Wouldn't harsh death penalties promote a defensive play ?
ie. I see a fight over there but am not 100% sure we will win so i don't even bother cause of the 30 min res penalty or so ? Doesn't make much sense to me, to make a game where you are punished so harsh for making a mistake. It is still a game...
They promote smart play. If your side is being overwhelemed, a death penalty encourages you to fall back and regroup.
You still want to fight, because the things you are defending (your town, your homes, etc) have value. What a death penalty discourages is people going cowboy and charging randomly into a horde of enemy players.
The only time a death penalty discourages PvP is if what you lose is more valuable to you than what you are defending (i.e. if someone could take all your gear).
Rez-zerging is a tactic for bad PvE raiders, it just shouldnt be viable in a RvR game like this.
Personally I dont think the best solution is a timed rez-sicknesses. Just being spawned away from the fight is enough to remove you from that specific fight for awhile, while still allowing you to engage in other fights that you might run into on your way back. Some kind of harsh penalty is required though if youre going to be able to pop someone back up right there where they fell.
Game doesnt need rez sickness, graveyards shouldn't be close enough to the main areas of battle that the travel times are insignificant. The idea of some form of temporary rally point would be worth testing but I reckon it would be too advantageous to the higher pop faction.
As for combat rez, I dont think there should be any easy way to do it even with a cooldown. You wanna try then you should have to put yourself at risk. Even then the number of times its possible in a short period of time should be limited.
That being said, I do still think that anyone being able to rez ala GW2 is better than it being healers only. I'd rather see that and there be more limits on how often you can actually be rez'd before being forced too a graveyard.
The reason I asked about Rez sickness after releasing is to impose some type of penalty so if the battle is near main city you are not at full power when re-entering the fray
Game doesnt need rez sickness, graveyards shouldn't be close enough to the main areas of battle that the travel times are insignificant. The idea of some form of temporary rally point would be worth testing but I reckon it would be too advantageous to the higher pop faction.
As for combat rez, I dont think there should be any easy way to do it even with a cooldown. You wanna try then you should have to put yourself at risk. Even then the number of times its possible in a short period of time should be limited.
That being said, I do still think that anyone being able to rez ala GW2 is better than it being healers only. I'd rather see that and there be more limits on how often you can actually be rez'd before being forced too a graveyard.
The reason I asked about Rez sickness after releasing is to impose some type of penalty so if the battle is near main city you are not at full power when re-entering the fray
If your realm is so overwhelmed that enemies have pushed you all the way back to just outside your main city then making it harder on them is a safety valve to prevent one realm from just being trapped inside its safe area (very bad for the game). Thats the only time that sort of situation seems acceptable.
Originally posted by Axxar That would be the ultimate defeat. Your enemy building a huge city right outside your capital.
Something that really shouldnt be reasonably possible given the negative impact on the game that would have. One of many reasons why I think local rezzing is worse than having people only spawn within their own territory.
The deeper into their own territory they are, the more advantage the defenders should have. The game needs to be balanced so that even the largest two factions together cant completely lock the third into just its own safe area.
Originally posted by easy-r none, if you die you lose some items depending on how game works and you are back at your bind point with a death penalty of sorts
In my system suggestion, though I allow the spawn point to potentially be close, its worth noteing, not only do you have to walk back to the balltle from the rez point, but you need to walk to the rez point from the battle through the veil. so while in a way, My system actually does increase the penalty of dieing. so long as the system is designed to discourge spawn points that are too close, it can make death involve more travel time ( hope fully encounters along the way ). Preventing spawn points from being too close is easy to fix by doing 2 things. 1) they dont work if they are under attack, and if put in a keep under attack, that is considered under attack too. 2) Putting a rez point very close to a battle will likely find the rez point under attack too
Originally posted by zeroumus ...Preventing spawn points from being too close is easy to fix by doing 2 things. 1) they dont work if they are under attack, and if put in a keep under attack, that is considered under attack too. 2) Putting a rez point very close to a battle will likely find the rez point under attack too
This has potential, but the question is how you define when a keep/town is under attack so you can say the rez points inside are "under attack". Its really not as easy as it sounds.
First of all you have to define the interior of a completely free built structure so that you can say whether anything inside that interior is "under attack".
What happens if there is a gap somewhere in the wall? Does the entire area around the keep become "interior space" so no rez points work? Or does the interior become "exterior space" and the rez points inside still work?
Once you figure that out you have to determine what "under attack" means. Just hitting the wall? How long does that effect last? Can all of the towns in the surrounding area be shut down by solo archers sneaking in and plinking arrows at the walls? That would be a problem. But then if you have to consistently be hitting the walls with siege equipment just to prevent everyone from rezzing right inside thats a problem too.
These are the problems you have to deal with when the world is so heavily sandbox. Complicated solutions sound good, but they lead to problems, bugs, and exploits.
Im still a fan of "you can rez at your nearest house". Its simple and effective. It gives defenders an advantage but mainly just those individuals who live on the territory being attacked or other keeps/towns nearby. It scales up easily because larger walled areas allow more plots with more people living on them.
One way to determine if something is contested (and therefore unusable as a respawn point) is to have it tied to the stabalizers MJ has talked about. Stabalizers would have a certain radius of effectiveness. Any respawn not within the radius of a stabalizer controlled by your realm would not be "stable" enough to be usable. The respawn would only have to be within the radius of one working stabalizer, so you could set up multiple stabalizers that overlap the area of the respawn as a matter of strategy. I would also require the character to "attune" themselves to the particular respawn point prior to dying to use it (the way we had to in DAoC). If the one you were attuned to were shut down, you would revert to the previously attuned point, etc.
I'd be willing to bet that while we will be able to place stabalizers inside keeps, we will not be able to build keeps around respawn points.
One way to determine if something is contested (and therefore unusable as a respawn point) is to have it tied to the stabalizers MJ has talked about. Stabalizers would have a certain radius of effectiveness. Any respawn not within the radius of a stabalizer controlled by your realm would not be "stable" enough to be usable. The respawn would only have to be within the radius of one working stabalizer, so you could set up multiple stabalizers that overlap the area of the respawn as a matter of strategy. I would also require the character to "attune" themselves to the particular respawn point prior to dying to use it (the way we had to in DAoC). If the one you were attuned to were shut down, you would revert to the previously attuned point, etc.
I'd be willing to bet that while we will be able to place stabalizers inside keeps, we will not be able to build keeps around respawn points.
Sounds kinda of fun.. and when suggesting ideas about the game, it is wise to try and work them into MJ's ideas, cuz he is the boss, and he is not going to simply change his core ideas for no reason.
I don't think the fine tuning of the system of determining what is under attack and what is not will be that hard. It also really depends on how free form things are. my gut feeling is it will not be like minecraft where you simply claim a area and expand as needed. i think there will be plots that restrict sizes, the plots may be adjacent to another however allowing a semi free form feel. i dunno, if anyone knows what MJ said about this, please link. if the game is truly free form, it may be a "little" hard or computationally expensive to determine things like, where a structure ends? it would not be that hard though. but... these stabilizers could be one method to define a region..
Maybe a healing hall/(rez point) and a stabilizer could just be the same thing... They could have nothing to do with keeps at all per say. what about that idea? To prevenent things from getting to complicated, thats my suggestion
Originally posted by zeroumus ...Preventing spawn points from being too close is easy to fix by doing 2 things. 1) they dont work if they are under attack, and if put in a keep under attack, that is considered under attack too. 2) Putting a rez point very close to a battle will likely find the rez point under attack too
This has potential, but the question is how you define when a keep/town is under attack so you can say the rez points inside are "under attack". Its really not as easy as it sounds.
I am not an expert, and I know its not easy, but i dont think it would be that hard
First of all you have to define the interior of a completely free built structure so that you can say whether anything inside that interior is "under attack".
the blocks that build interior "stuff" could just have a flag that ID's it as such, now you might propose the idea that people might cheat and use "outside" flagged items, but to stopthat, you simply make it so you can not build most things on top of something without a proper flagged indoor floor tile.
these are just rough ideas, I can not predict every exploit that will occur. thats what internal/alpha testing should be for.
What happens if there is a gap somewhere in the wall? Does the entire area around the keep become "interior space" so no rez points work? Or does the interior become "exterior space" and the rez points inside still work?
EDIT, SCRATCH THAT, see below
Once you figure that out you have to determine what "under attack" means. Just hitting the wall? How long does that effect last? Can all of the towns in the surrounding area be shut down by solo archers sneaking in and plinking arrows at the walls? That would be a problem. But then if you have to consistently be hitting the walls with siege equipment just to prevent everyone from rezzing right inside thats a problem too.
I would consider it under attack if any block or system was below 95% for more than 60 seconds. and it would reset once its repaired to 100% past 60 seconds. Thats more then enough to address a solo griefer. So a guy trying to using this tactic would need to do 5% damage and wait 1 minute before having any effect. then if defended, it could be repaired quickly to reset it, no restrictions on rebuilding time . at this point, the grier should not be able to keep up with the person repairing, so long as he sticks around. Needless to say, its likely someone will find him by that time if the structure is defended.
These are the problems you have to deal with when the world is so heavily sandbox. Complicated solutions sound good, but they lead to problems, bugs, and exploits.
you are correct here, not everything is addressed here, this is what internal testing/alpha/beta should be about.
EDIT, actaully there is a better way to deternine with he block system what is under attack in a free form system
simply make it that if one block is below 95% for more than a minute ( like i suggested earlier ), then a large radius around that block becomes under attack, this radius would be larger than a typical keep or castle, large enough that a functioning rez point would be far enough away. if your keep is larger than the radius, then congrats, not all of your keep is under attack, if the radius hits anohter keep or structure, then too bad, its partially/fully under attack too
i still think it will be a plot system however with predefined boarders.
Never the less what the polls ask, just wait until you get into the masses of daoc fans that want to see things that wern't broken in daoc, also be in CU... just wait.... lolol
Never the less what the polls ask, just wait until you get into the masses of daoc fans that want to see things that wern't broken in daoc, also be in CU... just wait.... lolol
ps this is one of them
I think you'll be surprised by the number of people who dont want to play the exact same game they played in 2001. And if you change some of the mechanics you have to examine and readjust all of them.
You cant just transplant mechanics from one game to another because you are likely to end up with completely different results. Mechanics work a certain way within a given environment.
Never the less what the polls ask, just wait until you get into the masses of daoc fans that want to see things that wern't broken in daoc, also be in CU... just wait.... lolol
ps this is one of them
Hopefully, and it should fall completely on, CSE will properly educate people taking the pole. It could be as simple as making a "Extra Credits" or "Zero Puncuation" like animation explaining the different options to give the person voting the most amount of information possible so they can make the most educated choice. Yes there will be people who won't watch the videos and just blindly vote but hopefully there will be enough people who educate themselves on the potential ideas presented by CSE that a choice is made based on taking everything into consideration and not just "I liked Daoc system so I'll just not try and understand something different and vote for keep it the same." Daoc's rez system wasn't horrible and I wouldn't be upset if they went with it but since MJ has talked about taking chances I feel areas like rezzing, combat, etc. are a place where chances need to be taken. Personally there are systems Daoc uses I feel are outdated and can be redesigned and implemented better. Combat and rezzing being two of them. I backed this game on the hope we'd see Daoc influences in the design not just copy and paste the systems it uses. I'll play it regardless because I'm a fan of RvR and deep crafting/housing systems but I feel they have a chance to get innovative here. We can look at a game like GW 2 and see the good and bad they did. I don't think anyone wants rezzing like we see in GW 2 but I understand why they designed it like that (no dedicated healing classes). You see other areas where they innovated a little and discovered a much better way to do something (Warhammer did it first with PQs but the events in GW 2 were a good way to distance, at least some, from the quest grind).
Basically I hope CSE properly visualizes what they want to do like with what we saw with the building updates. I feel it would be worth taking a little extra time to create short animated videos to help those who can't just listen and understand a visual medium to make a educated choice.
"Rather than love, than money, than fame, give me truth."
Comments
They promote smart play. If your side is being overwhelemed, a death penalty encourages you to fall back and regroup.
You still want to fight, because the things you are defending (your town, your homes, etc) have value. What a death penalty discourages is people going cowboy and charging randomly into a horde of enemy players.
The only time a death penalty discourages PvP is if what you lose is more valuable to you than what you are defending (i.e. if someone could take all your gear).
Rez-zerging is a tactic for bad PvE raiders, it just shouldnt be viable in a RvR game like this.
Personally I dont think the best solution is a timed rez-sicknesses. Just being spawned away from the fight is enough to remove you from that specific fight for awhile, while still allowing you to engage in other fights that you might run into on your way back. Some kind of harsh penalty is required though if youre going to be able to pop someone back up right there where they fell.
The reason I asked about Rez sickness after releasing is to impose some type of penalty so if the battle is near main city you are not at full power when re-entering the fray
If your realm is so overwhelmed that enemies have pushed you all the way back to just outside your main city then making it harder on them is a safety valve to prevent one realm from just being trapped inside its safe area (very bad for the game). Thats the only time that sort of situation seems acceptable.
How you want your rezzing?
medium rare, please.
(sorry, could not help it
)
Something that really shouldnt be reasonably possible given the negative impact on the game that would have. One of many reasons why I think local rezzing is worse than having people only spawn within their own territory.
The deeper into their own territory they are, the more advantage the defenders should have. The game needs to be balanced so that even the largest two factions together cant completely lock the third into just its own safe area.
There will be NO ITEM LOSS on death in this game
This has potential, but the question is how you define when a keep/town is under attack so you can say the rez points inside are "under attack". Its really not as easy as it sounds.
First of all you have to define the interior of a completely free built structure so that you can say whether anything inside that interior is "under attack".
What happens if there is a gap somewhere in the wall? Does the entire area around the keep become "interior space" so no rez points work? Or does the interior become "exterior space" and the rez points inside still work?
Once you figure that out you have to determine what "under attack" means. Just hitting the wall? How long does that effect last? Can all of the towns in the surrounding area be shut down by solo archers sneaking in and plinking arrows at the walls? That would be a problem. But then if you have to consistently be hitting the walls with siege equipment just to prevent everyone from rezzing right inside thats a problem too.
These are the problems you have to deal with when the world is so heavily sandbox. Complicated solutions sound good, but they lead to problems, bugs, and exploits.
Im still a fan of "you can rez at your nearest house". Its simple and effective. It gives defenders an advantage but mainly just those individuals who live on the territory being attacked or other keeps/towns nearby. It scales up easily because larger walled areas allow more plots with more people living on them.
One way to determine if something is contested (and therefore unusable as a respawn point) is to have it tied to the stabalizers MJ has talked about. Stabalizers would have a certain radius of effectiveness. Any respawn not within the radius of a stabalizer controlled by your realm would not be "stable" enough to be usable. The respawn would only have to be within the radius of one working stabalizer, so you could set up multiple stabalizers that overlap the area of the respawn as a matter of strategy. I would also require the character to "attune" themselves to the particular respawn point prior to dying to use it (the way we had to in DAoC). If the one you were attuned to were shut down, you would revert to the previously attuned point, etc.
I'd be willing to bet that while we will be able to place stabalizers inside keeps, we will not be able to build keeps around respawn points.
Sounds kinda of fun.. and when suggesting ideas about the game, it is wise to try and work them into MJ's ideas, cuz he is the boss, and he is not going to simply change his core ideas for no reason.
I don't think the fine tuning of the system of determining what is under attack and what is not will be that hard. It also really depends on how free form things are. my gut feeling is it will not be like minecraft where you simply claim a area and expand as needed. i think there will be plots that restrict sizes, the plots may be adjacent to another however allowing a semi free form feel. i dunno, if anyone knows what MJ said about this, please link. if the game is truly free form, it may be a "little" hard or computationally expensive to determine things like, where a structure ends? it would not be that hard though. but... these stabilizers could be one method to define a region..
Maybe a healing hall/(rez point) and a stabilizer could just be the same thing... They could have nothing to do with keeps at all per say. what about that idea? To prevenent things from getting to complicated, thats my suggestion
I am not an expert, and I know its not easy, but i dont think it would be that hard
the blocks that build interior "stuff" could just have a flag that ID's it as such, now you might propose the idea that people might cheat and use "outside" flagged items, but to stopthat, you simply make it so you can not build most things on top of something without a proper flagged indoor floor tile.
these are just rough ideas, I can not predict every exploit that will occur. thats what internal/alpha testing should be for.
EDIT, SCRATCH THAT, see below
I would consider it under attack if any block or system was below 95% for more than 60 seconds. and it would reset once its repaired to 100% past 60 seconds. Thats more then enough to address a solo griefer. So a guy trying to using this tactic would need to do 5% damage and wait 1 minute before having any effect. then if defended, it could be repaired quickly to reset it, no restrictions on rebuilding time . at this point, the grier should not be able to keep up with the person repairing, so long as he sticks around. Needless to say, its likely someone will find him by that time if the structure is defended.
you are correct here, not everything is addressed here, this is what internal testing/alpha/beta should be about.
EDIT, actaully there is a better way to deternine with he block system what is under attack in a free form system
simply make it that if one block is below 95% for more than a minute ( like i suggested earlier ), then a large radius around that block becomes under attack, this radius would be larger than a typical keep or castle, large enough that a functioning rez point would be far enough away. if your keep is larger than the radius, then congrats, not all of your keep is under attack, if the radius hits anohter keep or structure, then too bad, its partially/fully under attack too
i still think it will be a plot system however with predefined boarders.
65% currently showing leave it like daoc, only expect the backers forum polls to be more over whelming...
was a good try though chumps... lets do this..
Ozek - DAOC
Niix - Other games that sucked
LOL. Biased poll is biased. It doesnt even include options for most of the things we've been talking about in this thread.
Options A,B, and C = simplisitc, bad, or dont really change much of anything.
Option D = If you like DAOC mechanics better than those options vote here.
Heck, I didnt even vote because all the options are bad.
I doubt anyone at CSE is that bad at making polls.
Never the less what the polls ask, just wait until you get into the masses of daoc fans that want to see things that wern't broken in daoc, also be in CU... just wait.... lolol
ps this is one of them
Ozek - DAOC
Niix - Other games that sucked
I think you'll be surprised by the number of people who dont want to play the exact same game they played in 2001. And if you change some of the mechanics you have to examine and readjust all of them.
You cant just transplant mechanics from one game to another because you are likely to end up with completely different results. Mechanics work a certain way within a given environment.
Hopefully, and it should fall completely on, CSE will properly educate people taking the pole. It could be as simple as making a "Extra Credits" or "Zero Puncuation" like animation explaining the different options to give the person voting the most amount of information possible so they can make the most educated choice. Yes there will be people who won't watch the videos and just blindly vote but hopefully there will be enough people who educate themselves on the potential ideas presented by CSE that a choice is made based on taking everything into consideration and not just "I liked Daoc system so I'll just not try and understand something different and vote for keep it the same." Daoc's rez system wasn't horrible and I wouldn't be upset if they went with it but since MJ has talked about taking chances I feel areas like rezzing, combat, etc. are a place where chances need to be taken. Personally there are systems Daoc uses I feel are outdated and can be redesigned and implemented better. Combat and rezzing being two of them. I backed this game on the hope we'd see Daoc influences in the design not just copy and paste the systems it uses. I'll play it regardless because I'm a fan of RvR and deep crafting/housing systems but I feel they have a chance to get innovative here. We can look at a game like GW 2 and see the good and bad they did. I don't think anyone wants rezzing like we see in GW 2 but I understand why they designed it like that (no dedicated healing classes). You see other areas where they innovated a little and discovered a much better way to do something (Warhammer did it first with PQs but the events in GW 2 were a good way to distance, at least some, from the quest grind).
Basically I hope CSE properly visualizes what they want to do like with what we saw with the building updates. I feel it would be worth taking a little extra time to create short animated videos to help those who can't just listen and understand a visual medium to make a educated choice.
"Rather than love, than money, than fame, give me truth."