Consequence-Free PvP in Alpha - Yes, It's Possible


Pathfinder Online

101 to 150 of 189 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
-Aet- Charlie wrote:
Do we play chess in PfO now?

There's Rock/Paper/Scissors :)

Goblin Squad Member

In before "I knew that was a parody, I was just testing you all."

Goblin Squad Member

I find this a very odd turn of the thread, indeed.

Bludd, I respect you, but I think you've backed yourself into an unsupportable arguement by most sane peoples standards....

"nothing of any substance" = ALL computer games including PFO, pretty much all hobbies or anything else in which ones own entertainment is the primary purpose.

You seem to be implying that someone who quits a computer game (or any other hobby) because they aren't enjoying it is somehow deficient in character. To put it bluntly, that's just plain NUTS. It's a computer game in a fantasy world, it's not defending the Fulda Gap against the 8th Guards Army.

Goblin Squad Member

DeciusBrutus wrote:
Xeen wrote:

This has got to be one of the funniest OPs I have ever seen. So, in order to pvp consequence free, you have to use an exploit.

Thanks again Nihimon for showing us both sides.

What is the exploit? Is it that you don't lose Reputation for attacking yourself? Is it that you gain the murderer flag for killing yourself? Is it that anyone can attack someone with the murderer flag without reputation loss?

Using a game mechanic in an unintended way for your gain is an exploit. That includes getting the murder flag so people can attack you consequence free, thereby giving you the opportunity to kill someone for achievements.

The type of exploits the both of you have been arguing about as long as I can remember.

Goblin Squad Member

Xeen wrote:
DeciusBrutus wrote:
Xeen wrote:

This has got to be one of the funniest OPs I have ever seen. So, in order to pvp consequence free, you have to use an exploit.

Thanks again Nihimon for showing us both sides.

What is the exploit? Is it that you don't lose Reputation for attacking yourself? Is it that you gain the murderer flag for killing yourself? Is it that anyone can attack someone with the murderer flag without reputation loss?

Using a game mechanic in an unintended way for your gain is an exploit.

Something the both of you have been arguing about as long as I can remember.

I should stay out of this, but fascinatingly find it beyond my power...

That is a bit of a stretch, by even strict standards. You seem to be reaching here.

Goblin Squad Member

It's not an exploit. At least not the definition I think we're talking here. It's a suggestion to use an intended game mechanic that results in a consequence. Now the fact that the person that used the intended game mechanic 'likes' the consequence has no bearing on whether it's actually an exploit.

This is no different than someone wanting to play an insane lunatic that has to stay away from all the settlements or be attacked. He can do that and the game will respond and give him that. The fact that he wants that to happen does not make it an exploit in my opinion.

Goblin Squad Member

I don't think Xeen is reaching much. it seems unlikely that the devs intend people to get the player killer achievement by killing themselves, nor that killing yourself repeatedly to get the murderer flag is an intention. While the latter is a pretty small exploit, the former is clearly one.

And while Nihimon is correct that it is possible, people who want to practice PvP shouldn't have to resort to workarounds to do it.

Goblin Squad Member

There must be a way they can allow you to set a flag, at least for testing. If nothing else, letting you select the murderer flag by ticking a box for now.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
FMS Quietus wrote:

It's not an exploit. At least not the definition I think we're talking here. It's a suggestion to use an intended game mechanic that results in a consequence. Now the fact that the person that used the intended game mechanic 'likes' the consequence has no bearing on whether it's actually an exploit.

This is no different than someone wanting to play an insane lunatic that has to stay away from all the settlements or be attacked. He can do that and the game will respond and give him that. The fact that he wants that to happen does not make it an exploit in my opinion.

I doubt the Dev's intended the MURDERER flag to be applied to killing oneself. They may not have even intended that a player be ABLE to kill oneself. The MURDERER flag (as I understand it) was intended for someone that had acted as the agressor in multiple PvP incidents so that other players had some measure of protection and warning against such players rather then being pure gank bait.

That being said, there is nothing unethical about what Nihimon is doing here. He's completely open about what he is doing and how it works. Moreover, it's ALPHA, this is the time and place to mess around with the mechanics and see how you can stretch, bend and break them. Ultimately the Dev's will determine whether it's an exploit or a "feature". My money is on the former. If they wanted players to be able to simply self-flag for PvP, it would have been pretty simply to build a function to do that. More importantly, it kinda muddies the MURDERER flag for players as no longer a usefull warning for players who are likely to initiate unprovoked PvP against you.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The fact that it is an unintended result and used, could mean that it is an exploit. The fact that it is used in an alpha (pre wipe) to gain information when there are no other ways to do so, makes it excusable and beneath consideration.

Clearly a poke and a reach to do so. Much like saying that those who don't like PVP only feel that way because they suck at it or that all those who are good at it love it.

Are you two just bored? You are usually better than this.

Goblin Squad Member

Bluddwolf wrote:
GrumpyMel wrote:

I find this a very odd turn of the thread, indeed.

Bludd, I respect you, but I think you've backed yourself into an unsupportable arguement by most sane peoples standards....

"nothing of any substance" = ALL computer games including PFO, pretty much all hobbies or anything else in which ones own entertainment is the primary purpose.

You seem to be implying that someone who quits a computer game (or any other hobby) because they aren't enjoying it is somehow deficient in character. To put it bluntly, that's just plain NUTS. It's a computer game in a fantasy world, it's not defending the Fulda Gap against the 8th Guards Army.

Actually if you carefully read what I had written you'll notice, I never said anyone was a quitter. I inferred that Audoucet was saying players quit games they don't like.

I stated that I rarely quit things, and to be honest I don't recall having done so in many years if not decades.

Audoucet asked me why not, and I provided a quite detailed explanation. My explanation was ignored or dismissed as not being on par with World Championship Chess!

........and we all skipped down the road to Tangentville and other absurdities (some I provided).......

But I stand by my argument that most people who dislike PvP are either not experienced with it, aren't good at it, or rely on other's impressions of it to form their opinion.

Edit..... You could also not like PvP if its just not your thing, but hopefully that comes after having given it a "good college try" as the saying goes.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Caldeathe Baequiannia wrote:
Kobold Cleaver wrote:
Damn you people for making me take Caldeathe's side! We're supposed to have a rivalry or something!
I promise not to read anything into it.

I-it's not like I like you or anything, you d-dumb elf!

*Flushes*
*Disembowels a gnome to divert suspicion*

Bluddwolf wrote:


Ahh, so you say they were simply quitters. The bodes even less well for those settlements that actively sought primarily players adverse to PvP. But that was already apparent to me when I suggested that even crafters should have a certain minimum of PvP skills, and the push back I got on that idea.

*Faceclaw*

Ow, my face.

Somebody who chooses not to do something they don't like to do is not a quitter unless there is an obligation to do that something anyways. Pathfinder Online is a game, not a job. You yourself admitted that boredom is a powerful weapon here.

I do agree that anybody who hates PvP is going to have a rough time in this game. I'm still not convinced that PvEers or gatherers will be able to avoid it at all. But you're presenting this in an elitist, "PvP-haters are quitters/sour grapers" manner, and that's a very simplistic way of viewing things.

Guurzak wrote:

You misunderstand what Nihimon is doing, Urman. Suicide doesn't get you any achievements. Suicide is a method by which you can get the Murderer flag, which then allows others to attack you without consequence, which allows you to fight back and (if you win) get achievements.

If suicide counted directly as a player kill, yes, that would be a problem. That's not the case here.

I played in the demo. If I recall right, suicide was a way to get achievements.

Anyways, I agree with Xeen (ow, that kinda burns). Using suicide to get an achievement is pretty obviously not an "intended game mechanic that results in a consequence".

It's alpha, though, so who cares?

Scarab Sages

Kobold Cleaver wrote:

Anyways, I agree with Xeen (ow, that kinda burns). Using suicide to get an achievement is pretty obviously not an "intended game mechanic that results in a consequence".

It's alpha, though, so let's report it to be fixed?

Fixed.

De nada.

If it was the case, Nihimon was innocent. He found it, tested it and reported it. Nothing wrong with it.


Not really "fixed" so much as "changing what I said". I didn't say that deliberately—someone indicated it's already been reported. I'd think that that would be a no-brainer.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

"The sky is blue."

(waits)

Goblin Squad Member

Lol

Goblinworks Executive Founder

Bluddwolf wrote:
I was too busy discovering what the color purple tastes like.

Quitter.

Goblin Squad Member

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Nihimon wrote:

"The sky is blue."

(waits)

I'm growing tired of you imposing your perception on everyone in this community. Next thing is you are going to call everyone who sais the blue they perceive is not the blue you perceive a liar.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

Crime! wrote:
I'm growing tired of you imposing your perception on everyone in this community. Next thing is you are going to call everyone who sais the blue they perceive is not the blue you perceive a liar.

He'd be right !

Goblin Squad Member

Stop arguing with me! You are not a Crime-Fighter.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

Xeen wrote:
DeciusBrutus wrote:
Xeen wrote:

This has got to be one of the funniest OPs I have ever seen. So, in order to pvp consequence free, you have to use an exploit.

Thanks again Nihimon for showing us both sides.

What is the exploit? Is it that you don't lose Reputation for attacking yourself? Is it that you gain the murderer flag for killing yourself? Is it that anyone can attack someone with the murderer flag without reputation loss?

Using a game mechanic in an unintended way for your gain is an exploit. That includes getting the murder flag so people can attack you consequence free, thereby giving you the opportunity to kill someone for achievements.

The type of exploits the both of you have been arguing about as long as I can remember.

So, you think "getting the murderer flag without losing reputation" is the exploit?

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

@all

Meh

Goblin Squad Member

DeciusBrutus wrote:
So, you think "getting the murderer flag without losing reputation" is the exploit?

Gaining the murderer flag is not so much the exploit, it's committing suicide to gain an achievement that is the problem.

It has not been mentioned yet, but this will lead to "kill swapping", which would probably be considered an exploit.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

I agree with Bludd, it's an obvious exploit. But it's an alpha, exploit isn't really bad, especially to "test" features.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

Bluddwolf wrote:
DeciusBrutus wrote:
So, you think "getting the murderer flag without losing reputation" is the exploit?

Gaining the murderer flag is not so much the exploit, it's committing suicide to gain an achievement that is the problem.

It has not been mentioned yet, but this will lead to "kill swapping", which would probably be considered an exploit.

You mean, exactly the same dynamic that is enabled by feuds? I agree that it is an undesired emergent behavior, but the only way to remove the incentive that I see would be to remove the PvP achievement.

Goblin Squad Member

DeciusBrutus wrote:
Bluddwolf wrote:
DeciusBrutus wrote:
So, you think "getting the murderer flag without losing reputation" is the exploit?

Gaining the murderer flag is not so much the exploit, it's committing suicide to gain an achievement that is the problem.

It has not been mentioned yet, but this will lead to "kill swapping", which would probably be considered an exploit.

You mean, exactly the same dynamic that is enabled by feuds? I agree that it is an undesired emergent behavior, but the only way to remove the incentive that I see would be to remove the PvP achievement.

You obviously know the difference between the activity described here and a feud. You also know that removing the PvP achievement is not the only solution.

Feuds have an influence cost, and will be in most cases non consensual.

GW can remove the incentive of committing suicide to become flagged, by creating a method of engaging in non consensual PvP that does not cost reputation and does nit require exploiting the system.

Why is suicide even possible?

GW should also be aware that if suicide is retained, it will become the fast travel of choice.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

My understanding was that there was already a system of voluntary PVP flags planned. Given that information, I'm not sure that voluntarily giving yourself the murderer flag is really a problem, given that it doesn't carry any of the benefits of those other voluntary flags.

As far as suicide, I think it's fairly important to have some way to voluntarily release your character in the event of becoming stuck, or a host of other reasons. As long as it carries all the weight of an actual death, I don't see much problem with it. It's no different than jumping into a group of mobs and letting them do it for you, or flagging yourself and letting a friend kill you.

Goblin Squad Member

Bluddwolf wrote:
GW should also be aware that if suicide is retained, it will become the fast travel of choice.

You respawn at the nearest Shrine of Pharasma. It's hardly worth losing 25% of inventory and taking damage on threaded gear to cross half a hex.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

Nihimon wrote:
Bluddwolf wrote:
GW should also be aware that if suicide is retained, it will become the fast travel of choice.
You respawn at the nearest Shrine of Pharasma. It's hardly worth losing 25% of inventory and taking damage on threaded gear to cross half a hex.

100% of inventory, unless you go back and pick up the rest.

Which would somewhat reduce the benefit of the fast travel.

Not to mention that most of the time you could simply get killed.

Goblin Squad Member

DeciusBrutus wrote:
100% of inventory, unless you go back and pick up the rest.

Good point. I'm getting spoiled by Alpha :)

Goblin Squad Member

This is just speculation, but here is how I see "suicide fast travel" working.

I'm on one end of the map, raiding. I'm wearing fully threaded gear, and I have one thread left. I set my bind point back at my home settlement at the other side of the map. I have not set any other bind points.

I'm needed on the other side of the map, so I commit suicide and poof! other side. I dump my semi damaged and replace all of it with a quick inventory pick up, known as a "go bag".

What is the loss of a few coin, or even a few thousand coin, to a millionaire or a billionaire?

Don't think there will be millionaires or billionaires in PFO?

Goblin Squad Member

Could someone just have a spare character kill them and have the same effect?

If we want to limit cross-map death-travel then perhaps more distant bind points cost more threads, or perhaps are simply impossible beyond some range.

Grand Lodge

I don't think given the current state of the game that due to the attempts to cut down on "suicide fast travel" that we will even have the option to "thread" to a particular rez point, at least not until well after the WoT is over.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Nihimon wrote:

"The sky is blue."

(waits)

"The night is not black if you know that it is green", so there. Now a days Clancy can't even

sing.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

Bluddwolf wrote:

This is just speculation, but here is how I see "suicide fast travel" working.

I'm on one end of the map, raiding. I'm wearing fully threaded gear, and I have one thread left. I set my bind point back at my home settlement at the other side of the map. I have not set any other bind points.

I'm needed on the other side of the map, so I commit suicide and poof! other side. I dump my semi damaged and replace all of it with a quick inventory pick up, known as a "go bag".

What is the loss of a few coin, or even a few thousand coin, to a millionaire or a billionaire?

Don't think there will be millionaires or billionaires in PFO?

The targets of your raiding find your corpse, take back 75% of what you stole from them, and make a note to have someone with proper equipment ready for the next time you raid.

That can also be mostly negated by only allowing you to change your bind point to your current location.

Goblin Squad Member

Can a twice marked tell where the bind points are?(sorry for the coming hijack)

Goblin Squad Member

DeciusBrutus wrote:
Xeen wrote:
DeciusBrutus wrote:
Xeen wrote:

This has got to be one of the funniest OPs I have ever seen. So, in order to pvp consequence free, you have to use an exploit.

Thanks again Nihimon for showing us both sides.

What is the exploit? Is it that you don't lose Reputation for attacking yourself? Is it that you gain the murderer flag for killing yourself? Is it that anyone can attack someone with the murderer flag without reputation loss?

Using a game mechanic in an unintended way for your gain is an exploit. That includes getting the murder flag so people can attack you consequence free, thereby giving you the opportunity to kill someone for achievements.

The type of exploits the both of you have been arguing about as long as I can remember.

So, you think "getting the murderer flag without losing reputation" is the exploit?

Hey, if you only want to read half my post... Thats fine.

I understand that it was a long and complicated post. Especially if it gets in the way of smelling the color purple.

Grand Lodge

To be fair Xeen, the only thing more tiresome than reading 100% of the posts on here is probably arguing with you about it's semantics. Besides, what I do with Purple is between my body and me :p

Goblin Squad Member

Pretty sure everyone can tell where the bind points are. Last I heard, a twice-marked was needed if you want to build a new bind point.

Goblin Squad Member

KotC Carbon D. Metric wrote:
To be fair Xeen, the only thing more tiresome than reading 100% of the posts on here is probably arguing with you about it's semantics. Besides, what I do with Purple is between my body and me :p

It was three sentences, that fully explained his follow up question.

Grand Lodge

Hey man, purple is controversial, some people get pretty heated.

Goblin Squad Member

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Oi, me gots dis joke. Wut's da diffrunz batween pink an' purple?

Yer grip!

HAR HAR HAR!

Akshully Guurzak nub get dis joke but it apparuntlee pritty funny fer hummies.

Goblin Squad Member

Xeen wrote:

Using a game mechanic in an unintended way for your gain is an exploit. That includes getting the murder flag so people can attack you consequence free, thereby giving you the opportunity to kill someone for achievements.

The type of exploits the both of you have been arguing about as long as I can remember.

Finding the main idea of a reading passage is the only way to understand it. Usually the main idea is found in the first sentence, and sometimes it is found in the last. On some occasions you have to read the entire passage and ask yourself, "What was this mostly about?"

After reading Xeen's comment, which was a whole three sentences, the main idea was very clear. It was not hidden or hindered by semantics, but concise.

An exploit is being used which leads to gaining a PvP based achievement.

I will give credit to Nihimon in ferreting out this exploit and revealing it, so that the Devs can fix it. However, I think that his choice of title lends itself to the perception that he is being cynical towards the concerns that there were / are no ways to engage in PvP in alpha without resulting in rep loss for someone.

It is only possible through the use of an exploit. An exploit that if left unaddressed by GW, finding its way into EE, would be the kind if thing Nihimon would lecture us over.

I find it a cynical view because it elevates the type of PvP that it produces to the same level as non consensual PvP. When PvP is only engaged by those who are willing, and only when they are willing, what you end up with is controlled risk and reward. That is basically "Red vs Blue, Arena or Battleground PvP" typically found in Theme Park MMOs.

There is no sense of danger, nothing risked, and little or nothing gained as a reward in that type of PvP. Even the learning experience is not a full experience, because too many factors are controlled.

I worked with a Principal of a school who would have fire drills in the rain, during lunch, in the first minute of the school day, in the snow, and once during an after school basket ball game. When he was bombarded by complaints during a PTA meeting he responded, "Fires don't always happen on bright, sunny days and when it's convenient for you."

Meaningful PvP is no different than responding to a fire or conducting a fire drill. It is only fully realized with all of the risks, rewards and learning, when it happens when you don't expect it and it is not convenient.

I heard second hand that Nihimon had said in one of his streaming videos, while trying to complete an escalation, "How bad would it be if a bunch bandits (pcs) would jump us while trying to do this?" (Paraphrased from second hand account).

It would be bad, and that is the whole point of Open World PvP.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

To be fare to Nihimon, he never suggested it was a good thing. I saw the post as an answer to the earlier question "Is it possible to test consequence PvP in the Alpha?"

My interpretation of Nihimon's answer, "Yes, it's possible, but only by exploiting a bug."

While the posted answer is certainly disappointing to those that care, it hardly deserves criticism as cynical. He could simply not have answered (or said no, since it isn't possible without an exploit), instead of giving people an option for testing it.

Goblin Squad Member

But don't you see? We have to attack Nihimon for what is essentially a bug report.

Goblin Squad Member

TEO Papaver wrote:
But don't you see? We have to attack Nihimon for what is essentially a bug report.

He did not write his first post as if it was a bug report.

Shadow Lodge Goblin Squad Member

Master of Shadows wrote:
I'd love to see a PVP flag introduced "Spoiling for a fight" or some such that a player can fly effectively inviting others to engage him in PVP. Anyone attacking someone flying the "Spoiling for a fight" flag suffers no loss of rep, though they may incur alignment penalties say if the settlement has outlawed brawling.

And we could call it "Come at me bro!"

Goblin Squad Member

TEO Papaver wrote:
But don't you see? We have to attack Nihimon for what is essentially a bug report.
Bluddwolf wrote:
I will give credit to Nihimon in ferreting out this exploit and revealing it, so that the Devs can fix it. However, I think that his choice of title lends itself to the perception that he is being cynical towards the concerns that there were / are no ways to engage in PvP in alpha without resulting in rep loss for someone.

Reading is fundamental, as is finding main idea of what was written. I clearly gave credit to Nihimon for finding and reporting an exploit, even though he did not represent it as an exploit or bug in his original post.

The only criticism, if you want to call it that, was for the title he chose to use. The title misses the point of the concern that led Nihimon to search for a way to PvP in Alpha, without either party losing reputation.

Yes he did find one way, but it should have been stated that it was through the use of what may be considered an obvious exploit. So, it would not be a valid resolution to the concern expressed. That to me creates the impression that the title was cynical or perhaps dismissive of the concern.

101 to 150 of 189 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Paizo / Licensed Products / Digital Games / Pathfinder Online / Consequence-Free PvP in Alpha - Yes, It's Possible All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.