Discussion in 'Release 16 Feedback' started by Net, Apr 23, 2015.
We can block it with /nozone or adding players to block list.
I went to Steam to see how many people were playing Darkfall at the moment (it doesn't show). I'd guess the over under was 200 people?
I then went to the review section and noticed that there were more negative reviews than there were positive. I clicked on a negative review and was amused by this gem: "Pros:
The uninstall button is working." LOL
Anyway, you'll get no argument from me that the SOTA combat system needs a lot of work. I'm all for ganking, spawn camping, and all the other nasty pvp tactics that you might find in other games. I think where you and I differ in our thinking is that I believe that a GAME should have viable ways to combat those tactics other than forming your own gank squad, being a higher level, or being more nasty than your opponent. I also believe that since SOTA is a roleplaying game, pvp should be integrated with roleplaying and not just "open" to whatever you can get away chaotic mechanics.
You both have a point there...
I can't help but think about the UO freeshards... where hundreds, even thousands still play with the old T2A rules and goodness gracious they're having a blast.
You'd try to catch them for an interview but no wait, they're way too busy ! Running everywhere to stock up back on pots and preparing ambushes and strategically trying to impose their presence on popular zones...
This with no GM input at all...
But I also agree with Baron Francisco !
The game needs to have a ruleset based on roleplaying, which is what was meant for UO but never saw the light of day because EA fired all the genius programmers who were fermenting some impressive AI for the task.
There needs to be levels of complexity...
Can you do a global /nozone?
Well '/nozone' currently blocks anyone but devs from zoning to you until you log out (for about 5 minutes).
"Chaotic mechanics" isn't what I would call my style of PvP.........its is however how I would now label the entire combat and skill tree system in the game.....Chaotic Mechanics......and yes they now suck more than ever.
I have no problem with your style of play and wasn't trying to label them. Open PVP doesn't have to be chaotic is what I'm saying. Just like we don't tell people to play football by throwing a ball on the field and then saying "ok do whatever you can get away with" we shouldn't tell people to play "pvp" without rules.
It's just the nuance that is missing.
Instead of "I ban thee" and "ignore" and "flag PVE only" you have sensible rules that make sense due to roleplaying.
Like if you go to a Duke's castle for an event in a pvp zone, and the duke is a magical paladin, you expect an assasination attempt to be at least lessened by some magic, or paladin's aura.
Whereas if the same duke is thinking oh yes I'm so strong I'll go get the assasin in his own castle. Well once there he would realise he's much less, that his skills seem to miss, especially if the attack is preemtive, meaning the AI of the game realised the assasin never attempted anything against the Duke, yet he's still attacking.
The duke will now be under the effect of the assasin's evil aura... the system needs to adapt itself dynamically.
It's the same thing I've been repeating to programmers since UO BETA... if there is such a thing as being ignored well hello !
With my AI system, Lord British would have never died to a wall of fire in his own castle !
What do you think of THAT ?! hehehe
I'm full of surprises HUH ?! hehehehe
I'll repeat myself again for the 1000th time... in this type of ruleset, the evil players need to have a motivation to play "ethically" and leave new players alone and tackle only players their relative size. This is often RP talking done through gods, or mentors, which NEED to be personified by someone with a human/divine touch, like one of the devs.
A page system is necessary to inventory and categorize by level of importance the manual actions the "god" proposes as incentives for their respective "worshippers".
A necromancer would have no choice but to please "death" or he will become mediocre and want to restart his character, it has to be that important. Noone could expect death to reward you cause you made a proper ritual within a week, the system would sort that out so the dev or NPC would not spend all his spare time fixing things.
Thats all made possible by cloud computing, the info is available to the client, the server, and the AI. It was harder to do in UO... but still.
The AI is constantly searching for relationships between players, categorizes them and adjusts the PVP rules consequently.
Just want to throw out there that the freeshard playerbase of UO doubles if not triples the paid servers, primarily because they offer open PvP rulesets. I couldn't pull some of my friends, who I'd played with for years, away from UO to go try ArcheAge when it first launched. It was too "Trammel" for them.
And we're role-players. There's an interaction you get from those open PvP rules you simply cannot emulate in any form without them.
The freedom to do what you want is a very fine goal to have. It's when that freedom gets abused that things get sticky. I'm not suggesting that we make a lot of hard rules like "no spawn camping". I'm just suggesting that we have some out of bounds markers, and call a foul a foul. The NBA, for example, allows for 6 fouls before you're thrown out of a game. Surly we could come up with a way to simulate a reasonable pvp rule set in an otherwise open environment. I mean, the goal should be to "play basketball" not "commit fouls". That's kind of my point about ganking and spawn camping. If your goal is to do that from the outset, you're not really "roleplaying" you're playing another game entirely.
Also, don't forget you're comparing something that is free vs. something that is not? Doesn't sound like a fair comparison.
Sorry Baron Francisco, but I was under the deep impression that we were only waiting for a true lord British game...
of course its fair to compare since we have been forged by Ultima Online as it was seen by Mr. Gariott and crew, not the EA version and its the only reason people started custom rulesets.
I never, not once tought hey I'll play this all my life.
I was waiting for SOTA, well... what I dreamed of SOTA.
I played only Siege Perilous on EA... since the new ruleset.
I'm pretty sure we also all tought Siege Perilous was a genius Gariott or Long idea... it seems clear now it was not ?
This is so confusing hearing you defend them like this... unfair comparison ?
People throw thousands at these freeshards for "donation" items (pixel crack, ethy mounts, special houses/mansions on the ocean) every month. Additionally, $15 a month is nothing nowadays. Microtransactions often put those sub prices to shame, which is why they've become so popular. I promise you, popular freeshard owners aren't hurting financially; in fact, it's a major criticism of the freeshard market, much like Trino gets with ArcheAge.
The thing about UO was that if you got killed and looted, you typically didn't res locally. You went back to town and got regeared, regrouped, and so on. People left the field. There was a "win" condition: kill everyone, see your enemies driven before you, hear the lamentations of the women, blind loot them, chop off their head, eat their bacon, mount their mug on your door step, and repeat. Reskilling wasn't often needed, not for any long term, simply because the reds didn't care (and would keep doing it, making it pointless to stay there) and the blue PKers wouldn't bother racking up counts for no benefit. People just went back to town or their house or wherever and got back on the horse.
In that regard, I would say spawn camping and reskilling is very much in role-play: I'm controlling the field. I don't want you coming back and taking it from me. Our efforts may be divided elsewhere, holding a point or whatever. Or maybe we just want people to fear/hate us (not mutually exclusive). It may not involve "thee"s and "thou"s but it's definitely creating the role of a villain (or vigilantes keeping the peace by statting and reskilling thieves and reds). In short, it's a matter of perspective.
Also that was the whole lesson we learned... people can roleplay a witless murderer, they're still roleplaying.
Will they retire are much joy and satisfaction for weaving in their character as you do ? Probably not, but they're roleplaying nonetheless... its their loss, not yours.
At least it shouldn't discourage you from roleplaying yourself, there will be bandits on the road, and bandits that hang in the same spot are supposed to be considered stupid and will be smashed by a guild sooner than later.
Especially here, the majority of the players are considered good, even the "evil ones" would group against some griefers with the good guys.
I am baffled when the tought only even crosses our antennas...
Within the limited scope of UO, I agree with you.
I want more from SOTA. What UO didn't do a great job exploring, imo, was the fact that people respawn. Death be default is almost meaningless until you enter into the equation things like looting or griefing. Then it becomes more meaningful because death results in the bridge that allows you to loot or grief.
So from a roleplaying standpoint, imagine a world where no one ever dies. Is murder even illegal anymore? Do jails work the same way as they do on earth? I don't think so.
I think that's something that's been missing from all PVP...a believable and reasonable accountability system that fits into the game world and is not built on our preconceived notions about how important life and death are.
I couldn't agree more, very well said.
Separate names with a comma.