This implies that killing other players is considerably easier than killing NPC. This would in turn imply that the resources needed to kill NPCs would be more than enough to kill players. This would imply that players equipped to kill NPCs would be a bigger threat than those merely equipped to kill players.
In short: I dont believe it.
Dude, you're an EVE player, no? It's not that it's easier, rather just a different set of tools and tactics. In most MMOs that have PvP, the PvPers behave very differently from the NPCs.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
In UO, the bonus a PK has is in preparation ond state of mind.
I rather suspected as much. When the "PK's advantage" is purely a player one, wherof does it become the duty of the devs to correct that? I mean, say I'm bad at raiding - should I get the devs to give me better loot rolls to compensate?
I guess what I'm saying is in an open-world PVP MMO, what excuse is there for saying Player A should get dev help vs Player B?
If you have some kind of criminal element then you can add risk to that criminal element:
(1) If you die as a criminal your character is wiped. Permadeath.
-- or --
If you die as a criminal your character is reset to level 1. They can keep their banked stuff, but have to level again... of course they likely can't use much of what they have banked.
(2) If you are a criminal, most organizations won't deal with you based on your reputation. Banks won't talk to you, stores won't let you sell, etc. There can be black market places. However, the criminal pays more at those locations and black market banks can be raided just like players, making them very risky to store things. As a criminal, if you want something safe, you need to carry it around with you.
(3) As a criminal gains in noteriety, bountys are placed on them. Those bounties should be very lucrative for even a team to track down the criminal and dispense justice.
(4) If you try to commit murder in a town, the town guards/militia should react accordingly. They should intervene on the behalf of the accosted.
(5) Items should degrade, making living life as a rogue difficult as you need to repair, repurchase equipment.
These are the reasons that in a country with a rule of law, you don't see the kind of behavior that is in most PvP games. There are real world consequences and a risk that people usually don't take unless there are extrordinary circumstances. People who gain noteriety are shunned from the public and eventually hunted down by whatever law is in the area. In medevial times, bandits would be hunted down by militia or by a nobles forces.
Originally posted by bstripp If you have some kind of criminal element then you can add risk to that criminal element: (1) If you die as a criminal your character is wiped. Permadeath. -- or -- If you die as a criminal your character is reset to level 1. They can keep their banked stuff, but have to level again... of course they likely can't use much of what they have banked. (2) If you are a criminal, most organizations won't deal with you based on your reputation. Banks won't talk to you, stores won't let you sell, etc. There can be black market places. However, the criminal pays more at those locations and black market banks can be raided just like players, making them very risky to store things. As a criminal, if you want something safe, you need to carry it around with you. (3) As a criminal gains in noteriety, bountys are placed on them. Those bounties should be very lucrative for even a team to track down the criminal and dispense justice. (4) If you try to commit murder in a town, the town guards/militia should react accordingly. They should intervene on the behalf of the accosted. (5) Items should degrade, making living life as a rogue difficult as you need to repair, repurchase equipment. These are the reasons that in a country with a rule of law, you don't see the kind of behavior that is in most PvP games. There are real world consequences and a risk that people usually don't take unless there are extrordinary circumstances. People who gain noteriety are shunned from the public and eventually hunted down by whatever law is in the area. In medevial times, bandits would be hunted down by militia or by a nobles forces.
Besides point no. 1 these are the right things to add risk for being a PK.
Earthrise, is going to do exactly this, and have an insurance-system on top of it, so that the PK doesn't get to loot the insured items.
NPC-guards that will attack criminal players in the NPC-areas (50% of the whole world), bounty-system where players can place bounties themselves, item-decay etc. and ofc criminals can be attacked by anyone else without penalties for doing so. So being a criminal you've got nowhere to rest.
In UO, the bonus a PK has is in preparation ond state of mind.
I rather suspected as much. When the "PK's advantage" is purely a player one, wherof does it become the duty of the devs to correct that? I mean, say I'm bad at raiding - should I get the devs to give me better loot rolls to compensate?
I guess what I'm saying is in an open-world PVP MMO, what excuse is there for saying Player A should get dev help vs Player B?
At what point did anyone mention that Non PKs needed Dev "Help"?
I think you may be misconstruing what I mean when I say balance. I'm not talking "class balance" or something along those lines where a player needs to be able to attack/kill/defend effectively against another player.
Solution is to make gear not the absolute key element about the players in your game. Games like WoW could never have open world PvP because it is far too gear driven
I wouldn't say "could never". If WOW were FFA PVP, players would simply adapt to the game's rules in the exact same way that EVE and Darkfall players have adapted -- by min/maxing the most effective-yet-cheaply-farmed gear for each type of situation.
"Would never" is more accurate.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
I think we are going about this from the wrong direction.
When most people think about open PvP, we try to examine it from the PvPer's perspective. In other words, how do we make PvP difficult, so that people are discouraged from doing it? Or, how do we make PvP profitable, so that people engage in it?
What results from this is that the game is built around the PvP needs, rather than the needs of all. And when the game is designed around the PvP experience, people who don't PvP aren't very interested. The result: PvPers, especially the "criminal" PKers, get bored, because there's nobody they can prey upon.
PvPers don't need limitations. They need victims. How do we get "victims" to play and not be concerned about being victims every now and then?
By giving them the things they want: robust non-combat gameplay. Robust non-PvP gameplay. Robust roleplay. A multitude of opportunities for creative expression. A relationship where combat players must rely on non-combat players to do combat well. This is what the best open PvP games did (Ultima Online, SWG, EVE). This is also what the worst open PvP games did poorly.
We have to think "sustainability" these days. Gankers aren't going to have gankees unless the game gives gankees something. The problem is, the ganking, powergamer, twinking element generally doesn't want to roleplay, work in a community, rely on crafted goods or non-combat professions, and thinks it's a waste of time and developer money to work on these things.
Great post. That makes so much sense it's likely to be highly overlooked.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
Actually, I don't advocate either one of those scenarios personally, (unless the game already has permadeath as a design concept, at which point, the balance becomes automatic)
What I am saying is that RL has a sort of built in high risk to the lifestyle (death/incarceration) while Games currently lack that risk. I would like to find SOMETHING that replaces the RL risk, but is still high enough to be the risk that balances the high reward of the outlawstyle of play.
Well, if the game relys on grouping, then the PKs will basically only be able to group with other PKs because nobody else is going to group with them. The main risk back in the day was to your player's reputation. If you had a reputation as a PK, people would not group with you and were likely to kill you or call in reinforcements to track you down. There is no game mechanic in the world that is going to deter PKs. The non-PKs have to step up and give the PKs a taste of their own medicine. The non-PKs have to step up and make it unprofitable for the PKs to act the way they do.
In RL, criminals get killed or locked up every day. So, the possibility of death or jail is not enough to deter them. However, neighborhood communities are able to get the gangs out of some neighborhoods if they work together and make it harder for them to do business.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
For a person interested primarily in non-PvP aspects of a MMORPG, PvP will never add much worthwhile stuff to the game experience. There is really nothing you can offer that person in a PvP game that a non-PvP game could not do better.
What about fear? I don't find myself looking over my shoulder nearly as often in PvE-only games or servers. I primarily look to FPS games for PvP because they are often more "fair", but I still play on PvP servers in MMOs for the sense of danger.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
In UO, the bonus a PK has is in preparation ond state of mind.
I rather suspected as much. When the "PK's advantage" is purely a player one, wherof does it become the duty of the devs to correct that? I mean, say I'm bad at raiding - should I get the devs to give me better loot rolls to compensate?
I guess what I'm saying is in an open-world PVP MMO, what excuse is there for saying Player A should get dev help vs Player B?
At what point did anyone mention that Non PKs needed Dev "Help"?
I think you may be misconstruing what I mean when I say balance. I'm not talking "class balance" or something along those lines where a player needs to be able to attack/kill/defend effectively against another player.
Well I'm seeing post after post saying that "the game" should inflict these penalties or "they" should make it so that PKs get syphillis if they gank someone or whatever. Unless I'm even more ignorant about where MMOs come from than I thought, I'm inferring that this means that the devs are to take care of it.
Scenario 1: Notorious PK Player A kill Player B's character. Immediately, A's character's dick falls off and A has to pass a test on the gender sociopolitics of Pride And Prejudice before he's allowed to log in again.
Scenario 2: Notorious PK Player A kill Player B's character. Immediately, all of B's guild add A to their KoS list and now all of A's known characters are in danger of being actively attacked by players C-X.
In both scenarios, A runs a substantial risk in killing B. But only in scenario 1 are the devs getting involved. You see what I mean? In Scenario 2, A and B are playing a game on an equal basis, and A is incurring in-game consequences for his actions. In Scenario 1, the devs are implicitly saying that this playstyle must be penalised over that playstyle. And the idea that PvP must be punished seems to be an unexamined asumption held by mnost of the posters in this thread, despite the fact that the thread is explicitly about an open world PVP MMO. Why PVP? Why not crafting? Why shouldn't exploring be penalised and discouraged with special penalties? If some of the players dont want other players making armour or mapping territory, then are they entitled to ask the developers to inflict stat loss or experience loss on those who do such things?
Scenario 1: Notorious PK Player A kill Player B's character. Immediately, A's character's dick falls off and A has to pass a test on the gender sociopolitics of Pride And Prejudice before he's allowed to log in again.
In UO, the bonus a PK has is in preparation ond state of mind.
I rather suspected as much. When the "PK's advantage" is purely a player one, wherof does it become the duty of the devs to correct that? I mean, say I'm bad at raiding - should I get the devs to give me better loot rolls to compensate?
I guess what I'm saying is in an open-world PVP MMO, what excuse is there for saying Player A should get dev help vs Player B?
At what point did anyone mention that Non PKs needed Dev "Help"?
I think you may be misconstruing what I mean when I say balance. I'm not talking "class balance" or something along those lines where a player needs to be able to attack/kill/defend effectively against another player.
Well I'm seeing post after post saying that "the game" should inflict these penalties or "they" should make it so that PKs get syphillis if they gank someone or whatever. Unless I'm even more ignorant about where MMOs come from than I thought, I'm inferring that this means that the devs are to take care of it.
Scenario 1: Notorious PK Player A kill Player B's character. Immediately, A's character's dick falls off and A has to pass a test on the gender sociopolitics of Pride And Prejudice before he's allowed to log in again.
Scenario 2: Notorious PK Player A kill Player B's character. Immediately, all of B's guild add A to their KoS list and now all of A's known characters are in danger of being actively attacked by players C-X.
In both scenarios, A runs a substantial risk in killing B. But only in scenario 1 are the devs getting involved. You see what I mean? In Scenario 2, A and B are playing a game on an equal basis, and A is incurring in-game consequences for his actions. In Scenario 1, the devs are implicitly saying that this playstyle must be penalised over that playstyle. And the idea that PvP must be punished seems to be an unexamined asumption held by mnost of the posters in this thread, despite the fact that the thread is explicitly about an open world PVP MMO. Why PVP? Why not crafting? Why shouldn't exploring be penalised and discouraged with special penalties? If some of the players dont want other players making armour or mapping territory, then are they entitled to ask the developers to inflict stat loss or experience loss on those who do such things?
Well lets go with Scenario B for a second then.
Scenario B is only TRULY effective, when there is some way to truly hurt player A. In a game like Eve, its possible to reduce player A back to practically starting condition trhough repeated ship destruction and pod killing. You can force Player A (through the back end risk) to lose his time, effort, and resources, even though he doesn't face that risk during his normal pirating operations.
In a game where you have open world PVP, but ineffective player policing methods, then scenario 2 goes out the window as effective high risk.
If it's not possible for Player B (& pals) to "truly hurt" Player A, how is it possible for Player A to "truly hurt" Player B?
Is this another question that's going to come back to "state of mind and mental preparedness"?
It goes back to risk and reward.
Eve allows you to truly hurt player a because of the ability to keep taking him down farther through continuous hunting. If the game relied on just "full loot" (like say, Darkfall) then you really can't inflict the same amount of harm against player a as player a can do against player b.
Player A's gameplay style of being a criminal means that the occasional losses suffered by his hunting are, in effect, just the cost of doing business. Since nothing happens beyond "full loot" then his playstyle allows him to minimize his loadout before going on the hunt.
A player who is going through normal means uses a gameplay that does not allow for minimizing his load out.
(Example: If your playstyle is one of "resource gathering" then you cannot play, and keep your goods safely in the bank while out and gathering. You MUSt walk around with resources in your pack. On the other hand, the player who wants to kill you, and take the resources you've been gathering, needs carry only enough stuff to effectively kill you. Once you are dead, and he has your stuff, he can run to the bank. It is then completely safe. If you die, you are out the time it took you to gather the stuff, plus the value of the stuff you gathered, plus the weapons and armor you have on hand to defend yourself. If he dies, he's out the minimum investment in weapons/armor needed to kill you, and the minimum amount of time needed to find you. In the long run, he'll have more successful attacks than unsuccessful ones, resulting in a very high profit margin, and very little real risk to himself.)
If it's not possible for Player B (& pals) to "truly hurt" Player A, how is it possible for Player A to "truly hurt" Player B?
Is this another question that's going to come back to "state of mind and mental preparedness"?
It goes back to risk and reward.
Eve allows you to truly hurt player a because of the ability to keep taking him down farther through continuous hunting. If the game relied on just "full loot" (like say, Darkfall) then you really can't inflict the same amount of harm against player a as player a can do against player b.
Player A's gameplay style of being a criminal means that the occasional losses suffered by his hunting are, in effect, just the cost of doing business. Since nothing happens beyond "full loot" then his playstyle allows him to minimize his loadout before going on the hunt.
A player who is going through normal means uses a gameplay that does not allow for minimizing his load out.
(Example: If your playstyle is one of "resource gathering" then you cannot play, and keep your goods safely in the bank while out and gathering. You MUSt walk around with resources in your pack. On the other hand, the player who wants to kill you, and take the resources you've been gathering, needs carry only enough stuff to effectively kill you. Once you are dead, and he has your stuff, he can run to the bank. It is then completely safe. If you die, you are out the time it took you to gather the stuff, plus the value of the stuff you gathered, plus the weapons and armor you have on hand to defend yourself. If he dies, he's out the minimum investment in weapons/armor needed to kill you, and the minimum amount of time needed to find you. In the long run, he'll have more successful attacks than unsuccessful ones, resulting in a very high profit margin, and very little real risk to himself.)
It seems like to would be trivial for the resource-gathering players to notice this minor, if inherent imbalance, and group together.
If it's not possible for Player B (& pals) to "truly hurt" Player A, how is it possible for Player A to "truly hurt" Player B?
Is this another question that's going to come back to "state of mind and mental preparedness"?
It goes back to risk and reward.
Eve allows you to truly hurt player a because of the ability to keep taking him down farther through continuous hunting. If the game relied on just "full loot" (like say, Darkfall) then you really can't inflict the same amount of harm against player a as player a can do against player b.
Player A's gameplay style of being a criminal means that the occasional losses suffered by his hunting are, in effect, just the cost of doing business. Since nothing happens beyond "full loot" then his playstyle allows him to minimize his loadout before going on the hunt.
A player who is going through normal means uses a gameplay that does not allow for minimizing his load out.
(Example: If your playstyle is one of "resource gathering" then you cannot play, and keep your goods safely in the bank while out and gathering. You MUSt walk around with resources in your pack. On the other hand, the player who wants to kill you, and take the resources you've been gathering, needs carry only enough stuff to effectively kill you. Once you are dead, and he has your stuff, he can run to the bank. It is then completely safe. If you die, you are out the time it took you to gather the stuff, plus the value of the stuff you gathered, plus the weapons and armor you have on hand to defend yourself. If he dies, he's out the minimum investment in weapons/armor needed to kill you, and the minimum amount of time needed to find you. In the long run, he'll have more successful attacks than unsuccessful ones, resulting in a very high profit margin, and very little real risk to himself.)
It seems like to would be trivial for the resource-gathering players to notice this minor, if inherent imbalance, and group together.
Minor? Why would you say its minor. This cuts to the root of the imbalance. It doesn't matter if its resource gathering, mob farming, etc.
Its the imbalance between time, effort, and resource risk that needs adjustment. Of course this is what PK's know. They LIKE that imbalance. its what draws them to the lifestyle. What they don't like is to have that risk adjusted on the back end because they feel that its "Unfair" and that they are "just playing the game."
Of course, most people in prison are just "innocent victims of the system" themselves, so I guess it makes sense that nobod wants to face back end consequences for front end imbalance.
To me, PvP is like crafting. It's something I like to do, but only about 10% of the time or less. Imagine a world in which another player can come along and make you craft lol. Yeah, you wanted to do a quest, but instead you will be forced to sit and sew something instead. Bleh. That's why i don't play such games.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
Alllllll MMORPGs should have open world PVP. Without PVP, what is the point of MMORPGs just to chat? Pve is nice but the rush, the true agony of defeat, the zenith of satisfaction from sweet victory comes from PVP against a WORTHY (within 2 -3 levels and similar gear/stats etc) gamer or enemy faction. MMORPGs without pvp is just a rpg that has speed bumps (other players in the way), one way streets (other players that went to dictate how an instance should be ran), dead end streets (unable to run instance because no pug and no guild members available), under construction (scheduled maintainence), and detours (exploiters,bots,hacks that take short cuts). Well I don't like traffic. If I have to be in traffic then I want the ability to demonstrate road rage (PVP)!
Why PVP? Why not crafting? Why shouldn't exploring be penalised and discouraged with special penalties?
Wow, do you really need the answer to that spelled out?
If so, here it is. Crafting is not an activity that revolves around intentionally and joyfully effing with other people. PvP is. That's the entire point of it in fact, particularly in this genre where the worlds never change and the player can do nothing but grind stats and gear all day. MMO PvP exists solely as an outlet for people to take out their frustrations on their peers. They get bored with the repetitiveness of MMOs and because they lack imagination as well as anything better to do with their time, they turn to having a few laughs at the expense of others.
PvP is a d-bag enabler. Exploring isn't. People that get their jollies by harming others should be penalized, whether it's a game or real life. It's really not rocket science.
Why PVP? Why not crafting? Why shouldn't exploring be penalised and discouraged with special penalties?
Wow, do you really need the answer to that spelled out?
If so, here it is. Crafting is not an activity that revolves around intentionally and joyfully effing with other people. PvP is. That's the entire point of it in fact, particularly in this genre where the worlds never change and the player can do nothing but grind stats and gear all day. MMO PvP exists solely as an outlet for people to take out their frustrations on their peers. They get bored with the repetitiveness of MMOs and because they lack imagination as well as anything better to do with their time, they turn to having a few laughs at the expense of others.
PvP is a d-bag enabler. Exploring isn't. People that get their jollies by harming others should be penalized, whether it's a game or real life. It's really not rocket science.
Thanks for your hilariously bigoted and narrow-minded rant. Can I remind you that this thread is specifically to discuss a hypothetical Open World PVP MMO? If you dont like PVP at all then you should be playing some other game.
Minor? Why would you say its minor. This cuts to the root of the imbalance. It doesn't matter if its resource gathering, mob farming, etc.
You are once again employing some unexamined assumptions. This time it is that "non PK" players are inherently easy to kill. Since even a rather average player is considerably more intelligent than any NPC, it's not easy to understand why this is inherently so. I agree with you that "resource gatherers" are in practice often easy to kill, but there's nothing to MAKE them be that way. Resource gatherers could, if they decided to, easily utilise the same level of organisation, attention and risk management. But they generally don't. Yet, this player refusal to play on the same level is assumed to merit developer special treatment.
There's no inherent reason that a "PK" character should be any more dangerous to a "non PK" character than the other way around. The only real difference is the player behind them. And I know this is true because I know and have encountered "resource gatherers" who are well able to look after themselves and evade or return any aggression. And in fact I have to do resource gathering myself, and yet somehow I'm able to manage this in completely open FFA gamespace (0.0 in EVE - and I'm not even talking about home alliance space, but hostile/contested space).
PS Please take note how I have distinguished between "character" and "player".
Why PVP? Why not crafting? Why shouldn't exploring be penalised and discouraged with special penalties?
Wow, do you really need the answer to that spelled out?
If so, here it is. Crafting is not an activity that revolves around intentionally and joyfully effing with other people. PvP is. That's the entire point of it in fact, particularly in this genre where the worlds never change and the player can do nothing but grind stats and gear all day. MMO PvP exists solely as an outlet for people to take out their frustrations on their peers. They get bored with the repetitiveness of MMOs and because they lack imagination as well as anything better to do with their time, they turn to having a few laughs at the expense of others.
PvP is a d-bag enabler. Exploring isn't. People that get their jollies by harming others should be penalized, whether it's a game or real life. It's really not rocket science.
Thanks for your hilariously bigoted and narrow-minded rant. Can I remind you that this thread is specifically to discuss a hypothetical Open World PVP MMO? If you dont like PVP at all then you should be playing some other game.
I know full well what the thread is about. You asked a question (the answer to which is obvious to most people) and I answered it.
Also, while I'll grant you that my point of view on this is narrow (regarding the fact that thuggery is never acceptable), I'd suggest you look up the term bigot. It doesn't mean what you think it means.
Why PVP? Why not crafting? Why shouldn't exploring be penalised and discouraged with special penalties?
Wow, do you really need the answer to that spelled out?
If so, here it is. Crafting is not an activity that revolves around intentionally and joyfully effing with other people. PvP is. That's the entire point of it in fact, particularly in this genre where the worlds never change and the player can do nothing but grind stats and gear all day. MMO PvP exists solely as an outlet for people to take out their frustrations on their peers. They get bored with the repetitiveness of MMOs and because they lack imagination as well as anything better to do with their time, they turn to having a few laughs at the expense of others.
PvP is a d-bag enabler. Exploring isn't. People that get their jollies by harming others should be penalized, whether it's a game or real life. It's really not rocket science.
Thanks for your hilariously bigoted and narrow-minded rant. Can I remind you that this thread is specifically to discuss a hypothetical Open World PVP MMO? If you dont like PVP at all then you should be playing some other game.
I know full well what the thread is about. You asked a question (the answer to which is obvious to most people) and I answered it.
Also, while I'll grant you that my point of view on this is narrow (regarding the fact that thuggery is never acceptable), I'd suggest you look up the term bigot. It doesn't mean what you think it means.
/tiphat
Seriously, you're flaming PVP on a discussion about PVP. That's like hating on tackling in a discussion about football TACKLING IS JUST GRIEFING WHY CANT PEOPLE ENJOY RUNNING AND PASSING LIKE I DO? I KNOW IT IS BECAUSE YOU ARE ALL EMOTIONAL CRIPPLES WHO WERE ABUSED NIGHTLY BY A MAN-TRAIN OF YOUR RELATIVES AND NOW YOU TAKE OUT YOUR RAGE ON ME
Minor? Why would you say its minor. This cuts to the root of the imbalance. It doesn't matter if its resource gathering, mob farming, etc.
You are once again employing some unexamined assumptions. This time it is that "non PK" players are inherently easy to kill. Since even a rather average player is considerably more intelligent than any NPC, it's not easy to understand why this is inherently so. I agree with you that "resource gatherers" are in practice often easy to kill, but there's nothing to MAKE them be that way. Resource gatherers could, if they decided to, easily utilise the same level of organisation, attention and risk management. But they generally don't. Yet, this player refusal to play on the same level is assumed to merit developer special treatment.
There's no inherent reason that a "PK" character should be any more dangerous to a "non PK" character than the other way around. The only real difference is the player behind them. And I know this is true because I know and have encountered "resource gatherers" who are well able to look after themselves and evade or return any aggression. And in fact I have to do resource gathering myself, and yet somehow I'm able to manage this in completely open FFA gamespace (0.0 in EVE - and I'm not even talking about home alliance space, but hostile/contested space).
PS Please take note how I have distinguished between "character" and "player".
Well lets deal with reality then, not "ideally." We talk about PK's, not your average run of the mill PVP. Remember this is open world pvp not free for all pvp. This means that while you CAN kill anyone you run across, its not the focus of the game.
Now I go back to your argument about which character is "more dangerous" to the other. You seem to CONSTANTLY ignore the concept of risk, and want to focus completely on the concept of win/loss chances.
I agree with you that Ideally the chances between a PK and a non PK character winning any particular fight is about 50/50. Reality is quite different though. A resource gatherer is generally geared and/or skilled at gathering resources, a PK is geared and skilled at hunting players. Plus, the term PK generally also connotates not just players who PVP, but those who tend to do so in an "unfair" way. (This means they wait until the person is in the middle of another fight, senses a temporary AFK, outnumbers, or just plain outlevels the other player) But that doesn't change the concept of RISK. Even with a 50/50 chance of winning, what is actually risked by the two players is vasty different. (Again, this is the point you tend to CONSTANTLY IGNORE.) It is this risk that I'm wanting to balance.
Since PK's are playing criminals, their life and risk needs to reflect that of the criminal. A criminal, like the PK, has a lower upfront risk compared to the reward they get from their criminal acts. On the other hand, the PK, (unlike the RL criminal) has no back-end risk.
Comments
Dude, you're an EVE player, no? It's not that it's easier, rather just a different set of tools and tactics. In most MMOs that have PvP, the PvPers behave very differently from the NPCs.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
I rather suspected as much. When the "PK's advantage" is purely a player one, wherof does it become the duty of the devs to correct that? I mean, say I'm bad at raiding - should I get the devs to give me better loot rolls to compensate?
I guess what I'm saying is in an open-world PVP MMO, what excuse is there for saying Player A should get dev help vs Player B?
Give me liberty or give me lasers
If you have some kind of criminal element then you can add risk to that criminal element:
(1) If you die as a criminal your character is wiped. Permadeath.
-- or --
If you die as a criminal your character is reset to level 1. They can keep their banked stuff, but have to level again... of course they likely can't use much of what they have banked.
(2) If you are a criminal, most organizations won't deal with you based on your reputation. Banks won't talk to you, stores won't let you sell, etc. There can be black market places. However, the criminal pays more at those locations and black market banks can be raided just like players, making them very risky to store things. As a criminal, if you want something safe, you need to carry it around with you.
(3) As a criminal gains in noteriety, bountys are placed on them. Those bounties should be very lucrative for even a team to track down the criminal and dispense justice.
(4) If you try to commit murder in a town, the town guards/militia should react accordingly. They should intervene on the behalf of the accosted.
(5) Items should degrade, making living life as a rogue difficult as you need to repair, repurchase equipment.
These are the reasons that in a country with a rule of law, you don't see the kind of behavior that is in most PvP games. There are real world consequences and a risk that people usually don't take unless there are extrordinary circumstances. People who gain noteriety are shunned from the public and eventually hunted down by whatever law is in the area. In medevial times, bandits would be hunted down by militia or by a nobles forces.
Besides point no. 1 these are the right things to add risk for being a PK.
Earthrise, is going to do exactly this, and have an insurance-system on top of it, so that the PK doesn't get to loot the insured items.
NPC-guards that will attack criminal players in the NPC-areas (50% of the whole world), bounty-system where players can place bounties themselves, item-decay etc. and ofc criminals can be attacked by anyone else without penalties for doing so. So being a criminal you've got nowhere to rest.
At what point did anyone mention that Non PKs needed Dev "Help"?
I think you may be misconstruing what I mean when I say balance. I'm not talking "class balance" or something along those lines where a player needs to be able to attack/kill/defend effectively against another player.
So long, and thanks for all the fish!
I wouldn't say "could never". If WOW were FFA PVP, players would simply adapt to the game's rules in the exact same way that EVE and Darkfall players have adapted -- by min/maxing the most effective-yet-cheaply-farmed gear for each type of situation.
"Would never" is more accurate.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Great post. That makes so much sense it's likely to be highly overlooked.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
Well, if the game relys on grouping, then the PKs will basically only be able to group with other PKs because nobody else is going to group with them. The main risk back in the day was to your player's reputation. If you had a reputation as a PK, people would not group with you and were likely to kill you or call in reinforcements to track you down. There is no game mechanic in the world that is going to deter PKs. The non-PKs have to step up and give the PKs a taste of their own medicine. The non-PKs have to step up and make it unprofitable for the PKs to act the way they do.
In RL, criminals get killed or locked up every day. So, the possibility of death or jail is not enough to deter them. However, neighborhood communities are able to get the gangs out of some neighborhoods if they work together and make it harder for them to do business.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
What about fear? I don't find myself looking over my shoulder nearly as often in PvE-only games or servers. I primarily look to FPS games for PvP because they are often more "fair", but I still play on PvP servers in MMOs for the sense of danger.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
Well I'm seeing post after post saying that "the game" should inflict these penalties or "they" should make it so that PKs get syphillis if they gank someone or whatever. Unless I'm even more ignorant about where MMOs come from than I thought, I'm inferring that this means that the devs are to take care of it.
Scenario 1: Notorious PK Player A kill Player B's character. Immediately, A's character's dick falls off and A has to pass a test on the gender sociopolitics of Pride And Prejudice before he's allowed to log in again.
Scenario 2: Notorious PK Player A kill Player B's character. Immediately, all of B's guild add A to their KoS list and now all of A's known characters are in danger of being actively attacked by players C-X.
In both scenarios, A runs a substantial risk in killing B. But only in scenario 1 are the devs getting involved. You see what I mean? In Scenario 2, A and B are playing a game on an equal basis, and A is incurring in-game consequences for his actions. In Scenario 1, the devs are implicitly saying that this playstyle must be penalised over that playstyle. And the idea that PvP must be punished seems to be an unexamined asumption held by mnost of the posters in this thread, despite the fact that the thread is explicitly about an open world PVP MMO. Why PVP? Why not crafting? Why shouldn't exploring be penalised and discouraged with special penalties? If some of the players dont want other players making armour or mapping territory, then are they entitled to ask the developers to inflict stat loss or experience loss on those who do such things?
Give me liberty or give me lasers
hahaha, I laughed so hard my dick fell off.
Edil's a PK everyone!
Give me liberty or give me lasers
Well lets go with Scenario B for a second then.
Scenario B is only TRULY effective, when there is some way to truly hurt player A. In a game like Eve, its possible to reduce player A back to practically starting condition trhough repeated ship destruction and pod killing. You can force Player A (through the back end risk) to lose his time, effort, and resources, even though he doesn't face that risk during his normal pirating operations.
In a game where you have open world PVP, but ineffective player policing methods, then scenario 2 goes out the window as effective high risk.
So long, and thanks for all the fish!
If it's not possible for Player B (& pals) to "truly hurt" Player A, how is it possible for Player A to "truly hurt" Player B?
Is this another question that's going to come back to "state of mind and mental preparedness"?
Give me liberty or give me lasers
It goes back to risk and reward.
Eve allows you to truly hurt player a because of the ability to keep taking him down farther through continuous hunting. If the game relied on just "full loot" (like say, Darkfall) then you really can't inflict the same amount of harm against player a as player a can do against player b.
Player A's gameplay style of being a criminal means that the occasional losses suffered by his hunting are, in effect, just the cost of doing business. Since nothing happens beyond "full loot" then his playstyle allows him to minimize his loadout before going on the hunt.
A player who is going through normal means uses a gameplay that does not allow for minimizing his load out.
(Example: If your playstyle is one of "resource gathering" then you cannot play, and keep your goods safely in the bank while out and gathering. You MUSt walk around with resources in your pack. On the other hand, the player who wants to kill you, and take the resources you've been gathering, needs carry only enough stuff to effectively kill you. Once you are dead, and he has your stuff, he can run to the bank. It is then completely safe. If you die, you are out the time it took you to gather the stuff, plus the value of the stuff you gathered, plus the weapons and armor you have on hand to defend yourself. If he dies, he's out the minimum investment in weapons/armor needed to kill you, and the minimum amount of time needed to find you. In the long run, he'll have more successful attacks than unsuccessful ones, resulting in a very high profit margin, and very little real risk to himself.)
So long, and thanks for all the fish!
It seems like to would be trivial for the resource-gathering players to notice this minor, if inherent imbalance, and group together.
Give me liberty or give me lasers
Minor? Why would you say its minor. This cuts to the root of the imbalance. It doesn't matter if its resource gathering, mob farming, etc.
Its the imbalance between time, effort, and resource risk that needs adjustment. Of course this is what PK's know. They LIKE that imbalance. its what draws them to the lifestyle. What they don't like is to have that risk adjusted on the back end because they feel that its "Unfair" and that they are "just playing the game."
Of course, most people in prison are just "innocent victims of the system" themselves, so I guess it makes sense that nobod wants to face back end consequences for front end imbalance.
So long, and thanks for all the fish!
To me, PvP is like crafting. It's something I like to do, but only about 10% of the time or less. Imagine a world in which another player can come along and make you craft lol. Yeah, you wanted to do a quest, but instead you will be forced to sit and sew something instead. Bleh. That's why i don't play such games.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
Alllllll MMORPGs should have open world PVP. Without PVP, what is the point of MMORPGs just to chat? Pve is nice but the rush, the true agony of defeat, the zenith of satisfaction from sweet victory comes from PVP against a WORTHY (within 2 -3 levels and similar gear/stats etc) gamer or enemy faction. MMORPGs without pvp is just a rpg that has speed bumps (other players in the way), one way streets (other players that went to dictate how an instance should be ran), dead end streets (unable to run instance because no pug and no guild members available), under construction (scheduled maintainence), and detours (exploiters,bots,hacks that take short cuts). Well I don't like traffic. If I have to be in traffic then I want the ability to demonstrate road rage (PVP)!
Bring back Vanilla WoW pvp
Wow, do you really need the answer to that spelled out?
If so, here it is. Crafting is not an activity that revolves around intentionally and joyfully effing with other people. PvP is. That's the entire point of it in fact, particularly in this genre where the worlds never change and the player can do nothing but grind stats and gear all day. MMO PvP exists solely as an outlet for people to take out their frustrations on their peers. They get bored with the repetitiveness of MMOs and because they lack imagination as well as anything better to do with their time, they turn to having a few laughs at the expense of others.
PvP is a d-bag enabler. Exploring isn't. People that get their jollies by harming others should be penalized, whether it's a game or real life. It's really not rocket science.
Thanks for your hilariously bigoted and narrow-minded rant. Can I remind you that this thread is specifically to discuss a hypothetical Open World PVP MMO? If you dont like PVP at all then you should be playing some other game.
Give me liberty or give me lasers
Give me liberty or give me lasers
I know full well what the thread is about. You asked a question (the answer to which is obvious to most people) and I answered it.
Also, while I'll grant you that my point of view on this is narrow (regarding the fact that thuggery is never acceptable), I'd suggest you look up the term bigot. It doesn't mean what you think it means.
/tiphat
Seriously, you're flaming PVP on a discussion about PVP. That's like hating on tackling in a discussion about football TACKLING IS JUST GRIEFING WHY CANT PEOPLE ENJOY RUNNING AND PASSING LIKE I DO? I KNOW IT IS BECAUSE YOU ARE ALL EMOTIONAL CRIPPLES WHO WERE ABUSED NIGHTLY BY A MAN-TRAIN OF YOUR RELATIVES AND NOW YOU TAKE OUT YOUR RAGE ON ME
Give me liberty or give me lasers
Well lets deal with reality then, not "ideally." We talk about PK's, not your average run of the mill PVP. Remember this is open world pvp not free for all pvp. This means that while you CAN kill anyone you run across, its not the focus of the game.
Now I go back to your argument about which character is "more dangerous" to the other. You seem to CONSTANTLY ignore the concept of risk, and want to focus completely on the concept of win/loss chances.
I agree with you that Ideally the chances between a PK and a non PK character winning any particular fight is about 50/50. Reality is quite different though. A resource gatherer is generally geared and/or skilled at gathering resources, a PK is geared and skilled at hunting players. Plus, the term PK generally also connotates not just players who PVP, but those who tend to do so in an "unfair" way. (This means they wait until the person is in the middle of another fight, senses a temporary AFK, outnumbers, or just plain outlevels the other player) But that doesn't change the concept of RISK. Even with a 50/50 chance of winning, what is actually risked by the two players is vasty different. (Again, this is the point you tend to CONSTANTLY IGNORE.) It is this risk that I'm wanting to balance.
Since PK's are playing criminals, their life and risk needs to reflect that of the criminal. A criminal, like the PK, has a lower upfront risk compared to the reward they get from their criminal acts. On the other hand, the PK, (unlike the RL criminal) has no back-end risk.
So long, and thanks for all the fish!