Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Sign in to follow this  
Mykro

To Encourage PvP: a necessity for the sustainability of a PvP game

Recommended Posts

People are joking in chat that the name of the game should be "Lumberjack Simulator".... and unfortunately that is kind of true. At the current design, the game is very similar to Age of Conan Bori --- which people joked as boring because people just pve against rocks and trees all day (devs should research this if they are unaware of how this project turned out for Funcom). A little bit of harvesting is fine, but hours upon hours is not. People are not going to stick with a game that is all about the exciting ACTION harvesting (except for a handful of die hard harvesters). 

Another problem I see is the significant loss of durability on death -- I understand the concept on why its in the game, but an inadvertent consequence of this is to discourage pvp. Unless you know you are going to win, there is no point in fighting because you lose so much durability on your gear when you die. 

The game is in danger of becoming one which discourages pvp, and instead encourages "PvRock." I would recommend dramatically reducing durability loss from death. Also please see another post I made about "NPC Workers" (or thralls) which do the actual harvesting for you:

 

I really want this game to be great (I wouldn't have bought a $500 pledge pack otherwise), but I also don't want to play Lumberjack Simulator and PvRock or PvTree all day. 

The game should encourage PvP, not discourage it. 

 

In order for this post to be more useful, does anyone have any other ideas on ways to encourage pvp more? One quick idea, could be that when you kill a player there is a chance they drop an ear, or a scalp, or some other body part that is used in the crafting of vessels/potions. Any other ideas?

 

Thanks,

Mykro, MD

Edited by Mykro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, losing so much durability on your gear when you die discourages PvP. I mean, look at EVE Online, no PvP in that game because when you lose you usually get your ship destroyed, and you can also lose your implants, and you might also lose your skills when you actually die! Let's not make the same mistakes of one of the longest lasting open world PvP games! We must think of just the immediate effects of losing a battle, and not about the economy as a whole. We must stand fast and say, when I buy something, I expect it to last until I find something better! I only want to run around in armor I can not afford to lose! Trading is the key. Buddy that likes to harvest and craft making the armor and weapons and such, you paying and then a killin' you shall go!

Though, I'm not a huge fan of the 'action' harvesting. Counting pips and making sure I execute the action on 4 pips instead of five then getting just one hit in before I use the action again. I think they should just break it up into five different actions and the more pips you use for one the more powerful it is, I hate trying being at four and the tree only needs one more hit to be felled.

 

Edit: grammar, punctuation.

Edited by Stehlen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems to me Mykro that you (and the people you were chatting with) are too focused on the current stage of development. I'd encourage you to seek out a larger perspective. Right now the game could be called many things, and complete isn't one of them.

 

Most of the things that would make an accurate "Crowfall First Impressions" video aren't even in the game yet or are only shells of what they will be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Mykro said:

durability loss from death.

This is necessary for a player-crafted economy to exist. The longer players hold on to one set of gear, the less gameplay there is for crafters.

 

5 hours ago, Mykro said:

A little bit of harvesting is fine, but hours upon hours is not.

This is the problem - the time it takes currently to get the resources for one set of gear is way out of balance. I prefer a ruleset with gear looting because it gives PvPers something to gain from fighting other PvPers, but the only way that works is to have gear be easy to replace (and it is too much grind right now).


tiPrpwh.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm unsure if gathering is too slow or not, or death penalties are too harsh or not... But let me explain what's happening here.

 It's very likely that gathering is too slow and death penalties too harsh for a test nobody gives a crap about. The point of things like gathering times and death penalties is that they make you care about what's going on and become invested. No significant death penalty = I don't care if I die. But in a test environment, you already don't care at all about what's going on so the death penalty seems particularly egregious.

Here are a few important things to keep in mind on this topic:

 

1.  The game is really unfinished. Factories aren't even in yet, and while I don't understand the use or context of a factory when there's no way to mass harvest materials so that gear can be mass produced, I have to trust that what is basically the SWG crafting team has got this one.

2. There's close to zero trade between players on the test realm and no economy. In the live game, if you don't want to gather, you should be able to kill things for stuff, and then sell that stuff and buy crafted goods or raw materials, hopefully all through a structure that can be built in holdings or something. On launch there will be people out there who will gather their asses off, all the time, forever. Don't forget the legions of chinese and russian farmers either.

Furthermore, powerful groups of players will want to sell off their crappy gear that's way too bad for them to even consider wearing, which should help to establish a baseline of gear that the average guy can afford. This will be accelerated even more on full loot Dregs realms. In Darkfall my bank would regularly become full - be rendered nonfunctional - because of the sheer quantity of gear I was hauling in from my nightly murders.

3. As I alluded to in my opening statement, the tedium of harvesting may be equal on test to launch, but the critical difference is that the result of that harvesting, the payoff (getting gear, killing people, taking fortresses, and ultimately winning campaigns) is infinitely more meaningful in the shipped game. On the test realm it's all laggy, buggy nonsense which is why I and the vast majority of people interested in Crowfall rarely bother playing, if ever. Guilds will also work hard to gear up their members so they can actually put up a decent fight, you know, when the game is actually out and people care about that sort of thing.

TL;DR Test =/= Live. Don't overcorrect due to lack of meaning in test.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the replies. I can craft a more complete response later (when im not at work), but I do agree with gear taking too many resources currently. I think some of the basic ingredients (like iron ore, hides) should be reduced by maybe a third.  

You make a good point that things like factories aren't in the game yet, and that the game isn't fully developed at this point-- and that is  why I am bringing this topic up now, so it can be reviewed early on, not after launch once players have developed opinions of the game.

Thanks again all. Good discussion.

Edited by Mykro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/10/2018 at 2:06 AM, Mykro said:

People are joking in chat that the name of the game should be "Lumberjack Simulator".... and unfortunately that is kind of true. At the current design, the game is very similar to Age of Conan Bori --- which people joked as boring because people just pve against rocks and trees all day (devs should research this if they are unaware of how this project turned out for Funcom). A little bit of harvesting is fine, but hours upon hours is not. People are not going to stick with a game that is all about the exciting ACTION harvesting (except for a handful of die hard harvesters). 

Damn, you would also hate Eve Online (opposite to thousands of players playing it) ;)

On 1/10/2018 at 2:06 AM, Mykro said:

Another problem I see is the significant loss of durability on death -- I understand the concept on why its in the game, but an inadvertent consequence of this is to discourage pvp. Unless you know you are going to win, there is no point in fighting because you lose so much durability on your gear when you die. 

This is again similar to eve: you wear only what you can afford lose, I doubt everyone will be eager to run in the most complex/expensive gear all the time. My impression is that you are thinking like a solo player trying to "do something" in game rather than join a guild.

 

On 1/10/2018 at 2:06 AM, Mykro said:

In order for this post to be more useful, does anyone have any other ideas on ways to encourage pvp more? One quick idea, could be that when you kill a player there is a chance they drop an ear, or a scalp, or some other body part that is used in the crafting of vessels/potions. Any other ideas?

I guess that a player dropping loot/resources and/or opening road to capturing an objective will be enough motivation for groups of players to go out hunting in "fleets".
My guess is that will also immidietly be EK's turned into skirmish arenas outside of Campaigns.


You're into FPS aswell? Check out my site: http://gearuptowin.com where you can check what gear does your favorite CS:GO/Overwatch player use!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes Eve has a dedicated base which has played the game for a long time, however it also hasn't been that successful at maintaining a high server population. What is the average view count of twitch users streaming Eve? What is the average server population for Eve? My guess is not that great. So saying "this is how Eve does it, so it must be a good system" isn't necessarily true...

 

Again, I am truly just trying to help the devs, my goal isn't to troll for no reason. The main selling point of CF, and the most anticipated in-game activity, will be its dynamic pvp system. In my opinion, this this dynamic pvp system has a much better chance to maintain the game's popularity, than creating a Harvest Simulator (which will turn off many PvPers from day one and only retain a few hardcore harvesters who enjoy this). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Mykro said:

Yes Eve has a dedicated base which has played the game for a long time, however it also hasn't been that successful at maintaining a high server population. What is the average view count of twitch users streaming Eve? What is the average server population for Eve? My guess is not that great. So saying "this is how Eve does it, so it must be a good system" isn't necessarily true...

 

Again, I am truly just trying to help the devs, my goal isn't to troll for no reason. The main selling point of CF, and the most anticipated in-game activity, will be its dynamic pvp system. In my opinion, this this dynamic pvp system has a much better chance to maintain the game's popularity, than creating a Harvest Simulator (which will turn off many PvPers from day one and only retain a few hardcore harvesters who enjoy this). 

Eve is also horrible at getting new players to stick with the game.  

But to address your concerns, right now you could argue the game plays like this because it is a test, but they also have not truly shown any evidence that they know how to alleviate your concerns.  Furthermore, I'd say they've shown evidence that will lead the game further in the wrong direction.

I understand people love crafting, I understand people love harvesting, but the focus of the game needs to be PvP, and we all know the amount of people that like to strictly focus on PvP completely dwarfs the amount of people that like harvesting and/or crafting.  I think ACE is trying too hard to make all of these elements equal in importance when it doesn't make sense to because most people don't really care or find interest in 2 out of those 3 activities.  


Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a pretty common complaint; hence the name "harvest fall". We can only hope the devs take the feedback and adjust the game accordingly.

Harvesting is not fun and even less so when you're forced to do it to progress your character.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be best for them to make basic gear super easy to attain, green gear very easy to attain, blue gear easy to attain purple gear hard to attain orange gear extremely hard to attain.

The appeal of CF should be getting relevant for PvP quickly and duking it out.  


Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A good system I think would be to have a system in place that tally’s your kills and you get some kind of currency from kills which allows you to purchase pvp resources that can be crafted in to pvp specific gear or something along those lines. Gives pvp players a reason/way to grind also.

And a system like this fulfills the cycle of trading and crafting. There just has to be a system in place that prevents people farming kills on each other over and over .

Edited by VeganLord

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, VeganLord said:

A good system I think would be to have a system in place that tally’s your kills and you get some kind of currency from kills which allows you to purchase pvp resources that can be crafted in to pvp specific gear or something along those lines. Gives pvp players a reason/way to grind also.

And a system like this fulfills the cycle of trading and crafting. There just has to be a system in place that prevents people farming kills on each other over and over .

i don't want pvp currency at all. i want crafters to make my gear or i want to kill someone and take what they have.

On 1/18/2018 at 10:06 AM, Mykro said:

Yes Eve has a dedicated base which has played the game for a long time, however it also hasn't been that successful at maintaining a high server population. What is the average view count of twitch users streaming Eve? What is the average server population for Eve? My guess is not that great. So saying "this is how Eve does it, so it must be a good system" isn't necessarily true...

 

Again, I am truly just trying to help the devs, my goal isn't to troll for no reason. The main selling point of CF, and the most anticipated in-game activity, will be its dynamic pvp system. In my opinion, this this dynamic pvp system has a much better chance to maintain the game's popularity, than creating a Harvest Simulator (which will turn off many PvPers from day one and only retain a few hardcore harvesters who enjoy this). 

Eve maintained a 36k logged in player base over the past year Source. I don't use Twitch as a metric for population, it's a metric for popularity. Much of eve life is boring.

You don't have a full vision of the game systems. You don't know about blueprints or factories. These may change how the gatherer can gather for 3 hours and the crafter to take that and get 25 suits of gear. That alone is enough to not tell the dev's what's wrong with the game. We're playing a test environment which has missing systems. Once all of the systems are in then we can give better feedback on the system. If it still takes 5 hours for one set of advanced gear then yes give feedback.


etDenA9.png
Camaraderie ~ Loyalty ~ Honor ~ Maturity ~ Integrity ~ Duty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Primarily with the earlier topics. I don't think the games economy has been touched to the degree that it will need to be. They just have arbitrary numbers in code for all of us to play the game, not necessarily provide proper economy. My suggestion is to do some math and help them figure out what a good amount of resources gathered per durability lost is.

Edited by KanashiGD

Game Designer | KanashiGD.com | @KanashiGD

Elf of Hy'shen Avari

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, KanashiGD said:

Primarily with the earlier topics. I don't think the games economy has been touched to the degree that it will need to be. They just have arbitrary numbers in code for all of us to play the game, not necessarily provide proper economy. My suggestion is to do some math and help them figure out what a good amount of resources gathered per durability lost is.

if factories allow a gatherer or crafter to increase the usable materials then giving feedback is useless currently. If factories do not multiply the usable resources then we should. Until we know how factories and blueprints will work it's hard to give feedback on the system.


etDenA9.png
Camaraderie ~ Loyalty ~ Honor ~ Maturity ~ Integrity ~ Duty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/9/2018 at 8:06 PM, Mykro said:

People are joking in chat that the name of the game should be "Lumberjack Simulator".... and unfortunately that is kind of true. At the current design, the game is very similar to Age of Conan Bori --- which people joked as boring because people just pve against rocks and trees all day (devs should research this if they are unaware of how this project turned out for Funcom). A little bit of harvesting is fine, but hours upon hours is not. People are not going to stick with a game that is all about the exciting ACTION harvesting (except for a handful of die hard harvesters). 

Another problem I see is the significant loss of durability on death -- I understand the concept on why its in the game, but an inadvertent consequence of this is to discourage pvp. Unless you know you are going to win, there is no point in fighting because you lose so much durability on your gear when you die. 

The game is in danger of becoming one which discourages pvp, and instead encourages "PvRock." I would recommend dramatically reducing durability loss from death. Also please see another post I made about "NPC Workers" (or thralls) which do the actual harvesting for you:

 

I really want this game to be great (I wouldn't have bought a $500 pledge pack otherwise), but I also don't want to play Lumberjack Simulator and PvRock or PvTree all day. 

The game should encourage PvP, not discourage it. 

 

In order for this post to be more useful, does anyone have any other ideas on ways to encourage pvp more? One quick idea, could be that when you kill a player there is a chance they drop an ear, or a scalp, or some other body part that is used in the crafting of vessels/potions. Any other ideas?

 

Thanks,

Mykro, MD

PvP is to be player generated.  That's how it should work.

So long as a CW is POPULATED with people going about their various tasks and points of preferred interest, PvP will take care of itself.  That's all the "encouragement" the game should "legislate" on the player base.

How does the issue of some players focusing on "Lumber jacking", or mining, or whatever, alter someone else's CHOICE to PvP on a PvP map?


“Letting your customers set your standards is a dangerous game, because the race to the bottom is pretty easy to win. Setting your own standards--and living up to them--is a better way to profit. Not to mention a better way to make your day worth all the effort you put into it." - Seth Godin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Bramble said:

PvP is to be player generated.  That's how it should work.

So long as a CW is POPULATED with people going about their various tasks and points of preferred interest, PvP will take care of itself.  That's all the "encouragement" the game should "legislate" on the player base.

How does the issue of some players focusing on "Lumber jacking", or mining, or whatever, alter someone else's CHOICE to PvP on a PvP map?

If PvP isn't rewarded/incentivized [as much as PvRock], yes it will still occur, but not as much as those who want a PvP game would want. A historical concept in past MMOs is "do not force  PvP players to have to PvE." A player should be able to progress at similar rates no matter the type of gameplay they engage in (PvE, PvP, etc.). 

Don't get me wrong, there is some incentive to PvP right now -- you can loot players. PvPer's can also wander the world and loot some resources from chests. However, the current high requirements of resources to make gear, the high durability loss on death, and unimpressive loot from chests makes PvP a very ineffective means of progression. 

If you take a game like Elder Scrolls which rewards PvP, there is a lot of it. If you take black desert, which really only rewards node wars and a daily battleground, you don't see much world pvp -- you see players do node wars and a daily battleground. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Mykro said:

If PvP isn't rewarded/incentivized [as much as PvRock], yes it will still occur, but not as much as those who want a PvP game would want. A historical concept in past MMOs is "do not force  PvP players to have to PvE." A player should be able to progress at similar rates no matter the type of gameplay they engage in (PvE, PvP, etc.). 

Don't get me wrong, there is some incentive to PvP right now -- you can loot players. PvPer's can also wander the world and loot some resources from chests. However, the current high requirements of resources to make gear, the high durability loss on death, and unimpressive loot from chests makes PvP a very ineffective means of progression. 

If you take a game like Elder Scrolls which rewards PvP, there is a lot of it. If you take black desert, which really only rewards node wars and a daily battleground, you don't see much world pvp -- you see players do node wars and a daily battleground. 

If anything looking other players who already harvested, would likely be the most time-efficient way to progress, as it only a short battle to get all the resources they took maybe an hour or more to gather, since your active progression is tied to gear

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Mykro said:

If PvP isn't rewarded/incentivized [as much as PvRock], yes it will still occur, but not as much as those who want a PvP game would want. A historical concept in past MMOs is "do not force  PvP players to have to PvE." A player should be able to progress at similar rates no matter the type of gameplay they engage in (PvE, PvP, etc.). 

Don't get me wrong, there is some incentive to PvP right now -- you can loot players. PvPer's can also wander the world and loot some resources from chests. However, the current high requirements of resources to make gear, the high durability loss on death, and unimpressive loot from chests makes PvP a very ineffective means of progression. 

If you take a game like Elder Scrolls which rewards PvP, there is a lot of it. If you take black desert, which really only rewards node wars and a daily battleground, you don't see much world pvp -- you see players do node wars and a daily battleground. 

That players have to be "paid" anymore for PvP to be meaningful is one of the great fallacies in MMORPG PvP anymore.  And it's a nasty, insidious rot that isn't immediately apparent if your eyes are easily glazed by "pay me my money-zors so it's worthwhile."

Thus, as was found in Archeage for example, you have people who dual-log alts and enter arena sessions to farm THEMSELVES for . . . Honor points.  The currency rewarded to those who wanted to PvP.  So nice to actually avoid PvP if the system can be gamed for the loots.

First we hold up PvP as this Great Thing that other modes of game play must be subordinate to, then in the same breath we say it has to have the same reward dynamic as a "less dangerous", or "less skillful" mode of game play.

No.

You want PvE activities to have as many rewards, as many incentives, as much diversity and character as possible . . . within the framework of this game as makes sense (e.g. no quest chains to "level") . . . to PACK as many players as possible into willing CW participation.

Going about their business, being motivated to go find that leather / ore / ruins / (whatever).  

At which point PvP is, without fail, going to take care of itself.  Because others are going to want the fruits of their labor, are going to want to protect or attack that caravan, are going to have ambushes setup at farming spots, etc.

Because that's human nature.


“Letting your customers set your standards is a dangerous game, because the race to the bottom is pretty easy to win. Setting your own standards--and living up to them--is a better way to profit. Not to mention a better way to make your day worth all the effort you put into it." - Seth Godin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You don't need to create extra incentives for PvP when you're giving people all the stuff in a guys pocket for killing him, and the guy has to open himself up to getting murdered to get that stuff in the first place. That poorly made socks sorts itself out quite handily. Shadowbane's design worked quite well for years using exactly this design, only in that case the "gathering" was looting mobs and the daily attempt to flip some mines. If you give people something valuable to fight over, people will fight over it.

Whether the specifics of the cost of gathering, the impact of passive income from trading, factories, or thralls, and other stuff will alleviate the current situation where every single player feels compelled to craft all their own stuff is another matter. Ideally harvesting SHOULD be valuable and enjoyable for the harvester, and crafting SHOULD take some time and effort because if it does not there's no incentive for other players to trade for gear rather than make it themselves. Not only that, but there's a very real situation of wolves and sheep. You WANT people to WANT to do all that gathering and crafting because those players become objectives for attack and defense and make combat meaningful. I can go play quake if I want to fight over scoreboard points. If I'm playing an MMO I want to attack and defend over stuff that matters, and that means that for me to GAIN something of value, someone else must also LOSE something of value. For that stuff to have value it has to have effort attached to it because the only currency that has any real value in a video game is time. Time spent gathering. Time spent rolling poorly made socksty crafting rolls to get that really good one. Time spent building siege engines or walls or trees. Time spent running all the way across the map and back to get that t10 material in to the hands of a skilled crafter.

We're not missing an incentive to PVP. We're simply missing an economy that allows people to trade the results of their preferred style of play for the results of someone else's preferred style of play. Right now everyone is determined to make their own stuff because they don't have to make any long term choices about their playstyle. Everyone has access to crafting everything, everyone can respecialize completely from pvp builds to gathering builds for any type of material for practically nothing, and as a result there's no incentive (or working UI or database or even currency) to sell your "thing you do" in order to buy someone else's "thing they do"

"PvP currency" is just a reward for indiscriminate violence (mostly against alts) that doesn't encourage people to fight over anything BUT pvp currency, which in turn causes the game to devolve in to one giant glorified deathmatch or afk macro fest where nobody ganks anybody, nobody fights over resource spots, nobody gives a poorly made socks about losing control of any objectives, and nothing matters but pvp currency. I signed up for a game where stuff matters because the lead designers of this game made other great games I really enjoyed where stuff mattered. I didn't sign up to have whizbang 24/7 pvp on demand. I can get that in other genres that are much better designed for it.


PopeSigGIF.gif

Rub rock on face and say "Yes food is eaten now time for fight"

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
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...