Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Deloria

Pollice Verso

Recommended Posts

That's basically limiting player's decisions based on what somebody decides is the "right" thing to do in a situation for a certain playstyle. Why can't I be merciless in crushing my enemies? Why must, if I want crit or speed boosts, have to take certain moral codes?

 

I don't like engineering player behavior in such a blunt way. Mechanics that incentivize players to branch out is fine, but these sorts of systems you recommend limit playstyles to very strict and linear behavior.

 

I truly don't see how any sort of honor or mercy system can work here without destroying individuality.

We're not limiting anything :P  - its offering choices.. because its just as easy to balance with other mechanisms.. including a penalty to negate every bonus.

 

Just like a reputation system: Scoring favour with one faction causes negative rep with another..

 

SO an honor system could be negated by a dishonour system. Mercy with mercilessness.

 

The only difference is really how simple people want their game to be..

Some people want a straight forward shoot'em'up - others love delving into numbers and stats.. and still other favour strategy. Others like political games and intruigue - psychological or otherwise.

 

Games are becoming more and more sophisticated.. One of the key "selling points" of Crowfall is the diverse character skillsets. Another is that campaigns will offer multiple rulesets - multiple scenarios - a huge number of possibilities.

 

It's about choices - and it may not be YOUR choice but it would be mind :P Hence I stuck it in the suggestion box.

Edited by Deloria

www.CrowfallRP.com


Disclaimer: My RP with you might become a public story: https://soundcloud.com/shiv-mahon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I daresay there already is such an option. It's called the "just don't kill them" option. Additionally, if you don't want to loot them, don't loot them. So why adding a system for something that already can be done?

 

But i agree that implying the final blow principle into gameplay would be nice and would make killing a clearer decision.

 

I don't think that anything else would be needed to give the gameplay opportunities. The game could even simply relate your knock downs to your death blows to give you your merciful/merciless titles. Likewise your number of looted corpses.

 

I think we should bear some things in mind

  • ACE's actual priority is to get the game shipped. Everything that will cost additional time is likely to be not considered seriously. If it doesn't bring in extraordinary gain at a low cost. Though such things may be reconsidered after release. 
  • The players are the main content. The game silver lining is to give us players the opportunities to be and create content. (to say: implying the final blow principle is such an opportunity, but building a huge honor system is content - the last one has to be done by ourselves)
  • Real life is a good reference, but not the best. Todd made this clear very early by stating funism > realism. (to say: it won't happen that you will be bound 20 seconds for looting.)

 

tl;dr

Implying a final blow principle is a thumbs up ;) from me. But i don't think that something more complicated will happen, especially not before release. This is mostly stuff we will have to do ourselves, if we want to do so.

Why do we have deities?

 

And since we have them - how can they add interesting dynamics to the game?

At the moment theyre just "team colors"..

 

But - For example we already have the possibility of temples and statues to gain buffs.. One could argue that's the beginning of the honor system right there.. 

 

What if for example players in the chaos side of things could gain the infamy bonus by "sacrificing" their fallen opponenets - whilst the Order crowd gain "honor" by sparing them.

 

Isnt that following a game dynamic that would make deity choices more interesting? It give players a reason to stick to a certain deity. It would give a greater sense of purpose in choosing one. What kind of player you are defines your choices now.

 

I think that's interesting. 

 

You can call it an artificial game mechanic if you like.. but every game mechanic is really. Game mechanics are simplified replications of how things exist in the real world. 

 

And,. as regards Dev priorities.. as long as they have a suggestions box in their forums I will keep suggesting stuff :) Its up to them to choose their priorities - not me - But I hope there are toolkits that focus on the dynamic social aspects of the game.

Edited by Deloria

www.CrowfallRP.com


Disclaimer: My RP with you might become a public story: https://soundcloud.com/shiv-mahon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another reason why this would not work well is that It completely disrupts the flow of large scale combat and to a lesser degree small gang fights. When a player goes down he should be down. The next thing on your mind should be the next target. There should be no need to break ranks to perform some anime style "finish him" move or RP'ing "I smite thee" dialog choice. The player that died certainly doesn't want to wait for this GvG battle to end before respawning because you haven't decided his fate. On the other hand, if you we have a countdown timer for you to decide his fate, this will pressure you to break ranks. This is a no win situation. You either ignore the timer rendering it useless or you abandon the group momentarily to decide and perhaps even get yourself killed.

 

After the battle go loot your foes and move on.

Edited by Vasnyr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another reason why this would not work well is that It completely disrupts the flow of large scale combat and to a lesser degree small gang fights. 

I don't think its a great idea either, but I don't think this is the reason.

 

You could easily have a 5 second timer that defaults to "kill." To me something like this wouldn't be any different than the possibility of looting a player after a PvP encounter or skinning and eviscerating them for their organs and such as a necromancer. It would be set up so that it was an option that defaulted to kill IMO. At least if one were inclined to put this in the game (I'd not be).

 

Some jackwads already stop to loot during PvP. They shouldn't, but they do.

Edited by coolwaters

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 seconds? So you are going to abandon the fight so you can go smite a player or are you going to ignore the timer? Either way you just proved my point above.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another reason why this would not work well is that It completely disrupts the flow of large scale combat and to a lesser degree small gang fights. When a player goes down he should be down. The next thing on your mind should be the next target. There should be no need to break ranks to perform some anime style "finish him" move or RP'ing "I smite thee" dialog choice. The player that died certainly doesn't want to wait for this GvG battle to end before respawning because you haven't decided his fate. On the other hand, if you we have a countdown timer for you to decide his fate, this will pressure you to break ranks. This is a no win situation. You either ignore the timer rendering it useless or you abandon the group momentarily to decide and perhaps even get yourself killed.

 

After the battle go loot your foes and move on.

I just don't think this is true - that "down but not out " mechanism is in a lot of games - including first person shooters. Its a cool team play thing to be able to dive in in the nick of team to help a fallen comrade.. I did it on xbox loads of times. Its also nerve-wracking when you're laying on the ground bleeding your guts out and screaming for the guy on the sofa next to you to come get me come get me!!! but of course they're swarmed by enemies.

 

Its a far far more interesting gameplay mechanism than "Bang you're dead." IMHO Its better for group play. Its better for solo play. Whats not to like? saying "oh it will never work" is entirely subjective. It works for a lot of games and a lot of people just fine.

 

Also When you get to loot shouldnt be an artificially impsed constraint. "You can only loot after the battle" might be the more sensible choice but .. by enforcing it you actually restrict player choice for the sake of simplicity. If a player wants ot be a sneaky bugger and loot the corpses you all had a hand in killing that should be their choice. Ninja looting is a valid gameplay mechanic too.

Edited by Deloria

www.CrowfallRP.com


Disclaimer: My RP with you might become a public story: https://soundcloud.com/shiv-mahon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We're not limiting anything :P  - its offering choices.. because its just as easy to balance with other mechanisms.. including a penalty to negate every bonus.

 

Just like a reputation system: Scoring favour with one faction causes negative rep with another..

 

SO an honor system could be negated by a dishonour system. Mercy with mercilessness.

 

The only difference is really how simple people want their game to be..

Some people want a straight forward shoot'em'up - others love delving into numbers and stats.. and still other favour strategy. Others like political games and intruigue - psychological or otherwise.

 

Games are becoming more and more sophisticated.. One of the key "selling points" of Crowfall is the diverse character skillsets. Another is that campaigns will offer multiple rulesets - multiple scenarios - a huge number of possibilities.

 

It's about choices - and it may not be YOUR choice but it would be mind :P Hence I stuck it in the suggestion box.

 

How might you balance those who aren't fully merciful or merciless? The more neutral parties? Why is it even important to give bonuses for player choices in-game? They've built their character, there's the diversity, but now you're saying that building your character further will depend on how you play the game: you're limiting building variety by having one's stats or skillset be directly attached to how they play the game. You're either limiting playstyle in those who want certain builds, or limiting builds for those who enjoy a certain playstyle. Either way, you limit them rather than diversify.

 

Choices doesn't necessarily mean more diversity in the player base. In fact, certain ones, such as this, may even pigeonhole players into a very simplistic design which forces their behavior rather than encourages freedom to play how one wants.

Edited by Dondagora

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How might you balance those who aren't fully merciful or merciless? The more neutral parties?

 

Off the top of my head... Merciful players get a bonus of up to 6 mercy buffs for merciful acts. merciless get up to 6 merciless buffs. A neutral player can have 3 of each. Or instead make it they can cleanse a chaos / order players buffs if they kill them.... or make it so they get a material advantage for every kill that chaos / order players dont get... or that they can choose what they like but only 5..

How difficult was that really?

 

Why is it even important to give bonuses for player choices in-game?

 

Because thats kind of a major plot device in every game that ever existed? 

Ever visited a mana shrine? A healing well? Ever stood in a Safe zone? Stood on high ground and rained arrows down? Attacked an unprepared enemy? Bonuses can be gained through strategy, timing, skill, opportunity, game devices, luck or teamplay... to name a few. I simply describe bonuses based on social interaction and moral choices because frankly Crowfall is supposed to be more intelligent than your average MOBA.

 

They've built their character, there's the diversity, but now you're saying that building your character further will depend on how you play the game: you're limiting building variety by having one's stats or skillset be directly attached to how they play the game.

 

No. All those customisations in their character dont mean a thing if they are locked into the same ruleset every single time they play.. Diversity in METHOD of playing is as important as diversity in the character.. Ideally EVERY choice you make - moral or strategic - should have a game affecting consequence.  Thats true diversity and true emergent gameplay.

 

I think I'm offering a meaningful choice for the METHODS by which they're going to play.. Gameplay affecting consequences based on behavioural aspects of the players choices and playing style.

This includes their preferences towards for example moral choices.. Honor is an actual thing to some players. Being seen as a good sport is also very important.. Chivalry... Sportsmanship.. These things dont just occur in the movies. Players do actually appreciate being given opportunities to demonstrate them... the fact they are also reflected in game choices is only a good thing. To be rewarded for being good by the god of good - and getting a Kudos.. a buff... or being cursed for it.. or getting some gold... or a shiny title. This is not a bad thing.

 

You're either limiting playstyle in those who want certain builds, or limiting builds for those who enjoy a certain playstyle. Either way, you limit them rather than diversify.

 

This is not true. For example: Offering moral choices does not limit players.. Right now you have to choose a deity whether you want to or not. You MUST be Order neutral or Chaos. SO now I add morality to the mix: Good, Ambivilent or Evil.

 

Is being given a choice between being chaotic good and lawful ambivalent limiting a player more than simply Chaotic and Lawful? 

 

Choices doesn't necessarily mean more diversity in the player base. In fact, certain ones, such as this, may even pigeonhole players into a very simplistic design which forces their behavior rather than encourages freedom to play how one wants.

 

I'm not sure what this means.. Of course offering more choices - if they are interesting ones - adds diversity. Some players would prefer to be offered moral choices that chaos / order ones.

 

Good and Evil, by the way is a perfectly valid game mechanic in almost every game, movie, book and tv show that has ever come before us.. so saying "it won't work cos ppl dont like to be faced with moral choices" or "it limits players by making them choose" ... you can see that this doesnt really stand up to the evidence, right?


www.CrowfallRP.com


Disclaimer: My RP with you might become a public story: https://soundcloud.com/shiv-mahon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

How might you balance those who aren't fully merciful or merciless? The more neutral parties?

 

Off the top of my head... Merciful players get a bonus of up to 6 mercy buffs for merciful acts. merciless get up to 6 merciless buffs. A neutral player can have 3 of each. Or instead make it they can cleanse a chaos / order players buffs if they kill them.... or make it so they get a material advantage for every kill that chaos / order players dont get... or that they can choose what they like but only 5..

How difficult was that really?

 

Why is it even important to give bonuses for player choices in-game?

 

Because thats kind of a major plot device in every game that ever existed? 

Ever visited a mana shrine? A healing well? Ever stood in a Safe zone? Stood on high ground and rained arrows down? Attacked an unprepared enemy? Bonuses can be gained through strategy, timing, skill, opportunity, game devices, luck or teamplay... to name a few. I simply describe bonuses based on social interaction and moral choices because frankly Crowfall is supposed to be more intelligent than your average MOBA.

 

They've built their character, there's the diversity, but now you're saying that building your character further will depend on how you play the game: you're limiting building variety by having one's stats or skillset be directly attached to how they play the game.

 

No. All those customisations in their character dont mean a thing if they are locked into the same ruleset every single time they play.. Diversity in METHOD of playing is as important as diversity in the character.. Ideally EVERY choice you make - moral or strategic - should have a game affecting consequence.  Thats true diversity and true emergent gameplay.

 

I think I'm offering a meaningful choice for the METHODS by which they're going to play.. Gameplay affecting consequences based on behavioural aspects of the players choices and playing style.

This includes their preferences towards for example moral choices.. Honor is an actual thing to some players. Being seen as a good sport is also very important.. Chivalry... Sportsmanship.. These things dont just occur in the movies. Players do actually appreciate being given opportunities to demonstrate them... the fact they are also reflected in game choices is only a good thing. To be rewarded for being good by the god of good - and getting a Kudos.. a buff... or being cursed for it.. or getting some gold... or a shiny title. This is not a bad thing.

 

You're either limiting playstyle in those who want certain builds, or limiting builds for those who enjoy a certain playstyle. Either way, you limit them rather than diversify.

 

This is not true. For example: Offering moral choices does not limit players.. Right now you have to choose a deity whether you want to or not. You MUST be Order neutral or Chaos. SO now I add morality to the mix: Good, Ambivilent or Evil.

 

Is being given a choice between being chaotic good and lawful ambivalent limiting a player more than simply Chaotic and Lawful? 

 

Choices doesn't necessarily mean more diversity in the player base. In fact, certain ones, such as this, may even pigeonhole players into a very simplistic design which forces their behavior rather than encourages freedom to play how one wants.

 

I'm not sure what this means.. Of course offering more choices - if they are interesting ones - adds diversity. Some players would prefer to be offered moral choices that chaos / order ones.

 

Good and Evil, by the way is a perfectly valid game mechanic in almost every game, movie, book and tv show that has ever come before us.. so saying "it won't work cos ppl dont like to be faced with moral choices" or "it limits players by making them choose" ... you can see that this doesnt really stand up to the evidence, right?

 

 

I'll address a few things: Methods do make the difference, methods are effective or ineffective. It isn't a matter of good or evil [frankly because that's subjective, though this is more a philosophical point]. Do the merciless thing, perhaps people will get sick of your cheap methods and gang up on you. Risk and reward. Do the "sportsman-like" thing, and you'll have a fair fight while other players might respect you more for competing with such a strategy.

 

Honor exists in-game, I simply do not feel it needs to be incentivized. People will be honorable and dishonorable on their own accord, no need to reward them for being themselves, or performing acts that aren't necessarily "themselves" for the sake of buffs.

 

By killing diversity, I mean this system rewards people for "acting" honorable or "acting" merciless and so on. Social actions, however, will have social rewards. They may not be large [one person respecting you for your methods after 1v1], but that's how the real world, which you brought up a bit before, works. Real world honor is an accumulation of numerous acts, not gaining immediate benefit. That's the social game I see which this system you bring up seems to diminish [as it lessens the noticeable "mediocrity" which the honorable or merciless or merciful stand out from].

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just don't think this is true - that "down but not out " mechanism is in a lot of games - including first person shooters. Its a cool team play thing to be able to dive in in the nick of team to help a fallen comrade..

 

The last MMO I played with a mechanic like this was GW2 and I hated it. After shooting my enemy 10 times in the face he goes down with a new health bar! Now he's throwing rocks at me, teleporting, throwing enemies back and whatever else. Oh yes and frantically mashing buttons like a 10 year old at Chuck E. Cheese's to "bandage" himself. Never mind the arrows sticking out of his face. This stuff is far too gamey for me. Not that this is exactly what you're proposing but I am sorry, i just don't like it.

 

Like I said before, it's a system with a built in double negative. You either ignore the timer rendering it useless or you abandon your team for a period while you role play thumbs up or down, or die trying. There is nothing you can say to convince me otherwise. :)

Edited by Vasnyr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that's interesting. 

 

[...] as long as they have a suggestions box in their forums I will keep suggesting stuff :)

 

Absolutely. I just shared my assessment that a more complicated honor system is unlikely to happen before release.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we're talking about hidden stats.

 

 

The last MMO I played with a mechanic like this was GW2 and I hated it. After shooting my enemy 10 times in the face he goes down with a new health bar! Now he's throwing rocks at me, teleporting, throwing enemies back and whatever else. Oh yes and frantically mashing buttons like a 10 year old at Chuck E. Cheese's to "bandage" himself. Never mind the arrows sticking out of his face. This stuff is far too gamey for me. Not that this is exactly what you're proposing but I am sorry, i just don't like it.

 

Like I said before, it's a system with a built in double negative. You either ignore the timer rendering it useless or you abandon your team for a period while you role play thumbs up or down, or die trying. There is nothing you can say to convince me otherwise. :)

 

Im not sure how to relate this to what I'm describing.. the whole point of a down and out system is that people can't act unless revived - Offering an opportunity for a final blow or saving grace action. 

 

Gears of War - Albion Online - Any squad co-op game in the past 10 years... its a very common and well recieved gameplay mechanic. I think what you're describing sounds very iffy. I can't help it if GW2 implemented it badly :P Plenty of games implement it well.

Edited by Deloria

www.CrowfallRP.com


Disclaimer: My RP with you might become a public story: https://soundcloud.com/shiv-mahon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we're talking about hidden stats.

 

 

 

Im not sure how to relate this to what I'm describing.. the whole point of a down and out system is that people can't act unless revived - Offering an opportunity for a final blow or saving grace action. 

 

Gears of War - Albion Online - Any squad co-op game in the past 10 years... its a very common and well recieved gameplay mechanic. I think what you're describing sounds very iffy. I can't help it if GW2 implemented it badly :P Plenty of games implement it well.

 

None of the games you mention here are really mass PVP games, Albion is dead before release. GW2 on the other hand tried to be a mass PVP game but it was very boring with a fixed world and structures. I have no idea how they expanded the game because I left before that. I simply used it as an example to point out the negatives of a system similar to what you are proposing. You still haven't addressed my primary contention:

 

"Like I said before, it's a system with a built in double negative. You either ignore the timer rendering it a useless mechanic or you abandon your team for a period while you role play thumbs up or down, or die trying. There is nothing you can say to convince me otherwise."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll address a few things: Methods do make the difference, methods are effective or ineffective. It isn't a matter of good or evil [frankly because that's subjective, though this is more a philosophical point]. Do the merciless thing, perhaps people will get sick of your cheap methods and gang up on you. Risk and reward. Do the "sportsman-like" thing, and you'll have a fair fight while other players might respect you more for competing with such a strategy.

 

Honor exists in-game, I simply do not feel it needs to be incentivized. People will be honorable and dishonorable on their own accord, no need to reward them for being themselves, or performing acts that aren't necessarily "themselves" for the sake of buffs.

 

I think this is the big point - and its OK I respect your perspective: We disagree because I think EVERY player decision or interaction in a game can be turned into an interesting game mechanic. This is about the evolution of games. And the VAST majority of gamers enjoy Moral dilemmas as part of their entertainment, because it speaks to us as human beings.

 

 

By killing diversity, I mean this system rewards people for "acting" honorable or "acting" merciless and so on. Social actions, however, will have social rewards. They may not be large [one person respecting you for your methods after 1v1], but that's how the real world, which you brought up a bit before, works. Real world honor is an accumulation of numerous acts, not gaining immediate benefit. That's the social game I see which this system you bring up seems to diminish [as it lessens the noticeable "mediocrity" which the honorable or merciless or merciful stand out from].

 

A player walking into this system now has better reasons for choosing to be "Chaos or Order" or going with a cretain deity - because it corresponds to WHO they are (or in an RP sense who their character is)  - not simply what they think the coolest crest is... 

 

When "rewards pop up" in game they are rewards for you succeeding in your playing style. This is important and welcome regardless if its cos you played a Guinea pig or cos you played a goody-two-shoes. Moral alignment is simply another attribute of the character.. It's worked in plenty of games and has been a staple of rpgs since before I was born - so I dont understand the idea that its a restrictive mechanism.. no definitely not.

By any standard it is something you find in the most immersive and most character driven games and stories. The trick is to use it right.

 

"Encouraging players to play nice" is not the same as forcing them to.. the game should have equal encouragements for players to play nice or mean or indifferently. 

 

But now a whole new world of game mechanics can open up.

What if you are aligned to a "good" god - like Cybele - but actually play as a complete psycho... would she renounce you? Would Malaki headhunt you for his team?

 

Would you start seeing certain bonuses, based on honor/ dishonour as a hidden stat? 

Could they be transferred to guild? To campaign?

 

Would the nature of a players game actually be affected? Whould they hesitate to kill certain players? Would teams turn on each other when faced with disparate and confusing moral choices...

 

This stuff is epic Emergent gameplay... all possible with a simple hidden honor system / morality alignment. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Deloria

www.CrowfallRP.com


Disclaimer: My RP with you might become a public story: https://soundcloud.com/shiv-mahon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

None of the games you mention here are really mass PVP games, Albion is dead before release. GW2 on the other hand tried to be a mass PVP game but it was very boring with a fixed world and structures. I have no idea how they expanded the game because I left before that. I simply used it as an example to point out the negatives of a system similar to what you are proposing. You still haven't addressed my primary contention:

 

"Like I said before, it's a system with a built in double negative. You either ignore the timer rendering it a useless mechanic or you abandon your team for a period while you role play thumbs up or down, or die trying. There is nothing you can say to convince me otherwise."

 

But youre talking about combat.. and Im trying to answer you on combat. PvP is arguably about combat..and this particular mechanism is specifically about killing blows in combat. Almost every new combat orientated game these days has this mechanism - because it works so well.

 

Its clear you don't want it but... respectfully "Do not want." is not the same as "Is no good."


www.CrowfallRP.com


Disclaimer: My RP with you might become a public story: https://soundcloud.com/shiv-mahon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But youre talking about combat.. and Im trying to answer you on combat. PvP is arguably about combat..and this particular mechanism is specifically about killing blows in combat. Almost every new combat orientated game these days has this mechanism - because it works so well.

 

Its clear you don't want it but... respectfully "Do not want." is not the same as "Is no good."

 

If you are going to continue ignoring the clear negatives I pointed out then i have no more reason to post in this thread. This is my last attempt...

 

"Like I said before, it's a system with a built in double negative. You either ignore the timer rendering it a useless mechanic or you abandon your team for a period while you role play thumbs up or down, or die trying. There is nothing you can say to convince me otherwise."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you are going to continue ignoring the clear negatives I pointed out then i have no more reason to post in this thread. This is my last attempt...

 

"Like I said before, it's a system with a built in double negative. You either ignore the timer rendering it a useless mechanic or you abandon your team for a period while you role play thumbs up or down, or die trying. There is nothing you can say to convince me otherwise."

 

 

I'm sorry - I just don't see this at all. It would only be a negative if it was badly implemented. And this would be a very easy system to implement quite well.

 

Every action has some delay.. drawing a bow string has a delay.. switching a weapon has a delay.. why should "performing finishing move" or "looting corpse" not have a delay - the same as "harvesting node"?

 

If someone stops in the middle of battle to harvest a gold ore should they be able to one click it to inventory? Surely looting a corpse should have an equal penalty. 

 

I can try and describe what I think would be one (of an infinite number of ways) to implement it:

 

 

 

A good implementation would be a "Killing blow" skill.. with two differnet hotkeyable skills to represent the killing blow: "Execute" and "Saving Grace": 

 

You dont HAVE TO perform a killing blow.. you cna just let them bleed out. The advantage of performing a killing blow is: It ensures they arent revived.. The disadvantage is it takes 3 seconds to perform the flourish.

 

If you bring your opponent to zero hp they collapse on the floor.. their screen goes red.. they cant do anything unless someone revives them within 20 seconds... if noone does they die and their corpse is lootable (which normally takes a few seconds... like a harvesting penalty to kind of discourage people from live fire looting).

 

Any player choosing to loot in a live battlefield is doing the same thing as someone finding a rare ore and deciding to stop to mine it.. its greedy and reckless - but valid gameplay: It does need that time penalty though. One click looting is just lazy design and should have died with diablo.

 

 

So in this system:

Every player has access to 2 killing blow moves that can be performed on a downed player: 1 is called Execute... if you use execute on a downed player within that 20 seconds you kill them and autoloot them (and a hidden "honor" stat system records 1 merciless point). First to Execute is first to autoloot... major advantage - so we could balance that out with a weight penalty if we like.

 

The other killing blow move would be "saving grace" - if you use it on a downed foe within 20 seconds you "send them back to their god" and their corpse will not be lootable when they die. Your hidden "honor" stat system records one "merciful" point.

 

 

So really, in combat its about how fast you can press a hotkey on a downed player.. regarding the killing blow skills: most players will prefer one or the other.. for some it would be situational.. (I will execute on a regular basis, cos i like the loot -  but if I meet a good player or low level player (where the loot will be crap) I might spare them).

 

SO now you have a system that REFLECTS the moral preferences of the player, or at least the gameplay versions of the moral preferences: 

 

You also have an honor system that defines morality as a game mechanic and now you can start to introduce other systems in to take advantage of it. Buffs, Titles, Godly favours.

 

At the extreme end being too much of one or the other might lose you the favoure of your god - making you an outright outcast on the battelfield.. A pariah even to your own Guild! In the Dregs this would have extreme consequences - and even purposeful betrayals (Im gonna switch my alignment half way through and go to the other side)... which is what a throne wars system should be all about.

 

So as to your double negatives. No they dont exist if a system is implemented correctly - but all systems are negatives if they aren't.

 

This system offers players choices and doesnt get in the way of combat but actually enhances it:

We have introduced a "Downed teammate revival system" A hidden "Honor" stat system.. real moral choices and some cool finishing blows. We have the possibility of defining future strategic implications to campaigns based on moral choices - and we can totally shake up the battlefield if we like based upon how players choose to play.

Edited by Deloria

www.CrowfallRP.com


Disclaimer: My RP with you might become a public story: https://soundcloud.com/shiv-mahon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry - I just don't see this at all. (...)

snip

 

How about no to this whole system ?

When my enemy Health bar hits 0, I expect two things : Death Animation and then Interaction with corpse.(looting / taking body parts or ressurection if game permits).

 

What you are propossing makes it complicated for no reason at all.

 

Why would someone want to spare opponent ? Because you are cool guy or what ? Everyone should be after items, fast victory and stuff. 

What if I did kill someone and want to kill him and someone ''spares him'' ? I want his loot after all, easy to exploit.

And if I am only one that has to choose : Why I am getting some kind of autoloot adventage ? What kind of stupid proposal is this.

Why are you putting ranged classes at disadventage of having to run up to place where enemy lies ?

 

 

This system is complete trash with so many problems this few questions don't even begin to describe it.

Why should even MORAL system provide any adventages or disaventages ? ITS MORAL, so it has no implication. 

Please no BS about buffs from gods or any outcast things. Decide it yourself not by in game system.

 

Btw where are those PVP MMOS that have this system that's so great that nowadays everyone has it ?

Coop games ? Then go play coops, here we do have PVP mmo.

Albion ? Widly recognized only by its poorly made socksty PvP system. Let it die.

Gw2 was already mentioned, death system is bad there to say at least.

Edited by Naur

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about no to this whole system ?

When my enemy Health bar hits 0, I expect two things : Death Animation and then Interaction with corpse.(looting / taking body parts or ressurection if game permits).

 

We get it.. you like simple stuff. Any moba on a mobile phone offers you this. <.<

 

 

What you are propossing makes it complicated for no reason at all.

 

Complicated doesnt equal bad.. having 10 choices is more complicated than having two. Tetris isn't complicated. Immersion and emergent gameplay is FUNDAMENTALLY about choice and complexity. I wanna bang my head when ppl here beg so hard for Crowfall to be something new and different and emergent and then start raiging at the thought of "too complicated."

Ive explained using far more words that I should need to why theres GOOD reason for it - but feck it Im hyped on coke so heres some more. 

 

Why would someone want to spare opponent ? Because you are cool guy or what ? Everyone should be after items, fast victory and stuff. 

 

Are you kidding? Not everyone is a rabid 12 year old psycho. If theres a diplomatic or political incentive to spare them - or I can get a 100 million bounty by delivering them to a judge alive then so be it. Again EMERGENT.

 

What if I did kill someone and want to kill him and someone ''spares him'' ? I want his loot after all, easy to exploit.

 

Youre only thinking about you.. This is about offering choices to hundreds of thousands of players..some of whom dont play like you. Youre describing a MOBA. Im describing an mmo thats trying to offer depth and emergence.

 

And if I am only one that has to choose : Why I am getting some kind of autoloot adventage ? What kind of stupid proposal is this.

 

I actually think you might not be fully understanding what Im trying to write. Is english your first language? I can try again if its not clear but I think I have been, and to be honest when you're so hostile as to call me stupid - why bother? You're not here to discuss - you're here to disparage.

 

Why are you putting ranged classes at disadventage of having to run up to place where enemy lies ?

 

Cos..you know.. If you want to loot abody you kinda have to bew next to the body. Or you think the corpse should mail their stuff to you? If theres no looting the final blow doesnt need to be next to the body. Im not sure why this wasnt obvious. I think you just wanted an argument.

 

This system is complete trash with so many problems this few questions don't even begin to describe it.

 

Why should even MORAL system provide any adventages or disaventages ? ITS MORAL, so it has no implication. 

Please no BS about buffs from gods or any outcast things. Decide it yourself not by in game system.

 

Just.. wow.

 

Btw where are those PVP MMOS that have this system that's so great that nowadays everyone has it ?

Coop games ? Then go play coops, here we do have PVP mmo.

Albion ? Widly recognized only by its poorly made socksty PvP system. Let it die.

Gw2 was already mentioned, death system is bad there to say at least.

 

First: It doesnt make sense to use example of bad systems to say "it wont work - isn't it better to say "it wont work if its done badly and here's an example." I already used several other games to describe where it works well. secondly, and as far as I know:

 

Divergence online (also with permadeath).

 

Trials of ascension (also with limited life respawn count)

 

Wizardry Online (ash system meant if you didnt revive in time you were permadeathed).

 

Shaiya (also with permadeath unlocked at lvl 40).

 

What you think Crowfall is the only hardcore PvP game? This system works even in permadeath scenarios.

 

Anyway.. I think this is the last time Im gonna respond to you.. Frankly youre hostile and here to cause an argument - and thats a real pity.

Edited by Deloria

www.CrowfallRP.com


Disclaimer: My RP with you might become a public story: https://soundcloud.com/shiv-mahon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...