretty darn harsh. I suppose high rep will be a rather effective shield against "unsanctioned" PvP, I just hope it isn't too good a shield. Once again, the whole point to the system in the first place is so that people aren't immune to nonconsensual PvP, and it sounds at the moment like max reputation might be effective immunity, epecially if they had to spend a whole month recovering from the effects of one kill as in your example. Just my opinion, and without a full picture, so I suppose it's not even a good opinion at this point.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Since I visit the forum about once a day, it's impractical to do more than skim threads with such heavy activity, but I wonder...
Would you be wearing these green hats on Apocalypse Day?
Also, I thought the faction warfare stuff was added to provide an excuse for opt-in & consequence free/light PvP, for those who wanted it?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Remember, No Weapon Day is mandatory for all non-UNC members. And No Sword Day is everyday! Also you're required to carry lots of valuables at all times.
I cannot help cackling as I envision what may happen when you attempt to bring down that wandering old man of the woods wearing the raggedy green cloak.
I SO wish we were not burdened with nameplates overhead...
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...not burdened with nameplates overhead...
As other games teach us, no nameplates requires sufficient variance in character appearance to make up for the "loss". In City of Heroes, it was reasonably easy to achieve that level of variability; in fantasy-themed games, it may be significantly harder to accomplish, so pity the poor art departments and their overtime.
I do think I'd like any game where I can recognise people without the UI, though.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...not burdened with nameplates overhead...As other games teach us, no nameplates requires sufficient variance in character appearance to make up for the "loss". In City of Heroes, it was reasonably easy to achieve that level of variability; in fantasy-themed games, it may be significantly harder to accomplish, so pity the poor art departments and their overtime.
I do think I'd like any game where I can recognise people without the UI, though.
As someone with vision issues, these days I recognize people more by build and how they move. There are lots of subtle things you don't realize are important to recognizing individuals until you have to depend on them. It's like the "forced first-person perspective" thread, UI elements that don't seem to make sense on the surface can fill in for a lot of sensory information missing in a game environment.
The floaty name needs to be hidden if a character is in stealth mode, though.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
By the way, is there a list or a post suggesting what kind if effects a low reputation will have mechanically?
Here are a few posts that might clarify things.
What are the disadvantages of having a low reputation?
- Extremely restricted access to most settlements and therefore training and trading.
- Reduced likelihood of settlement membership.
- Limited opportunities for VC membership.
- Limited opportunities for group play.
- Becoming a prime target for anyone who wants to make a kill and therefore extremely dangerous travel around the game world.
- Extreme difficulty in obtaining and holding onto gear and loot.So yeh - CE players have it ok. Its a@&%%#+s who will struggle.
The reputation system inflicts collective punishment for the behavior of individuals. Since the quality and nature of the structures in your Settlement is dependent on your reputation, and the abilities of your characters are dependent on the quality and nature of the structures in your Settlement, if a character is eroding your reputation and thus degrading the quality and nature of the structures in your Settlement, every character in the Settlement is affected.
So reputation will drive the collective to expel people who refuse to conform to the collective's will with regard to reputation.
(emphasis in original)
I think that the biggest impact of the reputation system will be in aiding a social group in identifying and removing bad actors; the people who just can't keep the crazy locked down and who pose a continuing risk of upsetting carefully maintained tradeoffs being made by the rest of the group.
And of course:
I think the designer's ideas about reputation and alignment are still in a lot of flux, and there will be a better time to dig into the mechanic once we've done more work on other systems. I don't believe that whatever plan we start with will survive contact with the community and will need to be revised many times based on feedback and exploitation discovery.