Goblin Squad Member
|
I am in disagreement (partially) with both. It was not the expected (or average) result in Darkfall, although it was possible. In PfO, it will be for at least two years. That is, if you plan to be doing your sightseeing/harvesting alone.
PfO has the potential to be a wonderful game. Just don't expect to play it in the same way (as a non aggressor) as most people (that end dissatisfied) play other MMO's. Go in groups that are ready for conflict and you will win some of them and be about your regular business right after.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I went out into the danger zones (in DFUW) often, as did many of the Goblin Squad. I went alone a great majority of the time. I made it back to "bank" my goodies 80 - 90% of the time.
Just in case it's not clear by my saying "most of the people try to kill you most of the time", I'm really not talking about the rate of "outings without being killed". I'm talking about, if you see 10 non-allies while you're away from the safe zones, do 7 of them try to kill you?
And yeah, I've gotten for a very long time that there will be lots of PvP in PFO. Please don't let the way some folks like to talk about my motives lull you into thinking I don't want a PvP game.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I went out into the danger zones (in DFUW) often, as did many of the Goblin Squad. I went alone a great majority of the time. I made it back to "bank" my goodies 80 - 90% of the time.Just in case it's not clear by my saying "most of the people try to kill you most of the time", I'm really not talking about the rate of "outings without being killed". I'm talking about, if you see 10 non-allies while you're away from the safe zones, do 7 of them try to kill you?
And yeah, I've gotten for a very long time that there will be lots of PvP in PFO. Please don't let the way some folks like to talk about my motives lull you into thinking I don't want a PvP game.
You have made it clear that you are aware. I am having trouble classifying Darkfall in the murder simulator realm. Not certain that was what you meant, but you def. seem to have an attitude that it is at least a "random kill fest". Any time you go about looking for targets, that is applicable. It seems to me, that every time I was killed it was for my gear and my harvest. We knew it was open PVP when we went in. WE just didn't play cooperatively.... When we got some skills, were attentive and fought back things changed a lot, at least for me.
So anyway, my remarks are more directed toward lurkers and casual browsers that skim these threads. My apologies that I used your posts as a springboard for my message. I did not mean to paint you any which way at all. :)
To me, it is important to get across (and recognize ourselves) that this game will have lots of PVP. I believe that you already do. The fact that they will need extra skills, rep and threading may mitigate (somewhat) the fact that the map is smaller, population larger (most likely), there isn't a recall, and some other things. What we can do is not sugar coat it and play differently than we have in other games. It seems important to remind people that they can play this game and have fun, but odds are they will have a better chance grouped and ready for conflict.
Turn the tables.
edited
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I am having trouble classifying Darkfall in the murder simulator realm.
I'm sure we all have our own definitions of "murder simulator". My problem with Darkfall, as I've said before, is that there was no reason not to kill a stranger just to see if he dropped something. The fact that PFO will have meaningful Reputation, so the question of "is it worth it to me to kill this stranger" isn't always an obvious yes.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I am having trouble classifying Darkfall in the murder simulator realm.I'm sure we all have our own definitions of "murder simulator". My problem with Darkfall, as I've said before, is that there was no reason not to kill a stranger just to see if he dropped something. The fact that PFO will have meaningful Reputation, so the question of "is it worth it to me to kill this stranger" isn't always an obvious yes.
Fair enough. As long as we recognize and inform people that another reason for someone to choose to kill them (on sight) is because they are operating alone.
There are many ways to get those targets into the "legitimate" range. At least so far as proposed, there are.
Edit: S&D, as proposed (and if trainable by anyone with the will) wrecks the whole premise of "consequential PVP". It is neat and intriguing, but just wrong for this game. Or at least (to me) it is just as infuriating as being ganked by someone without the agency of faction/feud/war. Other's mileage may vary on that...
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm increasingly worried that the messages coming out of the community don't match what will actually happen in game, and the disconnect between what people hear, and what they experience, will cause blowback. So I'm trying to be blunt when asked this question directly:
"Will I get killed regularly in Pathfinder Online by other players?"
The answer to this question is "yes you will".
I read this as plain as day.
Pathfinder Online is a game about conflict. One mode of conflict is combat. It will be the primary mode of conflict as Early Enrollment begins. Suggesting otherwise creates a false impression of what the game will be like that will potentially cause a huge problem as we launch.
Our goal, as developers, and our goal, as a community, needs to be to work to make those conflicts meaningful rather than random, and we need to work to identify, and remove, players who only want to inflict meaningless deaths on other players "just for the lulz". But we owe it to ourselves and to the game to be upfront and honest when people ask us if they're going to face character death at the hands of other players. Because they will.
Emphasis mine. I read this as "Wake up!" do not sugarcoat. There are many ways to ensure that your targets are "meaningful" or "rep manageable" and you will often find yourself as such. Especially in the early years of the game.
What will be different is not that there will be less PVP that seems random to the victim. The majority of victims will not care about motive. The difference will be that there are just as many reasons and ways (because of mechanics, and general set up) to engage in PVP in a manageable/legitimate/meaningful way.
Lets wake up and embrace the game as it looks like it will probably really be. If I am wrong, what do you lose?
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
That's the wrong scenario. The right scenario is "N. Ewbie wanders outside the marshal-patrolled area because he saw an interesting rock formation out there and he wants to play around on it. Somebody sees him and kills him."That is the expected outcome of being noticed playing around near interesting scenery in Darkfall. If there was interesting nullsec scenery in Eve, that would be the expected outcome of gawking at it. It should not be expected that gawking at scenery in PFO will result in getting attacked.
Having played both games, Darkfall for about 6 months and EvE Online for over 9 years, this false characterization is the problem here on the PFO forums. Not only will PFO be different from those games, but those games are different from those games, based on your description.
The Boogey Man does not exist or is represented by such a small population it can be largely ignored. There will be do few Boogey Men, that GW will be able to deal with them. For those that slip through, your player grouping will have all if the tools they need to exact revenge.
(nesting fixed)
Go back into Darkfall, walk from a starting city out until you see an interesting feature outside the green zone, and explore and play with it the way an Explorer playstyle would. How many players would see you and not attack before a player attacked you?
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
I went out into the danger zones (in DFUW) often, as did many of the Goblin Squad. I went alone a great majority of the time. I made it back to "bank" my goodies 80 - 90% of the time.Just in case it's not clear by my saying "most of the people try to kill you most of the time", I'm really not talking about the rate of "outings without being killed". I'm talking about, if you see 10 non-allies while you're away from the safe zones, do 7 of them try to kill you?
And yeah, I've gotten for a very long time that there will be lots of PvP in PFO. Please don't let the way some folks like to talk about my motives lull you into thinking I don't want a PvP game.
There's probably a nonzero amount of selection bias, in that you notice every character that attacks you but possibly not all of the ones that don't.
But by and large, the biggest positive factor in my safety on extended outings was the low population.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Be interested to see the interplay of groups + hexes + territory claimed vs unclaimed.
That interplay will lead to some groups allying/treating with other groups so as to focus on securing area and harassing other groups more effectively when their paths cross. Then hopefully a strong enough group will have a secured area and that then pitches the risk vs reward choice a player will have to make.
If the above sort of pattern unfolds, the allying/treaty/negotiation stage seems the most powerful factor given there will be many groups and possibly locally evenly matched dispersing away from out-matched in a given area!
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Be interested to see the interplay of groups + hexes + territory claimed vs unclaimed.
That interplay will lead to some groups allying/treating with other groups so as to focus on securing area and harassing other groups more effectively when their paths cross. Then hopefully a strong enough group will have a secured area and that then pitches the risk vs reward choice a player will have to make.
If the above sort of pattern unfolds, the allying/treaty/negotiation stage seems the most powerful factor given there will be many groups and possibly locally evenly matched dispersing away from out-matched in a given area!
This post got me thinking. If there were mini events or objects in the world that required cooperation of small groups (I'm not just talking about escalations), then players might be more inclined to welcome contact outside of the safe zones.
The idea I have is inspired from a Star Trek Online mission where you had to place yourself and several of your away team on several icons in the ground simultaneously. A very similar task could be created as part of unlocking certain exploration achievements.
This would give some reason not to attack everyone you encounter.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I actually really like that idea of being told what factors might have influenced your death. I wonder if that is possible to communicate in some kind of "killmail".
Awesome, I helped. :) I was thinking that in a lot of situations where a player got killed, it is maybe not be very hard to code such a message/mail, since it is an objective situation that can be easily tracked by the game:
Wars, Feuds and Enemy factions could be tracked, your character could be tagged for this, so matches against an opponent could be made, with a concurrent message/mail when you get killed. It could be a simple chat message, or a more elaborate mail explaining a few things, or both. The mails could stop after a while, but the message in chat could stay.
The example where you broke the law due to hex/local laws could also be easyly generated: this message could be linked to the fact you were wearing the criminal flag while being killed. The message would rather be: "you got killed while wearing the criminal flag". Maybe it is even possible to inform you why you were wearing the criminal flag but this could be a lot harder to track/code, not sure.
Things may get more complicated when you get killed by a group, with several players doing damage: not everyone in this group may be at War/Feud/Enemy faction with you. Not sure what message (or multiple messages) you should get for that.
Even though most people will know that they attacked someone first, the message "You got killed by a player that you attacked first" could still be useful: sometimes, especially in hectic or panicky situations, you may not have been aware that you were actually the one that initiated combat.
I think simple feedback like this could alleviate those first weeks in the game big time for many new players, when they are experiencing their first deaths. It will give some meaning to it, and will also act as a Tutorial: such a message may be the first notification they get about the existence of Wars, Feuds, Enemy factions and local laws in the game. Hopefully this will encourage them, rather then scare them away in those important but vulnerable first weeks in the game.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I think simple feedback like this could alleviate those first weeks in the game big time for many new players, when they are experiencing their first deaths. It will give some meaning to it, and will also act as a Tutorial: such a message may be the first notification they get about the existence of Wars, Feuds,...
I think this could help with players new to PvP. I am pretty sure that it would help me :)
Of course you would want a toggle to opt out of the message/mail once you were experienced enough.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I actually really like that idea of being told what factors might have influenced your death. I wonder if that is possible to communicate in some kind of "killmail".
Awesome, I helped. :) I was thinking that in a lot of situations where a player got killed, it is maybe not be very hard to code such a message/mail, since it is an objective situation that can be easily tracked by the game:
Wars, Feuds and Enemy factions could be tracked, your character could be tagged for this, so matches against an opponent could be made, with a concurrent message/mail when you get killed. It could be a simple chat message, or a more elaborate mail explaining a few things, or both. The mails could stop after a while, but the message in chat could stay. ...
Agreed. The game recognizes different hostility states. It should be possible to record what hostility state was in effect when a character dies. Sometimes a character will be attacked and killed while unflagged and not hostile to her attacker, the game can report this as well.
I think advising the character of the objective situation is more useful (and accurate) than having players optionally self-report why they attacked.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I went out into the danger zones (in DFUW) often, as did many of the Goblin Squad. I went alone a great majority of the time. I made it back to "bank" my goodies 80 - 90% of the time.Just in case it's not clear by my saying "most of the people try to kill you most of the time", I'm really not talking about the rate of "outings without being killed". I'm talking about, if you see 10 non-allies while you're away from the safe zones, do 7 of them try to kill you?
And yeah, I've gotten for a very long time that there will be lots of PvP in PFO. Please don't let the way some folks like to talk about my motives lull you into thinking I don't want a PvP game.
There's probably a nonzero amount of selection bias, in that you notice every character that attacks you but possibly not all of the ones that don't.
But by and large, the biggest positive factor in my safety on extended outings was the low population.
I have to completely agree with this. A larger map, a smaller population and recall made it easy to succeed at gathering and traveling more often than not.
It will be much tougher in PfO, for a good long while at least. We can deal with it if we choose to by understanding that, acccepting it, and playing in different ways. I fully recognize that almost everyone here understands that and is already planning accordingly. If we do understand and are planning, then maybe we should be communicating that message more when we address individuals that pop in with concerns.
Change the way that we think and that we (as typical non aggressors)approach/play this kind of game:
1. Learn to work more with others in dangerous areas rather than hoping to not be spotted. When "Youmad Bro?" and his "Nasty Boyos" kill you (without agency: faction, feud, war) make him take rep hits for a few or a whole party of victims. When they have agency, have numbers with you to discourage or fight when you must.
2. Accept that conflict will be common (on average) for a few years at least. Try to get over death by a player's aggression as feeling different than death at a tough AI's. Not that we should be apathetic about being killed, just try to grasp that it is not the End of All Enjoyment. Dust off, reequip, note names and move on to plan "B" for that play session.
3. Learn to look at players that "kill on site" as incredibly challenging content (just like tough wandering monsters). Plan/expect/anticipate that they will be out there when you go, instead of the old "take my chances" approach.
4. Advocate that S&D get modified or forgotten. It gives too much power to accost without agency or consequence. It can be done with chat for those that want to avoid rep hits and the targets that want to pay some rather than lose all.
Personally I would love to be able to explore/travel/gather alone if I feel like it. I will sometimes (when I feel crazy). If you go into this game thinking that the reputation system (alone) will keep you relatively safe for solo play, you are mistaken. If you lead curious people to believe that it will, you are misleading them. It is the reputation system AND numbers that will make you successful.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I actually really like that idea of being told what factors might have influenced your death. I wonder if that is possible to communicate in some kind of "killmail".
Awesome, I helped. :) I was thinking that in a lot of situations where a player got killed, it is maybe not be very hard to code such a message/mail, since it is an objective situation that can be easily tracked by the game:
Wars, Feuds and Enemy factions could be tracked, your character could be tagged for this, so matches against an opponent could be made, with a concurrent message/mail when you get killed. It could be a simple chat message, or a more elaborate mail explaining a few things, or both. The mails could stop after a while, but the message in chat could stay. ...
Agreed. The game recognizes different hostility states. It should be possible to record what hostility state was in effect when a character dies. Sometimes a character will be attacked and killed while unflagged and not hostile to her attacker, the game can report this as well.
I think advising the character of the objective situation is more useful (and accurate) than having players optionally self-report why they attacked.
Yes, definately. I think a lot of players will not bother with giving a rationale, and if they do, you could quickly get a nasty dialogue(though that will happen sometimes anyway).
In the example you give (the unflagged player getting killed while non hostile)the reported message could also work as an aide for reporting someone who frequently kills a (same) person without any rationale (no War, Feud, did not break the law etc). This only works if the actual name of the killer also appears in the message.
This may not be a good idea because now we enter the realm of subjectivity, like some players may think it necessary to report someone when they have collected 10 of such "I did nothing" kill-messages from the same player, while other may do so after 2. Also, carrying a big fat purse full of gems(that he watched you mine) may well be a very valid rationale for the one that kills you, if he is willing to take the rep-hit. In such a case that kill message would not reflect this particular (valid) rationale. Also, chat-logs can be falsified, though a "kill-mail" may be more difficult to falsify.
So I would not want to get overboard with this as a reporting aid, I think the feature should mostly be about informing a player why he was most likely killed. Still something to keep in mind, since some players probably *will* use kill-mail as a way to point a finger to possible griefers. Which is probably one of the few drawbacks of killmails/messages: you provide a tool that makes it more easily to complain about other players, since they may feel "they have a case" now(in the case where they got killed unprovoked and unflagged with no Wars etcetera going on with the killer). Again, this only applies if the name of the killer appears in these messages, so.
Still, if there was no message at all, the befuddled newbie may rage even sooner when he gets killed and does not know why.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Advocate that S&D get modified or forgotten. It gives too much power to accost without agency or consequence.
If by "modify" you mean, make it a Faction based skill, then I might agree to that being a good idea. I would counter that the use of caravans also be a trained and slotted skill and added as a faction based skill.
I have a feeling that is the route it is going in, because it is easiest to program.
I would also modify it by lowering the level in which both bandit and merchant gain access to those skills. That is unless gaining level 4 in a faction is fairly quick and easy.
If on the other hand you mean "modify" to make it even less desirable to use SADs, well the Devs have already taken away the Rep Bonus and made their use a criminal act everywhere. If you are looking to put the reputation hit into it, then you are just going to encourage it not being used.
The "Monsters in the Basement" will be used and that is something I thought was not desired by anyone.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Advocate that S&D get modified or forgotten. It gives too much power to accost without agency or consequence.If by "modify" you mean, make it a Faction based skill, then I might agree to that being a good idea. I would counter that the use of caravans also be a trained and slotted skill and added as a faction based skill.
I have a feeling that is the route it is going in, because it is easiest to program.
I would also modify it by lowering the level in which both bandit and merchant gain access to those skills. That is unless gaining level 4 in a faction is fairly quick and easy.
If on the other hand you mean "modify" to make it even less desirable to use SADs, well the Devs have already taken away the Rep Bonus and made their use a criminal act everywhere. If you are looking to put the reputation hit into it, then you are just going to encourage it not being used.
The "Monsters in the Basement" will be used and that is something I thought was not desired by anyone.
My thought was that it would not be needed (as a programmed mechanic) if the "faction" thing catches fire. That would include the need for a suitable number of targets to be encouraged to "faction up" as well. If enough do, the S&D could stand on it's own through chat or prior agreements for those unaffiliated wretches with pitiful cargoes/capacity, etc... My preference would that it be forgotten if factions catch on, rather than modified. If it must be "in" then produce a counter to it that can be trained and slotted.
The biggest problem with S&D is that it is a PVP "attack" that is impossible to counter or avoid without combat. I didn't expect you to like this philosophy. :)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The biggest problem with S&D is that it is a PVP "attack" that is impossible to counter or avoid without combat. I didn't expect you to like this philosophy. :)
It has a full proof counter, "Projectile a Strong Profile". If I have a target that projects a weak profile (few or no guards) I am likely to SAD that target, rather than outright attack. The reason is, he is more likely to accept the SAD.
If that same target presents a greater risk, now I would then have to think about whether a SAD is the better of the two tools I have at hand. Ambush and a first strike attack are likely my better choice.
If the target presents a very strong profile, and the reward is really not great enough to counter that, then I would probably not even trigger my Blind and let him pass.
Just for the sake of discussion, a low risk and low reward target is also likely to be ignored as well.
Our ideal is Low Risk, Moderate reward. We hope to encounter that often. Our dream is to find the truly foolish Low Risk, High Reward. In that case, we would even sacrifice reputation and just go for the kill and max loot.
The High Risk, High Reward is for when we are really feeling adventurous or there will be a good amount of prestige attached to pulling off such a heist. This would likely be in the context of a feud, faction or war, so reputation is not a factor.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If my pouch is jingling, that means there is more room in it.
I'd rather my blade keep a sharp edge, than drip with blood.
I don't drink wine often, but when I do, I drink Rum!!
But I thank you for your well wishes, and I wish you well in return. A merchant that makes profits, contributes to a target rich environment.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Bringslite, I think you're absolutely right that folks shouldn't be encouraged to think they can play PFO soloing, or duoing with their wife or friend, the way they've been able to in other games. That's one of the reasons I really loved this quote from Lee, and referenced* it* so* many* times*.
Can I play the game Solo
LH: [laughing] That is a fantastic - I love that question.
SC: [laughing] You shouldn't do that, you're going to die.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Bringslite, I think you're absolutely right that folks shouldn't be encouraged to think they can play PFO soloing, or duoing with their wife or friend, the way they've been able to in other games. That's one of the reasons I really loved this quote from Lee, and referenced* it* so* many* times*.
Can I play the game Solo
LH: [laughing] That is a fantastic - I love that question.
SC: [laughing] You shouldn't do that, you're going to die.
That is a great quote and you have used it often and to effect. No one that reads your stuff should think that you are naïve of expected PVP or what is coming.
The quote (itself) is a good example from the guys designing the game and the reputation system of the way things will be. It is another clear message that WE need to recognize and take some of the layers in the "layered approach" (toward bad gamers) into our hands. The Rep system will make this a different game and help, but we need to help too. The rep system will solve some problems, but crafty people are already describing ways around suffering it. S&D completely skirts it at the high cost of a skill and possibly a slot, making the game essentially FFA PVP for those that choose it.
I am aware that they will tinker with things until they get the balance that they want. It will take years, though. Additionally, I am unsure that "the balance" they want is what I had thought it was. Which is ok because I would still be playing Darkfall if you guys had liked it more and stayed. I certainly think PfO will be exponentially better, yet I believe it will be just as bloody (even if "meaningfully" bloody) as any other sandbox.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
... I would still be playing Darkfall if you guys had liked it more and stayed.
I think the reason I harp on what will likely end up being only a very minor reduction in overall PvP is that I think it's going to be a significant reduction in the kind of PvP that would make me want to play something else.
In Darkfall, I didn't get upset when someone killed me while I was in the dark red PvP V area harvesting for xp. I didn't get upset when someone killed me while I was sneaking around their town trying to open up the map. What got me was the general, overall feeling that whenever I encountered anyone (where we were both obviously aware of each other), there was no reason for them not to kill me. There was no meaningful decision they had to make other than "can I win?"
I think it would be really useful to compile a list of recommendations for inexperienced players. Things like:
- Don't walk up behind someone without hailing them first.
- Don't use Sneak around other characters unless you want them to think you're trying to ambush them.
- If you encounter someone you don't know, hail them from a distance.
- Don't travel alone.
- Don't expect to be able to explore the territory of a group you're not allied with.
- Be exceptionally wary of anyone who doesn't respond to your hails in a friendly manner.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I've got to admit I get a little excited hearing how dangerous PFO will be from both mobs and players - and hence the necessity of groups of players will be very important a lot of the time in the wilds.
When you have several groups deciding whether to attack each other then it's possibly a bit more down to group choices being made:
1. Who has the most?
2. Who's land is this anyway?
3. Who are they?
4. What should we do: Bail for reinforcements, warn them, ask their intentions, fight etc.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
S&D completely skirts it at the high cost of a skill and possibly a slot, making the game essentially FFA PVP for those that choose it.
Would it not be skirting the Feud, War, Faction and PvP systems to use an unaffiliated alt as a mule, to transport your star metal?
The SAD system is a counter to that. But, as you rightly pointed out, the SAD requires the high cost of training and slotting the ability. You neglected to mention that issuing a SAD makes the bandit / interdictor a PvP target for anyone who wishes to freely attack.
I say it once again. If the costs of using the SAD are increased beyond what they are now, then low rep alts will be the appropriate counter to the unaffiliated mule alt.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
That would only be useful if responding to hails in a friendly manner and then attacking was expensive. It seems like a tiny adjustment to the Reputation system to make it so....
Be exceptionally wary of anyone who doesn't respond to your hails in a friendly manner.
I think it's more based on human nature. I'm thinking of some story I heard/read about the evolution of the tradition of waving in the Old West. For whatever reason, the folks who were more likely to shoot you when you got close were also unlikely to give you a friendly wave first.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
That would only be useful if responding to hails in a friendly manner and then attacking was expensive. It seems like a tiny adjustment to the Reputation system to make it so....
Be exceptionally wary of anyone who doesn't respond to your hails in a friendly manner.
What about players who don't use chat channels? How does the system decide what is "a friendly manner"?
We don't know what kind of an adjustment to the reputation system it will be, because we don't know how or to what extent the reputation system will work. I see no reason to believe that the reputation system will likewise be at a MVP state for much of EE. If it is sufficient in that state, I would hope that GW put all of their energies into getting the settlement warfare system running in time for OE.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I think it's more based on human nature. I'm thinking of some story I heard/read about the evolution of the tradition of waving in the Old West. For whatever reason, the folks who were more likely to shoot you when you got close were also unlikely to give you a friendly wave first.That would only be useful if responding to hails in a friendly manner and then attacking was expensive. It seems like a tiny adjustment to the Reputation system to make it so....
Be exceptionally wary of anyone who doesn't respond to your hails in a friendly manner.
The really bad guys will kill you with a smile on their face, after having praised you for being a fine and upstanding gentlemen.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Something that really stood out for me when I was researching the rules and etiquette of RP is that it's rude and disrespectful to RP the effect your actions have on other characters. Rather, you only describe what your actions are. I think that's a useful lesson in life in general.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Something that really stood out for me when I was researching the rules and etiquette of RP is that it's rude and disrespectful to RP the effect your actions have on other characters. Rather, you only describe what your actions are. I think that's a useful lesson in life in general.
This is why many people don't use non custom chat channels, other than in places where combat is unlikely (market place, tavern, dock, etc.)
It is actually quite important to know how the local chat will work.
1. Are you automatically logged into it when you enter a new "local" area?
2. Does your name appear on a list in local chat?
3. Will the total number of people in local be shown?
If local chat is in any way like it is in EVE, then the same rules will apply. Never engage in conversations in local chat. You want chat monitors to believe you are either passing through (quickly), or in a safe area (docked) and AFK.
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
That would only be useful if responding to hails in a friendly manner and then attacking was expensive. It seems like a tiny adjustment to the Reputation system to make it so....
Be exceptionally wary of anyone who doesn't respond to your hails in a friendly manner.
What about players who don't use chat channels? How does the system decide what is "a friendly manner"?
We don't know what kind of an adjustment to the reputation system it will be, because we don't know how or to what extent the reputation system will work. I see no reason to believe that the reputation system will likewise be at a MVP state for much of EE. If it is sufficient in that state, I would hope that GW put all of their energies into getting the settlement warfare system running in time for OE.
I'd make it a system command. The point is to make it expensive signaling, which means it has to have a cost.
Another option would be to make the greeting something that reveals something about how recently the greeting character has attacked another player character. If a character waves to you with a bloody hand, it might be more of a threat than a reassurance.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I'm slightly perplexed here. On one hand there is a suggestion SAD mechanics are removed and the chat system used in its place, and on the other hand a mechanic to 'show friendliness' is being touted.
To my mind, it would be preferable to get the basic mechanics of the classes/archetypes completed plus those of basic PvP. This to me includes SAD, which is the small group/individual PvP option. Once these are sorted out and tested, then other more complicated mechanics could be investigated, especially when they dip into the realm of emotes (of which have been discussed previously).
Some of these thoughts/ideas most likely stem from my years of playing roleplaying games where you had to build relationships and trust with people and not rely on mechanics to do the work for you. This comes back to the 'multiplayer' aspect of the game. Make friends, build relationships, learn who to trust (and who not to) and if someone stabs you in the back, relay this to your circle of friends for their information. That person shouldn't get the jump on any of your friends going forward.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I'd prefer the chat to NOT be like Local in Eve (or not any forced regional/local chat at all - goodbye gold spammers!). I would prefer the hex's list of players be hidden, and not automatically logged into unless someone chooses to display it using some toggled trigger or flag. Think of a possible bait mini-game for PvP that way (e.g. all /anon don't show). For "local", I would use emote-distance (say 100 units @ ~ 2-3x the longest range attack) to allow /say, /yell, etc without being committed to engagement. Could be another reason to consider banner / surcoats if the settlement/alliance association is not displayed easily. Most regular companies will chat using TeamSpeak/Ventrilo, etc instead of in-game chat.
As far as "greeting" someone or expecting someone to respond or you'll consider them hostile - c'mon, what are the odds of that actually happening? If the game is as PvP-focused as it sounds it will be, most people will veer off / flee if trying to avoid combat (solo or without support nearby), and move in closer if they are considering the pros and cons of engagement. The angle of their movements and actions (buffing/drawing weapons/spells) will tell me more of their intentions than a /wave will.
I could see a concept allowing a player-set flag of "mood" from 1-10 where you show your crankiness and willing to PvP everything in sight vs. "let's trade" or "can we meet and talk about XYZ event yesterday."
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In another post, I wrote of how we will each gain a local knowledge of most of those who share our locality. We will learn through our own experiences and by word of mouth of those whom we share agency, of those acquaintances that we can trust, be wary of or shun.
Unlike flags or gestures, these that I mention can not be false. Even if those that we trusted bore false witness, upon meeting you for the first time, that new individual will show that witness to be false through your own experience.
If exploration is indeed a pillar of PFO, then isn't the discovery of the nature and hearts of others it's greatest form?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I actually really like that idea of being told what factors might have influenced your death. I wonder if that is possible to communicate in some kind of "killmail".
In general, this is what I see happening.
Day One of Early Enrollment, people are going to log in and go looking for fights. It's going to be a pretty bloody, pretty messy free-for all. We are thinking about ways to influence that start
As a newbie player to MMO I identify with the concerns raised by the other newcomers regarding getting offed by malicious players while just trying to learn the ropes. I think the idea of informing players about the contributing factors to their death would go a considerable way in new player retention. I don't necessarily mind dying a few times in the process of learning (other than merely learning that other people are mean). In regard to the messy free for all on day one and the ongoing effect from continuous new player enrollments one concern I have is that there were a considerable number of goodies given out as part of the kickstarters and presumably not all of the items can be protected. It would be great if Thornkeep had a practice arena or some such where players could try out individual PvP combats without risking lives or possessions while learning how to move/equip/buff etc. This is something you could do to "influence that start" so that people didn't have to hunt each other to get their experience.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@ Victor the Veteran
Early on, your character will be using low level gear and all of it will be threaded (you can not lose it). Of the gear you might lose (25%) it will be fairly cheap to replace. So the loss you might suffer as part of PVP or PVE for that matter is pretty small.
Arena PVP is a poor substitute for actually going out into the world, with veteran players, and experiencing PVP in a more organic and unpredictable situation.
GW might actually include an arena for PVP, and that is fine. But, don't fall for the idea that it is in anyway equal to the non consensual PVP you will face in the open world.
I think you will also discover that the players that are most involved in PVP are actually not malicious, but really quite helpful.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@ Bluddwolf
Right, I get that. Thanks for pointing that out though, it's a valid point. It would just be nice if there is a way to test drive the interface and train the fingers a bit before facing serious consequences in a mix up with the experienced players.
The NPC Starter Zones are set up for learning the interface and that will likely be the place where you group up with other players for the first time.
There will be companies of players dedicated to training new players in all aspects of the game, but in particular PvP.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Day One of Early Enrollment, people are going to log in and go looking for fights. It's going to be a pretty bloody, pretty messy free-for all. We are thinking about ways to influence that start, but I think it's inevitable. It's just a natural human thing to want to see how the tech works, and the most interesting combats are going to be with other players, so there is going to be a massive PvP explosion. Pretending otherwise just sets us up for failure and a huge PR debacle.
I don't think early RPK practices are influenced by "testing the software". I think it comes down to "Is it profitable", do the losses outweigh the potential gain. Early on, I'm speculating here, people will be holding most of starting resources in their inventory, so chances are solo players running around will either be out gathering, or out hunting gatherers, either way, they are likely to have something useful to you. Once people start grouping up, the PvP is less RPK, and more banditry.
This bloodbath is a valuable lesson in surviving in the game. One on one encounters will probably always end in conflict, but when parties encounter each other, there may be some avoidance, as the potential losses are much higher, and won't be resolved in a matter of seconds.
Everything the game has the player do early on should be aimed towards grouping players up. If players are constantly dying alone, they should get some popups guiding them to finding a group. Maybe have a tool where established groups can for half a party and guide new players through some early content, and the new players can give a star rating for the players, so the people who use this as a trap are quickly weeded out.(I could say a lot more here, but won't clog this discussion)
When someone buys the game, there should be a popup: "This game is not designed for solo play, only purchase if you are willing to work with others frequently, or ready for a very challenging existence!"
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
When someone buys the game, there should be a popup: "This game is not designed for solo play, only purchase if you are willing to work with others frequently, or ready for a very challenging existence!"
There will be some players that are similar to me. I fully intend to play with others and form a list of players that I prefer to group with. Saying that though, there will be times where I will go solo, out into the dangerous world. Either because I have some goal in mine that I believe will be easier achieved alone plus I will enjoy the challenge or I just don't feel like being that social at the time.
Now, I fully understand I will be at greater risk going solo but I accept that risk.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I actually really like that idea of being told what factors might have influenced your death. I wonder if that is possible to communicate in some kind of "killmail".
In general, this is what I see happening.
Day One of Early Enrollment, people are going to log in and go looking for fights. It's going to be a pretty bloody, pretty messy free-for all. We are thinking about ways to influence that start, but I think it's inevitable. It's just a natural human thing to want to see how the tech works, and the most interesting combats are going to be with other players, so there is going to be a massive PvP explosion. Pretending otherwise just sets us up for failure and a huge PR debacle.
A few days, maybe weeks into Early Enrollment, the first-day jitters will have calmed down and folks won't be so hasty to drop everything and fight each other "just because". When we reach that point we'll be more able to communicate values to the players even if there's no in-game mechanical effects.
Of course depending on how we add new accounts, and how fast we add new accounts, there's going to have to be a continuous process of re-education as those new players hit the servers and want to "try out" the combat system.
Early Enrollment, because of it's MVP nature, is also going to be a time & place where people want to test a lot of stuff, so they can make suggestions to us and participate in Crowdforging. So I expect all sorts of attacks between players that have a metagame value even if the ingame value is hard to parse. It's very difficult to say that we don't benefit from those actions in the long run.
Thank you for returning my drive for this game. I honestly was thinking it was going to become a Mining simulator.
Yes, Killmails do exactly what you are asking. We always used them as a training tool in Eve. Not only for the new PVPers but also for the veterans.