Re: Keeping your titles and basing them differently ...
Posted: 19 Apr 2015 18:58
You think about it, then bonk yourself on the head with your spiked steel
tessto! Your face brightens!
Ahhh !
tessto! Your face brightens!
Ahhh !
The Official Genesis MUD Forums
https://www.genesismud.org/forums/
No, it's not. It's a strategic choice by the group with nothing to lose. There is no point for someone above their mortal level to fight people he cannot harm by killing. In fact it removes the impetus for fighting them.Cherek wrote:As I see it there is nothing abusive about attacking someone who has more to lose. It's a strategic choice, by both sides.
Well I would say if someone has the balls to get a group and attack you then the loot would be reward enough, as you won't find a group of three running in with green longswords and a body-stocking. As the Myth now doesn't have to worry about some cry baby posting his goodbye on the forums because he was killed... I would assume they would find the loot gathering off other players much more enjoyable now. Then again some of them just do it for the tears.Mortis wrote:No, it's not. It's a strategic choice by the group with nothing to lose. There is no point for someone above their mortal level to fight people he cannot harm by killing. In fact it removes the impetus for fighting them.Cherek wrote:As I see it there is nothing abusive about attacking someone who has more to lose. It's a strategic choice, by both sides.
I think this is a good thing. There is nothing more disheartening for a new player to have just hit a mortal level they've been striving for only to make a stupid mistake and die back down below that mortal level. It is not fun.Mortis wrote:This also gives free reign to players who have just hit a mortal level to try any quest or monster or exploration they want with zero risk of loss. Sure, they can die by testing out what they want, but there's no penalty. Why are we considering allowing this?
Anyone can decide on not continuing to grow past myth. Sure, those who are already myth++ don't get that much of a choice. Except dying down to small myth of course. Which they absolutely could do if they wanted to. But all new myths will get the choice. And I think it would be really really good for Genesis to offer a benefit for NOT continuing to grow after myth. We should offer more than this I think, but this would be a start.Mortis wrote:No, it's not. It's a strategic choice by the group with nothing to lose. There is no point for someone above their mortal level to fight people he cannot harm by killing. In fact it removes the impetus for fighting them.Cherek wrote:As I see it there is nothing abusive about attacking someone who has more to lose. It's a strategic choice, by both sides.
Yes. There would be times in your life as a mortal where you could explore without much risk. Which in my opinion is a good thing. If you have checked the KILL-log lately you'll see it's full of real newbies dying all over the place. Genesis is extremely dangerous for a new player, I think we could ease up a little on that. And remember it's only fairly risk free when you have zero XP after hitting a new level. I think people will still die a lot when not at that threshold, and still receive the same old penalty for doing so. And Genesis will still be full of random death traps that people will run into and be frustrated about. But I think it makes sense to give people the option to NOT grow for a while, and instead explore some of these things that killed them in the past, or they are too scared to try, and perhaps never would have tried otherwise.Mortis wrote: This also gives free reign to players who have just hit a mortal level to try any quest or monster or exploration they want with zero risk of loss. Sure, they can die by testing out what they want, but there's no penalty. Why are we considering allowing this?
Primarily, because it sounds fun. I completely agree with what Mirandus wrote in response.Mortis wrote:This also gives free reign to players who have just hit a mortal level to try any quest or monster or exploration they want with zero risk of loss. Sure, they can die by testing out what they want, but there's no penalty. Why are we considering allowing this?
I agree that there are concerns with this system, and that it will involve some aspects of game design that are not ideal. However, as Greneth (who I also agree with) pointed out, our current design is laden with heavy design flaws that have resulted in a gameplay dynamic that limits fun gameplay to grinding for the seeming majority of our players. I do agree with you that including hardships in games is part of what makes them fun (Dark Souls, anyone?). However, players have been saying for years that our death penalty is too harsh, which makes pvp very unfun all too often.Mortis wrote:There are a lot of parts to games that aren't fun. However, if you take them away, you may find your enjoyment for what's left waning.
The death vacation was not found to be a better way forward for the game. This proposition shares several of the same problems. We don't have to try anything "because we can" as the only reason. It's ok to think about the repercussions. I've posted a few concerns. I haven't heard a way to address them. I'm not in favor of a way for players to cheat death.