Goblin Squad Member
|
I agree with bringslite on this point. If coin doesn't have tangibility and is not to be found physically on a person during a SAD it shouldn't be asked for. I think coin, if it is both of those things, should be allowed, but if not then no. I would further like to further the explanation of how a SAD removes items from the game however. They change ownership, certainly, but I do not understand how they are removed (unless it is used to pay the npc bandits of the hideout)
@Gaskon
The problem with your idea is that what if the merchants just stop hitting the "continue" every time no matter what? Sure they still lose the wealth (that is, whatever of value is in the eskrow/SAD conditions) but the bandits don't get it. If this happens every time then being a bandit will no longer be a viable role (you won't do something if you physically cannot succeed)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I think that fiction is full of stories of bandits masquerading as ordinary people up to the point the robbery commences. For that reason, I think that robbers shouldn't need to declare themselves until the moment of the robbery - that makes the ambush built in to the SAD action.
I'm largely sympathetic to this general point, and I've made similar points about Non-Unique Names, Anonymity, and Disguises. However, I've also internalized Ryan's argument that certain aspects of the game need to be things we can actually game.
Making the bandits subject to PvP for a significant time after the robbery might have much of the same effect.
I would be 100% in support of this if PFO also implemented my preferred solution to the general problem of characters logging off after their misdeeds, namely Keep characters in-world at all times, even when players are logged off.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I think that was only ever a talking point, something people threw in to discussions. The reality was the stolen goods would remain in the economy and be sold in market, just by the robber rather than the traveler (or the robber would use them, decreasing the demand for goods from the economy. Same-same). So that point didn't hold up under examination. Maybe it finally died.Part of the justification and selling point for SAD was that it would eliminate goods and items from the system. This was supposed to make it great, because it would encourage a brisk economy of risk to the goods and scarcity.
What happened to that?
I can understand that. It is why I am in favor of the bandit having the choice to try and use or sell the stuff the hard way or a "hand wave fence mechanic" where the stuff can be converted to quick gold somehow and disappears from the economy. Via mysterious "foreign merchants" or something.
There are still problems in determining value, I suppose, but those exist in any system where the merchant has to decide what his cargo is worth and what he will give in a SAD for them.
How can anyone fail a hauling contract if the goods still make it to port? All they can do is lose money.
In summary: Keep your tricksey, hobbitsy hand away from my precious - precious coin. MY Precious! ;)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
What if SAD coins, instead of being an immediate transfer of funds, put the amount in a system-generated escrow account, and was then released to the bandit only after the merchant reached his destination?
I really, really like that. It actually makes me think that a prior idea I had might also be workable, namely to give Merchants a strong incentive to put some Coin in escrow prior to their journey to cover any SADs they want to accept. If the Merchant didn't have enough in escrow to cover the SAD, then they automatically refuse.
This is a very raw idea, and not fully thought through.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I am still pretty sure that as long as "coin" is not an in-game object, we should try and train our thoughts away from it being a primary reward for the SAD. At least as much as we can. Perhaps it will be a possible part or option or perhaps not.
I think the devs originally intended Coin to be used to satisfy a SAD. It's the demand for Items that is suspect.
... stand and deliver, which allows the Outlaw to demand money from their victim through a trade window.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I am still pretty sure that as long as "coin" is not an in-game object, we should try and train our thoughts away from it being a primary reward for the SAD. At least as much as we can. Perhaps it will be a possible part or option or perhaps not.I think the devs originally intended Coin to be used to satisfy a SAD. It's the demand for Items that is suspect.
... stand and deliver, which allows the Outlaw to demand money from their victim through a trade window.
That is true. I have always assumed/hoped that it was just an early thought and not well defined. Coin might make the system smoother, but I don't like it.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Making the bandits subject to PvP for a significant time after the robbery might have much of the same effect.I would be 100% in support of this if PFO also implemented my preferred solution to the general problem of characters logging off after their misdeeds, namely Keep characters in-world at all times, even when players are logged off.
I think that leaving characters in-world at all times has other problems; I believe Ryan said it actually caused clutter - 10x the people would stand around and 90% would be afk. Not a vibrant world.
What if the post-SAD PvP-timer, and any similar timers, only ran down while the character was logged on? Bandits would need to either go into a welcoming town, safely make it to their hide-out, or stealth/skulk in the woods for some time. I'd expect banditry to be more common close to wilderness and monster hexes, places where the bandits could bolt to after a robbery.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I think that some of these ideas are ok really, if balanced and these "monsters in the basement" are not used. A bad guy could SAD me for my escrow, kill me after for my cargo and care less about the rep hit.
If you get SADed and you can see the guy has -5000 rep, yup, you know that's coming next.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I think that leaving characters in-world at all times has other problems...
And I've generally accepted Ryan's arguments there. I'm not really still trying to push for that, even though I think it would be the perfect solution in an ideal world.
What about making it so that the Characters can't log out while they have the Flag, as BrotherZael suggests?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I think that leaving characters in-world at all times has other problems...And I've generally accepted Ryan's arguments there. I'm not really still trying to push for that, even though I think it would be the perfect solution in an ideal world.
What about making it so that the Characters can't log out while they have the Flag, as BrotherZael suggests?
That is already pretty common in most games. I think it is a good idea. What is the difference between staying online and hiding until a timer expires or hiding and logging out - persisting until a timer expires?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
kobold you are totally right
spirit is a giant rip off of dances with wolves and other classics I never had the patience to fully watch
Well, I mean, I can't say it's a ripoff of Dances With Wolves, because that's Pocahontas and Spirit does have its own plot, but man, the theme is just generic as heck, and there's almost no real innovation to be seen.
I don't really think it's bad--it's still very high-quality--but I think it may in my Bottom Five on the Dreamworks list.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Nihimon/BrotherZael I think that has strong possibilities. There will be other PvP situations where people should have some delay before they can log out; I'd think that different situations could have different timers.
Back when hideouts were introduced, one of their benefits (iirc) was that they were a safe place to log-out. I would think that a bandit who made it back to his hide-out maybe should be able to log-out, even with a PvP timer active. (I think it would create traffic to hideouts - a good thing. I think perhaps only some of the bandits might know of the hideout and escape there with the loot. Junior bandits would be left out as a sop to any pursuers - which would make almost everyone happy.) Likewise, a warrior returning from some PvP who makes it back to an inn might be able to log out quicker than if he's standing in a field.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What if SAD coins, instead of being an immediate transfer of funds, put the amount in a system-generated escrow account, and was then released to the bandit only after the merchant reached his destination?I really, really like that. It actually makes me think that a prior idea I had might also be workable, namely to give Merchants a strong incentive to put some Coin in escrow prior to their journey to cover any SADs they want to accept. If the Merchant didn't have enough in escrow to cover the SAD, then they automatically refuse.
This is a very raw idea, and not fully thought through.
Something like this is what I would advocate too...but I think we are missing the new SAD as a skill. Anyone who uses has the skill slotted should be able to try to use it on anyone at any time...without a limitation to caravans.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...SADs should not be able to be used to force a fight that gets the bandit around reputation loss...
...A SAD should not reward reputation. It should only help to avoid loss. It should not be "workable" for free rep gain unless all well-defined "roles" have a comparable vehicle to gain reputation.
These are the things that I agree with the most. I definitely do not envy the devs trying to figure this one out...
I also agree with the others here who say that initiating a SAD should have a rep loss associated with it, albeit less rep loss than a normal, un-instigated attack on a non-flagged opponent. The net result should be that bandits would choose to try using SAD instead of outright ganking.
SAD breakdown:
1. Initiating a SAD causes Rep/Align loss, but less (1/4 of normal) as much as an unprovoked attack.
2. Initiating a SAD causes a Hostile/Criminal/Bandit (whichever) flag for instigator.
3. Resolution Amount of SAD is based on the relationship of the rep of Initiator and Victim, and the total gold/inventory carried by the Victim (maybe starts at 30% and increases based on bad rep of Bandit but decreases based on good rep of victim? Bandit has the option of gold or inventory?). Victim chooses to match the minimum, pay more than the minimum, or decline altogether.
**Possible SAD outcomes:
a. Victim settles the SAD agreeably: initiator is flagged Hostile/Criminal and takes Rep/Align loss (1/4 normal); no flag for victim, maybe Rep/Align gain for victim? (Encourages victims to pay and avoid conflict).
b. Victim declines the SAD: initiator may attack but suffer Rep/Al loss (1/4 of normal), no flag for victim, no Rep/Align gain for victim.
c. Victim settles the SAD agreeably, Bandit attacks anyway: Bandit receives normal flags and Rep/Al loss.
d. Bandit declines the Payment amount (feels it is not reasonable, etc.): see (b).
e. Victim declines the SAD and attacks the initiator: victim is flagged Attacker/Hostile and all normal pvp rules apply.
Conclusions:
For Bandit –
Hostile/Criminal Flag.
Rep/Align loss of successful SAD = 0.5x normal.
Rep/Align loss of successful SAD AND STILL KILLING VICTIM = 1.0x – 1.5x normal.
Rep/Align loss of failed SAD and NOT killing victim = .25x normal
For Victim –
No Flag unless they attack the Bandit, then normal flag rules apply.
NO Rep/Align loss
Rep/Align GAIN for complying with SAD
Ability to take out Bounty on Bandit
This way, there is incentive for the Bandit to actually USE the SAD system instead of simply attacking the victim (less rep loss than normal) AND there is incentive for the Victim to comply with the SAD (gain rep).
The victim could always retaliate AFTER the SAD is over and while the Bandit is still flagged Criminal, but he won’t be able to recover all of the SAD’d items (because of threading/looting rules). He could SAD the Bandit if he wanted, but he still won’t recover all of his lost items because of the Payment Amount calculations (see #3, above).
I think this system is not perfect, but it works well for what it is supposed to do. We all have to remember that the Victim is the victim here; he/she should not be punished for being robbed with Rep/Align losses. Yes, he is taking risks in transporting goods, but there shouldn’t be the ability to completely strip him/her.
Anyway, those are my two gil.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@ Dayzk
As a bandit I'd have to say, I would never use a SAD with your system. No matter what I would still lose reputation. I would rather take full rep loss and full loot, against a target that presents a good risk vs. reward ratio.
Otherwise I would just stick to ambushing targets that are sanctioned due to feuds, wars, faction, or other circumstances that make them sanctioned.
How would I generate a large enough target pool?
1. Feud the largest and more trade centric company(ies) that we can find.
2. Join any war as mercenaries.
3. Join a faction, not based on RP reasons, that will give us the greatest number of adversaries or is directly opposed to a merchant faction.
4. Instigate trade companies to feud against us, making themselves targets for our own attacks.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Bringslite and whomever is concerned
The difference being safety. If you stay online during that period you can watch the character and react to adverse situations. That said, it is wrong to force someone to stay logged in, as they might have work they have to go to or something else along those lines. This method allows them to log out if they ABSOLUTELY HAVE TO, but it still carries the risk.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Bringslite and whomever is concerned
The difference being safety. If you stay online during that period you can watch the character and react to adverse situations. That said, it is wrong to force someone to stay logged in, as they might have work they have to go to or something else along those lines. This method allows them to log out if they ABSOLUTELY HAVE TO, but it still carries the risk.
Now you guys are silly. Of course I know that there is the difference in being able to defend yourself or not.
That is from the point of view of the flagged person, though. It remains that their toon is still online for possible payback. That is important from the point of view of the pursuit.
Gods help me. :)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@ Dayzk
As a bandit I'd have to say, I would never use a SAD with your system. No matter what I would still lose reputation. I would rather take full rep loss and full loot, against a target that presents a good risk vs. reward ratio.
Otherwise I would just stick to ambushing targets that are sanctioned due to feuds, wars, faction, or other circumstances that make them sanctioned.
How would I generate a large enough target pool?
1. Feud the largest and more trade centric company(ies) that we can find.
2. Join any war as mercenaries.
3. Join a faction, not based on RP reasons, that will give us the greatest number of adversaries or is directly opposed to a merchant faction.
4. Instigate trade companies to feud against us, making themselves targets for our own attacks.
Even with regular attacks/unprovoked you will never get all of a victims' loot... with my system you have a chance to get more than just the normal x% of random inventory and unthreaded equipment.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@ Dayzk
As a bandit I'd have to say, I would never use a SAD with your system. No matter what I would still lose reputation. I would rather take full rep loss and full loot, against a target that presents a good risk vs. reward ratio.
Otherwise I would just stick to ambushing targets that are sanctioned due to feuds, wars, faction, or other circumstances that make them sanctioned.
How would I generate a large enough target pool?
1. Feud the largest and more trade centric company(ies) that we can find.
2. Join any war as mercenaries.
3. Join a faction, not based on RP reasons, that will give us the greatest number of adversaries or is directly opposed to a merchant faction.
4. Instigate trade companies to feud against us, making themselves targets for our own attacks.
Also, my numbers on rep/align gains/losses are not absolute, just some base numbers to work with I guess. Those sorts of things would be up to the devs. The basic principals of my system are what I wanted to convey.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@ Dayzk
As a bandit I'd have to say, I would never use a SAD with your system. No matter what I would still lose reputation. I would rather take full rep loss and full loot, against a target that presents a good risk vs. reward ratio.
Otherwise I would just stick to ambushing targets that are sanctioned due to feuds, wars, faction, or other circumstances that make them sanctioned.
How would I generate a large enough target pool?
1. Feud the largest and more trade centric company(ies) that we can find.
2. Join any war as mercenaries.
3. Join a faction, not based on RP reasons, that will give us the greatest number of adversaries or is directly opposed to a merchant faction.
4. Instigate trade companies to feud against us, making themselves targets for our own attacks.
Finally, I think the main problem is the "reputaion" system, as others have mentioned. I wouldn't want you to lose rep either, maybe the SAD just applies to Alignment? Or we need 'Notoriety' points like someone else mentioned.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I usually try not to speak for folks who often disagree with me, but especially because of his recent post in the UNC Policy thread, I'll venture a guess that one Bluddwolf's problems with your system is that it includes Rep Loss.
I wholeheartedly believe that the SAD itself should not cause Rep Loss. The only thing that should cause Rep Loss is attacking without a SAD, or attacking after an accepted SAD.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I usually try not to speak for folks who often disagree with me, but especially because of his recent post in the UNC Policy thread, I'll venture a guess that one Bluddwolf's problems with your system is that it includes Rep Loss.
I wholeheartedly believe that the SAD itself should not cause Rep Loss. The only thing that should cause Rep Loss is attacking without a SAD, or attacking after an accepted SAD.
I can agree with that. Except for if the SAD is abused (ie. Victim gives robber coin/items and Robber STILL kills them).
I do, however, feel that SAD should not increase Rep either. At the very least, therefore, be a neutral activity (on the rep side). I hope we can all agree that it would be a Chaotic shift on the alignment axis tho...
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I hope we can all agree that it would be a Chaotic shift on the alignment axis tho...Really going out on a limb here, but I'd guess Bluddwolf might even relish that Chaotic shift :)
Heh heh, very true.
With the multiple threads concerning these reputation issues, and the amount of UNRELATED threads that turn INTO discussions on rep, I seriously wonder if GW can see that a more robust rep system is needed...
What if Rep was made an account-wide thing, instead of per character, and some other system (standing/notoriety) was implemented for the IC stuff. It seems to me that would solve at least a few of the issues we keep seeing pop up ("monsters in the basement", etc.)
Again, just my two gil. And man, I hate de-railing this thread...
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Does the merchant pass the mule on the way to town B? So now your merchant is once again unaffiliated (you said you had a settlement), there's no longer an army of alts (face it, you're not that popular) and there are no guards (which makes sense, their company kept disbanding).I am confused by this and do not understand if you do not get the concept or if you are yanking Steelwing's chain.
Guilty as charged, Bro.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
What if Rep was made an account-wide thing
Then folks will simply put their "monsters in the basement" on separate accounts. I'm extremely opposed to this idea. See Never punish a player for using a single account
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What if Rep was made an account-wide thing, instead of per character, and some other system (standing/notoriety) was implemented for the IC stuff. It seems to me that would solve at least a few of the issues we keep seeing pop up ("monsters in the basement", etc.)
Then each character would be on a separate account. Why punish people for using a single account?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
What if Rep was made an account-wide thingThen folks will simply put their "monsters in the basement" on separate accounts. I'm extremely opposed to this idea. See Never punish a player for using a single account
I agree. I don't like it... but I don't like all the other issues reputation raises either.
Que sera, sera, I suppose.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Guilty as charged, Bro.Does the merchant pass the mule on the way to town B? So now your merchant is once again unaffiliated (you said you had a settlement), there's no longer an army of alts (face it, you're not that popular) and there are no guards (which makes sense, their company kept disbanding).I am confused by this and do not understand if you do not get the concept or if you are yanking Steelwing's chain.
I thought so. I know that Steelwing is thick skinned. You had me going for a post or two. I have never been described as the sharpest tool in the kit, though. ;)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Que sera, sera, I suppose.
Serious tangent here, but one of my favorite leveling zones in Vanguard was Ksaravi Gulch. I know that a lot of game designers like to put little Easter Eggs in their games, and I was thrilled when I felt like I'd figured this one out. Ksaravi = K-sa-ra // sa-ra-vi = que sera // c'est la vie.
And of course, now I have that song stuck in my head (not that there's anything wrong with that)
Also being a blunt tool (that came out wrong) I'm sure if it's supposed to sound like a math question or just insane questioning. Either way, it's making me think of the homework I should be doing.
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I usually try not to speak for folks who often disagree with me, but especially because of his recent post in the UNC Policy thread, I'll venture a guess that one Bluddwolf's problems with your system is that it includes Rep Loss.
I wholeheartedly believe that the SAD itself should not cause Rep Loss. The only thing that should cause Rep Loss is attacking without a SAD, or attacking after an accepted SAD.
Anyone who thinks that any action related to a SAD other than attacking someone who has paid should cause Reputation loss has a very different understanding of what Reputation is than I do.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Que sera, sera, I suppose.Serious tangent here, but one of my favorite leveling zones in Vanguard was Ksaravi Gulch. I know that a lot of game designers like to put little Easter Eggs in their games, and I was thrilled when I felt like I'd figured this one out. Ksaravi = K-sa-ra // sa-ra-vi = que sera // c'est la vie.
And of course, now I have that song stuck in my head (not that there's anything wrong with that)
You just blew my mind.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I hope we can all agree that it would be a Chaotic shift on the alignment axis tho...Really going out on a limb here, but I'd guess Bluddwolf might even relish that Chaotic shift :)
Well, it is in fact Tuesday!!!! Relish is typically green!!! I have my Hat!!!
A Chaotic Shift is not enough, I want an Avalanche! Of Chaos!!!
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Kobold... is that you?
Brother Zael, are you not enlightened? You have not been graced by being in the presence of Hiiimmmm! The Patron Saint of the a Green Hat! The Grand Marshal of Green Hat Tuesday!
Hobbs the Short is his name in his mere immortal form. He is the embodiment of Chaos, and I am just his insignificant [i]Harbinger[/].
Hobbs could SAD merchants in other games, from PFOs server. Hobbs beat the internet in 1967.
Kobold, you ask??!!! Blasphemy!!