Author Topic: Player vs Player  (Read 3380 times)

Chalgyr

  • Grand Poobah of Kingdoms of the Lost
  • Implementors
  • Heroic Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 809
  • Grand Poobah
    • Chalgyr's Game Room
  • Other character names: Glith, Devinoste, Deakkyn, Wolfryc, Rylee, Deus... it goes on for a while
Player vs Player
« on: 03/15/13, 07:02 »
So we have a few different player vs player elements on here. There's the kingdom wars (which doesn't seem to have the people to support the system anymore really), an arena (which does get some use) and then open pvp/bloodsworn pvp.

We've always had requests for it, and more of it in different shapes and sizes - but how do you feel about it in general? Bloodsworn has become more of an expanded grouping mechanism it seems. What PVP systems have you seen in the past that you liked? Do you like a game like Warcraft that (depending on sever) has PVP enabled if you are in an 'enemy' zone? Have you seen some PVP elements in other MUDs that you really liked - and if so what about them was appealing? Do you prefer games iwth no PVP, limited PVP or wide-open PVP like a Godwars title?
I must be here, 'cause I'm not all there.

Elendil

  • New
  • *
  • Posts: 34
Re: Player vs Player
« Reply #1 on: 03/15/13, 13:04 »
My Opinion?

Let PvP be left in the arena, or if the thumb-suckers insist upon beating in each other's brains outside of the arena, let it be bloodsworn only attacking other bloodsworn members, since most in the game have forgotten that PvP's purpose was strictly for IC reasons, and IC reasons alone.  My feelings about Bloodsworn is another topic for another time.  I have seen the PvP feature be abused one time too many, sorry Chal.

Daklore

  • Builders
  • Sr. Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 480
  • Crazy Perverted Gnome Demon
Re: Player vs Player
« Reply #2 on: 03/15/13, 13:12 »
Personally, I dislike PvP, but understand it can be useful, even needed for a dynamic RP world. Doesn't mean I enter into it, I'll try and avoid it in most games if I can. Unless that's the focus of the game(League of Legends).

My problem with PvP is often the risk involved.... I don't like risk, go figure >P. But there's also the fact that PvPers -tend- to be the most toxic players in the game by nature, because all they care about is how big their "e-peen" is, and how they can kill everyone in the game. All they care about is the PK and how it makes them feel great, and not how it makes the other people--who may not want to be involved in the first place--feel.

Serene is a nice way to combat it, but it isn't -always- RP viable. I would avoid PK and go serene outright if I could, but Daklore's roleplay doesn't -allow- for the OOC serene mechanic to be applied. I've accepted that, and in the past, I used to be involved in PK. But, if you remember, Fuzzbutt, Daklore only pk'd as a last resort, or a response to an action that called for violent retribution(mostly the Tyrek-Mventious war, the Klevnone-Tolin wars when I was still in Tolin ... and those people after my bounty).

The problem with KotL is, PK is inherently unbalanced. There's only one or two ways to go about it, both require you to be customed out the wazoo, and in most cases, once you've got augments, there's only one way to go about it. I won't reveal the way, so people will abuse the hell out of it, but it's rather anti-fun when you -have- to min-max to even hope to be successful at PK. Yes, min-maxing exists in other PvP games, yes some people find it fun... but games existing around the PK mechanic can exist without the min-maxing, and min-maxing can often only return minimal benefits. Well, extreme min-maxing. There's always going to require some sort of focus around the kind of class/profession/whatever you're playing to optimize your strengths. But it doesn't require extreme maths to squeeze every last point of offense and defence you can manage to get out of it.

KotL requires this, though. It shouldn't. Skills are underpowered(with some noticable, but minor, exceptions), spells are overpowered, resistances are overpowered, anyone who isn't a fighter or mage is pretty much frakked... and there's simply no reason to PK when you know the hard-coded mechanics have already determined the winner before you fight. Unless you have the same min-maxed build, then it comes down to who gets lucky first.

tl;dr: PvP can be nice and beneficial, but only if it's well-balanced and constantly tweaked to make sure it remains balanced. KotL does not offer a balanced approach to PvP, therefor, it's unfun.
"Okay, who let Odin out of his cage?"
*A blue bouncy ball bounces by*
"That's it, I'm outta here."

Elendil

  • New
  • *
  • Posts: 34
Re: Player vs Player
« Reply #3 on: 03/15/13, 13:40 »
My problem with PvP is often the risk involved.... I don't like risk, go figure >P. But there's also the fact that PvPers -tend- to be the most toxic players in the game by nature, because all they care about is how big their "e-peen" is, and how they can kill everyone in the game. All they care about is the PK and how it makes them feel great, and not how it makes the other people--who may not want to be involved in the first place--feel.

Serene is a nice way to combat it, but it isn't -always- RP viable. I would avoid PK and go serene outright if I could, but Daklore's roleplay doesn't -allow- for the OOC serene mechanic to be applied. I've accepted that, and in the past, I used to be involved in PK. But, if you remember, Fuzzbutt, Daklore only pk'd as a last resort, or a response to an action that called for violent retribution(mostly the Tyrek-Mventious war, the Klevnone-Tolin wars when I was still in Tolin ... and those people after my bounty).

KotL requires this, though. It shouldn't. Skills are underpowered(with some noticable, but minor, exceptions), spells are overpowered, resistances are overpowered, anyone who isn't a fighter or mage is pretty much frakked... and there's simply no reason to PK when you know the hard-coded mechanics have already determined the winner before you fight. Unless you have the same min-maxed build, then it comes down to who gets lucky first.

tl;dr: PvP can be nice and beneficial, but only if it's well-balanced and constantly tweaked to make sure it remains balanced. KotL does not offer a balanced approach to PvP, therefor, it's unfun.

Amen to those words, Ero-sennin.  The parametres must be set and strictly adhered to, or let PK be done away with altogether.

Tylon

  • Builders
  • New
  • *
  • Posts: 41
Re: Player vs Player
« Reply #4 on: 03/15/13, 18:14 »
I do not think pk in kotl has the capacity to be enjoyable at this juncture. Mind you I haven't done much (if any) of it, but the resist system and rather large damage output numbers by players kind of puts me off. Its like a rock paper scissors game where some people have a flamethrower that melts the rock/scissors and ignites the paper. I can also see where trying to balance out all of the classes/races/religions/kingdom rewards/custom level of characters/etc.etc.etc. could be a real nightmare for implementation.

I think some of the more enjoyable pk systems I've participated in involved dropping the entire contents of one's inventory. It seems counter-intuitive that that could be fun, but pk without stakes is sort of dry. Mind you, I don't think that would work here.

I dislike the concept of enforcing RP reasons behind pk. Its just odd to me.

Algorgon

  • New
  • *
  • Posts: 7
Re: Player vs Player
« Reply #5 on: 03/15/13, 18:57 »
KOTL is really the only mud I've played, but I'm really not big on PvP. Just not my thing. I'd rather go bash mobs and get treasure. I don't mind if it's in the game, just keep it optional and somewhere where I don't get caught in the crossfire. Watching would be fun though

elios

  • New
  • *
  • Posts: 24
Re: Player vs Player
« Reply #6 on: 03/16/13, 10:13 »
Chalgyr,

Where do I start?  I loath Player vs Player with a passion in any form I do believe you would understand my reasons why Chalgyr.  Bloodsworn I would do away with if I had my druthers but I can live with players having their punch-ups in the arena.

But there must be that in-character roleplayed-out reason strictly enforced for there to be any fighting of that sort to my way of thinking whether some dislike it or not.  We have had enough mindless toxic players that would ambush another's character for no reason.  It is your pitch Chalgyr but I felt I needed to have my views posted.  For the record I agree with Algorgon's player in that there is enough to do without that element needing to be in play.

Daklore

  • Builders
  • Sr. Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 480
  • Crazy Perverted Gnome Demon
Re: Player vs Player
« Reply #7 on: 03/16/13, 19:09 »
I dislike the concept of enforcing RP reasons behind pk. Its just odd to me.

Not enforcing RP behind PK opens the doors to douches just PKing because they can. That's practically an invitation for toxic, lulzy players to just go out and try and kill everyone for no reason other than, "it makes them feel like a big man out-of-character".

There are GodWars muds for that.

KotL is primarily a RP mud, and taking an action simply because you can, not because it's logical and in-character(being a homicidal maniac is not enough of a reason... and Daklore had that very reason to PK people pre-wipe(still does, he is a homicidal maniac when he wants to be)). Even Achaea requires RP behind PK... although you can sometimes get away with a lulzy pk without any RP on occassion.
"Okay, who let Odin out of his cage?"
*A blue bouncy ball bounces by*
"That's it, I'm outta here."

Tylon

  • Builders
  • New
  • *
  • Posts: 41
Re: Player vs Player
« Reply #8 on: 03/16/13, 23:23 »
The concept that a character can be toxic to anyone in a system that has pk immunity (serene) implemented is laughable.

It has been my observation over the years that when open pk is available and such toxic characters surface, a balance is created by opposing factions. More often than not, such characters become isolated and ineffectual as a result. Most of the best pkers out there, in any game that allows it, are not the ones that are bullies... they are the enforcers going after the bullies.

Godwars muds are a joke.

The more a player population can police themselves, the more engaging a pk system can be. There is always going to be a small population that extremely dislikes pk and an equally small population that loves to do nothing but pk. Most simply fall in the middle. The best systems require very little rules and little or no immortal intervention. It promotes character accountability. I would argue that such a system would provide many RP opportunities as well.

Now I'd like to touch very briefly on the concept of RP required for PK. I see very little difference between someone RPing a homocidal maniac that plinks people off and someone going around plinking people off just 'because'. At least, in respect to the 'toxicity' of the player. Someone could RP becoming a mindless zombie that attacks everyone in sight.  I think in an RP environment, if someone is PK'd the RP will follow anyways. Someone can't RP a holy saintly templar, go kill all of Murkwood's weres/elves while they are rubbing all over each other (which would be about any point in time...), then go back to being a holy saintly templar.

There's always this pervasive fear that if you give a player population the pk reigns, they will implode. On the contrary, I've found it leads to a controlled system... that players are satisfied with because they are influencing the controls themselves.

« Last Edit: 03/16/13, 23:25 by Tylon »

elios

  • New
  • *
  • Posts: 24
Re: Player vs Player
« Reply #9 on: 03/17/13, 00:02 »
And just why the hell should anyone need to make their characters serene unless it is their choice?  The trouble is that we can police ourselves all we like but it will not stop a toxic player from trying to have their way only to hide their character at a questmaster-mistress or the healer's area or some other place where the offender is out of reach therefore evading possible retribution.   And in the past there have been players that either can not tell the difference between in-character and out-of-character or take something that is out-of-character and make it into something that is in-character (The war between mesilena and every other kingdom over an out-of-character argument).  And there are those in the past that decided they wanted to target someone's character for an out-of-character reason.

Daklore's player has been in this game longer than most of the players so he can give an informed opinion and I have been in this game long enough and experienced enough to give an informed opinion.  As Daklore's player said there are toxic players out there let there be controls put into place or the whole be scrapped.   Spend some more time in this game and do your homework before you label anything as "Laughable".

Tylon

  • Builders
  • New
  • *
  • Posts: 41
Re: Player vs Player
« Reply #10 on: 03/17/13, 00:44 »
And just why the hell should anyone need to make their characters serene unless it is their choice?

I'm proposing that if someone can't deal with potentially being around these 'toxic elements', there's a very easy hard coded option. So really it is their choice. I'm of the opinion that pk can't really be a middle of the road type of exercise. Its either all or nothing. Either you can handle it or you can't. If you can't, there's serene.

As far as character hiding goes... players can't hide forever (even in a realm this large) and I note many classes have trapping and binding skills in addition to weapon flags that keep folks in place. Many realms have permanent killer flags that amongst other things make characters summonable/gatable, which is removed upon death. Perhaps that could be an option if safety spots are a huge issue here.

I noted that a fair bit of RP followed the Mesilena war. Doesn't that satisfy the need for RP to be happening around seemingly every event?

I thank you for the advice on becoming more informed. I will continue to observe the rich PK environment here at KoTL that you and Daklore draw your wealth of knowledge from.

elios

  • New
  • *
  • Posts: 24
Re: Player vs Player
« Reply #11 on: 03/17/13, 01:15 »
Sarcasm has no place in this discussion Tylon.  And for your information there was no roleplaying elements involved until during and after the fact.  You want to bladder on about player retention this is one where you will lose players.  As for the cost of going serene check help convert.

This game I have found to be rather unique from any of the other games I have experienced therefore there will be a steep learning curve.  You sir are the relative new player who has yet to experience this game fully to make any sort of informed opinion.  I have said what I wished to say about this topic I consider it closed.

Daklore

  • Builders
  • Sr. Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 480
  • Crazy Perverted Gnome Demon
Re: Player vs Player
« Reply #12 on: 03/17/13, 13:23 »
Jeebus you two, go to your corners for fifteen minutes and quit it.

We get it Elios, you're anti-pk. Tylon is pro-pk. I'm in the middle.

Therefor, I'm the most balanced opinion here. I'm not saying that because I think I'm right, I'm saying it because I'm not extremely in favour or against pk. I have a much more balanced mindset toward the "in-the-middle" folks. Most of the in-the-middle folks don't really care about PK. They engage in it either because they have too(RP reasons, good ones), or because of toxic players griefing them.

And a system can't -always- deter toxic players just off of other players. Yes, in the past it has happened. But as you get a larger playerbase, where you can get lulzers bringing in their friends to take advantage of groups... they can start to deter the deterrants... and then they're free to do whatever they want.

This happens on Achaea, where the players -should- be able to police the toxic players, but they -can't- because the toxic players are able to out-grief the non-toxic players, simply because -most- don't want to be involved in pk. And the toxic pkers don't care about the penalties and just keep doing it until the admins step in, simply because they -can-.

The "pk-minded" always look down on the non-pkers, saying they're "whining because they're wimps" or "because they don't know how to play". This is exactly the kind of toxic behaviour that occurs, simply because some people don't -want- to fight. Serene gives them an out, but because of the rules surrounding serene, they can -never- roleplay any sort of scenario that would cause, or require, retaliation ... because it can never happen. Serene is a safety blanket to avoid being bullied. It does its job well.

So lighten up, enjoy what the game has to offer, and stop thinking that PK equals immersion. It doesn't equal that to everyone.
"Okay, who let Odin out of his cage?"
*A blue bouncy ball bounces by*
"That's it, I'm outta here."

Thalia

  • Code Junkie
  • Board Administrator
  • Heroic Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 631
Re: Player vs Player
« Reply #13 on: 03/17/13, 15:37 »
My 2 cents...

CvC  (Character vs. Character) is IC.  PvP (Player vs. Player) is not.   Too often CvC morphs into PvP.

To do mutually agreed upon CvC, we have the Arena, Sparing and Dueling.  To do mutually agreed upon whatever-whenever, we have Bloodsworn.   Other than in times of declared war, I'm not sure why combat outside of those should be allowed.

A player whose character is subject to a surprise attack tends, at best, to be annoyed.  I'd be willing to assert, that, with rare exception, no player finds the experience enjoyable.  The result is sometimes escalation of intra-character tension (IC/acceptable), sometimes escalation of intra-player tension (OOC/not desirable), sometimes complaints to IMMs (OOC/really not desirable), and sometimes a player quitting the game (OOC/really really not desirable).

Why should we allow surprise attacks?  It seems like a pretty easy annoyance to get rid of and one who's upside is overwhelmed by the downside.

sye

  • Builders
  • Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 198
  • Other character names: Ashlor Zipfe
Re: Player vs Player
« Reply #14 on: 10/14/13, 17:25 »
Bloodsworn only, make the benifits slightly better than they are, remove the cons of dying as much as possible.   (this would make it more fun and enjoyable and mutually exclusive and agreeable)

Pdeaths or wins shouldn't even be shown unless you're bloodsworn.
So they would never exist to anyone outside of bloodsworn.  (so during war times it wouldn't hurt someones char sheet at all)

Just a thought.

Thanks,


Anyone who has never made a mistake has never tried anything new - Albert Einstein