Goblin Squad Member
|
@ Andius,
I gave solutions, but you ignored them. But, on some of yours, that is what I suggested.
I had suggested that there is a maximum Rep gain per day. Which I believe GW already has the idea of doing. In their description of the SAD, they said an accepted SAD would give double the daily maximum.
Why do Bandits need double the daily maximum? Because GW wants bandits to be active versus merchants, otherwise you end up with unfettered resource gathering and hyper inflation.
I had written that GW should treat "Farming SADs or Kills vs Alts" an exploit and not just an unsanctioned activity. The GMs can very easily see if you are in fact farming your own alts or other characters of your own company, settlement or faction.
Slap an exploiter with maximum negative Rep and a ban for a period of time.
Goodfellow had suggested that the ratio of earned Rep vs. loss of Rep could be 1:10 or even higher if need be.
I have said that Rep Gains and Losses should be uniform, so that you don't have High Rep players griefing, "Just because they can afford to."
Plenty of solutions for gaming the system have been provided. Will they stop gaming completely, "No" of course not. There will always be someone smarter that can find a way. But, once their exploit is discovered, the GMs / Devs have the responsibility to shut them down.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Do we know anything about how to get rep in general?
If there are carrots, just not where you want them, there could be a reason for that...
In general, I think rep should be awarded for "generating good content for fellow players". That's a bit vague, yes. Building, conquering and defending settlements certainly is good content, though (makes the game exciting even for the innocent bystanders).
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Personally, I believe there should be gains in rep for meaningful PvP. Napoleon has a tremendous reputation even today. Similarly Julius Caesar, and Charlemagne and Alexander the Great. Similarly it seems to me great generals and leaders in PFO should certainly gain rep. Had the ancient world been virtual, Leonidas and the 300 would have stood against the Persians in...
Which is why PFO Reputation should be renamed. It has nothing at all to do with fame or notoriety or reputation as you just used it. It is about how many unflagged people you've killed and how recently.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Which is why PFO Reputation should be renamed. It has nothing at all to do with fame or notoriety or reputation as you just used it. It is about how many unflagged people you've killed and how recently.
Rename it to Favour of Pharasma. The primary difference between an NPC and a PC is that the PC is 'threaded' by a Goddess. You can use that.
Pharasma has blessed each one of us, and she doesn't appreciate it when we kill each other in ways that are 'unsanctioned' by her will. Thankfully she has provided us with plenty of 'sanctioned' ways to do so. When you go against her will you lose Favour of Pharasma, and when you play along you gain Favour of Pharasma. You can now be as arbitrary as you want regarding which activities are 'sanctioned' and which are 'unsanctioned'. Gods are arbitrary.
Now you can directly tie having a low Favour (reputation) with mechanical deficits in game. Low Favour characters have a weaker connection with Pharasma, and so they get fewer threads to protect their gear. They cannot bind themselves to lesser shrines (respawn points) of Pharasma, and so must confine themselves to temples. I'm sure you could think of other fitting and thematically appropriate debuffs.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It is about how many unflagged people you've killed and how recently.
It should also be about how much you have engaged in meaningful and positive game play.
Whether your infraction was recent or far in the past, it should not have been absolved by the mere passage of time. You should have to actively play in a positive manner to recover.
For the that say, "Then they will just grind positive game behaviors", I respond..."Yeah, and your point is?"
It doesn't matter why someone is engaging in positive behavior, it matters that while they are they can not be involved in negative behavior. The desired result that GW us looking for us still achieved. There is no "gaming" your way out if that reality, unless your character can be at two places at nice and doing two different activities simultaneously.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It is about how many unflagged people you've killed and how recently.It should also be about how much you have engaged in meaningful and positive game play.
Perhaps. It could or it should. But the reality of what has been explained so far is this: no one will have negative reputation unless they killed an unflagged character. Have we been told of any other way to lose reputation?
And the context of my statement in reply to Being, was that Julius Ceasar and Napoleon may have had great reputation as military leaders, but that has nothing to do with PFO Reputation as it has been defined so far.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
For the that say, "Then they will just grind positive game behaviors", I respond..."Yeah, and your point is?"
This right here. I hope that some restrictions are put into place so that people are more encouraged to play the proper way than to grind rep on alt characters, but other than that I do hope that playing in a rep-positive manner would give rep. I do not believe that is an unachievable goal, but I think with some thought, iteration, and feedback, it is definitely in the realm of possibility.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@ Nihimon,
Are you suggesting that there should be no way to gain reputation by playing in a positive manner?
I am suggesting it should not be easy to recover from evil acts. You might have seen me point this out before.
The solution to most of your objections can be summed up by "don't let people make easy recoveries from evil acts".
The most important thing is not that characters can kill other characters. The most important thing is that there are consequences for doing that. And it's a corollary of that statement that the more often a character kills other characters, or helps a character killer, the harder it must be for that character to recover from doing so.
I'm sure you have your reasons for proposing ways to make it fairly easy to regain lost Reputation, and I'm sure it's not because that will allow you to randomly kill as many "sheep" as you can.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If you don't like my idea of rewarding desired PVP actions with rep, then what incentive does anyone have for doing those desired PVP actions?
Territorial Control.
[Edit] Or would you prefer the "incentive" to be the ability to kill newbs and other sheep without suffering ill consequences?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It is about how many unflagged people you've killed and how recently.It should also be about how much you have engaged in meaningful and positive game play.Perhaps. It could or it should. But the reality of what has been explained so far is this: no one will have negative reputation unless they killed an unflagged character. Have we been told of any other way to lose reputation?
And the context of my statement in reply to Being, was that Julius Ceasar and Napoleon may have had great reputation as military leaders, but that has nothing to do with PFO Reputation as it has been defined so far.
Urman,
We know the ways to lose rep, the question is, "What is the best way to earn it?"
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Depending on how the ratio is set up, gaining positive reputation tells a settlement exactly what they will be looking for. Namely how much acceptable pvp has this person engaged in versus possible unacceptable engagements?
If the system is time based, all it tells settlements is that you either have not engaged in non meaningful pvp or you simply have waited your timer off (or some mixture of those)
I was relatively neutral in this conversation, but I have to admit I like the idea of the system being tied to positive and negative behaviors.
I don't mind it being gameable either, if for example someone has to engage in twice, thrice, or four times the positive pvp outlets to offset the more negative ones. That just means a system has successfully funneled someone away from activities this community would rather not see.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
From the Darkfall Lessons Learned thread:
The point I was replying to was the comment about "going Pirate, then becoming good again". The intent of the response was to say that people cycling in and out of Dredd Pirate Roberts territory and back is limited by the incredibly onerous time requirements and boredom required. It happens, but it happens infrequently. That's a good design from the standpoint of saying that you can do some edge-case thing, but the game system implies limits that few will bother to overcome the inherent challenge.
People do all sorts of incredibly time consuming and boring things in MMOs. Player boredom is the only truly meaningful resource in MMO design. However people who get off on the thrill of player-killing are temperamentally unsuited to long, boring intervals of grinding no-challenge content. They don't do it if they can avoid it.
There are other people, of a very different temperament, who are content to harvest resources using utterly boring mechanics for hour after hour. They are getting some pleasure just from seeing a number on a graph go up slowly over time. There is a reason Pachinko is a successful entertainment business. Some people find boring, repetitive behavior very soothing. Plus they can be super social while they do it; the resource extraction is just an excuse to log in and chat with friends.
These two people are fundamentally different and a game design can work at limiting the first behavior without limiting the second! even though that may seem counter-intuitive.
Allowing PVP-centric players to run down their Reputation with kills of unflagged characters and then allowing them to continue PvP-centric play in running their Reputation back up through participation in wars and feuds is completely counter to the above post of Ryan's.
PVP-centric players want PVP in any form. Allowing them to jump back and forth between reputation damaging and reputation rewarding PVP is rewarding them for...
Good call, thanks for the quote. I actually agree totally with Bluddwolf and Ryan. I had assumed this "earn through good behaviour program" would replace the slow slide over time I had previously supported. Instead of earning 50 Rep a day for doing nothing, bandits should earn 5-10 Rep per "successful SAD". This, combined with the multitudes of other encouraged means of play that will inevitably be presented, offers a slow way to gain Rep while playing the way bandits enjoy (albeit being required to make the Rep gain choices).
So, even though I support the grind up Rep idea, I do not think it should be feasible to make more in a day than was being advocated for in the Rep over time system: Fast down, slow up. But, I also think there needs to be enough options for gaining Rep that there are positive gameplay options for all approved styles of play. This way, the grind might be slow, but the play should be fun.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Do we know anything about how to get rep in general?In this vein, why has no one suggested simply waiting until the devs give us some meat to chew on, instead of chewing the very air itself?
Shane has it right. It is likely the same reason as any other topic we theory craft. To keep the conversations moving in between dev updates and clarifications.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
And the context of my statement in reply to Being, was that Julius Ceasar and Napoleon may have had great reputation as military leaders, but that has nothing to do with PFO Reputation as it has been defined so far.
Which is why I think that using the term 'Reputation' was a mistake. The current system doesn't really model reputation. So push the current reputation system into a re-badged Favour system, and instead make reputation a crowd sourced model of trustworthiness.
For example: The developers are going to have access to a lot of data. They are going to be capable of knowing who are friends, who are enemies, how much one person interacts with another. They should leverage that knowledge to design a system that allows people to mark others as trustworthy, and weigh each individuals choice by how connected they are to the person that they are marking.
Say Reputation (the new subsystem) is a measured scale of 10,000 to -10,000, and you start at 0. I have been at war multiple times with Andius, however every time I have been at war I have conducted myself with 'honour' and been 'gentlemanly'. Andius believes that I am a respectful individual, and chooses to +Rep me. Because the game can know that Andius and I have very little actual connection together, it weighs that +Rep appropriately. My reputation increases by +5.
But say Andius suddenly decides that I am kind of a dick, and he feels that I should be punished for my dickishness. He chooses to -Rep me. Because my interactions with Andius have been primarily contentious anyway (all those wars and assassinations and killings) his -Rep isn't weighed very heavily against me. My reputation now decreases by -1. At the end of all that, my final reputation is now -1 (started at 0, went up 5, then lost the 5 and went down 1).
And it works the other way. Cyneric, who is a good friend of mine, we have been allied from the beginning of the game, decides to +Rep me. The game knows that this doesn't really mean much. I gain +1 reputation from this transaction. But then I betray Pax! Cyneric, who stays loyal with Pax, doesn't appreciate this, and -Reps me. Historically I have been very friendly with Cyneric. The game knows that if he is -Repping me, it is likely to be because I did something dastardly. I lose 5 reputation from this transaction. Now my final reputation is -6!
Combined with the other two subsystems (Alignment and Favour) this gives players a good measure of other players they come across. Alignment tells me how you play the game. Favour tells me how likely it is that you will randomly attack me. Reputation tells me how respectful and trustworthy you are.
And best of all, there are plenty of academic sources to draw inspiration on how such a system may work. The Reputation Economy is a term you may have heard of. Leverage the work being done by academics and stick it right into your game.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@ Nihimon,
Are you suggesting that there should be no way to gain reputation by playing in a positive manner?
I am suggesting it should not be easy to recover from evil acts. You might have seen me point this out before.
I'm sure you have your reasons for proposing ways to make it fairly easy to regain lost Reputation, and I'm sure it's not because that will allow you to randomly kill as many "sheep" as you can.The solution to most of your objections can be summed up by "don't let people make easy recoveries from evil acts".
The most important thing is not that characters can kill other characters. The most important thing is that there are consequences for doing that. And it's a corollary of that statement that the more often a character kills other characters, or helps a character killer, the harder it must be for that character to recover from doing so.
Who said anything about easy rep gain? Who said anything about engaging in unlimited Unsanctioned PvP? Or about killing noobs?
These are your "straw man" arguments. I'm suggesting encouraging and rewarding positive game play. You are just too close minded to imagine that carrots work along with the stick.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
We know the ways to lose rep, the question is, "What is the best way to earn it?"
My preference is accelerated rep gain over time, for the time where no rep losses are incurred. So basically the character is played and spends his time in game and does "sanctioned" pvp or craft or exploring or chats in taverns. And his Rep recovers, as long as he doesn't do rep-loss actions. Which would be killing unflaggeds, at this point in time.
No types of (meaningful) gameplay are favored over any other with a time-based regain. Hobs can just chat in local, mongering his fish, while his reputation regains from that horrible incident he was involved in last week. You can be involved in a feud, Andius can be guarding his flocks, someone else can be killing gobbos in PvE. Everyone is playing the meaningful game and regaining rep.
Can someone have a stable of alts and just cycle them into inactive status? Sure. Rep regain over time should require the character be in a XP-gaining status: subscription or PLEX. That way the guy with the 8 alts cycling through rep regain can do it, if he maintains 8 subscriptions. Any character not in a XP-gain mode should walk the straight and narrow path and not lose rep.
Can someone just log off from the game and come back in a month when he's high rep again? Sure. He misses out on all of the other rewards, social connections, loot, enjoyable game time. And maybe he gets tired and just stays away for 2-3 months. His settlement isn't getting much value from that guy.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Who said anything about easy ?@ Nihimon,
Are you suggesting that there should be no way to by playing in a positive manner?
No one. Clearly, no one said anything at all about anything remotely like easy rep gain. Sorry for my confusion.
Apology accepted since it is clear your confusion is that positive game play is always easy. Perhaps that is true for a crafter or someone that sits in a library reading books all day. It is not easy for anyone who ventures out into the world.
A gatherer's life is not easy. Nor is the life of a caravan operator, an explorer, a soldier, bandit, assassin, bounty hunter, etc.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
We know the ways to lose rep, the question is, "What is the best way to earn it?"My preference is accelerated rep gain over time, for the time where no rep losses are incurred. So basically the character is played and spends his time in game and does "sanctioned" pvp or craft or exploring or chats in taverns. And his Rep recovers, as long as he doesn't do rep-loss actions. Which would be killing unflaggeds, at this point in time.
So couldn't we have something like: in the gain OT (over-time) rep system, base gain is 50 a day with a 1.1 multiplier per day they do not loose Rep. Instead of OT gain, have positive behaviour based such that there is either a 50 Rep limit per day, or the gain from any one act is so small the average person grinding any given act would gain 50 in a day? This can even be combined with the multiplier.
No types of (meaningful) gameplay are favored over any other with a time-based regain. Hobs can just chat in local, mongering his fish, while his reputation regains from that horrible incident he was involved in last week. You can be involved in a feud, Andius can be guarding his flocks, someone else can be killing gobbos in PvE. Everyone is playing the meaningful game and regaining rep.
This is a good point, ideally people will be able to take the positive choices in their desired gameplay style: explorer, social, merchant, PvP, PvE, etc...and make the same Rep when taken on average. However, that would be a tough thing to balance. It will end up there are "easy rep runs" and they will become flooded with people grinding Rep, even if they do not mesh with their desired gameplay style.
Maybe another option, a simpler one, is that a single act of positive game play a day gives you that daily limit of 50 Rep...and each day with no Rep loss, you get that 1.1 multiplier.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
People keep pointing out that Reputation is a purely game mechanic and has nothing to do with real reputation. The fact is, it does and it is both.
While high rep may or may not be a good indicator as to whether you are trustworthy, low reputation is certainly going to affect how people, settlements collectively, and game systems interact with you. To say that they will not or that it has nothing to do with "actual player perception" of your toon is probably not true.
Low rep will carry a stigma. High rep gained through nothing more than not doing anything, would only be an indication that you don't do anything outside of sanctioned or, more likely, anything at all.
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
Who said anything about easy ?@ Nihimon,
Are you suggesting that there should be no way to by playing in a positive manner?
No one. Clearly, no one said anything at all about anything remotely like easy rep gain. Sorry for my confusion.
Apology accepted since it is clear your confusion is that positive game play is always easy. Perhaps that is true for a crafter or someone that sits in a library reading books all day. It is not easy for anyone who ventures out into the world.
A gatherer's life is not easy. Nor is the life of a caravan operator, an explorer, a soldier, bandit, assassin, bounty hunter, etc.
So you think that being a gatherer or bounty hunter is something appropriate as a cost of being a jerk? Keep in mind that the "price" for one person is the "gameplay" for another.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
No types of (meaningful) gameplay are favored over any other with a time-based regain. Hobs can just chat in local, mongering his fish, while his reputation regains from that horrible incident he was involved in last week. You can be involved in a feud, Andius can be guarding his flocks, someone else can be killing gobbos in PvE. Everyone is playing the meaningful game and regaining rep.This is a good point, ideally people will be able to take the positive choices in their desired gameplay style: explorer, social, merchant, PvP, PvE, etc...and make the same Rep when taken on average. However, that would be a tough thing to balance. It will end up there are "easy rep runs" and they will become flooded with people grinding Rep, even if they do not mesh with their desired gameplay style.
Maybe another option, a simpler one, is that a single act of positive game play a day gives you that daily limit of 50 Rep...and each day with no Rep loss, you get that 1.1 multiplier.
I think it's even simpler to just do the rep gain over time, with the multiplier like you say, but I could go either way. It depends on how fast they expect rep to regain, but if it's 15000 Rep/mo, there are 720 hours in a month and we could get hourly Rep gains instead of daily. They might/will be fractional, which is fine. Computers keep track of it.
I'm not sure what is driving the need for check-in actions. Are we worried that "The Goodfellow" who expects to play only a few hours a day around other commitments regains as much Rep as I do when I'm playing 6-8 hours a day? It doesn't hurt me that much, frankly. PFO will be about so much more than the effort to keep Rep up. Resource collection, looted kills, trading, crafting, wars and feuds and so much more. The people who have more game time will be rewarded in lots and lots of ways.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
No types of (meaningful) gameplay are favored over any other with a time-based regain. Hobs can just chat in local, mongering his fish, while his reputation regains from that horrible incident he was involved in last week. You can be involved in a feud, Andius can be guarding his flocks, someone else can be killing gobbos in PvE. Everyone is playing the meaningful game and regaining rep.This is a good point, ideally people will be able to take the positive choices in their desired gameplay style: explorer, social, merchant, PvP, PvE, etc...and make the same Rep when taken on average. However, that would be a tough thing to balance. It will end up there are "easy rep runs" and they will become flooded with people grinding Rep, even if they do not mesh with their desired gameplay style.
Maybe another option, a simpler one, is that a single act of positive game play a day gives you that daily limit of 50 Rep...and each day with no Rep loss, you get that 1.1 multiplier.
I think it's even simpler to just do the rep gain over time, with the multiplier like you say, but I could go either way. It depends on how fast they expect rep to regain, but if it's 15000 Rep/mo, there are 720 hours in a month and we could get hourly Rep gains instead of daily. They might/will be fractional, which is fine. Computers keep track of it.
I'm not sure what is driving the need for check-in actions. Are we worried that "The Goodfellow" who expects to play only a few hours a day around other commitments regains as much Rep as I do when I'm playing 6-8 hours a day? It doesn't hurt me that much, frankly. PFO will be about so much more than the effort to keep Rep up. Resource collection, looted kills, trading, crafting, wars and feuds and so much more. The people who have more game time will be rewarded in lots and lots of ways.
If it were only about jealousy from players that play more, why would we agree to a daily cap or an "earned through time" to "applied through in-game actions" similar to the exp system?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Okay: how about rep gained while outside game has to be 'claimed' with in-game deeds like conducting an escalation patrol or producing crafted products or harvested resources?
Oh, I like that...it makes the mechanic work like kind of like experience and merit badges.
If it were only about jealousy from players that play more, why would we agree to a daily cap or an "earned through time" to "applied through in-game actions" similar to the exp system?
Sorry for being dense, I am not sure what you are asking...can you restate it?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I'm not sure what is driving the need for check-in actions. Are we worried that "The Goodfellow" who expects to play only a few hours a day around other commitments regains as much Rep as I do when I'm playing 6-8 hours a day? It doesn't hurt me that much, frankly. PFO will be about so much more than the effort to keep Rep up. Resource collection, looted kills, trading, crafting, wars and feuds and so much more. The people who have more game time will be rewarded in lots and lots of ways.
It was a response to this. Does that clear it up?
P.S. You are not dense, although you do have gravity. :)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
President Onihimon is completely disbelieved by some and the rest of us are clearly on koolaid: someone else has to restate all his positions. I understand we are launching a Kickstarter to provide him with a parrot who can repeat his words more believably.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I'm not sure what is driving the need for check-in actions. Are we worried that "The Goodfellow" who expects to play only a few hours a day around other commitments regains as much Rep as I do when I'm playing 6-8 hours a day? It doesn't hurt me that much, frankly. PFO will be about so much more than the effort to keep Rep up. Resource collection, looted kills, trading, crafting, wars and feuds and so much more. The people who have more game time will be rewarded in lots and lots of ways.If it were only about jealousy from players that play more, why would we agree to a daily cap or an "earned through time" to "applied through in-game actions" similar to the exp system?
Like I said, I don't know what is driving it. If you think it's about jealousy, maybe it is.
If Hobs spends 8 hours chatting with people, or handing out care packages to new players, what discrete actions of his are rewarded? Or are your actions more worthy than his? Or take a settlement leader - those poor blokes are spending 8 hours a day in teamspeak coordinating stuff. Do they contribute less to the game than you do?
If Hobs' chats and handing out care packages are counted at good play actions and can be captured by the game as such, it seems trivial to game it so a character can do this while effectively afk.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...If Hobs spends 8 hours chatting with people, or handing out care packages to new players, what discrete actions of his are rewarded? Or are your actions more worthy than his? Or take a settlement leader - those poor blokes are spending 8 hours a day in teamspeak coordinating stuff. Do they contribute less to the game than you do?
If Hobs' chats and handing out care packages are counted at good play actions and can be captured by the game as such, it seems trivial to game it so a character can do this while effectively afk.
Player characters can award rep, sorta like an 'up' vote. New players haven't much rep in my current model of the game so if I am right they will need to award rep without giving of their slowly accumulating stock.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@ Nihimon,
Are you suggesting that there should be no way to gain reputation by playing in a positive manner?
I am suggesting it should not be easy to recover from evil acts. You might have seen me point this out before.
What ways, besides slow recovery over time, do you see as acceptable for those that engage in PvP to actively gain positive REP?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@ Urman
I do not think it is about jealousy. That was the point of my reply.
To be honest I can only accurately answer for myself as I truly do understand my position.
I feel like there should be the most rewards for actions in-game rather than logged out, non action. I think that the system should be encouraging us to be in-game doing mostly positive things, but not in the "well you didn't do bad so we won't punish you" only philosophy.
Let the in game actions be boring (depending on your viewpoint), let them be limited. For goodness sake, let the rewards be for stuff that we "do" just like the penalties are for stuff that we "do". :)
unfortunaly the abuses cant and wont be punished if they go this way, sad i know.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If Hobs spends 8 hours chatting with people, or handing out care packages to new players, what discrete actions of his are rewarded? Or are your actions more worthy than his? Or take a settlement leader - those poor blokes are spending 8 hours a day in teamspeak coordinating stuff. Do they contribute less to the game than you do?
If Hobs' chats and handing out care packages are counted at good play actions and can be captured by the game as such, it seems trivial to game it so a character can do this while effectively afk.
I believe reputation needs to be actively gained, not passively gifted, so I'm not expecting to be compensated for what I do outside the game, no matter how beneficial it might be to the game or the community. True, I don't plan to either PvP (with Hobs) or do things that will cost me reputation, so I'm one of the few people who will likely be a null rep player.
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
What ways, besides slow recovery over time, do you see as acceptable for those that engage in PvP to actively gain positive REP?@ Nihimon,
Are you suggesting that there should be no way to gain reputation by playing in a positive manner?
I am suggesting it should not be easy to recover from evil acts. You might have seen me point this out before.
That's the million dollar question. I'm not aware of any method that doesn't have excessive drawbacks.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Okay: how about rep gained while outside game has to be 'claimed' with in-game deeds like conducting an escalation patrol or producing crafted products or harvested resources?
Any meaningfull reputation system needs to have a cost measured in something that is actually costly to people who would choose to spend as little as possible.
Riffing off of DeciusBrutus; any grinding actions that people want to do anyway are hardly costly for those people. (PvP for Bluddwolf? Gathering/Crafting for Bringslight? Other preferred actions for other people)(I'm not sure of your goals in PFO, BL.) They'll do them anyway. These are all good gameplay things, and the players earn loot or produce value, or achieve strategic gains for their settlements. But it's not costly at all.
Time away from their preferred gaming style is costly. Killing PvE enemies that drop almost no loot is costly. Walking endless patrol loops in the starter towns where you'll never see combat is costly.
unfortunaly the abuses cant and wont be punished if they go this way, sad i know.Can you clarify what you mean?
i was posting about sanctioned PvP giving reputation, sorry for the vague post.
Also i agree 100% with Andius in page 1.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Okay: how about rep gained while outside game has to be 'claimed' with in-game deeds like conducting an escalation patrol or producing crafted products or harvested resources?Any meaningfull reputation system needs to have a cost measured in something that is actually costly to people who would choose to spend as little as possible.Riffing off of DeciusBrutus; any grinding actions that people want to do anyway are hardly costly for those people. (PvP for Bluddwolf? Gathering/Crafting for Bringslight? Other preferred actions for other people)(I'm not sure of your goals in PFO, BL.) They'll do them anyway. These are all good gameplay things, and the players earn loot or produce value, or achieve strategic gains for their settlements. But it's not costly at all.
Time away from their preferred gaming style is costly. Killing PvE enemies that drop almost no loot is costly. Walking endless patrol loops in the starter towns where you'll never see combat is costly.
I am fine with that. I do not think that they have to be "fun" things to regain rep burned in unsanctioned actions. I am not sure that people starting at "0" should have to do boring things either.
Let's look at this from another angle:
How can a brand new player earn rep so that they,
a: Can become an even less attractive target to roving killers?
b: Earn it faster than someone trying to get it up from -5000?
c: Fast enough that they can be an asset to the org. they join"
d: Get to play (in a positive way) and gain one of the most important metrics that they will need to succeed?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
That's the million dollar question. I'm not aware of any method that doesn't have excessive drawbacks.What ways, besides slow recovery over time, do you see as acceptable for those that engage in PvP to actively gain positive REP?@ Nihimon,
Are you suggesting that there should be no way to gain reputation by playing in a positive manner?
I am suggesting it should not be easy to recover from evil acts. You might have seen me point this out before.
If REP loss is exponential and REP gain is flat rate, would this not solve the problem, given REP gain has a daily cap?
I know people say that they want people that do neg REP things to spend a lot of time making that up. If you do not provide them with a vehicle for rewarding positive behavior, they will accept and learn to play in their low-REP status and that will foster negative behavior patterns.
If their playing by the rules (as opposed to playing how they like) does nothing to better their situation, they will play how they like.
That's the million dollar question. I'm not aware of any method that doesn't have excessive drawbacks.What ways, besides slow recovery over time, do you see as acceptable for those that engage in PvP to actively gain positive REP?@ Nihimon,
Are you suggesting that there should be no way to gain reputation by playing in a positive manner?
I am suggesting it should not be easy to recover from evil acts. You might have seen me point this out before.
If REP loss is exponential and REP gain is flat rate, would this not solve the problem, given REP gain has a daily cap?
I know people say that they want people that do neg REP things to spend a lot of time making that up. If you do not provide them with a vehicle for rewarding positive behavior, they will accept and learn to play in their low-REP status and that will foster negative behavior patterns.
If their playing by the rules (as opposed to playing how they like) does nothing to better their situation, they will play how they like.
or they can exploit the sh** out of it(without daily cap) and be a di** again ASAP.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
How can a brand new player earn rep so that they,
a: Can become an even less attractive target to roving killers?
b: Earn it faster than someone trying to get it up from -5000?
c: Fast enough that they can be an asset to the org. they join"
d: Get to play (in a positive way) and gain one of the most important metrics that they will need to succeed?
a: by not committing acts which loose Rep and persistently acting in a way that contributes positively to the gaming community. They might only gain a bit each day, but the longer they go without a Rep hit, the more this daily bonus increases.
b: Why is this relevant? A -5000 or even -7500 Rep person who decides to turn over a new leaf should gain at the same rate as a Rep 0 person. Each day they earn what they are allowed and each day that rate increases if they do not loose Rep. Of course, it will take the -7500 person a much longer time to get to 7500 simply because they have to gain 15000 as opposed to 7500.
c: Their real contribution will be in Influence, the question should be how to minimize the fact that a new character has 0 Rep to the average Rep of the settlement. I hope:
I could see Rep contribution to a settlement be proportional to the "experience level" of the character, so low "experience" characters have a much lower impact on the average Rep of the Settlement. Vets reps effect the Reputation of the Settlement much more.
I would counter that (and also fulfill the second half of Ryan's point) by making Influence inversely proportional to the "experience level" of the character. Low experience characters provide more Influence for their achievements.
d: That simply comes down to GW giving us many ways to contribute content positively to the community.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
From the Darkfall Lessons Learned thread:
The point I was replying to was the comment about "going Pirate, then becoming good again". The intent of the response was to say that people cycling in and out of Dredd Pirate Roberts territory and back is limited by the incredibly onerous time requirements and boredom required. It happens, but it happens infrequently. That's a good design from the standpoint of saying that you can do some edge-case thing, but the game system implies limits that few will bother to overcome the inherent challenge.
People do all sorts of incredibly time consuming and boring things in MMOs. Player boredom is the only truly meaningful resource in MMO design. However people who get off on the thrill of player-killing are temperamentally unsuited to long, boring intervals of grinding no-challenge content. They don't do it if they can avoid it.
There are other people, of a very different temperament, who are content to harvest resources using utterly boring mechanics for hour after hour. They are getting some pleasure just from seeing a number on a graph go up slowly over time. There is a reason Pachinko is a successful entertainment business. Some people find boring, repetitive behavior very soothing. Plus they can be super social while they do it; the resource extraction is just an excuse to log in and chat with friends.
These two people are fundamentally different and a game design can work at limiting the first behavior without limiting the second! even though that may seem counter-intuitive.
Allowing PVP-centric players to run down their Reputation with kills of unflagged characters and then allowing them to continue PvP-centric play in running their Reputation back up through participation in wars and feuds is completely counter to the above post of Ryan's.
PVP-centric players want PVP in any form. Allowing them to jump back and forth between reputation damaging and reputation rewarding PVP is rewarding them for...
That's a good analysis--I think you're "getting it." :)
@ Kabal362
There a just as many ways to make in-game rep accumulation (for actions) in game, non exploitable as there are for any other MMO to make exp gain non exploitable when it is earned for in-game actions.
killing monsters and..? if it involves Players-Players interactions its exploitable.