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

Slowing the Horde

Recommended Posts

Alright... so let me start off by saying that I'm not sure if the coding to make something like this happen would be too intensive or not. If not though, then I think that this would be a way to encourage larger guilds to not clump together as much.

 

What if, for every section of ground an individual walked over, it was tracked in a sort of broad sense. Like invisible footprints, but over a wider area of ground. If one person walks over that path that's fine. Hell, maybe nothing happens if 30 people from the same guild walk over that spot. But once a force of say... 50 of the same guild cover that same ground, maybe the ground starts to deteriorate a bit, and you get a 5% movement speed debuff over that location. If it's a hundred people going over the same spot maybe it's 15%. then 20%, maybe capping out at 25% for say... 200 people or so?

 

The goal being to either encourage the mega guilds to split their forces into different locations, to spread out more which would allow for combat to happen at various points along a line, and maybe allow for a smaller force to hit a much larger force and then fall back with only the front liner's of the enemy's force being able to keep up.

 

This effect could of course fade off relatively quickly, I'd say a minute or less. That way the server would need to keep track of less information. It could also be scaled up or down dependent on what the Devs felt the appropriate guild size was for a given point in the game cycle. 

 

If getting large forces from point A to point B becoming too problematic was a concern, a potential buff could be introduced to bypass the ground deterioration (Light Feet?) that could come with a large combat effectiveness debuff for 60 seconds or so after coming out of it (-50% stats seems about right). That way long map travel wouldn't be a pain, but it couldn't be used in combat.


pKWaYh4.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm against this simply because it should be left up to the players not some weird mechanic created by the devs. If some group wants to mega recruit to an absurd level, gratz you won a campaign, want to megazerg someone else's castle, congratz you won it.


gCWxS8u.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not a huge fan. Apart from this being the opposite of what actually happens (tons of people -> packed earth), it seems arbitrary/gamey. Smaller groups should have ways to gain the mobility advantage over large forces, but not in this way.

 

Similar to what Arkade said, if food turns out to be a vital part of game play there will be supplies somewhere, maybe in caravans? If not food, then siege weapons or materials. Thus a smaller force is much more mobile because they are not tied to pack animals or a supply chain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not a huge fan. Apart from this being the opposite of what actually happens (tons of people -> packed earth), it seems arbitrary/gamey. Smaller groups should have ways to gain the mobility advantage over large forces, but not in this way.

 

Similar to what Arkade said, if food turns out to be a vital part of game play there will be supplies somewhere, maybe in caravans? If not food, then siege weapons or materials. Thus a smaller force is much more mobile because they are not tied to pack animals or a supply chain.

That depends on the moisture of the road. Wetter ground can become more muddy which was kind of my thinking. I'm not fully sold on its implementation myself, but liked the thought of it dissuading the "Ball up in as big a clump as possible and CHARGE!" tactic.


pKWaYh4.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is there always a push by potential players, in nearly game these days, to punish those who have access to a larger pool of players than themselves?  Rather than demand those groups be punished, why not work harder to increase your own membership?

 

In nearly ever post where someone wants another group punish due to their size, never is that size limit identified. If you think a guild should be punished for being large, put a number on it and explain why that particular size and above deserves to be penalized.


An old and grumpy gamer who should have grown up years ago.

uhvMkGn.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is there always a push by potential players, in nearly game these days, to punish those who have access to a larger pool of players than themselves?  Rather than demand those groups be punished, why not work harder to increase your own membership?

 

In nearly ever post where someone wants another group punish due to their size, never is that size limit identified. If you think a guild should be punished for being large, put a number on it and explain why that particular size and above deserves to be penalized.

 

his breath is slightly cat-flavoured already...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At current with every ability being basically an AOE, any amount of clumping is just a terrible idea anyway. You would end up killing your own team mates if you just traveled in a large mass. Traveling like that means when you do get attacked, you will suffer immediate losses, while your team repositions so they aren't hitting themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is there always a push by potential players, in nearly game these days, to punish those who have access to a larger pool of players than themselves?  Rather than demand those groups be punished, why not work harder to increase your own membership?

 

In nearly ever post where someone wants another group punish due to their size, never is that size limit identified. If you think a guild should be punished for being large, put a number on it and explain why that particular size and above deserves to be penalized.

1: Because at a certain point you're running with so many people that they might as well not be people anymore. You can't get to know them all, or coach them all, or organize them to a more than basic level. In my experience that starts to happen around the 80ish marker. Could be more or less depending on the guild, but it definitely happens well before say... 200.

 

2: I did list numbers up there.


pKWaYh4.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1: Because at a certain point you're running with so many people that they might as well not be people anymore. You can't get to know them all, or coach them all, or organize them to a more than basic level. In my experience that starts to happen around the 80ish marker. Could be more or less depending on the guild, but it definitely happens well before say... 200.

 

2: I did list numbers up there.

 

 

Your experience.

 

 

 

Clarify what that is exactly....

 

 

Because as an EVE player. I say pile more people in and let's get thousands of players fighting.  As A DAoC vet. I say pile it in. 

 

 

The problem with a majority of players is their experience is Theme parks. Which leads to them not actually grasping how a sandbox actually works. Because they're used to Faction A vs Faction B vs Faction C (sometimes), They don't know what friendly fire is (besides /duel commands which is a voluntary system) So they never grasp that there is a C faction and a F faction and a Q faction and a T faction and so forth. Which means their suggestions are always going to come up short because they have never ever actually experienced a sandbox pvp fight. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your experience.

Clarify what that is exactly....

Because as an EVE player. I say pile more people in and let's get thousands of players fighting.  As A DAoC vet. I say pile it in. 

 

The problem with a majority of players is their experience is Theme parks. Which leads to them not actually grasping how a sandbox actually works. Because they're used to Faction A vs Faction B vs Faction C (sometimes), They don't know what friendly fire is (besides /duel commands which is a voluntary system) So they never grasp that there is a C faction and a F faction and a Q faction and a T faction and so forth. Which means their suggestions are always going to come up short because they have never ever actually experienced a sandbox pvp fight.

Don't waste your time reasoning with him; he will call your experience anecdotal while claiming his reasoning to be ultimate facts. He did that in another thread already, friecely attacking the concept of ganking (executing), saying it's favoring zergs.

 

It's pointless to argue with people who have their minds made up out of theme park mmo experience or general disgust towards competitiveness.

Edited by Qbs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't waste your time reasoning with him; he will call your experience anecdotal while claiming his reasoning to be ultimate facts. He did that in another thread already, friecely attacking the concept of ganking (executing), saying it's favoring zergs.

 

It's pointless to argue with people who have their minds made up out of theme park mmo experience or general disgust towards competitiveness.

I didn't see you offering anything to counter the logic used there. You just seem to vomit your emotions and feelings all over a topic which is... well, you just keep being you princess.


pKWaYh4.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your experience.

 

 

 

Clarify what that is exactly....

 

 

Because as an EVE player. I say pile more people in and let's get thousands of players fighting.  As A DAoC vet. I say pile it in. 

 

 

The problem with a majority of players is their experience is Theme parks. Which leads to them not actually grasping how a sandbox actually works. Because they're used to Faction A vs Faction B vs Faction C (sometimes), They don't know what friendly fire is (besides /duel commands which is a voluntary system) So they never grasp that there is a C faction and a F faction and a Q faction and a T faction and so forth. Which means their suggestions are always going to come up short because they have never ever actually experienced a sandbox pvp fight. 

Shadowbane, from live through the emulator afterward, so... about 7-8 years? Guild Wars 2. Archeage. I could throw in pretty much every game I've played since PvP MMO's are my genre of choice, but given recent topics on the forums those are the most relevant three. Really though, the Shadowbane experience is the most relevant one here. Two sided server wars were the predecessor to many servers shutting down and a lot of player burnout. They weren't as fun as the guild vs guild fights of give or take similar numbers.

 

However, I wasn't looking to prevent large guilds from forming or even stop a double sided server war. Some of my stronger memories from Shadowbane are leading those giant half a sever forces, and that can be fun too. Especially when the server will for sure end at some point. I was just looking at dropping another mechanic to consider when organizing a horde that large that would allow for a smaller force to still feel like they have a chance against them. Slow the middle and rear of a 150 person ball o' fun, and a 40 person force could hit, fall back, and mostly only have 40 or so people right on their heels. The rest of the force would be there quickly enough, but it would enhance the kiting game that a small force needs to do to play with a bigger force.


pKWaYh4.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't see you offering anything to counter the logic used there. You just seem to vomit your emotions and feelings all over a topic which is... well, you just keep being you princess.

There was no logic to counter but rather a ball of disconnected thoughts based on your personal feelings. Thank you, I like being the princess, as long as you'll always pick up my shoes.

 

I was just looking at dropping another mechanic to consider when organizing a horde that large that would allow for a smaller force to still feel like they have a chance against them.

Of course. Only someone quoting GW2 or Archeage could ever come up with an idea to introduce artificial game mechanics instead of promoting tools which can be utilized by player skill to deal with certain situations. Gosh, you're not even hiding it anymore. Might aswell show your true power level here.

Edited by Qbs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was no logic to counter but rather a ball of disconnected thoughts based on your personal feelings. Thank you, I like being the princess, as long as you'll always pick up my shoes.

 

You don't have to tell me that you're too inept at rational thought to recognize both the pros and cons of potential mechanics. You make that clear every time you post and insult the individual rather than debate the idea. But that's fine. Forum Warrioring was as much part of Shadowbane as anything else, so I don't mind picking you apart while I have adult conversations happen with other people.

 

 

Of course. Only someone quoting GW2 or Archeage could ever come up with an idea to introduce artificial game mechanics instead of promoting tools which can be utilized by player skill to deal with certain situations. Gosh, you're not even hiding it anymore. Might aswell show your true power level here.

 

All game mechanics are artificial. It's simply a question of whether they're more beneficial than harmful to the goals of a game. I didn't come in here declaring that this was the best idea ever and had to be implemented. It was an idea for a mechanic that does have some pros to it, even if it may not be enough to warrant implementation. The same way that downed state has some pros to it even if, imo, they're not right for this game. You don't seem to be interested in having a conversation though, which makes your value here dubious.


pKWaYh4.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
saving my face here

 

I'm not going to repost what you've said previously, but just by suggesting such a sillly idea like in this thread is an instant-disqualification for everything you post. You may call it an ad hominem, but I call it "recognizing a problem at its root". I'm really sorry but I can't take anything you write seriously, judging by what and how you've written so far.

 

And no, not every game mechanic is artificial. There is a fine distinction between (1)enabling and (2)forcing game mechanics. The first one enables players to create content / interact with minor corner stones, while the latter one is forcing players into certain behavior. l2gamedev.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2: I did list numbers up there.

 

Yes, I see that now, my apologies.  That said, lets examine the areas of your initial argument where you haven't fully fleshed out the idea.

 

"But once a force of say... 50 of the same guild cover that same ground, maybe the ground starts to deteriorate a bit, and you get a 5% movement speed debuff over that location. If it's a hundred people going over the same spot maybe it's 15%. then 20%, maybe capping out at 25% for say... 200 people or so?"

 

"Same spot of ground" is undefined.  What size are?  5' radius?  10'?  50'?  You couldn't get more than a very narrow path actually because your own footsteps do not cover that much square footage.  You'd have a line, perhaps 1' wide that would be affected by further footsteps.  So 100 people walking in single file would have those further down the line walking slower, by your logic.  But if you isntead broke them into 10 columns of 10 there would be no deterioration in walking speed.

 

Then lets look at the other component you left out:  Time.  How long will any particular piece of ground affect walking speed?  Clearly 100 people stomping on the same piece of ground in the span of a minute would have a larger affect upon the ground than 100 people walking across the same ground over the span of 24 hours.

 

However it works out, there could be a myriad of ways to easily bypass your desire to punish those guilds who can bring more friends to bear than, apparently, you will be able to do.


An old and grumpy gamer who should have grown up years ago.

uhvMkGn.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An interesting idea, but I feel its just too much processing power (in most cases) and not needed.

 

The one time I think mass travel would be relevant is if it is a visibly unstable cliff (or perhaps traveling over a hidden tunnel) in which case the ground could collapse. 

 

That type of "movement slowing" would be part of tactics and choosing your location rather than an artificial system construct. 

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...