Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
L2P n00bz!
Illyrian
Member Posts: 300
In another example of refined humour FLS released a new forum thread titled L2P.
After numerous reports how in game economy doesn't work the first sticky in this new thread tries to explain how to work the flawed economy.
Instead of fixing the problems - educate the players how to work with a flawed game design. It is not really surprising having in mind that devs are already instructing people how ganking is a good thing. Be satisifed with less, why play a working game when you can have teeth pulling fun with a poor design.
Two thumbs up for those who are sticking out.
Comments
I was interested to see this forum title - and the player reaction to it.
This thread is also interesting:
http://www.burningsea.com/forums/showthread.php?t=21247
Again, MMOs are an interesting thing IMO in that there is a definate crossover between the in-game community and the out-of-game community(ies) who are often based in forums.
Maybe I'm a snob and / or condecending but I tend to find that "elite speak" (or should that be "l337 $p34|<"?) tends to be associated with a 'younger' player whom in many cases (though not all) is immature with a short attention span?
In fact, although the internet is supposed to be anonymous I think it would be fair to say that in many cases you CAN identify maturity (not age) and to some degree intelligence (?) by the way a person writes?
And in MMOs, maturity, intelligence and perserverance (or lack of these) tend to be reflected in certain playstyles?
So, if you make your community a welcoming place for a certain group then you can expect that to be reflected in game?
Nothing says irony like spelling ideot wrong.
L2P n00bz!
when i saw that, i was immediately reminded of Kaplan's rant, of how raiding in wow was fine, just the 99% of the players that didn't raid needed to learn to play and then they'd understand the joys of raiding.
could we please get correspondent writers and moderators, on the eve forum at mmorpg.com, who are well-versed on eve-online and aren't just passersby pushing buttons? pretty please?
I understand that it can be tongue-in-cheek, but one would think the game has enough of a bad reputation regarding ganking that it would have the good sense to avoid making it worse.
Actually, just earlier today, I came across comments made last July by Isildur (one of the developers) on an external site:
Note that I put ‘hardcore’ in ’scare quotes’ to indicate I was ’sneering’ at the term. Because the people who want fun competitive PvP are already playing fun competitive PvP, in GW and in WoW and in EVE. The people who want to gank are waiting for the Next Big Failure to come along, to let them grief noobs for a few months before it shrivels up and dies. This is because every sane developer has learned this lesson: griefing and ganking doesn’t just lose you the $15/mo from the person who was griefed. It has a multiplicative effect, creating an environment in your game, and a reputation outside your game, and people tend to steer clear. ‘Play to Crush’ as a selling point and marketing slogan probably lost SB twice the players it ended up bringing them.
Competitive PvPers will show up to PvP in Pirates, because our PvP rocks, because it’s fun and rewards player skill. Griefers will show up and discover there’s not much for them to do, because player skill isn’t what they really want — what they really want is 6v1 gangbangs against weaker opponents. Unsurprisingly, I like the former and detest the latter. And I was never even a victim in UO, so I don’t have that ancient bitterness to explain it. But I did fight an awful lot of evenly-matched PvP battles — with open looting and stat loss — in Kesmai.
Source: http://brokentoys.org/2007/07/23/see-you-in-ultima-online-no-shadowbane-uh-daoc-hey-swg-wait-horizons-vanguard-darkfall-yeah-totally-see-you-in-darkfall-newb/
I quoted that comment on a PotBS forum thread discussing the game's "vision" and I can't wait to see if Isildur will respond. If he was honest last July, he must be somewhat dismayed at what is going on with his game. There is the additional problem that the collective perception of the game being a ganker's paradise has really been encouraged by the developers themselves, and the "no crying in the red circle" mantra is probably the closest thing I have seen to Shadowbane's "Play to Crush". Not a good sign.
His entire post has whiffs of irony at its finest.
For those that don't usually look at links - this one is in a designers blog and a number of people from other Developers (KFS1 from CRS as one example) actually discuss PvP in this one.
Maybe I am just a little bit picky here - but amongst the intelligent conversation you get Isildur with "kthx. bye"...
Nothing says irony like spelling ideot wrong.
Not to mention that rather embarrassing jail analogy.
Still, how do you reconcile his position with that of DrewC, who wrote a while back:
First, Open Sea PvP is a very low restriction PvP system. Characters can be attacked by virtually anyone, and they can most certainly be ganked. That's the nature of the system, and we're not changing that system. So we don't want to hear any crying about it. War's not fair. Open Sea PvP is war. Open Sea PvP is not fair. I recommend trying to figure out how to make it not fair in your favor.
Second, it's a reference to the fact that it's only a game, and not something worth crying about. I know MMORPGs are very immersive games, and many people poor a lot of time and energy into these games. I'm really happy that players are that excited about Pirates, but at the end of the day, it's important to remember that it's still a game. It's not worth losing your temper, or getting upset over. It's just a game.
In short: there's no crying in the red circle.
Source: http://www.burningsea.com/forums/showpost.php?p=190578&postcount=6
Translation: Anything goes, and since it's just a game (except to those making $$$$$ out of it) we don't want to hear you complaining about it.
Either the developers are hypocrites, or they don't know what they are doing. Either way, the game is in trouble.
It's not very hard to reconcile. You can only get ganked in PotBS if you do one of two things:
1) Voluntarily turn on your PvP flag - many people do this because of the reduction in NPC aggro and speed boost it gives. Surely we can all agree members of this group have no legitimate cause for complaint?
2) Enter a red circle. This one's usually the sticking point. Some folks refuse to modify their gameplay in response to the world (as in red circles appearing over a port they want to get to). Avoid the port and you can't get ganked. It's not a FFA situation by any stretch of the imagination.
Actually, my point was more in regard to the type of PvP that currently exists in PotBS. By all accounts the red circles have turned into gankfests, often disguised as balanced PvP (with the opponent's five buddies waiting for the word in the closest port).
The type of PvP which Isildur sought seems to have completely vanished from the game, to be replaced almost unilaterally by ganking. The devs should have seen it coming.
Anyone doing the PVE quests to level is sent from port to port to do so. It's ridiculous to claim that people don't have to enter the red circles. The game sends you there and only way to level up without doing so is to engage in mind numbingly boring open sea grinding.
For freetraders, it's even worse. If a port where they have their production facilities gets enveloped in a red circle, they are forced to run the six ship gankers gauntlet in an almost unarmed ship to get resouces in and out of port. The alternative, is to stop playing that character until the situation is resolved by a port battle.
After my freetrader was forced to move base for the third time in two months (and to make matters worse, contention decay had been turned off), I'd had enough. I did the same as most other players and cancelled my subscription.
This is why economic warfare (blockade) is ineffective in POTBS. No player should ever be totally cut off from their production facilities if they think it through. Even when under foreign control, you can still accumulate labor. And the foreign tax on small items is negligable. It actually pisses me off more when my nation puts my economic base under contention, rather than let the other side just keep it.
As to PvE quests, I always have several quest lines dangling, waiting til I get around to them. To break up the monotony on any MMORPG I switch off and do different things. I do not sit at my keyboard and grind all day, nor do I craft all day, nor do I explore all day. Using one of my favorite games, EQ 2 as an example, I PvE grind until I get bored, maybe do some exploring, maybe dig my character deep into a fix surrounded by mobs to see if I can get out, then go and craft a bit. Sometimes, in POTBS, I just sit at the auction house writing down ship/equipment characteristics so I can decide what I want to do when I reach the appropriate level. Sometimes I study whats on the auction house and look for a shortage. Sometimes I study several auction houses to see if I can fill that shortage and make a profit from hauling. Sometimes I am studying the map, and the Wiki site, to figure out a way to make money, or to obtain components for free. Right now I make ship provisioning (sells for about 2000 gold) for just about free because I figured out what I have to do to get major components for free.
People say in POTBS there is no exploration, there is only the OS grind. Well, when I decide to explore I am visiting the auction houses at ports, cataloging the junk collector quest, cataloging the hauling to Port X quests, or just plain poking around through towns (enjoyed Tortuga). Granted, there could be more exploration things to do, but there are some.
Grinding to level cap day after day, hour after hour, is boring in any game. Don't kid yourself, there is no variety in grinding orc mobs, then switching to grinding goblin mobs. The grind is the grind. The game is what you make of it, use your imagination, it is, after all, entertainment. Unlike TV, games do not do it all for you. You can't sit behind your computer and just watch. It is what it is, and it's up to you to make something happen.
L2P = Learn To Play!
It''s a sad fact that many of the mmorpg.com forum posters have given up playing potbs without even learning how to play it.
The L2P section of the FLS forums will be a great benefit to the new players that want to get the most out of the game.
It is an even sadder fact that game's poor design is covered by blaming players inability to learn the ropes of a simplistic game. Funny really as it seems majority of players had no problem mastering much more complex games.
I think we learned all to well how to use jumping ships to avoid PvP zones, invisibility jump, gank, stealth outfit etc. Unfortunately it isn't much fun to coax and twist the flawed game mechanics in order to play.
Last I remember is you advocating forming player organized anti gank squads since ganking irritates lots of players and game design support it. I suspect that, as well as suffering griefers, also falls under L2P.
Sorry, but although the game has issues as you would expect shortly after release, L2P is not intended as an excuse to cover them over.
PvP is the main area that needs improvement but that has nothing to do with L2P. FLS has admitted that rewards do not match the risk & will be corrected in the next patch.
Most players accept that Potbs has a steep learning curve, if you find it easy peasy good for you.
L2P is intended as an aid to help get newbie players up to speed & is a very good idea.
For you to suggest that L2P is a way for FLS to cover up the in-game problems is completely wrong.
Sorry, but although the game has issues as you would expect shortly after release, L2P is not intended as an excuse to cover them over.
PvP is the main area that needs improvement but that has nothing to do with L2P. FLS has admitted that rewards do not match the risk & will be corrected in the next patch.
Most players accept that Potbs has a steep learning curve, if you find it easy peasy good for you.
L2P is intended as an aid to help get newbie players up to speed & is a very good idea.
For you to suggest that L2P is a way for FLS to cover up the in-game problems is completely wrong.
I am really tired of "new game has issues" garbage. This is 2008 and POTBS plays like something released in 1999. Arguably older games has better starts and less issues, even if they did not one would expect POTBS would deliver better then they did. After all, there was time to learn.
After numerous reports of problems with game economics FLS has a favourite son write long post educating people how to play instead of fixing the issues.
No crying in red circle and L2P are bound to solve all of the game problems. At least for devs because whatever is not working in the game it is not devs fault, no - the players need L2P. It is definitelly a cheaper option.
As I said, you were the one that had problems with ganking (and plethora of other issues) as did most others. The answer is simple "no crying in red circle" and "L2P".
i repeat - L2P has nothing to do with the ingame problems.
We have already discussed them on other threads & FLS are doing all they can to make PvP more rewarding & interesting.
They are not intentionally related to L2P although if it helps players get more enjoyment out of the game thats fine.
I hate to keep harping on it, but I just can't help it: The developers got away from what they knew, and what they were good at. They started out making a tactical ship sim mmo, and ended up with 4 indistinct nations fighting in the carribbean, with poorly implemented avatar combat, a shaky economy, gold spammer fights, and ganker issues. They got so far off their initial path that comparing where they were in 2005, and where they are now, is like looking at two extremely different, separate mmos.
Even more ironic is that the post after Isildur's "kthx.Bye." post actually does a pretty good job of highlighting what kills games with PvP:
A-Game breaking exploitible bugs and
B-Lack of turf worth holding/conquoring/defending/destroying
Hmmmmm.
Edit: I would add to that:
C- Exploitible design
D- Short travel times (small game world) - which I suppose could be listed with C?
Nothing says irony like spelling ideot wrong.
The thread on the PotBS forum regarding Isildur's comment:
http://www.burningsea.com/forums/showthread.php?t=21615
Still no response from Isildur or anyone else at FLS.
I honestly don't understand why people have such a hard time with it.
I'm not much of a PvPer. On the other hand, I do participate extensively in RvR activities ( I have sailed in 14 port battles since launch 2 months ago) and red circle defense. I don't get sunk a whole lot because I analyze the situation before entering the circle. If it's locked down by a 3 to 6 person squad ... I just don't go in unless I'm in a ship I'm prepared to lose. Instead, I start asking on the Conquest chat if anyone wants to group up to do something about the situation. If they don't, I move on to other ports and other goals. It's sort of like DrewC said ... I make it unfair in my favor, I expect to lose or I stay away. Where's the problem?
I think what DrewC said was the height of arrogance, even if he has a bit of a point, that's still not the way someone should act. There are certain realities that will always exist in PvP, and ganking (especially ganking of n00bs) is not something that is going to go away, the effect can be minimized.
Personally I hear people upset that their area is under a bubble. Yes it sucks, but do we expect our ports to always be free of conention? That's why, whereever possible, I setup bases of operations in ports that are more safe from the enemy. Certain resources are more rare, and hence, people are fighting to conquer those ports more. This part I have no problem with.
Turning off conention decay I thought was a stupid move. The thing about unrest is that the fire should have to be continually fanned until it blows over. Honestly, i'd like a quick contention decay. This makes driving ports into unrest something that has to happen fast. If you can't co-ordinate it quickly, then your not going to get the port. (i.e. on blackbeard the favorite tactic of pirates has been to generate a bubble around it, but then leave it alone at about 6.5k unrest, since there are few pirate npc's to drive down contention, and lets face it, the garrison commander quests don't reduce a lot of unrest. Without their being any constant activity, ports should return to normal.
Yes, the decision to lack a real incentive to PvP was a bad idea. Yet I see a certain disconnect on the forums. On the one hand, nationals are crying about pirate gankfests. on the other, pirates are crying when SOL's show up. While there are some legitimate cases of ganking, I think many can agree that some people define "ganking" as going into a place they have no business going, and losing as a result of it. For example, last night a level 8 pirate was deep in the bubble. I let him pass. but would anyone say that if me and a friend attacked someone in a full pvp area that it's a "gank?" What was he doing there?
Personally I think for ports that are in unrest, freetraders should have the ability to make a killing financially in supplying the towns to stabilize them.
I certainly concur on the turning off decay is hurting things. Maybe once the underdog tools are dynamic they can turn it back on - the reason for shutting it off was smaller factions had a much harder time overcoming decay than larger ones.
As for arrogance ... maybe, but I actually wish move devs would act like that. By this I mean the stance defined by "we have a vision and I'm sorry if it doesn't match with what you wish to see, perhaps you should find a different game" is a breath of fresh air to me.
I think people are intelligent enough to read between the lines. Being a dev or a top person with a company means you have a certain sense of decorum when dealing with your customers. DrewC essentially said stfun00b and that's not customer service.
For the "most" part, I actually concur with a lot of what he said though. 99% of the time, you know your going into an area you shouldn't. If you don't, then you consider it a lesson learned, and you won't make that same mistake twice.
Personally, i would make certain areas a "priority" for lower level guys. They get the first invites. Only when something cannot be filled do you invite the higher up guys. Areas like the Antilles, have the best resoucres, but also make it ONE DANGEROUS place to setup shop. Those areas should be the 50 pvp spots. You can try fighting there if you are lower level, but it wouldn't be recomended. This would open PvP to all levels. For starter ports, make them extremely secure in the radius a bubble would appear, to where attacking them would be quite frankly not in your best interest.
And this is the part I haven't figured out..... for those who try to form gank squads in lower level zones, there has to be some sort of incentive discouraging them.
Agreed - and is it just my imagination or has he been very quiet since?
(Maybe Danicia banned him from the forums? :-D )
The more I look at games with PvP (that work) I think the solution is travel time.
That is... you want to operate in a certain area of the map? You have to base yourself there (or near there).
PotBS created a world where no player is more than 60 minutes away from any other player. So, it cost "gank squads" nothing to get together and roam the map?
(I said this pre-release too and was shouted down by a number of Fanbois - who appear to have moved on now BTW...)
Nothing says irony like spelling ideot wrong.
There is a trainload of suggestions on the forums. One of them was to reduce ship OS visibility and detection to historical 20 - 25 miles maximum instead of 80ish that are in effect now. And that was under clear weather, make the fog, haze, heat, storm, and it would decrease visibility even further. That is, after all, how lots of historical traders dodged dangerous zones. Confederate blockade runners for example normally made their dash through blockade by utilising shallows and poor visibility.
Separation into PvE servers where content is turned off but all PvE mobs are "elite" and PvP servers where everyone is perma flagged and production costs 1/4 of that on regular server.
Exp loss for gankers if hitting players more then 10 levels underneath them (level decay). If the ship disparity is also more then 10 levels between the two - no MOV etc.
Not my ideas I just remember some of the stuff that has been tossed around and well argumented for.
Personally I was disappointed with the replies Rusty made to Vetarnias in:
http://www.burningsea.com/forums/showthread.php?t=21615
Yeah I got the idea that iwas basically "nothing to see here, move along." Though to be honest, that's a very embarassing comment made that conflicts with the way things currently are. I'm not sure it "can" be responded to, outside of saying "look, there are some things in our vision that didn't account for the way people would abuse it, and we're working to fix it."
Yet that isn't even said.....
Yeah I got the idea that iwas basically "nothing to see here, move along." Though to be honest, that's a very embarassing comment made that conflicts with the way things currently are. I'm not sure it "can" be responded to, outside of saying "look, there are some things in our vision that didn't account for the way people would abuse it, and we're working to fix it."
Yet that isn't even said.....
Well, to be honest what is to be expected?
Look at the number of players with different opinion what the game is - PvP, RvR, PvE/PvP mix etc. The design is such that it makes it hard to say what kind of game it is supposed to be, let alone what has to be done for it to work.