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

PVP Etiquette: Rules sets, 1 vs 1, ganks, and camping.


Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Ok so while I will give my own opinion on this I'm not going to be saying I'm right here.  I want to hear what everyone else feels about how we want to behave as a community in our PVP game and where your personal lines are.  This was inspired by some recent events but is not directly focused on them as I believe there is a much larger discussion to be had. 


Guild vs Guild: This is PVP land, enter at your own risk.  It's a harsh and unforgiving land that you should expect more quarter in.  Kill, camp, gank, zerg, stealth, etc.  No such thing as an even or fair fight, only victory or defeat.  If it's not actual cheating like cross realming then use every tool to dominate.  I'd say don't be a dack about it, but honestly if that's the rep you want then go for it.  No kid gloves in GvG.

Infected:  1/2 tutorial, 1/4 farming, 1/4 faction PVP.  This is where all our newbies the game teaches nothing get funneled.  IMO this should be where we help and teach those players and we should engage in regular PVP and try to win, but we should also try not to crush anyone too much.  Example: I'm out looking for ganks.  In different parts of the map I see the same player.  Kill them a couple times, but don't kill them literally every time you see them.  We need this players to stick around, our population is not healthy.  I can get ganked and camped and rekt and zerged and etc.  I'm a grizzled veteran of RVR games.  But new players often just quit after a couple weeks of such experiences.

Shadow (for when it exists):  Full Faction vs Faction PVP.  Pretty close to GvG level savage, but maybe a bit more honor and "gentlemanly conduct".


1 vs 1:  When to do it? Should you do it? What about rulesets? Etc.

- Personal Feeling: I always love when people have enough respect and balls to 1 vs 1 and their mates not jump in.  That being said I don't think you should expect this on GvG or Shadow.  However I do think it should be alot more regular in Infected.  If we want to teach people how to fight 1 vs 1 then ganks are very VERY poor at that.  New players need experience at both groups chasing them and reasonably fair 1 vs 1 fights.  So I'd love to see a mix of both to get people trained up, people that will hopefully end up going on to various factions and guilds making a richer game for us all.  Honestly, it'd be lovely if there was a day on infected where the server had a gentleman's agreement to do 1 vs 1s either for our own entertainment or potentially even prizes.  I'd chip in a couple thousand to a prize pool and I'd participate (and lose prolly) myself!  And if we can do that maybe we can manage some group fight days too.  Infected NEEDS more PVP anyways, right now it's 80% ganking people farming.

And ofc is actual major objectives are on the line like forts or keeps then 1 vs 1s should wait until after if people are taking them.

Ganks:  How many times same person?  Waiting for harvest/mobs?  Giving helpful advice to do better surviving future ganks?  Etc?

-Personal Feelings:  GvG or Shadow: Gank away and Git Gud noobs.  Infected?  Try not to repeatedly gank the same people too much.  If you feel like it teach them how to do better vs ganks.  And don't say generic useless stuff like "there are counters" or "don't be solo" even if those are both technically true.  Those do not help new or solo players any.  Instead say things like "if you can't fight back, run to the nearest fort.  Use your CCs and movement abilities but spread out your CCs and don't use them all at once OR "it's better and safer if you go in groups but if you insist on being solo then you should prolly use X class(usually stealth)/race.  Now granted I don't expect gankers to actually help people like 1 vs 1 players do because gankers want easy kills (ganks) and 1 vs 1 players want good solo fights.  Helping the other player benefits 1 vs 1 players but not gankers.  However that's where others can step in and give them advice. 

In general on Infected I'd say show a little more mercy on harvesters and people with mobs on them.  I'm not saying never gank like that, but get a healthy mix.  Honestly if you're only ganking people harvesting or with mobs on them you prolly need practice anyways.

Camping:  How long is it ok to camp out in an area?  Does it matter where that area is?  Does the server ruleset matter? (Infects vs GvG currently, but later shadow too)  Is Runegate camping ok?  Etc.  1 person, 2 people, 5 people?

- Personal feelings:  I feel very differently between GvG/Shadow  vs Infected.  GvG/Shadow is veteran land, Camping is part of victory.  I'm not fond of it, but you're there to control territory and destroy your opponents while uplifting your allies.  Infected is some weird dergified mix of tutorial, farming for dregs, and Faction vs Faction that has no winner or win condition. As such I have stricter feelings about camping here.  If you're taking a fort or keep?  Camp all you need to accomplish that objective.  Otherwise?  Taking over mob spawns and farming spots is fine but camping rune portals and camping entire areas feels quite harmful to the game.

Infected is filled with newer players who are already struggling to learn the game's systems and I just don't think mercilessly grinding their face into the dirt in the tutorial is the best way to teach them the game or get them to stick around.  And we need every player with our struggling populations.  IMO they should be taught, shepherded, helped, and built up so that when they get to serious PVP worlds like the Dregs they can actually fight back against getting ground into the dirt.  While all camping and ganking and etc is fine by the game's rules, so long as it's a tutorial zone and new players are completely and utterly unprepared because our tutorials SUCK and they have 0 game knowledge I just think that we should show some degree of selective restraint.  Example:  mow through an area 2-3 times and kill everyone you see, but don't camp it for 5 hours straight.  Go gold farm in a village and claim it for your faction as long as you want but stay in that village if you're gold farming.  If people come near and try to fight you? Kill the crap out of them.  But don't chase players halfway across a zone just for getting in sight range, especially if it's next to a portal...you're not gold farming at that point you're camping.  And if you're roaming an area in a rotation killing evertying in site...that is also camping.  Great for GvG and Shadow too, bad for Infected. 

I want us to build a community and I just don't see that happening if folks struggling to learn the overcomplicated and underexplained game are being murdered continuously by much more experienced players.

 

Edited by Ralathar44
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 85
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Dont go to Infected with lvled vessels and crafted gear. Thank you.

There can be no etiquette in pvp games because nothing is enforceable by other players (see jails or fines IRL). The developers must hard code unwanted behaviors from even being possible or the worst

Ok so while I will give my own opinion on this I'm not going to be saying I'm right here.  I want to hear what everyone else feels about how we want to behave as a community in our PVP game and where

Posted (edited)

There can be no etiquette in pvp games because nothing is enforceable by other players (see jails or fines IRL). The developers must hard code unwanted behaviors from even being possible or the worst of the worst section of the playerbase (which games like this attract by nature) will for sure push negative behaviors to their limits.

Warhammer Online realized this during production, as as such added many safeguards to discourage deviant behaviors. One example being turning players that were too high of a level for a PvP map into 1 hp chickens not capable of doing anything but moving if they chose to enter. 

Edited by Toadwart
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ironically Dregs is actually safer than Infected. A few of my guys went to Infected just to get some quick and dirty PvP as you can find it much quicker there.

We'd rather spend all our time in Dregs but it's just not super populated in the beta.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

For ACE:

I personally have known quite a few players who quit the game because they were ganked. Most of these cases, they wandered into Sky Point unknowingly since the game currently has no clear indication of where to go after the current version of the tutorial. This issue might be resolved with a more complete tutorial in Infected (which I believe is in the plan).

I also know some level 25-28s who were just trying their best to farm mobs in Sky Point, getting consistently ganked by people (usually vesseled level 31-32s) until quitting. They were basically "farmed". In my opinion, that's just unnecessarily cruel. Perhaps if Shadows is implemented, impose a level cap in Infected, so it is not just a hunting ground for bored PvP players? Also, perhaps a warning the first time a player use the rune gate to Sky Point telling them that PvP happens more frequently here and they should go to other areas instead?

For players:

My position as a crafter is very much pro-PvP, even in Infected. But maybe, just maybe, a clear consensus to stop bullying new players might help us retain the server population, as @Ralathar44 said. I'm just going to put it out there that there are two people leveling today who were ganked in Moosename. I'm going to leave it to the reader why this is unhealthy for the server population. I suggest letting people level up to 30, then maybe we will have more people playing and we'll have more level 30 targets. Wouldn't fighting more geared people who are ready to fight, a more enjoyable experience for the hardcore PvP fans out there? Because honestly, when I see people 4v1 ganking a level 25, that's just cheap.

I agree that having too many "community PvP rules" is a little ridiculous. But I really do hope that most PvP-ers have reasonable target choices in Infected. Just remember that many players in Infected have only played the game for a few hours. They are no match for your level 32 vessel in full blue crafted gear. In dregs? I don't care, good hunting.

Edited by Bearsy
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, Toadwart said:

There can be no etiquette in pvp games because nothing is enforceable by other players (see jails or fines IRL). The developers must hard code unwanted behaviors from even being possible or the worst of the worst section of the playerbase (which games like this attract by nature) will for sure push negative behaviors to their limits.

Warhammer Online realized this during production, as as such added many safeguards to discourage deviant behaviors. One example being turning players that were too high of a level for a PvP map into 1 hp chickens not capable of doing anything but moving if they chose to enter. 

This is true, communities can self police to a degree if they decide certain things are to be avoided, folks with bad reputations tend to get excluded from guilds and such due to their rep, but it's not as effective as direct enforcement, encouragement, incentives, disincentives, etc by design.  Things don't have to be a hard ban or 1hp chicken, you could simply get downscaled or debuffed.  I'm not saying to do either of those things, I'm just providing examples of "soft" controls and disincentives. 

But I figured seeing how people felt on things first would be a bit more warranted than asking for changes immediately.  If I was in the minority I'd just accept things as they are and hope the game could survive it.  I don't want to tell people how to play but I also don't want all our newbies driven away via toxic experiences.  It's rough to try and balance player ability to have agency and play how is fun for them vs negative player consequences for the decisions largely made by a small % of people :x.

Edited by Ralathar44
Link to post
Share on other sites

ACE has created a game that encourages ganking. Most players don't gank newbies and don't like folks that do BUT, there is little the player community can do to discourage ganking when ACE see's it as a key part of their game. 

macdeath_sig.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, MacDeath said:

ACE has created a game that encourages ganking. Most players don't gank newbies and don't like folks that do BUT, there is little the player community can do to discourage ganking when ACE see's it as a key part of their game. 

I agree that ganking is an essential part of the game, and I like that. But I fail to see any reason why players need to bring 4 level 32 vessels into Infected to gank a level 26 farming Satyrs. Apart from the fact there are no economic gain because of no inventory drop, it prevents new players from leveling up and inhibits intermediate players to farm up to join dregs. I understand that some experienced players want to play the faction v. faction aspect, hence I really hope the Shadows campaign can be implemented. I really do believe that the current Infected should be a stepping stone for new and intermediate players. Unfortunately, the last few days it has been overpowered vessels' sadistic hunting ground.

Regarding ACE, I pointed out a few things in my post up there on how ACE can make Infected a bit less cruel for new/intermediate players. I would love to hear your opinions on those. And once again, my suggestions are for Infected. I have only one opinion on ganking in dregs (and hopefully Shadows): do it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Bearsy said:

I agree that ganking is an essential part of the game, and I like that. But I fail to see any reason why players need to bring 4 level 32 vessels into Infected to gank a level 26 farming Satyrs. Apart from the fact there are no economic gain because of no inventory drop, it prevents new players from leveling up and inhibits intermediate players to farm up to join dregs. I understand that some experienced players want to play the faction v. faction aspect, hence I really hope the Shadows campaign can be implemented. I really do believe that the current Infected should be a stepping stone for new and intermediate players. Unfortunately, the last few days it has been overpowered vessels' sadistic hunting ground.

Regarding ACE, I pointed out a few things in my post up there on how ACE can make Infected a bit less cruel for new/intermediate players. I would love to hear your opinions on those. And once again, my suggestions are for Infected. I have only one opinion on ganking in dregs (and hopefully Shadows): do it.

I'm not anti ganking... I'm anti ganking new players. Let em learn the game without the big kids driving them away.

macdeath_sig.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Players attempting to make up rules that aren't enforced by the game's systems never ends well. It just ends up with you yelling at someone because they decided not to follow rules you made up that they never agreed to.

There is no such thing as pvp etiquette in a pvp game. That's an expression of "should" and "should" is not how video games operate. There is "can" and "can not". If people can do a thing, and they want to do a thing, they will do that thing.

While you might like to be the guy that "respects the 1v1" or whatever, I assure you that you'll never find yourself in a game where you can simply enforce that behavior by making forum threads or typing in general. Either you control the server environment and what is allowed there or you don't, and in the case of an MMO you don't. Plenty of people simply do not care, and nothing you say is going to make them care. Plenty of people pvp specifically because they get a dopamine rush from killing any another player. Plenty of people aren't fighting you to prove they're better, they're fighting you because they want your stuff. I fall in the latter category. I want your stuff, or I want to keep my stuff. That's why I play PvP MMOs. I can have a far better 1v1 experience playing a game with systemic rules that enforce that 1v1, or an even pvp match in a system that matchmakes even teams with an ELO ranking system. I play MMOs for the uncertainty, social dynamics, and creativity that more restrictive games have to limit for those kind of pvp systems to work. I expect everyone in that environment to operate within its rules, and I expect if I run across 10 people all 10 of them are going to murder me if we don't know each other or have some kind of arrangement. They might not, but the fact that they can means that I expect that they will and behave accordingly. As a result I have never been anything but pleasantly surprised by players choosing to be nicer than they had to be.

Reaching out to "the community" to invent a set of rules is a pointless endeavor because no player has the authority to enforce them. You can impose a policy on your own guild, make it known that is your policy, and action your members for violating it, but outside of that players simply do not have, and should not expect to have authority over other players to determine the "right" and "wrong" way to engage in PvP.

Whether players "should" bring a full group of veterans to gank newbies is irrelevant. Making a plea to those players to stop is a waste of your time. They are doing so because they can, and that's really all there is to it. If you're developing a game, your first assumption is that if players can do something, they will. If you don't want them to do something, you create systems that prevent it.

You're barking up the wrong tree asking "the community" not to engage in behaviors that fall within the realm of possibility in a game. If you want a behavior to not happen, the developers are the only people with the authority and ability to prevent it. Expecting anything else is just setting yourself up for disappointment.

Edited by PopeUrban

PopeSigGIF.gif

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

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, PopeUrban said:

There is no such thing as pvp etiquette in a pvp game. That's an expression of "should" and "should" is not how video games operate. There is "can" and "can not". If people can do a thing, and they want to do a thing, they will do that thing.

Certainly worked in Dark Age of Camelot and many other older games.  Maybe it won't work these days because games have become so big and because people's attitudes in games have continually worsened and we've just shrugged and accepted it.  There was always SOME toxcitiy in games, but people behaving like folks do now in FPS games, MOBAs, and etc would not have been tolerated by the communities and without friends and support in game along with being KOS (kill on sight) they would usually quickly quit a game because it was not fun to be hunted and hamstrung all the time.  Even their allies would refuse to protect them.   So people very much avoided having too bad of a rep, because it was basically suicide.

But when games are so big you can't even learn the names of your regular enemies, that kind of reputational based accountability has largely fallen to the wayside.  But our game isn't that big.  You will prolly recognize the names of most active players.  Reputation and accountability matters here still.  And it's a team game where allies and friends are not only valuable but arguably necessary.  We definitely have the power to do this.  The question is whether we should or not and first...what would even be considered problem offenses.

Edited by Ralathar44
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Ralathar44 said:

Certainly worked in Dark Age of Camelot and many other older games.  Maybe it won't work these days because games have become so big and because people's attitudes in games have continually worsened and we've just shrugged and accepted it.  There was always SOME toxcitiy in games, but people behaving like folks do now in FPS games, MOBAs, and etc would not have been tolerated by the communities and without friends and support in game along with being KOS (kill on sight) they would usually quickly quit a game because it was not fun to be hunted and hamstrung all the time.  Even their allies would refuse to protect them.   So people very much avoided having too bad of a rep, because it was basically suicide.

But when games are so big you can't even learn the names of your regular enemies, that kind of reputational based accountability has largely fallen to the wayside.  But our game isn't that big.  You will prolly recognize the names of most active players.  Reputation and accountability matters here still.  And it's a team game where allies and friends are not only valuable but arguably necessary.  We definitely have the power to do this.  The question is whether we should or not and first...what would even be considered problem offenses.

No. It did not work.

THE fact that you consider "being KOS" an anomaly in stead of the default state of being in DAOC tells me you're wearing some extremely rose colored glasses. Its like when people talk about UO and claim the anti-PKs were a check on PK behavior. It is a fairy tale they tell themselves based on the confirmation bias of the very few encounters where it worked being cemented as positive memories. I could pretend I was a brilliant guild officer and politician in shadowbane because my favorite memories are the handful of times in the several years I played where things went 100% my way. In reality, objectively speaking, my greatest victories were atypical, which is why they are so memorable and my nation, while stable on the server, was not well known for being particularly special or having a particularly amazing win rate.

As I said before, the end of this impusle only results in you being upset that other people didn't follow rules you made up and they never agreed to. You have already begun. What you are calling toxicity is literally people simply playing the game. That's your problem here. You've already decided in your own head that there are rules that some people are violating that simply do not exist, and that nobody else has agreed to, but that you have already decided are a moral imperative. They are not, and you aren't the moral arbiter of anyone that hasn't bent their knee to you. This is the same mindset that leads to people absolutely losing their minds over "zerging" and "griefing" and all kinds of perfectly normal and expected behavior in pvp sandbox games.

This impulse to blame other players for their own subjective perception of the failings of a game's design is assigning authority and responsibility to the wrong people, and misdirecting energy better spent questioning those with objective authority to define rules. Know why there's not a ton of people ganking newbies right outside the temples in infected? Because there is a systemic barrier in the form of debuffs and travel time to make that behavior less attractive. Not because everyone agrees its too mean or because everyone's responsibility is to ensure new players don't have a bad first impression.

Edited by PopeUrban

PopeSigGIF.gif

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

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, PopeUrban said:

No. It did not work.

THE fact that you consider "being KOS" an anomaly in stead of the default state of being in DAOC tells me you're wearing some extremely rose colored glasses. Its like when people talk about UO and claim the anti-PKs were a check on PK behavior. It is a fairy tale they tell themselves based on the confirmation bias of the very few encounters where it worked being cemented as positive memories. I could pretend I was a brilliant guild officer and politician in shadowbane because my favorite memories are the handful of times in the several years I played where things went 100% my way. In reality, objectively speaking, my greatest victories were atypical, which is why they are so memorable and my nation, while stable on the server, was not well known for being particularly special or having a particularly amazing win rate.

As I said before, the end of this impusle only results in you being upset that other people didn't follow rules you made up and they never agreed to. You have already begun. What you are calling toxicity is literally people simply playing the game. That's your problem here. You've already decided in your own head that there are rules that some people are violating that simply do not exist, and that nobody else has agreed to, but that you have already decided are a moral imperative. They are not, and you aren't the moral arbiter of anyone that hasn't bent their knee to you. This is the same mindset that leads to people absolutely losing their minds over "zerging" and "griefing" and all kinds of perfectly normal and expected behavior in pvp sandbox games.

This impulse to blame other players for their own subjective perception of the failings of a game's design is assigning authority and responsibility to the wrong people, and misdirecting energy better spent questioning those with objective authority to define rules. Know why there's not a ton of people ganking newbies right outside the temples in infected? Because there is a systemic barrier in the form of debuffs and travel time to make that behavior less attractive. Not because everyone agrees its too mean or because everyone's responsibility is to ensure new players don't have a bad first impression.

Back in the day of early UO, I was one of the folks in an Anti-PK guild. Of course it didn't solve any issues. And, of course. Anti-PKers were ALSO killing players, players whose playstyle we disagreed with. So I stopped. Stopped caring if another player was a Glorious Lord, a Dred Lord, or anything in between.

Let the devs decide which types of behaviors to encourage or discourage. 

macdeath_sig.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Ralathar44 said:

Certainly worked in Dark Age of Camelot and many other older games. 

How so?

I played Andred until it collapsed and Mordred ran on fumes. Despite DAoC being one of the early and IMO best PVP focused MMOs, the FFA servers were a mess. While the RvR servers with structure did just fine.

This game started with the old "Play to Crush!" slogan from Shadowbane. People will do whatever it takes to win and many times that comes with someone not having a great time. Until the forum police came in, even the forum wars were happening long before this was resembling a game. Those people got run off though.

It isn't surprising that eSport games with clear cut rules, ranks, matchmaking, and an attempt at balance are massively more popular then any PVP MMO or MMOs in general. People love to compete, but not when it is total chaos.

By the time someone made it to the end game of DAoC and started running around the frontiers they usually had a decent handle on their class because it worked similar in PVE and PVP and required players to actually know what they were doing. No spamming left click and a few powers at anything in front of them like this game. PVE is a great training tool when it is designed well along with some classes that require mechanical and tactical skill. Not that Crowfall lacks this completely, but it is rather low. Tab in DAoC requires far more effort then whatever "action combat" this game is.

Even if someone headed out into the frontiers in DAoC, they likely had close to a full kit and just hadn't fully leveled up every ability. Unlike this game where there might be a significant difference between a lvl 25 or 30 or someone with Disciplines. Likely players also doing PVP had friends, guildies, or just faction mates around. Anyone out solo was either doing it wrong or specifically out to gank others. Also the mid level training battlegrounds that allowed players to practice PVP 24/7 with similar leveled players. There was Darkness Falls and having some exposure to PVP but also the faction pride and having higher ups come save the day.

Overall, DAoC had a lot more structure, training, and PVP focused design compared to this game. It wasn't just that back then people played nice. The game just wasn't set up poorly nor encouraged cheesy PVP.

I've commented many times that I hope this game is popular enough to have "ranked" campaigns. Essentially caps on power. Limited guild numbers, limited gear/vessel/disc quality. Like a 20 Guild Limit, lvl 30 Max, Green Tier Character Campaign. Allow players to play against similar enemies. Doubt anything like this will happen though.

ACE's PVP content is basically run around and kill whatever you see. There is no sportsmanship or complex strategy. Do PVE or stop others from doing PVE, stand in circles, and show up at siege time.

Ganking people is part of the game. If players aren't able to continue playing due to being spawn camped, zones/gate camped, or whatever else then that shows flaws in game and map design.

Albion Online does a decent job of splitting a one world game into tiered risk vs reward zones. Players know what to expect in each one. There is full loot and no kill zones. There is punishment system. There is flagging. There is actual thought put into making a "PVP game" beyond you can attack others so it is a PVP game.

ACE could do or try many different things but doesn't seem to care or understand how to do it.

Worrying about 1v1 fights is silly in a GvG/Faction game. Using a tiny population that can't even fill one campaign as resembling anything at launch or with a full pop doesn't help much. If there were 2k running around one campaign, things might look much differently. Worrying about 5 year vets in full kits stomping lowbies in Infected might not be something anyone experiences. Too hard to tell currently. This game is supposed to cater to a variety of players that unfortunately are all crammed together in a micro unfinished version of the game.

If things are really broken at launch, hopefully ACE takes some time to redesign some stuff, but for now I don't see much point on their end or the tiny community. Sad people going around ganking on infected, but is what it is. Many cried when gear loot was tried. This game is sheep and sheep in wolves clothing. Low risk reward experience. Play to Crush, even if that means crushing the game's future I guess.

 


 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I played DAOC for years, there was definite respect between different people on different sides even though we often killed each other.  Not everyone ofc, but it certainly happened a good bit with veterans who stuck around and got known.  Please do not gaslight, you can say you had a different experience and that is fine, but telling someone else their experience they had never existed is pretty poor behavior.  I can't count the amount of times we emoted to folks on different realms rather than kill each other out of respect and got the same back in turn.  And sometimes you even chatted outside the game on different boards and forums. (not the fire class balance rage board threads you're prolly thinking of haha)

Maybe how you played was different, your reputations were different, and thus your experiences were different.  The majority of our time was spent killing each other, but for some of us at least there was also more than that.  KOS being the default state or not, these interactions still happened and not infrequently.  Both on FFA and on RVR.  Both Frontiers and Battlegrounds.

I'm actually kinda sad for yall that yall never experienced that additional level of social interaction.  It make the whole thing a bit better when you've got people you're friendly with on the other side you get to compete against sometimes :).

Edited by Ralathar44
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, PopeUrban said:

This impulse to blame other players for their own subjective perception of the failings of a game's design is assigning authority and responsibility to the wrong people, and misdirecting energy better spent questioning those with objective authority to define rules. Know why there's not a ton of people ganking newbies right outside the temples in infected? Because there is a systemic barrier in the form of debuffs and travel time to make that behavior less attractive. Not because everyone agrees its too mean or because everyone's responsibility is to ensure new players don't have a bad first impression.

Both can certainly happen.  We're not helpless.  We all have agency and can choose to exercise it.  Collectively as a community we can indeed make a difference in how the game is played both for better and for worse.  ACE's intervention with incentives and game design helps alot ofc, but is not actually required.  It makes a good excuse though.  "I can't help doing x/y/z it's how the game designed.  They practically have me at gunpoint here!"

If anything the power of social expectations and shunning and shame should be more understandable than ever before in the current state of online, the world, and social media.  Both when used sparingly for good and when used in great amounts for ill.  The idea that we are somehow powerless and it's all up to ACE is a myth.  But we've pretty much foisted all personal responsibility off on developers expecting them to control all our behaviors for us.  Thus if you can do something folks can just say "if it's allowed then it's ok for me to do it" so people can justify their own poor behavior and deflect responsibility for it.

None of this means we should change things one way or another in the game.  Only that we have the power to and that we often use design and developers as an excuse to be the kinds of people we always wanted to be in the first place.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Ralathar44 said:

I played DAOC for years, there was definite respect between different people on different sides even though we often killed each other.  Not everyone ofc, but it certainly happened a good bit with veterans who stuck around and got known.  Please do not gaslight, you can say you had a different experience and that is fine, but telling someone else their experience they had never existed is pretty poor behavior.  I can't count the amount of times we emoted to folks on different realms rather than kill each other out of respect and got the same back in turn.  And sometimes you even chatted outside the game on different boards and forums. (not the fire class balance rage board threads you're prolly thinking of haha)

Maybe how you played was different, your reputations were different, and thus your experiences were different.  The majority of our time was spent killing each other, but for some of us at least there was also more than that.  KOS being the default state or not, these interactions still happened and not infrequently.  Both on FFA and on RVR.  Both Frontiers and Battlegrounds.

I'm actually kinda sad for yall that yall never experienced that additional level of social interaction.  It make the whole thing a bit better when you've got people you're friendly with on the other side you get to compete against sometimes :).

I have played DAoC since the closed Beta. I still play DAoC almost every day on a private 'classic' server.  I can never remember a time in those 20 years were there weren't people ganking lowbies in the frontiers. DAoC was set up so players could avoid the frontiers if they wanted to.

Crowfall is designed to funnel newbies into PvP zones within the first few hours of game play. Ganking here is encouraged.

Old time DAoC and Crowfall couldn't be more different. This month, with the major focus on HD, I rarely log into CF and my DAoC time has gone way up.

macdeath_sig.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Ralathar44 said:

I played DAOC for years, there was definite respect between different people on different sides even though we often killed each other.

I can't count the amount of times we emoted to folks on different realms rather than kill each other out of respect and got the same back in turn.  And sometimes you even chatted outside the game on different boards and forums. (not the fire class balance rage board threads you're prolly thinking of haha)

Ganking lowbies and being a cheesy jerk are quite different then playing with KOS of equal foes.

Known and had plenty of respect for players/guilds I fought against, even joined their guild/faction/servers over time in different games.

Having an overall positive community and some running around zerging noobs in a poorly designed game are different matters.

Knowing everyone on a server days are gone unless a game is rather unpopular. Crowfall is still in that state but won't be doing so hot if it continues like that. This game is supposed to have 50k+ playing it, not a couple hundred.

9 minutes ago, Ralathar44 said:

Collectively as a community we can indeed make a difference in how the game is played both for better and for worse. 

ACE's intervention with incentives and game design helps alot ofc, but is not actually required.  


If anything the power of social expectations and shunning and shame should be more understandable than ever before in the current state of online, the world, and social media. 

Collectively we don't agree while being in the same community, that's just how people are be it real life or gamers. Trying to get everyone to do the "right" thing or whatever isn't ever going to work. 

Shaming doesn't work.

Structure and enforced rules are the only thing that get players in line. 

If a game allows particular behaviors then someone is going to do it. That isn't throwing in the towel, it's reality.

All for getting up on the soapbox and making things better, but likely not going to be successful. If it was that easy, there's a few real world problems that could use some fixing.

I don't know of any modern game built on PVP and competitive play that is policed by the players at all or for the better of the product. Do you?

 


 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
30 minutes ago, MacDeath said:

I have played DAoC since the closed Beta. I still play DAoC almost every day on a private 'classic' server.  I can never remember a time in those 20 years were there weren't people ganking lowbies in the frontiers. DAoC was set up so players could avoid the frontiers if they wanted to.

Aye, once you went out into big boy PVP you were fair game.  BUT there was no ganking lowbies, just killing enemies high/mid/low.  If you got focused it was because of your class, you being alone (which even solos could easily choose not to be I should know I solo'd for a long time in that game), or because you had grey armor and were squishy.  Frontiers and Battlegrounds were one big siege ongoing all the time.  If you recall in my original post there is no such thing as ganking when objectives are active you're trying to take.  You're playing the objective.  In DAOC the objectives were always active.  Any enemy spared is another enemy besieging your tower or keep.  So you killed anyone and there was a sort of universal fairness to that and also plenty of counters.

That is not true in Crowfall.  In DAOC you killed to secure objectives, in Crowfall infected people kill just to kill.  They don't siege forts even if they have full control of the entire map and forts are open for siege and they have 10+ people ganking across the map.  These players could all go to dregs and fight over real objectives but they choose to come to infected instead and kill for nothing.  No realm pride, no rewards, no objectives, no incentives, just killing disadvantaged folks for the sake of killing.  That directly spits in the face of the design of Crowfall in all honesty, but it's what much of the community has chosen to do.

EDIT: Hopefully in time enough of the people farming up now will stay with the game and hit dregs and actually play the game as designed.  But we'll see if enough of them stick around that long.  The grind is long and the ganking of farmers/harvesters for no gain (and no real lasting detriment to the farmers/harvesters except frustration) is much.

And as always, there is no one "mode" people are in.  You could defend a keep that day, have some friendly emotes with an enemy or enemy guild afterwards, and then chat about it later on forums or IMs. 

Edited by Ralathar44
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, APE said:

Trying to get everyone to do the "right" thing or whatever isn't ever going to work. 

Hard disagree.  I belong to multiple different groups, two of those being nerd and gamer, others of those being identity subjects I'm not going to go into here, that were marginalized, beat up, picked on, etc back in the day.   Societal perception changed and treatment changed.  For those that had associated laws passed the laws were one of the last steps in that process.  The design was one of the last things to change after acceptance happened and societal behavior had already significantly changed.

History does not agree with you.  Where do you think all the social rules and laws we have today came from?  They didn't just fall out of the ether.  People collectively decided to behave in certain ways.  Sometimes good and sometimes bad.

EDIT: I gotta say out of all the directions for this thread to take people actively disbelieving in democracy is not one I expected.  After all what is democracy but the collective deciding what our behaviors should be and what is "right"?

Edited by Ralathar44
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...