The PvP Thread

@Ara

Of course you never played a game where NPCs perform better than the human mind; game AIs are made to be beaten, which is why games usually go with dumbed down AI, introduce intentional flaws that the player can exploit, etc. A game where the AI was tuned to be as hard as possible would be a commercial failure.

Heck, look at WoW raid bosses. Even a child should be able to devise patterns for using the boss' abilities in a way that would make it simply impossible to beat, and any novice programmer could easily implement that. Those bosses are clearly and intentionally dumbed down, and dumbed down a lot.

As I said before, making an AI that can beat most, if not all, players is not the hard part. What is hard is making an AI that is hard to beat but still fun to play against.

Case in point, aimbots. Those are very simplistic AIs without the usual limits game devs build into their enemies' AIs. Most aimbots are very crude as far as AI goes, something that a beginner could build up in a few minutes, and still they can upgrade the performance of a very bad player enough to, potentially, dominate a game against even good players without aimbots. It's not fun to play against an aimbot, though.

Now imagine an actually well build AI, made by someone more intelligent that the script kiddies that usually make aimbots, and designed to be as hard as possible, without the intentional limitations usually added to make AIs beatable; it would make a common player with an aimbot look like an amateur, and likely would be able to beat the best players with close to 100% certainty.

Also, as others have said, NPCs don't need to mirror the capabilities of player characters. It's often better to make NPCs appear more powerful than the players anyway; players often find it more fun to attack an enemy that is visibly stronger than them but that can be beaten with skill. This is another point where difficulty can be tuned in PvE.

Finally, PvP + PvE is not double the risk. Unless you are talking about fighting the mobs and the other players at the same time, in which case you get the rewards for killing the mobs and the reward for killing the other players anyway, so no need to artificially double the reward Also, in your scenario, the PKers that ambushed the dragon killers will actually fight the dragon afterwards in easy mode, since the original dragon killers will likely have already damaged the dragon before dying; if that is the case, shouldn't they, by your appraisal of how risk and reward should work, receive actually less loot from the dragon?

Anyway, my preference would be to do it the other way: keep the rewards the same, but make the dragon itself easier (without reducing the rewards) when the players attacking it are flagged for PvP. Also, tune the PvP difficulty decrease so the average progression speed, for players that always enable PvP and players that never enable PvP, is roughly the same. This would allow everyone to choose whichever mode he likes most without having to worry about efficiency.

As for player looting: I sure hope it is either optional or not present at all. I, at least, am not interested in PvP with full loot, even if fully consensual. If all PvP features full loot, don't expect to ever fight against me - and I believe a lot of players that would otherwise try the PvP will, instead, completely avoid it if full loot can't be avoided.


@Acrylic 300

The best place to see the difference between the modes is likely https://www.shroudoftheavatar.com/?p=3955 . It's somewhat old, but to the best of my knowledge nothing has changed.

Single player online is meant to allow players to easily change to Friends Play or Open Play, while keeping most of the advantages of offline play, in order to entice into playing online the players that would otherwise prefer to play offline. RG / Portalarium wants as many players online as possible. Also, single player online, like friends play online, is achieved by just having the server filter out everyone else - which means the player can still interact with the game world itself as if he was playing in open play online but was the only player in that map, with all the resulting consequences.

Besides, going into FPO without any friend would be exactly the same as going into Single Player Online anyway, so there is no sense at all in having any restriction in SPO when compared with FPO

 

@Owain, perfect example. You have your PvE group set out to fight a Dragon and your PvP group set out to fight a Dragon while using some strategy to fend off potential PvP interference.

No PvP interference means you can farm your Dragons at will. If there is a PvP attack while you are fighting your Dragon. You get your PvP battle and PvE loot at the same time. (if you can take it)

From my understanding of your prior post. That PvP battle while attempting to down Dragons is the PvP reward.

So players that are not PvPing are in fact getting a lesser reward because they are only attempting to down a Dragon. They do not get the added enjoyment of PvP.

 

@Ristra, do not mistake an ambush for an interrupted PvE expedition.

Typically, the three groups I mention will trade roles. The group fighting the dragon will rotate to the dungeon entrance. The group that was on the entrance shifts to overwatch, and the overwatch group takes out the next dragon, so everyone is happy.

But the KGB is primarily a PvP guild, and the group fighting the dragon is merely bait. Once a rival PvP group attacks the PvE party, the concealed group on overwatch attacks them. If they try to escape, the concealed group at the entrance cuts them off. If possible (dragon permitting) all 3 groups will converge on the group we've suckered in, and they end up caught between the hammer and the anvil.

The dragon is nice, but we aren't there for dragons.

 

I'm trackin ya, it's along the lines of having someone out gathering while a few people are stealth near by.

It's not about the gathering as much as it's about the bait for the PK to think he has an easy target.

 

Exactamundo.

 

Saying that the reward for being flagged for PvP is the "Joy" of PvP is not going to work to entice people to play that way. Calling the loot received from PvP the reward is not going to work either because PvP (outside an arena) is more about survival than killing. Why would I try to survive something that I can eliminate with a slider? Oh, yeah! I forgot, the "Joy" and "Loot" of it all. That's why everyone packed up and headed to Trammel right? Not!

There are two ways to look at PvP risk depending on the loot system:

1) Full loot and looting other players is not a reward because you risk losing everything compared to losing nothing in PvE. (unless monsters loot you dry). Looting other players is NOT the same as risk free monster looting because you do not risk losing your own equipment. Saying PvP loot is the reward for PvP is not good for the game.

2) If player looting is not allowed then it's still obviously more risky to PvP compared to PvE. This is the worst case scenario. Introducing nothing but greater risks will be very bad for the game.

I think a lot of the "No reward for PvP!" crowd has either never participated in PvP (outside arenas) or never plans to participate in it. Think about what it's going to take to convince you to PvP instead of about what it will take to nerf PvP out of existence because you don't like it. Think about what will make the game successful!

 

<i>" Think about what it?s going to take to convince you to PvP instead of about what it will take to nerf PvP out of existence because you don?t like it. Think about what will make the game successful!"</i>

This is very much what I am thinking about. I want to see people step into PvP even though they haven't enjoyed it in the past. While at the same time I am thinking about not rewarding PvP in a way that nerfs PvE.

 

How does rewarding PvP Nerf PvE?

 

By devaluing the the PvE rewards or short sheeting PvE rewards.

Devalue: The best items/resources in the game can only be obtained while open to PvP.
Solution: Make the best items/resources situationally open to PvP.

Short Sheet: Killing a dragon while flagged for PvP should give x4 the reward.
Solution: Separate the reward for PvE and PvP instead of increase the PvE reward because you are flagged for PvP.

 

I think something like 25% more loot on every PvE encounter would suffice. Either that or make PvE 25% easier when flagged for PvP. 25% better gathering ect...

That's about what it would take for me to slide the bar or click the flag.

 

I don't even know if they have a game architecture that can handle a 40v40 with a dragon raid. You can't run this peer to peer on one random person's machine. So it may be that there's really aren't those kinds of dragon raids and there aren't those kinds of PvP encounters for years.

Even 20 people all spamming skills with AoEs going off seems like way too much to me. This is very different from having 20 people in town chatting. Right now my system is choking on a video of one of those old L2 pre-raid fights, so I can't imagine running the real thing.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2iWcW65xjqM

 

From how I understand it, peer to peer isn't really the correct term. Not as far as 1 player is the host and all the others are clients.

I think Chris used the term crowd sourcing the server load once before.
I have not heard of a game using this method. (not that have been released) so we have nothing to reference.

If it was a peer to peer, there is no way large scale battles would be possible.

If it's a crowd source where some load is done on each local machine. Other parts are transmitted to a peer host, easily swappable to a different host. With anything that can not be trusted (trust but verify) will happen server side.

 

I agree with Acrylic. Rewarding PvP does not diminish PvE any more than rewards in PvE diminish my game if I choose to concentrate on PvP.

Ristra, I think you need to worry more about the game you want to play, and what you think you'll get out of it rather than worrying about what other people are getting who aren't even playing the same game you are playing.

Next, I expect crafters to demand the same phat lewt the PvP/PvE players are getting. It's pretty hazardous work, tailoring.

"Maybe get a blister on your little finger. Maybe get a blister on your thumb." -- Dire Straits, Money for Nothing.

 

@Owain

Actually, I do think that crafters should be able to progress at the same speed as fighters, be them of the PvP or PvE variety; crafters deserve having some challenging and rewarding non-combat gameplay for them to enjoy.

I just don't have the foggiest idea how that could be implemented, not in SotA. Some MMOs handle that with skill based minigames for the crafting, but I've yet to see an example of interesting and challenging crafting gameplay that is appropriate to an immersive game, instead of looking like either completely unrelated minigames or a re-hash of Cooking Mama.

 

@Owain, that is what I am doing. Discussing different rewards for different play styles. I have many play styles.

I feel the same way about PvE as I do PvP. PvE should never devalue or short sheet PvP either.

I am stating that the rewards for PvP, PvE, crafting, etc. should be self contained. Not amplified.

PvP + Gathering = PvP reward + Gathered material
PvP + PvE = PvP reward + PvE reward

Not PvP + Gathering = Gathered material x 2
Not PvP + PvE = PvE reward x 2

 

@Ristra, fair enough, although I still don't follow your reasoning when you talk about PvP rewards devaluing PvE rewards.

 

Hmmm, maybe devalue isn't the correct word. Or maybe drop off the reward part. Devaluing PvE, not PvE reward.

<i>Not PvP + Gathering = Gathered material x 2
Not PvP + PvE = PvE reward x 2</i>

If by simply flagging PvP you gain more resources or loot. Then by not flagging you are given less.

The act of flagging and being available for PvP should not be enough to gain a bonus. There is no guarantee on the "chance" of PvP encounter.

Change that up with some element to increase the odds of PvP encounter and the devalue is nulled.

Such as the weekly dragon boss, contraband/bounty hunter quests, meteorite with rare resources. These have a draw to them and will produce PvP encounters.

 

By flagging PvP, you risk losing more as well. Don't forget that. Should players then submit a form 1040 and then get to deduct their losses, and get a 'refund'.

I think you are reaching.

 

Using the UO model of full loot or SotA?

Should they be rewarded for their losses or their success? PvP is not the flag it's the engagement. You can't win or lose if you do not engage.

 

We don't know what model SotA will be using for loot in open PvP. There is a lot of support for full loot among those who advocate open PvP, and since Richard Garriott previously adopted full loot in UO, it is likely that he may do so again in SotA.

It isn't a matter of reward or penalty - I think it is a matter of being willing to accept the challenge, and if you accept the challenge, don't expect to be given a cookie in exchange.