Genesis Forums

Player Fight
Page 1 of 1

Author:  Strider [ 30 Mar 2011 20:27 ]
Post subject:  Player Fight

There seems to be plenty of threads discussing the merits of various mechanics for PvP, but I haven't seen much discussion about the extent to which the game fosters, limits, causes or allows actual conflict between players and to what extent it should do any of that. To put it another way, around this table some cowboys end up buying each other drinks, some end up taking it out side and some simply shoot others under the table, and I ask how much of that was in the cards?

Do we, should we or can we, have a a community of players that is by and large friendly and respectful, regardless of the conflicts and competing interests of our characters, or is it all about building and maintaining player factions that transcend and influence the game more than the roles we purport to play?

Are there in game interactions beyond the pale or that strike directly at the player instead of the character? Do interactions that do not directly impact the game like the words our characters use to or about each other, the emotes including spitting and groping, or the harvesting lesser loot we were going to leave in our wakes anyway, cause player conflict? How do we deal with players slowing, diverting or reversing the progress of each others characters, through theft, the possession or destruction of desired limited resources like magic weapons or high experience kills, guild management issues like blocking access or expulsion or, of course, fighting and death?

Are there mechanical things about the game, such as unequal power, size and experience of characters, the difficulty of making kills, supposed or actual guild-targeted equipment, the unequal benefits of scripting, or what have you, that can only drive frustration and conflict up to the player level?

If characters clash, how many additional fights should that spawn? How many deaths? Once the retaliation, and the retaliations against everyone who retaliated and the death of the small character who happens to be in the guild of someone tangential to the conflict have happened, what sort of resolution will there be?

Please note that I am asking more about general philosophy, structure and experience, and kindly spin off any discussions about specific incidents into other threads. Thanks.

Author:  Amberlee [ 31 Mar 2011 01:45 ]
Post subject:  Re: Player Fight

Love the fact that you take this up for discussion.
There is no right or wrong answer to this by the way.
But the questions you ask is something that everyone that participates in conflicts should ask themselves.

Author:  Booger [ 31 Mar 2011 04:40 ]
Post subject:  Re: Player Fight

VERY good thread idea, and well formulated note!
Myself I like it when everyone are friends, nice and helpful to each others. But I'm not gonn'a argue for it, just wanted to give my "vote".

Author:  Cherek [ 02 Apr 2011 15:44 ]
Post subject:  Re: Player Fight

I liked it best when Genesis had wars, conflicts and politics. I find the "everyone helps everyone" co-op game we have now pretty boring.

Author:  Strider [ 27 Apr 2011 01:35 ]
Post subject:  Re: Player Fight

I suppose it's poor etiquette to resurrect your own threads, but I didn't want to further pull what I thought was an interesting discussion off course, and this prompted me to write a lot of what I had hoped we would to get around to discussing in this thread.

From this thread...
Kas wrote:
zar wrote:
Kas wrote:
Being attacked with no warning is the price you risk to pay when someone else in your guild do the same(scoring a kill or not).

Should be quite natural to expect the same thing in return, no?

A life for a life.

So if once I was attacked by traveller guild member, I am justified to attack any traveller I meet?

My opinion, and example: If a Calian legend kills an random AA adept, it's only fair and natural that an AA legend may slay an random Calian adept in turn.

Therefore, Calian legends (in this hypothetical case) should be wary of who they kill since they in turn risk to compromise their smaller members by their actions.

Do this seem unfair to you?


Let me break this down somewhat.

At the logical level, such a routine devolves any act of violence into an infinite loop of rapidly expanding wronged parties seeking proxy revenge.

At the rules and functionality level, anyone can attack or slay anyone for any pretty much any reason or no reason at all. I think there are some game-play and community issues surrounding how player fighting works out, but it is not like I am leaving the game over it right now.

At the player level, I don't think that one can justify hurting members of an arbitrarily selected group for the actions of an individual player. Admittedly, occupational guild is at least more reasonable than say race or locational handiness, but absent other factors, I don't think a player of a small character deserves this crap. Now, I also think that various levels of bad things should happen to players who negatively impact other players for reasons of which I don't approve, but I think it is safe to say that there is not a player's community consensus on proper play.

From a guild level, I don't believe any guild has signed off on it's member's actions until it's leadership, or general membership for less structured guilds, has been appraised of the situation and rendered judgement, statements about the Mages that I may have misconstrued to the contrary, notwithstanding.

At the character level, I think that all fighting should be driven by roles. Sure, I can see constructs where holding a whole guild, race, or what have you, responsible for an attack makes sense or could be compelling, as easily as I can see constructs that kill the weak or innocent, shopkeepers or anyone else for that matter, but I think that proper game play requires reigning some of that in.

As it stands, with recovery you can barely curb committed malefactors with death but the only way not to negatively impact other characters is to pull up short of killing them.

From this thread...
gorboth wrote:
It hasn't been mentioned much (if at all?) in this thread, but one of the main arguments for a high death penalty is because it increases the value of certain aspects of roleplay. When you roleplay, the stakes are increased for your choices in relation to others. Anger people, and they might come after you. If them killing you only took one fanta from you, you would probably not mind so much, and would be more inclined to not care if you angered them. By making the penalty for death meaningful, we give the game world a sense of real consequences for your roleplay choices.

It is for this reason that I will not lower the death penalty in the forseeable future.

I agree that there needs to be an in game outlet for players to try to thrash out their differences but I think the problem is that as it stands, whenever characters clash, for whatever reason, especially when it ends in death, it seems to cause more hostility at the player level than any of these fights ever seems to resolve. If anything, the ripples of fights seem to peter out, but the bitterness and resentment seem to remain.

Cherek wrote:
I liked it best when Genesis had wars, conflicts and politics. I find the "everyone helps everyone" co-op game we have now pretty boring.

Yes, I think I may have seen you write something along those lines on one of these threads, but I asked if this conflict is, should or can be limited to our characters, or if we need to fight at the player level.

Author:  Cherek [ 27 Apr 2011 01:59 ]
Post subject:  Re: Player Fight

Strider: As it is now, conflicts are for the most part bound to _players_ not characters. And how could it not be? We are humans, players. Not characters. We can try to play a chracter, but we are emotionally attached to it.

I definitely think a lower death penalty would lead to less hatred and less anger. And more fun.

I understand Gorboth's point of view that just as in real life the choices of our characters get serious consequenses.

But this is not real life. This is a game. A game works on some basic principles. It deals very much with rewards for the player. Rewards we like in Genesis is for instance:

- Progression of our character
Watching it grow, getting EQ, joining guilds, raising in ranks, etc. This is probably the main type of reward in Genesis.

- Random chance
Gambling is a has always been a popular way of gaming. Luck. Random chance. Genesis deals with lots of rewards in this area too.

- Social Interaction
Its fun to meet people, to interact and talk. We usually get positive feelings from interacting with other people.

- Story
Well, like any book or movie, we have storytelling, and the fun we get from escaping the real life and taking part in an alternative world and plot.

And most useful in this discussion:

- Competition
Trying to outsmart your opponent, beat the highscore, beat your friends, etc. The basics of any human competition, and sport. Being better then the other players.

- Thrills
Adrenaline. Trying to survive a pfight, trying to kill someone else. Adrenaline levels go up, heart rate increases. (Or whatever happens phisically, I am no doctor). But basically the same type of "fun" you get from watching a scary movie for instance. Or dying a bungee jump. (I would imagine).

So we got lots of good things going for us! In theory anyway.

In the PVP area, it does not seem to work. We dont get pleasure from outsmarting our opponents. If we actually do manage to kill someone, it is more likely we feel bad, afraid they will leave the game. And those who lose in the PVP game lose so much of that first section above (character progression) that often they dont wanna play anymore, and sometimes they dont return. Since so much is a stake, too much imho, it leads to anger, bitterness, and lots of talk about how players who kill other players "destroy the game", "destroy the fun", etc.

So there is no reward for killing another player, and being killed removes huge parts of other positive aspects of the game that you spent a long time doing.

And as games deal with positive rewards you get for playing, it is quite obvious to me PVP in this game does not work as it should. And it wont work until it provides a positive feeling for those taking part.

Author:  Zar [ 27 Apr 2011 07:37 ]
Post subject:  Re: Player Fight

Great note.

I think that part of playerbase want to be restricted from pfights in order to enjoy the game.
There are a lot of ideas how to restrict pfighting:
1. PK status
2. PK areas
3. PK time of reboot
4. Special PK reboots
5. Pfighting is allowed against other guild only if guilds are agreed on war state (coded guild state relations)

Ideas are endless.
Personally I hate pfights: died many times, killed many times - not good for a game.

Author:  Laurel [ 27 Apr 2011 08:10 ]
Post subject:  Re: Player Fight

strider wrote:


Author:  Draugor [ 27 Apr 2011 09:18 ]
Post subject:  Re: Player Fight

As I am seeing pvp right now its, Earth or Arcon go on MY plains and try to kill MY guards, I scry and they run like little girls to the keep -.- So naturally I go to the keep and kill all the guards wile they hide in the guildhall.

I'd LOVE to see some more real pvp in the game, people that actually run and defend theire guildhalls etc, hell if they removed the weapon breaking crap on the Neidar guards I'd raid them aswell. Stuff like that would make the guilds raidable and thus almost force more pvp, AND! It wouldnt be the usual ganking, it would be regular defending theire home wich would make it alot more interesting. That would spark some interaction and fighting.

Author:  Strider [ 27 Apr 2011 21:09 ]
Post subject:  Re: Player Fight

zar wrote:
Personally I hate pfights: died many times, killed many times - not good for a game.

Then what is your recourse against other players and their characters?

Suppose you were fighting the extremely rare, easily solo-able with enough herb and equipment investment, uber-myth-level experience and loot granting twin NPCs, and someone wandered through stole your kill and loot, said "Sorry" and then wandered off. What if they swung back in time to pick off the second one? Even if they get some of what's coming to them, what do you get out of it?

Suppose you help us expand our player base and get your mother or significant other to play and someone says something truly offensive, exactly once. What would come of that?

Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC + 1 hour [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group