What determines if a game design, or a PvP system is good?
To me, the quality of NS4's game design is directly tied to of the overall experience for everyone who trys playing it. If most of the people playing think its fun and well balanced, then it is fun and well balanced.
Right now, I would have to say in NS4, the PVP aspect was not very well concieved/designed and how much fun it is depends on whether your a sadist or a masochist . Just look at all the dam grief on the boards. Thats not from too many bad players, or too many whiny players, or too many nasty players, its because of bad PvP design. Its just too easy for many if not most of players online at any one time, esp. new players, to get abused by a few players. If a few people can ruin the experience of the many, I hate to inform y'all, but that's just bad game design.
Now, in trying to handle some of the imbalance, we hear how players should read at times conflicting forum posts ("just don't use stone to flesh that much...") and alter their playing style just-in-case a DM is watching ("they better not do that in Avendale while Im watching..."). Again, this is just bad design. A good game designer considers all your different players behavior when you design your system. Like nobody thought that some epic char would run around trying to ruin every noobs day? Hello? Of course it will happen, unless you have a design which considers that and you build a cool in-game way of handling it that makes the whole dealio FUN for the Epic and for the New.
So, your reading perhaps thinking to yourself, "yeah, another person just bitching....". I'm not. This is a critique of the overall PvP design, which is only half-baked. Now, I am a huge fan of the NS series, and admire all the work that’s gone into it, but the PvP system is just, not very well thought out. A good critique includes an example of something better. Here is a better PvP system, that is PvP faction based, and allows for all types of game play (you can be a noob slayer there too, or just plain evil...), but creates consequences for those who wish to prey upon the weak, (and co-incidentally, makes it even better/more rewarding to prey upon the very difficult and impossible).
This is what they do on the NWN dalakora PW-Action Mod(http://www.dalakora.com).
They have full PvP based on Faction too.
If you get killed by someone who is not in your enemy faction, that character gets flagged as a criminal and a bounty is placed on their head. Everyone on that server sees that message.
If you enter a town or pass a Guard while being flagged as a criminal, you better get ready for an Epic fight.
If you die as a criminal, you loose all the items you had equiped. (that will give
If your a criminal, Anyone can kill you and not be charged for murder as a criminal.
If you get killed while flagged as a criminal you are no longer a criminal.
Your criminal status will wear off over time. (you can hide out and let your bad rep fade).
There is more detail to it and if your interested I highly reccomend you check their informative website out. The whole point is they spent the time thinking about how Factional PvP works in a Massive environment. They built a logical, and FUN way for people of all levels, and all playing styles to interact. Yes the mighty can prey on the weak too.... but there are consequences to consider. It’s a little more complex than just creating factions and turning factional PvP On....
Does the game design make it so that its FUN for MOST of the people or just a few?
It's about good game design.
Good PvP design
-
AndrewCarr
- Spamalot
- Posts: 576
- Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2003 2:54 pm
- Location: Marietta, Georgia
- Contact:
It would be fun for any noobs that don't want to be engaged in anything unexpected. It would be unfun for people who want to make their own faction.
Okies would, of course, be hurt by this system because we kill people not in our faction, just like some people in their factions profess to do. Meanwhile, there could be other relavent factions that spring up, on their own, or because of another faction, such as bountyhunters of isolationist and rabid hermits. Each one of these factions could be severely ruined by this system as when each one protected their interests, such as when okies claim okie mountain, and murder, or when bountyhunters/assassins take jobs, or when rabid hermits defend their hovels, they would all be flagged criminals and evil, and would then be set up for rape. Because now, on top of hurting the creation of new factions, the system would then keep the current factions as they are, with people griefing others by working to get them to become a criminal, so their hidden buddies could gangrape the "criminal" and steal their gear, a la Lineage 2.
So while i see nothing wrong with fleshing out the system, with workable player bounty type ideas, or intelligent guards, or custom factions, or whatever, I think this idea is pretty bad in general.
So yeah, if you want to stay in the factions the devs give you, then fine. But don't restrict others from using their imagination to create their own, with different values and beliefs.
Okies would, of course, be hurt by this system because we kill people not in our faction, just like some people in their factions profess to do. Meanwhile, there could be other relavent factions that spring up, on their own, or because of another faction, such as bountyhunters of isolationist and rabid hermits. Each one of these factions could be severely ruined by this system as when each one protected their interests, such as when okies claim okie mountain, and murder, or when bountyhunters/assassins take jobs, or when rabid hermits defend their hovels, they would all be flagged criminals and evil, and would then be set up for rape. Because now, on top of hurting the creation of new factions, the system would then keep the current factions as they are, with people griefing others by working to get them to become a criminal, so their hidden buddies could gangrape the "criminal" and steal their gear, a la Lineage 2.
So while i see nothing wrong with fleshing out the system, with workable player bounty type ideas, or intelligent guards, or custom factions, or whatever, I think this idea is pretty bad in general.
So yeah, if you want to stay in the factions the devs give you, then fine. But don't restrict others from using their imagination to create their own, with different values and beliefs.
Lindon Erithar
and
Quickie Mart the <a href='http://www.cultofokie.com'>Okie Ambassador</a>
and
Quickie Mart the <a href='http://www.cultofokie.com'>Okie Ambassador</a>
-
JesterOI
- Resident Spam King
- Posts: 1016
- Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2003 4:14 am
- Location: SPAM!!!ville
- Contact:
Would probably make more sense to have some sort of item that when left deactivated sets a flag that if anyone rated impossible kills you they become a criminal.
When activated this item flags the player as "willing" and therefore no criminal consequences will be visited upon an impossible rated character that kills the "willing" character.
As for preventing the effortless player from griefing the impossible player while set as "unwilling", the effortless player will be immediately set to "willing" if any aggressive action (attacking, pp'ing, etc...) is made against the impossible player. Also, the flag won't be set to "willing" if the effortless player is hit by the impossible character first, so that the effortless can atleast try to defend himself without having to be worried that the impossible player won't be set to criminal if he wins.
Finally, place a timer on the item so that you can only "hit the switch" 5 minutes after activating it and/or participating in any combat, to prevent switching to "unwilling" just before the impossible character kills them.
Of course, only players from your faction or an allied faction could collect a bounty and take the equipment of the criminal. But, players from any faction other than the criminals faction and the victims faction will be able to kill the criminal without becoming a criminal themselves, and get a bounty, but not the criminals gear.
Set the bounty to a certain amount of gems per criminal level and different (less valuable gems) for each bounty after the first that is currently on the criminal.
Have the gem start at Diamond for first bounty then decrease the value of the gem for each other bounty.
Example:
A level 20 criminal with 3 bounties would yield a bounty of:
20 Diamonds for first bounty
20 Emeralds for second bounty
20 Garnets for third bounty
With 5 bounties it would be:
20 Diamonds for first bounty
20 Emeralds for second bounty
20 Garnets for third bounty
20 Rubies for the fourth bounty
20 Jades for the fifth bounty
the bounty would be awarded to the killer of the criminal only, it will be up to the criminal to spread the wealth to any helpers.
BTW what are you talking about "because we kill people not in our faction"?
What codecat was talking about wouldn't affect you.
When activated this item flags the player as "willing" and therefore no criminal consequences will be visited upon an impossible rated character that kills the "willing" character.
As for preventing the effortless player from griefing the impossible player while set as "unwilling", the effortless player will be immediately set to "willing" if any aggressive action (attacking, pp'ing, etc...) is made against the impossible player. Also, the flag won't be set to "willing" if the effortless player is hit by the impossible character first, so that the effortless can atleast try to defend himself without having to be worried that the impossible player won't be set to criminal if he wins.
Finally, place a timer on the item so that you can only "hit the switch" 5 minutes after activating it and/or participating in any combat, to prevent switching to "unwilling" just before the impossible character kills them.
Of course, only players from your faction or an allied faction could collect a bounty and take the equipment of the criminal. But, players from any faction other than the criminals faction and the victims faction will be able to kill the criminal without becoming a criminal themselves, and get a bounty, but not the criminals gear.
Set the bounty to a certain amount of gems per criminal level and different (less valuable gems) for each bounty after the first that is currently on the criminal.
Have the gem start at Diamond for first bounty then decrease the value of the gem for each other bounty.
Example:
A level 20 criminal with 3 bounties would yield a bounty of:
20 Diamonds for first bounty
20 Emeralds for second bounty
20 Garnets for third bounty
With 5 bounties it would be:
20 Diamonds for first bounty
20 Emeralds for second bounty
20 Garnets for third bounty
20 Rubies for the fourth bounty
20 Jades for the fifth bounty
the bounty would be awarded to the killer of the criminal only, it will be up to the criminal to spread the wealth to any helpers.
BTW what are you talking about "because we kill people not in our faction"?
Codecat wrote:If you get killed by someone who is not in your enemy faction, that character gets flagged as a criminal
What codecat was talking about wouldn't affect you.
LVL 69 LFGS!!!
The Hasselhoff 4 3v3r!!! Metis n3v3r!!!
The Hasselhoff 4 3v3r!!! Metis n3v3r!!!
-
Mad_Bovine
- Noob
- Posts: 20
- Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2004 4:03 pm
Yes it would affect them, because their "faction" is anyone with Okie in their name. They choose to ignore the factions set up by the devs and just use their guild as a faction. Basically they ae just immature children who think it is funny to drive people away from a server due to lack of Dev intervention. I've seen it happen on other servers that were very popular one month, then dwindled away to just a few people playing because a few people decided to go around greifing anything they could. I hope that doesn't happen here.
Think you are lazy?
I once coded a 1300+ line library in C++ to avoid having to write 200 lines of code.
Bringing laziness to a whole new level
I once coded a 1300+ line library in C++ to avoid having to write 200 lines of code.
Bringing laziness to a whole new level
Codecat:
I checked out the site in question and read through their rules and explanations... wow. Their world is extremely well crafted to support the kind of PvP that they have... more power to them. But I think there are fundamental differneces that prevent a wholesale port of Dalakora's PvP system. For one, the Dalakora's realm (from reading the information on the website, not from actually playing it...) seems to have a great deal of stability built into the world. There appears to be defined kingdoms, and sturctured ruling systems. While Neversummer has structured ruling systems, I think the very nature of the Rifts, and the chaos they bring to the game prevent the formation fo rigid political bodies. Without the presence of a dominant kingdom/empire/protectorate and its accompanying rule system, the kind of police force required to police adventurers is nearly non-existant. So in game terms, that sort of system Dalakora has (in my understanding of it: PvP so rival political parties of the same kingdom can duel in the streets, ala Romeo and Juliet's Capulets and Montagues) might be a bit unweildly... should the scope of Neversummer grow... and each of the factions come to possess cities, towns, and hamlets that are all under the same ruling system of laws... maybe then the described system would be viable.
The origin of the players in NS also prohibits this sort of over-arching rule of law, without SERIOUS participation on the players' part. Our characters begin life being sucked from the ether, through a rift, and deposited on an unfamiliar plane. Without the players buying into the story, you won't have every new player character coming in and reading the rules so as to abide by them in game... there are server rules, sure, but these are different than factional rules. And let's face it... not every human being out there is cut out to follow someone else's orders. Not everyone is a law abiding citizen.
I'm not coming out a saying that this kind of a PvP system could never be implemented in NS, but I am of the mind that NS, in its current, chaotic state, isn't ready for that sort of system... unless faction by faction people took the initiative to hunt down the renegades, the outcasts, and punish them for leaving the fold.
I'm all for coming up with new ideas about PvP
I checked out the site in question and read through their rules and explanations... wow. Their world is extremely well crafted to support the kind of PvP that they have... more power to them. But I think there are fundamental differneces that prevent a wholesale port of Dalakora's PvP system. For one, the Dalakora's realm (from reading the information on the website, not from actually playing it...) seems to have a great deal of stability built into the world. There appears to be defined kingdoms, and sturctured ruling systems. While Neversummer has structured ruling systems, I think the very nature of the Rifts, and the chaos they bring to the game prevent the formation fo rigid political bodies. Without the presence of a dominant kingdom/empire/protectorate and its accompanying rule system, the kind of police force required to police adventurers is nearly non-existant. So in game terms, that sort of system Dalakora has (in my understanding of it: PvP so rival political parties of the same kingdom can duel in the streets, ala Romeo and Juliet's Capulets and Montagues) might be a bit unweildly... should the scope of Neversummer grow... and each of the factions come to possess cities, towns, and hamlets that are all under the same ruling system of laws... maybe then the described system would be viable.
The origin of the players in NS also prohibits this sort of over-arching rule of law, without SERIOUS participation on the players' part. Our characters begin life being sucked from the ether, through a rift, and deposited on an unfamiliar plane. Without the players buying into the story, you won't have every new player character coming in and reading the rules so as to abide by them in game... there are server rules, sure, but these are different than factional rules. And let's face it... not every human being out there is cut out to follow someone else's orders. Not everyone is a law abiding citizen.
I'm not coming out a saying that this kind of a PvP system could never be implemented in NS, but I am of the mind that NS, in its current, chaotic state, isn't ready for that sort of system... unless faction by faction people took the initiative to hunt down the renegades, the outcasts, and punish them for leaving the fold.
I'm all for coming up with new ideas about PvP
I've been playing online rpg's with full pvp since late 90's, mostly in text based form. And the most interesting mechanism to handle PVP that i've seen was 'status'. It represents how dangerous a player is in pvp.
1. You start out with 0 status.
2. If you PVP kill someone with less status than you, you don't gain status and get some penalty (exp?)
3. If you kill someone with higher or equal status than yourself you earn 1 status and they lose 1 status (status may not go below 0).
The beauty of the system is that it shields players who want to stay out of pvp, they simply have to keep their status at 0 by not killing people (but thats what they should be doing if they wanna stay out of pvp in the first place). So whenever a killer comes by he'll be killing someone with lower status and receive a penalty for doing it.
It even shields pvp-players from being killed over and over by the same person. Since each kill would increase the difference in status by 2, that would bring the target below the status of the attacker quickly, meaning the attacker will have the penalty for killing someone with lower status eventually.
On the other side, this setup also allows pvp serious people to seek out the real challenges out there, thru a list of online players and their respective status. Having a list like this is essential for the whole concept.
The concept can be expanded by giving rewards to players who reach a certain amount of status for example.
1. You start out with 0 status.
2. If you PVP kill someone with less status than you, you don't gain status and get some penalty (exp?)
3. If you kill someone with higher or equal status than yourself you earn 1 status and they lose 1 status (status may not go below 0).
The beauty of the system is that it shields players who want to stay out of pvp, they simply have to keep their status at 0 by not killing people (but thats what they should be doing if they wanna stay out of pvp in the first place). So whenever a killer comes by he'll be killing someone with lower status and receive a penalty for doing it.
It even shields pvp-players from being killed over and over by the same person. Since each kill would increase the difference in status by 2, that would bring the target below the status of the attacker quickly, meaning the attacker will have the penalty for killing someone with lower status eventually.
On the other side, this setup also allows pvp serious people to seek out the real challenges out there, thru a list of online players and their respective status. Having a list like this is essential for the whole concept.
The concept can be expanded by giving rewards to players who reach a certain amount of status for example.
-
turtlehermit
- Noob
- Posts: 23
- Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2004 7:10 pm
This is what they do on the NWN dalakora PW-Action Mod(http://www.dalakora.com).
Really good place to play if you do not mind getting bent over a barrel every other day. I used to play there like 3-4 months ago and there were at max 15 -20 peeps playing. The devs there are not too nice and very adamant about who they do and do not like. As you may guess I was on the "not like" list and summarily got banned for giving away about 100 some odd items that i had on my second favorite character after my Main character was stripped of over 100 some odd items after they implemented the 100 item inventory code. So since i decided to give out my excess items instead of allowing them to vanish I was booted. When i left 3 friends of mine left then we all recieved a ton of mail from mates we often partied with about the circumstances. Since that time i periodically check in on how many peeps are still around and the only ones who still play are either devs or dm's. Bye the way a few dm's often found it funny to drop excessive amounts of "x" opponents on you in the middle of battle. Or in the middle of fighting animals you are stripped of all buffs, I have heard from one friend who just quit last week that in a Ancient Red dragon lair after he defeated the beast as he has before the prior day all the sudden 3 more red dragons appeared and one started to talk to him... The dragons then attacked him and killed him. Hmmph...In dalakora after you die your equipped gear all drops and you have to retrieve it before somebody loots it or the Dm's decide to take it. Really shitty when you are lvl 20+ and max lvl gear you can buy is like 12.
They have a great place but the host of the house isnt too friendly. Does not matter how good the toys are if the person who shares them isnt fun to play with.
PvP...
It is really annoying sometimes. Now whenever i see "OKIE" I try to kill them before they kill me no questions asked. Heh the few times I was actually successfull...guess what a few of them actually started to [censored] and whine.
Really good place to play if you do not mind getting bent over a barrel every other day. I used to play there like 3-4 months ago and there were at max 15 -20 peeps playing. The devs there are not too nice and very adamant about who they do and do not like. As you may guess I was on the "not like" list and summarily got banned for giving away about 100 some odd items that i had on my second favorite character after my Main character was stripped of over 100 some odd items after they implemented the 100 item inventory code. So since i decided to give out my excess items instead of allowing them to vanish I was booted. When i left 3 friends of mine left then we all recieved a ton of mail from mates we often partied with about the circumstances. Since that time i periodically check in on how many peeps are still around and the only ones who still play are either devs or dm's. Bye the way a few dm's often found it funny to drop excessive amounts of "x" opponents on you in the middle of battle. Or in the middle of fighting animals you are stripped of all buffs, I have heard from one friend who just quit last week that in a Ancient Red dragon lair after he defeated the beast as he has before the prior day all the sudden 3 more red dragons appeared and one started to talk to him... The dragons then attacked him and killed him. Hmmph...In dalakora after you die your equipped gear all drops and you have to retrieve it before somebody loots it or the Dm's decide to take it. Really shitty when you are lvl 20+ and max lvl gear you can buy is like 12.
They have a great place but the host of the house isnt too friendly. Does not matter how good the toys are if the person who shares them isnt fun to play with.
PvP...
It is really annoying sometimes. Now whenever i see "OKIE" I try to kill them before they kill me no questions asked. Heh the few times I was actually successfull...guess what a few of them actually started to [censored] and whine.
-
Adut
- Developer
- Posts: 11
- Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2004 7:31 pm
- Location: California - Home of the Governator
It's the age old problem in these games of combining a leveling type of structure and putting PvP on top of that. You will always have Noobs and you will always have Ubers.
The problems start when the Ubers gank the Noobs, that's when the crying starts.
It's a weak tactic on the part of the Uber to gank somebody who is no challenge or "griefing them", but how do you prevent it, or do you want to prevent it (at least with a game mechanic)?
I think being able to be attacked at any time at any level adds a level of excitement to the game. It means that hide and move silently really mean something as skills especially at the lower levels.
It also is no fun to have someone camping a noob hunting area and being ganked by someone you have no chance of beating.
I have created several chars and investigated most of the starting areas and would recommend a UO kind of solution (old school UO with a tweak or two).
1. Make the gaurds/friendlies in a given town more Uber. I've seen a single person come in and totally wipe out all the guards in a town kill all the vendors kill all the noobs and leave. It should take a group of 5 or more high level characters to "own" a stronghold, instead of 1. This will have the effect of making the towns (and posssibly small surrounding areas) relatively safe for lower level characters to hunt and level.
2. Create a scoring system something like the following:
a) if you kill an enemy who is same level as you or higher you get points, the higher they are than you the more points you get.
b) if you kill someone below your level you get no points
c) if you kill someone more than say 4 levels below you points are subtracted (more points for the lower levels)
d) if you kill someone of your own faction or an allied faction (friendlies) you lose points.
e) if your points go negative you are basically griefing and at some threshold your negative grief points will start subtracting XP.
Anyway, just some ideas on how to combine the leveling of characters and PvP.
The problems start when the Ubers gank the Noobs, that's when the crying starts.
It's a weak tactic on the part of the Uber to gank somebody who is no challenge or "griefing them", but how do you prevent it, or do you want to prevent it (at least with a game mechanic)?
I think being able to be attacked at any time at any level adds a level of excitement to the game. It means that hide and move silently really mean something as skills especially at the lower levels.
It also is no fun to have someone camping a noob hunting area and being ganked by someone you have no chance of beating.
I have created several chars and investigated most of the starting areas and would recommend a UO kind of solution (old school UO with a tweak or two).
1. Make the gaurds/friendlies in a given town more Uber. I've seen a single person come in and totally wipe out all the guards in a town kill all the vendors kill all the noobs and leave. It should take a group of 5 or more high level characters to "own" a stronghold, instead of 1. This will have the effect of making the towns (and posssibly small surrounding areas) relatively safe for lower level characters to hunt and level.
2. Create a scoring system something like the following:
a) if you kill an enemy who is same level as you or higher you get points, the higher they are than you the more points you get.
b) if you kill someone below your level you get no points
c) if you kill someone more than say 4 levels below you points are subtracted (more points for the lower levels)
d) if you kill someone of your own faction or an allied faction (friendlies) you lose points.
e) if your points go negative you are basically griefing and at some threshold your negative grief points will start subtracting XP.
Anyway, just some ideas on how to combine the leveling of characters and PvP.
-
Adut
- Developer
- Posts: 11
- Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2004 7:31 pm
- Location: California - Home of the Governator
Couple of other things I forgot about the point system.
a) You should never lose XP for PvP death
b) You should only lose PvP points if you die (but never XP), number of points is based on comparison of CR of players.
c) If you lose PvP points because of death you would go to 0 but not negative, only killing player of much lower level than yourself or members of your own faction will get you negative or "grief" points.
a) You should never lose XP for PvP death
b) You should only lose PvP points if you die (but never XP), number of points is based on comparison of CR of players.
c) If you lose PvP points because of death you would go to 0 but not negative, only killing player of much lower level than yourself or members of your own faction will get you negative or "grief" points.