Darn... I just got SAD and lost the completed "Unauthorized Biography of Bluddwolf" that was being sent to Brighthaven to be published and mass produced.... :(Guess we'll have to continue using normal toilet paper.
I feel an Epic Rap Battle coming on...
Goblin Squad Member
|
Darn... I just got SAD and lost the completed "Unauthorized Biography of Bluddwolf" that was being sent to Brighthaven to be published and mass produced.... :(Guess we'll have to continue using normal toilet paper.
Ahh.. You mean, "Lord Andius' PVP Guide for Cliff Jumping". An excellent choice for toilet paper, "Soft" both literally and figuratively.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I know you are, but what am I?
I gave a positive post and agreed with Pagan, and instead I get accused of going back on my resolution not to debate on the SAD system.
Obviously, "Agreement" is not in any part of the definition of "Debate".
If he wants to give me "crap" he should do so more intelligently
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The issue I see with a goods to money equivalency transformation is that it gives settlements a reason to SAD themselves if at any time money ever becomes more important than any specific good (such as the need to quickly pay mercs for assisting defense).
If SADing oneself (or paying someone to do it) ever becomes a way to "gain advantage", I think the mechanic is not working as intended.
Even if the system is designed with a net loss, say 20-30% of the value is simply destroyed, SADing still becomes a way to exchange excess inventory that probably could not have been sold elsewhere (or at least easily).
But, I also have an issue with the money always on my person thing. If we are not allowed to actually deposit in a bank, and there is valid (read advantageous) reason to do so, people will just give their excess money to an alt, or to the settlement, or maybe a player who decides to run a bank service. For example, what if someone SADs me for 50g and I only have 10g on my body? I cannot believe GW will design the system so SADers get a free pass to kill poor noobs with no money, so I must assume money SADs will be limited by the amount one has on them...
Therefore, I must argue the only scenario that makes sense with what I know now (which admittedly might be faulty or incomplete), is a SAD only gives goods/cargo.
What happens to the goods once stolen? I could care less, but I hope it remains both an interesting challenge for bandits (just in case I ever go that path), and I hope there are options to recover goods (violently and non, just in case I go any other path).
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Darn... I just got SAD and lost the completed "Unauthorized Biography of Bluddwolf" that was being sent to Brighthaven to be published and mass produced.... :(Guess we'll have to continue using normal toilet paper.Ahh.. You mean, "Lord Andius' PVP Guide for Cliff Jumping". An excellent choice for toilet paper, "Soft" both literally and figuratively.
Perhaps I could use a list of all the people it takes you to cap a village, or even better, how many of you Lord Zanuul can kill entirely on his own. I hear both lists are pretty long. A non-RPK who put an honorific in his own name soloed your entire party even though your the ones who jumped him.
It's something you should probably start getting used to. ;)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Perhaps I could use a list of all the people it takes you to cap a village, or even better, how many of you Lord Zanuul can kill entirely on his own. I hear both lists are pretty long. A non-RPK who put an honorific in his own name soloed your entire party even though your the ones who jumped him.
It's something you should probably start getting used to. ;)
We had 12 people that capped 3 villages and killed about 6 players in the process.
Lord Zanuul killed all four members of the party we were in. He had, if I recall correctly about 180k Prowess and our total was about 100k (maybe). I had at the time only about 8k prowess, not really PVP viable. We did take him down to about half health, but we really had no chance.
Lord Zanuul is probably the best PVPer in Darkfall, he is featured in several podcasts. He commended us on our efforts and Rezzed us, and offered to help us farm Gnolls.
Sinister Tyrants was an exceptionally well respected clan in Darkfall. They never RPK'd and often showed mercy (no gank kills). It was a small clan though and we lost the settlement in a battle that was 64+ vs. our 8. We fought for nearly 3 hours, and scored more than our own number in kills. None of us left the field until the settlement fell, and we all left together.
PVP is not just about wins, but how you fought in draws and losses. You will never see me run from a fight I can't win, unless the field commander (Mechwarrior) calls for a peel maneuver + suppressive (focused) fire.
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
PVP is not just about wins, but how you fought in draws and losses. You will never see me run from a fight I can't win, unless the field commander (Mechwarrior) calls for a peel maneuver + suppressive (focused) fire.
You aren't making any attempt to remedy your tactical weaknesses? Or have you only ever played where there weren't meaningful consequences for losing fights?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I'm quite familiar with Zanuul. He has ideals nearly identical to mine and his clan used to use our Teamspeak. I'm in no disagreement that he is an excellent PvPer but many of the things you criticize me for, Zanuul and I share in common. Also prowess is not a straight measure of power. It doesn't take that much to max a character so if you made up 8k of a combine 100 at least one of the others if not all 3 had to be close to full fighting strength. Besides that a huge portion of his is invested in crafting masteries anyway. It didn't take 4 of you to take him to half because his character was so powerful. It's because he really is that much better than you.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I personally have no problem with a Stolen Flag on goods it creates some extra game dynamics that add to the overall game experience.
Allowing a hideout to remove the Stolen Flag off of items over time both encourages bandits to use their hideouts, but to put serious effort into hiding them well too.
A Black Market where you can auction goods that still have the Stolen Flag also adds to the games dynamics. Take for example if a Black Market required a settlement to have a certain Corruption rating to have a Black Market. Now what if further use of the Black Market raised the Corruption rating of Settlement? If you allow outsiders to establish the Black Market in a Settlement, the Black Market becomes something of a passive PVP. This is especially so if you give local Law Enforcement tools to track down and shut down the Black Market.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
You aren't making any attempt to remedy your tactical weaknesses? Or have you only ever played where there weren't meaningful consequences for losing fights?
PVP is not just about wins, but how you fought in draws and losses. You will never see me run from a fight I can't win, unless the field commander (Mechwarrior) calls for a peel maneuver + suppressive (focused) fire.
EvE, MechWarrior Online, and Darkfall all have meaningful consequences for losing.
The tactic of peeling is in fact an attempt to remedy a situation that is not going in your side's favor. It is not a "you have been routed", it is a orderly retreat with the intent of maneuvering to a new and more adventagious position to press the attack once again.
I typically don't PvP in games where there is no consequences for losing, games like WoW, STO, LoTRO, SWTOR, are all examples of consequence free PvP. The PvP in them is incredibly boring to me.
Fortunately, PFO has at least partial player looting, equipment and item destruction, item decay and whatever death penalty there will be. But I hope that GW is open to making the consequences for losing higher if those don't raise the level of anxiety of those who are about to lose.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I personally have no problem with a Stolen Flag on goods it creates some extra game dynamics that add to the overall game experience.
Allowing a hideout to remove the Stolen Flag off of items over time both encourages bandits to use their hideouts, but to put serious effort into hiding them well too.
A Black Market where you can auction goods that still have the Stolen Flag also adds to the games dynamics. Take for example if a Black Market required a settlement to have a certain Corruption rating to have a Black Market. Now what if further use of the Black Market raised the Corruption rating of Settlement? If you allow outsiders to establish the Black Market in a Settlement, the Black Market becomes something of a passive PVP. This is especially so if you give local Law Enforcement tools to track down and shut down the Black Market.
I agree I like the layers to be added.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
In all the trading I've done in Freelancer, I can say being hunted by both enemy soldiers and pirates really enhanced what was otherwise a dull point A to point B experience. Definitely there was a sense of thrill in Darkfall when I made it into town with a big load of loot, or in a Mortal when I made it up to a major city with a good started horse I had tamed. None of those games would be the same without those experiences. That's why I've supported the inclusion of a robbery mechanic in PFO, and am glad to see we have one.
However what made that experiences so meaningful was overcoming challenges and avoiding negative outcomes. When you do get robbed, that is a negative outcome. Pixels though it may be it represents time you spent to generate resources that you no longer have.
Every time I ran into friendly forces who gave me an escort, every time someone jumped in on my side and helped me out, every time I did the same for others it was an extremely positive experience. I can think of times that our entire diplomatic relation with another faction changed for the positive because I saved the bacon of one of their members.
Too much micro managing of player behavior in a sandbox mmo would remove these encounters and situations from the game, if only way to succesfully raid other factions is by having declared war without ruining your character essentially forever by having too much negative reputation then every guild/players will have dedicated resource non guild affiliated alts in order to avoid getting raid or robbed. SAD needs to be a hurtful and powerful tool longterm for players if it is to have any real gameplay effect at all.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Too much micro managing of player behavior in a sandbox mmo would remove these encounters and situations from the game, if only way to succesfully raid other factions is by having declared war without ruining your character essentially forever by having too much negative reputation then every guild/players will have dedicated resource non guild affiliated alts in order to avoid getting raid or robbed. SAD needs to be a hurtful and powerful tool longterm for players if it is to have any real gameplay effect at all.In all the trading I've done in Freelancer, I can say being hunted by both enemy soldiers and pirates really enhanced what was otherwise a dull point A to point B experience. Definitely there was a sense of thrill in Darkfall when I made it into town with a big load of loot, or in a Mortal when I made it up to a major city with a good started horse I had tamed. None of those games would be the same without those experiences. That's why I've supported the inclusion of a robbery mechanic in PFO, and am glad to see we have one.
However what made that experiences so meaningful was overcoming challenges and avoiding negative outcomes. When you do get robbed, that is a negative outcome. Pixels though it may be it represents time you spent to generate resources that you no longer have.
Every time I ran into friendly forces who gave me an escort, every time someone jumped in on my side and helped me out, every time I did the same for others it was an extremely positive experience. I can think of times that our entire diplomatic relation with another faction changed for the positive because I saved the bacon of one of their members.
The point of that post was to advocate the plain and simple position that unprovoked aggressive action should flag you to those around you. Freelancer had no alignment system. Darkfall has had three that I've tried. Mortal has had one. They were all terrible except Mortals which I'd rate as an overall pretty good, but they all shared one thing in common. In every single one if those systems attacking a blue (non-murderer) player who wasn't a war-target flagged you to everyone around you. Kill too many and you become a red (murderer) and everyone can kill you consequence free.
That one aspect of the system worked very well. Especially in Mortal where they made it so reds didn't get more murder counts for self defense.
The only aggressive action you could take in those games short of attacking people was pickpocketing in Mortal. It gave you a hidden flag, and if anyone revealed that flag, they could kill you consequence free.
It allowed players to dish out player justice, and help other players who are being attacked. That's extremely meaningful content.
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
You aren't making any attempt to remedy your tactical weaknesses? Or have you only ever played where there weren't meaningful consequences for losing fights?
PVP is not just about wins, but how you fought in draws and losses. You will never see me run from a fight I can't win, unless the field commander (Mechwarrior) calls for a peel maneuver + suppressive (focused) fire.
EvE, MechWarrior Online, and Darkfall all have meaningful consequences for losing.
The tactic of peeling is in fact an attempt to remedy a situation that is not going in your side's favor. It is not a "you have been routed", it is a orderly retreat with the intent of maneuvering to a new and more adventagious position to press the attack once again.
I typically don't PvP in games where there is no consequences for losing, games like WoW, STO, LoTRO, SWTOR, are all examples of consequence free PvP. The PvP in them is incredibly boring to me.
Fortunately, PFO has at least partial player looting, equipment and item destruction, item decay and whatever death penalty there will be. But I hope that GW is open to making the consequences for losing higher if those don't raise the level of anxiety of those who are about to lose.
If you have already budgeted for what you are flying/carrying, then the consequence of dying in EvE and Darkfall is not meaningful.
I haven't played MWO, but I doubt that anyone can look at anyone's hangar and make a good estimate of their K/D ratio for the last week.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As I said before, if stealing items from your enemy through SAD gives you goods with a Stolen flag, then stealing items from them by killing them and taking from their corpse should also give the Stolen flag. Unless there's some specific reason it should not?
Unless there's some specific reason it should not?
There shouldn't be a stolen flag.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Decius
I'd agree that death in EVE and Darkfall can be meaningful but we have to keep in mind that in all his stories he's running around in PvP gear with a heavy numbers advantage.
MWO is a match based FPS with elimination style rules. The "meaningful consequence for losing" is that you are eliminated from the match, and have to pay a tiny repair bill which basically equates to less profits that round because you still have to be beyond terrible to not make consistent profits. So it's meaningful if you consider match based FPS games to be meaningful.
In the scenario he criticizes me for withdrawing from we had been farming NPCs for fairly considerable period of time in a group appropriately sized for the NPCs we were farming. Being spotted by an organization known for RPK behavior, I made the call that our team should withdraw rather than getting caught engaged with NPCs and carrying a bunch of loot if they called in backup.
Bottom line. Bluddwolf is left bragging about how one of our allies spared him out of pity after his whole party only got him to half health, and gave them a pat on the head for their efforts. Our party avoided a potential wipe and made it to the bank with our loot. Loot in the bank = victory. He's left making excuses and trying to put a good spin on his defeats while attacking the means we used to achieve victory. That's always a pleasing position to see your enemies in.
Bluddwolf can pat himself on the back for his bravado but it only proves how sorely unprepared he is to lead in a game like this. These kinds of games aren't about how many kills you make or even K/D ratios. They are about acquiring and defending territory and assets. I operate in a manner that maximizes my efficiency in achieving that end goal. Bluddwolf overstaffs trivial tasks to the point of cutting his potential profits to about a third of what they should be and criticizes tactics that put money and loot in the bank. If he actually achieved consistent victory in his goal of earning kills I could rate his leadership skills at a C but knowing his 4 man party wiped on a single player, managing only to bring that player to 50% health, I'm forced to give him an F.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It allowed players to dish out player justice, and help other players who are being attacked. That's extremely meaningful content.
PFO has this, it is called "Laws", "Association / Agency", or accepting the consequences just like everyone else.
1. If someone attacks a citizen of your settlement, you can freely defend them.
2. If someone attacks a member of your company, you can freely defend them.
3. If someone attacks a member of your ad hoc group, you can freely defend them.
4. If someone violates a law in your settlement hex, you can freely attack the criminal.
5. If you have an active feud, way or are a member of the opposing faction, you can freely attack that person.
6. If that person raided your outpost, POI or similar structure, you can freely attack that person.
7. If that person attack you, you can freely defend yourself.
8. If you have a bounty, assassination or death curse against that person, you can freely attack that person.
9. If your settlement hex is in state of war, and the person is within a certain range, you can freely attack that person. (recent comment by Ryan, not sure if it is developed yet).
10. If you SAD someone and they turn down the offer, you can freely attack that person.
In think 10 should be enough, but if I missed any please feel free to add to it.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Qallz, I agree, unless it's well thought out and actually contributes to the fun. Which is why I'm putting this problem towards the people who are advocating a Stolen flag; if it contributes to making the merchant/bandit/bounty hunter interactions more interesting, varied, and well-thought out then I'm all for such a flag, but in its current state not so much.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Maybe we should have a "Fight Club" thread where you two can go to duke it out, so you aren't detracting so much from the actual thread content.
If there's going to be a Fight Club thread, you already broke the first two rules of it.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
knowing his 4 man party wiped on a single player, managing only to bring that player to 50% health, I'm forced to give him an F.
Yes it was a failure. I made no bones about it. However, unlike Darkfall, PFO will not have the same power curve differences that Darkfall has.
Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose. I have no issues with that reality.
Other games like EVE, to be honest, that PVP has dramatically changed and has shifted to large scale alliance based wars. The movement was away from small gang PVP. Even the small scale corporation vs. corporation wars have been scaled back (too expensive).
I'm hopeful that GW is not moving in that trend, and they leave the feud system very accessible (cheap to start). That and that company sized skirmishes are common place and unallied settlements can be viable.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Could we please take posts not related to the main subject (I.e. SADs and how how they affect merchants specifically) to PMs or another thread, please?
I'll let it lie for now though I do have more to say to him on the subject of SADs. I think my point in that side tangent has been made very clearly.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Bluddwolf
It allowed players to dish out player justice, and help other players who are being attacked. That's extremely meaningful content.PFO has this, it is called "Laws", "Association / Agency", or accepting the consequences just like everyone else.
Attacker
The character has attacked another character outside of a war situation, and the target character did not have a PvP flag. It denotes which character is the aggressor in PvP combat.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.
Given that. There's only one other mechanic outlined you could be debating with me...
My PFO Forum New Years Resolution is to refrain from debating SADs unless something new comes from the Devs or Ryan.
Strike 2!!! And it's only the 4th of January. ;)
Anyway your entire list is made up of ways you can have an investment in the fight. Otherwise you think we should get penalized. Good aligned PvPers get involved in conflicts they have no stake in to defend whichever party is in the right. That's what makes them good.
Reputation is supposed to penalize PvP that is toxic/meaningless. How is the role of interceding on other's behalf ever toxic or meaningless? In my opinion if I can't play my role then they should just do away with the role of SADs and banditry altogether. There is no sense in not allowing you to defend random strangers without consequence but letting you rob them without consequence. We already have settlement warfare so SADs aren't essential to this game's success.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Could we please take posts not related to the main subject (I.e. SADs and how how they affect merchants specifically) to PMs or another thread, please?I'll let it lie for now though I do have more to say to him on the subject of SADs. I think my point in that side tangent has been made very clearly.
I stand by this agreement and it is not a debate, but an agreement:
In the long run, if SADs are going to flag a bandit as a criminal anyway, the bandit is better off just saying "No" to SADs as well. As you [Pax Pagan] say, it makes no economic sense that without resource destruction, the value of items will not increase.
Furthermore, the bandit will gain benefit when the stolen goods are sold on the market. The benefits of the reputation bonus may not be necessary, if the ambush / raid was non rep losing to begin with. Reputation will naturally rise with each hour of not causing rep loss.
Raiding Outposts
(potentially) Caravans
POIs
Feuds
Wars
FactionsAre all ways to PvP / Loot without reputation or alignment consequences. If this remains or turns out to be the case, SADs might be unnecessary unless a target not falling within one of the above activities is carrying so much wealth and little protection, it will be worth either the rep loss or issuing a SAD at 75% or more.
There is quite honestly nothing I will debate short of a Dev Blog on the subject of SADs.
Pax pagan made a point on the economics of SADs and I agreed, nothing more here will be said on my part.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Let me help to settle this new SAD debate. As someone who will probably be on both sides of the SAD system, I think I have a rare opportunity here to offer an objective opinion.
- The problem with the flagging system, is that after someone attacks someone a few times in a row, they get the respective 24-hour flag (the Mass Murderer, for instance). Making someone open to PvP for a few hours, or especially for 24 hours after a SAD would strongly discourage this form of gameplay, and essentially, the SAD'er would receive treatment akin to that of a very Low Rep character. This would strongly discourage bandit-style play, and, quite frankly, if we're going to do that, we might as well remove the SAD system entirely.
- However, I think a big part of Andius's debate, is that if he SEES someone SAD'ing someone else, he should be able to attack them, and that seems pretty reasonable to me.
So how to solve it then?
Instead of the normal flag system, just make it so that people who SAD are flagged as (whatever) and open to PvP for a SHORT duration after each SAD (say, 90 seconds). This would be regardless of how many people they SAD'd previously, and would never stack, only reset (if they managed to SAD someone else within that 90 second time-frame).
This would give people a window in which they can attack SAD'ers after each SAD (as if they had witnessed it), while not consistently making Bandits fair game for anyone who wants to kill them.
Further, people who're SAD'd should be able to receive justice by putting a bounty on the SAD'er, in the same way that people who are killed in a way that causes Rep loss can do it.
So, there's two ways to get revenge on a SAD'er now:
1) Right place, right time... actually catching them in the act, and attacking them a short while later.
2) Someone getting pissed off after getting robbed, and placing a bounty on the robber (which can be done regardless of whether the SAD was successfully completed, or if it was turned down, and the person was killed). Does that make everyone happy? I don't really care, but it's a great system imo
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I think however the flag for SADing people works should be identical to how the flag for vigilantism (attacking people with PvP flags in a settlement that hasn't declared people with those tags fair game) works. If banditry doesn't have a 24 hour flag then neither should vigilantism. If banditry has a 24 hour flag then so should vigilantism.
I am in favor of 24 hour flags for both, because neither is really being treated like a low rep player. Low rep players get weaker characters and are forced to live in weaker settlements. That's the big penalty for low rep.
I think however the flag for SADing people works should be identical to how the flag for vigilantism (attacking people with PvP flags in a settlement that hasn't declared people with those tags fair game) works. If banditry doesn't have a 24 hour flag then neither should vigilantism. If banditry has a 24 hour flag then so should vigilantism.
I am in favor of 24 hour flags for both, because neither is really being treated like a low rep player. Low rep players get weaker characters and are forced to live in weaker settlements. That's the big penalty for low rep.
A 24 hour flag on banditry? The 24-hour flags are there as another means of discouraging PvP which GW deems "undesirable". Would you not agree with that?
And further, if you were to give the 24-hour flag for SAD'ing, would that not imply that SAD'ing was "undesriable" as a form of gameplay? I think it would...
And further, there's nothing official anywhere about "viligantism", that was merely a suggestion made by players, and shouldn't be taken into consideration with how the SAD system works, because it simply isn't part of the game, and may never be, whereas SAD's on the other hand are confirmed.
By saying SAD'ers should be subject to long flags, like the 24 hour flag, is a way of saying SAD'ing is a form of gameplay which is to be discouraged, AND, considering Ryan has confirmed that SAD'ers will have their Rep INCREASED by a successful SAD, and not DECREASED, then it's safe to say that the opposite is true.
Also, SAD'ing being a positive form of gameplay is self-evident, because if they didn't feel it was a positive form of gameplay, they wouldn't have put it in the game.
I'm just asking you to recognize SAD'ing as a positive form of gameplay, and then be a little reasonable, Andius.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I'd like an hour long flag at the least. But a bigger question is this: Regardless of flag duration, what is to be done about SADing then logging? Will there be a 5-minute wait period after you disconnect where your character stands there unless you logged in a safe location like in EVE?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
A 24 hour flag on banditry? The 24-hour flags are there as another means of discouraging PvP which GW deems "undesirable". Would you not agree with that?
No. Not at all. That's why I think vigilantism deserves equal treatment. Both SADs and vigilantism are forms of behavior I intend to engage in.
I feel no need to compromise because ultimately if we end up with a SAD system so broken I stop defending people from them that's good for me. I get to wield that broken SAD mechanic against my enemies. It's just bad for the game. I have no problem calling broken mechanics broken, even with they benefit me.
I think the character penalties designate what kind of PvP is "undesireable." I think when you are playing a full strength character that other characters are clear to engage that isn't marking you as an undesirable but meaningful content.
I am fine with being content for the lawful-evil enforcers who hate vigilantism and the chaotic-neutral guys who just don't appreciate my interloping. If they are hunting me then they aren't out bullying people not interested in PvP.
A 24 hour flag on banditry? The 24-hour flags are there as another means of discouraging PvP which GW deems "undesirable". Would you not agree with that?No. Not at all. That's why I think vigilantism deserves equal treatment. Both SADs and vigilantism are forms of behavior I intend to engage in.
You're denying the simple fact that the "Attacker" and "Mass Murderer" flags are there to discourage undesirable gameplay? Gimme a break man.
If that's true, then why do these flags only apply to people who killed/attacked "Unsanctioned" targets, and not people who kill/attack anyone, exactly?
An hour+ long "anyone can attack" flag for Bandits is a way of punishing people for engaging in that form of gameplay. Period.
Edit: That is to say it IS too punishing, regarldess of whether someone intends to be a punishment.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I have a little bit of trouble equating actions perpetrated on sovereign (player controlled) ground in the same way with those perpetrated in "wild territory".
Qallz's idea above is not too bad (for wildlands), though I would like the timer's extended a bit. Not so much that the victim can call in aid 10 min away for revenge from an accepted SAD. If you accept or stall the SAD then I like that the window to interfere should be short.
It should be a "right place right time" thing. If SAD is too inconvenient and too dangerous, it will never be used.
If you accept or stall the SAD then I like that the window to interfere should be short.
It should be a "right place right time" thing. If SAD is too inconvenient and too dangerous, it will never be used.
Yea, I concur... Maybe instead of 90 seconds from the time the SAD is either accepted or rejected, we made it 120 seconds from the time the SAD is proposed.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The SAD is an incredibly powerful mechanic. So far there has been no confirmation you can't demand 100% SAD's consequence free. It allows you to walk up to absolutely anyone in the game and demand they hand over all their stuff or you get to kill them reputation penalty free. There is not even confirmation you won't get evil points.
As much as some people are claiming "I'll just ambush everyone to avoid the downsides of SAD's if they are given downsides" that's a friggin pipe dream.
Attacker
The character has attacked another character outside of a war situation, and the target character did not have a PvP flag. It denotes which character is the aggressor in PvP combat.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.Criminal
The character has broken the law of a settlement while inside its boundaries.• Each time a character gets the Criminal flag they lose law vs. chaos.
• Anyone may kill a Criminal character without fearing reputation or alignment loss.
• Criminal is removed once the character has been killed.
• The Criminal flag lasts ten minutes unless the character does something to get it again before the duration runs out.
• If the character gets the Criminal flag again within the duration of its existing Criminal buff, the count of Criminal increases by 1 and the duration resets and adds ten minutes, up to a maximum of 100 minutes.
• If the character gets to Criminal 10 they get a new flag, Brigand, which lasts for 24 hours, and does not disappear on death. It acts the same as Criminal, allowing repeat offenders to be hunted down for longer periods of time.
Notice the aggressor buff lasts 24 hours. The criminal flag lasts 10 minutes per action up to a maximum of 100 minutes. To get the Brigand flag you really have to be breaking a lot of laws. To get the murder flag you don't have to be murdering that often.
But beyond that reputation, reputation, reputation!
Reputation is not designed in such a way that low rep characters are meant to be competitive on any level. You do much murdering people because it's just easier, and you now have a terrible character that there isn't much penalty for killing. And that isn't going away within any 24 hours.
If bandits get flagged serious bandits are going to jump targets lone players and caravans out on lonely roads or in back alleys where there is nobody around to see. This might make them a free target but it's also going to preserve their character strength and make it so that worst case scenario, it's only 24 hours until they can revert to normal. It's a worthwhile price to get someone's loot otherwise consequence free.
Everyone who just shoots unflagged targets with any frequency see will end up with characters so gimped they will either correct their behavior or leave the game. SAD using bandits are the only viable bandits in the long run, and like I said, if everyone decides banditry is too much trouble we still have settlement warfare and outpost raiding. So whatever.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You're denying the simple fact that the "Attacker" and "Mass Murderer" flags are there to discourage undesirable gameplay? Gimme a break man.
Anyone who considers the ability for other players to engage you in PvP to be a penalty is clearly not worthy to call themselves a PvPer.
If you are not a PvPer then you don't deserve mechanics that allow you to go out and take aggressive actions like robbery against other players who have done nothing to provoke you.
Those flags are there to allow PvPers of opposing aims to enjoy the content of fighting eachother. That's a good thing. That's why I'm an advocate of a vigilante flag that is specifically targeted at my own playstyle.
First of all, as I've already said, those flags are there to help prevent gameplay which GW finds undesirable, while still allowing people to do it (same as the Rep system). So those flags you posted are irrelevant to SAD'ing, in general. Currently, there's no flag whatsoever to discourage SAD'ers, and that's because SAD'ing is a positive aspect of gameplay.
Secondly, while they haven't specifically said you can't SAD someone for 100% of their loot at any time, that's mostly because they haven't revealed much of anything on the subject, and so, it's reasonable to assume this will not be the case (since if it is, that's a bit over the top).
And "only 24 hours"? 24 hours is a long time for anyone who wants to make their career doing banditry... It would essentially be ALL the time.
The system I proposed of making characters vulnerable to PvP for 120 seconds after they propose a SAD, and on top of that, to make it so that bounty contracts can be put on SAD'ers, I think that gives bandit-hunters plenty of wiggle-room, while not destroying the SAD system completely.
And no, the SAD system isn't so complicated that they'll have to remove it, that's absurd.
You're denying the simple fact that the "Attacker" and "Mass Murderer" flags are there to discourage undesirable gameplay? Gimme a break man.Anyone who considers the ability for other players to engage you in PvP to be a penalty is clearly not worthy to call themselves a PvPer.
If you are not a PvPer then you don't deserve mechanics that allow you to go out and take aggressive actions like robbery against other players who have done nothing to provoke you.
Those flags are there to allow PvPers of opposing aims to enjoy the content of fighting eachother. That's a good thing. That's why I'm an advocate of a vigilante flag that is specifically targeted at my own playstyle.
LOL, seriously? So you're suggesting that in order to call myself a PvP'er, I should be OK with everyone attacking me at any time without consequence, whereas I myself can only attack very few select targets without consequence?
Tell me, Mr. PvP'er, do you intend to engage a style of gameplay where anyone can attack you at any time, for any reason, and without consequences, whereas you can only attack specific players without consequence, under a specific set of conditions? lol Didn't think so.
And I would go even further in saying that YOU'RE not a PvP'er, because you go out of your way to try to get every little advantage you can over the people who are.
You're not a "sheepdog", you're a sheep who's trying to act like one. Though this isn't too surprising, considering your lack of MMO experience.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Tell me, Mr. PvP'er, do you intend to engage a style of gameplay where anyone can attack you at any time, for any reason, and without consequences, whereas you can only attack specific players without consequence, under a specific set of conditions? lol Didn't think so.
I'm telling you right now that Andius is going to be flagged for you to hunt him down consequence free fairly often.
Tell me, Mr. PvP'er, do you intend to engage a style of gameplay where anyone can attack you at any time, for any reason, and without consequences, whereas you can only attack specific players without consequence, under a specific set of conditions? lol Didn't think so.I'm telling you right now that Andius is going to be flagged for you to hunt him down consequence free fairly often.
The flags thing is self-evident, because those only punish other things which cost reputation.
And yes, but will ANYONE be able to attack him at any time, and for any reason, whereas he can only attack certain people without any consequence? Nope.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Tell me, Mr. PvP'er, do you intend to engage a style of gameplay where anyone can attack you at any time, for any reason, and without consequences?
I think vigilantism deserves equal treatment. Both SADs and vigilantism are forms of behavior I intend to engage in.
I think however the flag for SADing people works should be identical to how the flag for vigilantism (attacking people with PvP flags in a settlement that hasn't declared people with those tags fair game) works.
[[In reference to how SAD's should be treated.]]
My plan is simple. You get this flag identical to this one:
If you don't want to get shot down by a horde of interlopers every time you issue a SAD, play the game like a real bandit and don't go plying your trade in broad freaking daylight on a crowded street. Seriously!Criminal
The character has broken the law of a settlement while inside its boundaries.• Each time a character gets the Criminal flag they lose law vs. chaos.
• Anyone may kill a Criminal character without fearing reputation or alignment loss.
• Criminal is removed once the character has been killed.
• The Criminal flag lasts ten minutes unless the character does something to get it again before the duration runs out.
• If the character gets the Criminal flag again within the duration of its existing Criminal buff, the count of Criminal increases by 1 and the duration resets and adds ten minutes, up to a maximum of 100 minutes.
• If the character gets to Criminal 10 they get a new flag, Brigand, which lasts for 24 hours, and does not disappear on death. It acts the same as Criminal, allowing repeat offenders to be hunted down for longer periods of time.
Any further questions?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Tell me, Mr. PvP'er, do you intend to engage a style of gameplay where anyone can attack you at any time, for any reason, and without consequences, whereas you can only attack specific players without consequence, under a specific set of conditions? lol Didn't think so.I'm telling you right now that Andius is going to be flagged for you to hunt him down consequence free fairly often.The flags thing is self-evident, because those only punish other things which cost reputation.
And yes, but will ANYONE be able to attack him at any time, and for any reason, whereas he can only attack certain people without any consequence? Nope.
1) It's not self-evident to me. Adding Risks is not the same as adding punishments.
2) Andius has stated he WILL be using SADs when it serves his needs. He isn't some LG paragon I've noticed some people trying to paint him as. Adding RISKS to SADs isn't making things easier for him. My character won't be SADing directly, but she's more Lawful-leaning.