Match Making mega-thread (Request)

The Match Making system is probably the highest on my list of systems that I would like more detail about.
For PvE I do not see much detail required. Which is why I am posting in the PvP forum.

Current party
Friends/Family
Guild
Recent encounter
Relative level
PvP flag

Rearranging this into any order and it doesn't change the dynamic too terribly (arguably of course)
For PvP each one of these can have a pretty heavy impact on many things.

• Current party
  Very important but could be abused if party size is allowed to be very large.

• Friends/Family
  Similar to the party, could be rather large for some people.

• Guild
  Also very important for PvP. Guilds come to the aid of their members and could fill a hex.

• Recent encounter
  Without this then there would be no tracking targets.

• Relative level
  I am sure some will argue the point about being able to attack low level players but IMO this should be high priority. I don't see the need for random encounters with large level disparity.

• PvP flag
  From the tone of the dev discussions I gather that they intend for this to have less weight than some people would like. I am picturing the open PvP flag will have a role in the story that will play it's part along side of the PvE, not segregated. Giving this more weight is a type of segregation.

Anyone have some thoughts on this? Areas of the filter I am overlooking or concerns about the ones I did list? (I intentionally didn't go into great detail, just wanted to get the thread rolling)

 

As an avid PvPer I am completely ok with relative level. It's been said elsewhere but ganking isn't PvP, many people just don't understand that.

As far as your size suggestions I have some concerns. If people wish to roam in a large group they shouldn't be restricted. I say this only as a warning because obviously we have no idea how things would look. But it would be pretty lame if a group of 12 friends never encountered anything because the next biggest group is 5-6 people. Same goes for large guild hunts etc. I also realize a group of 12 hitting a 2 man group is still ganking. It's simply part of the world I wish to live in though.

That being said I rarely ran in large groups in UO and more often than not was on the side getting ganked. It never really bothered me much and just made me pay more attention to the game. Most frustrating thing I ever really ran into was people trying to grief my tamer, knowing they couldn't kill me but trying to get me distracted while I was PvE so I'd lose a WW to higher difficulty PvE mobs. That being said my one WW lived over 2 years and was like 5x GM, so it was really a non issue for me.

Also, getting ganked constantly doing the same thing is griefing yourself. I feel like many people who played UO never realized that. Definition of insanity...

The constant heightened sense of awareness was something I always deeply enjoyed even if I was just PvE or gathering. The world should be a dangerous place. How can people call themselves adventurers if they never want to be in harms way?

 

My concern with size is only due to the current limitation of 64 players per hex instance. A guild could cover that quickly and force an imbalance for the instance. 60 vs 4 anyone?

 

Latency, locale, and geographic location were mentioned. Don't lawyer them bro

 

Have they discussed any kind of faction system? Because that would trump all of this. I'm not expecting anything like WoW, it's more a sense of whether the system knows about friends vs enemies or if it's 100% FFA. Obviously this has rippling effects through AoEs and friendly fire, NPCs being hostile to certain groups, and dozens of other things.

Also is territory "owned" somehow, is there some "thing" that you're fighting over, etc.

Once the big questions are answered, the other stuff kind of falls into place.

 

@tekkamansoul Ahh yeah, if I would have dug up all the pertinent posts/videos I might have remembered those, thanks. I imagine location (US/EU/Etc) will filter first.

@PrimeRib That's a good one. Falls under the why we PvP section, another mega-thread on my list. This would be a hybrid of guild(or not guild) common interest, and relative level. For those that are into the story and purpose of PvP this will be very high on the list for match making.

I honestly see first come first serve being a big factor to keep the match making system from being manipulable by the players.

 

They also have not said whether there will be permanent PvP zones. I get the impression that most of them will be dynamic (which I favor because it keeps things fresh and it gives the people who don't want to PvP ever a chance to go everywhere.) The problem with that is that it makes it difficult to establish a permanent PvP stronghold. It would piss me off to no end if nonflagged players could just traipse all over contested areas with impunity.

I get the impression that they imagined a much more intimate game while we have dreams of grand scale battles.

 

I'm hoping non flagged players canenter those hexes....because I think the whole point of those hexes is to allowa part time pvp area. You will have those that want pvp all the time flagging for it but some of us just want to do it when we feel like it and that's what those areas are for.

 

I cannot remember exactly which video I saw it on, but I think Chris said that he originally envisioned parties to have a maximum of 6 members, but LB asked him to raise it to 8. I cannot say if that is still the "current thinking"™

 

1. match pve players with pvp players in pvp areas
2.????
3. profit

 

That reminds me: PvP should NOT filter based on ignore lists. If certain people on my ignore list flag for PvP then I definitely don't want the match-making system filtering them out. I'd much rather have the ability to put their head on a pike - over...and over...and over again.

 

When I talk about a contested area, I mean that it is an openPVP area. This is why I feel they should not be permanent but it does cause a problem with an earlier example that Owain gave about picking an area to protect for his Guild HQ that he was hoping would be in an open PvP zone. You can't really protect anyone if the server decides the hex is peaceful. Those are little kinks I'd like to see covered in the megapost.

 

Even if the contested area shifts players flagged for open PvP will still be able to PvP.

 

I'm all for this and specifically for the highlighted reason

 

If the open pvp hexes are balanced with non open pvp hexes then it wouldn't be as big of an issue. If most hexes are non open pvp then it should increase on the priority list. Boils down to how important the open pvp flag is for players that will go through the effort to get the flag enabled and accept the risk associated with it, probably pretty important.

 

Your wording is a little confusing so I'mma point out that open PvP is 100% of the hexes. Contested hexes consist of ~5% of the hexes.

 

So you are saying that 5% will be pvp hexes or 5% will be contested that flows between? 95% of the world map protected by Telsa towers doesn't sound like what RG describes in the videos.

 

Since the reason to expand the parties to 8 was to represent each of the virtues, if needed, I would expect the party size to be 8. I don't think they've made that change in the release versions we've been playing though.

 

The party size is 8 - but not sure if it has been implemented - at least thats what RG said (with the obvious disclaimer of don't lawer me bro)

 

Those are one in the same. PvP hex = contested hex = 5%. Open PvP = 100%

The PvP hexes are the contested zones and they are ~5% of the hexes. The concept of the contested hexes flowing between all the hexes is a guess on our part but it fits what they have been saying.