Prelude: Happy New World!

[ricky]

i've brought this up once elsewhere, might have been brought up again in this thread, but i cant be arsed to read through it.

here's my two cents:

like runescape, those who initiate combat (the attackers) will recieve a "skull debuff"(which should last probably 2-4 real life weeks.
skulled players will die permanantly. permadeath. character lost upon death.
regular, non skulled players will drop all items and respawn at their hearthfire upon death.
add a "recently deceased" debuff that lasts 24 hours after first death - if theyre killed again, they die permanently. permadeath. character lost upon death.
initiating combat with a skulled opponent will not skull any character.

One problem with this suggestion: Does nothing for when your casual player faces home invasion.

one problem with your contention: the current system is no better
If your home invaders already broke down your walls to circumvent the visitor buff, then you're fucked to begin with.

of course, this isnt a panacea to solve all the game's pvp problems, but perhaps its a step in the right direction.

[wolf1000wolf]

Since you brought up Runescape, kindly take a look at my suggestion here:
http://www.havenandhearth.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=52584

Might also be a good step towards balancing care-bears and PvP.

[ricky]

I just had a thought. Remember how Runescape does that Wilderness PvP thing? Where only players within a certain range of lvls can attack each other?

What if when on non-owned (Kingdom, Village, Personal) territory, you could only initiate an attack on another character if their "Combat Score" is at least within X of yours? (Combat Score being some combination of your UU,MM, Melee, Per,Str,Con,Agi).

Would that be a mechanic that could work in alleviating the whole one-sided PvP issue?

Sure, PvPers could make lower statted characters to go grief casual hermits but those hermits would stand a much better chance?
In a fight, those casuals would still likely lose if they don't know the combat system but it'd be more interesting?

This idea is pretty rough as it needs to allow for Siege and other things, but what do you guys think of the general idea?

I could see the concept work if it simply hardcapped your stats to the base of your opponents, for instance if you have 1000 stats and your opponent has 100 stats, with the cap being 25% of the lowest stats, your effective stats would be 125. of course you run into the problem of constitution. you cant simply lower your constitution in a fight

perhaps it could go the other way, however. that your opponent recieves 75% of the highest stats, where in the same scenario above the weaker character is given a handicap of sorts and his stats are 'raised' to 750 to meet your opponent.

Ultimately, however, these are just workarounds with the numbers and dont solve the problem, and only try to fix it.

[wolf1000wolf]

...

I could see the concept work if it simply hardcapped your stats to the base of your opponents, for instance if you have 1000 stats and your opponent has 100 stats, with the cap being 25% of the lowest stats, your effective stats would be 125. of course you run into the problem of constitution. you cant simply lower your constitution in a fight

perhaps it could go the other way, however. that your opponent recieves 75% of the highest stats, where in the same scenario above the weaker character is given a handicap of sorts and his stats are 'raised' to 750 to meet your opponent.

Ultimately, however, these are just workarounds with the numbers and dont solve the problem, and only try to fix it.

Interesting points but my idea had nothing to do with capping stats while in combat but rather had to do with being able to enter into combat at all...?

[Granger]

Please - ban botting in W10; unless they pay %10000 more for subscription ...

Not possible. If it was, some MMO would have succeeded in doing so by now.

Ban it in the rules and nuke one whenever being in a bad mood (or just want to have some fun) would already go a long way of deterring users from it.

Stop suggesting this.

No backseat moderating. You might dislike his opinion but are not to deny it to him.

The main thing that pushes people away from purchasing is the paywall, as in actually supplying money to the game. I would pour all my money I make into this game if possible, but since I need a PayPal card or the like I can not do of so, which sucks tbh. However I am planning on buying a year Bronze Sub and a Verification soon, least I can do

Their current payment provider takes nearly every form of payment imaginable (no idea if you can trade in camels, but if you ask nicely they'll most likely accept), so PayPal sucks (while correct in itself) isn't the issue anymore as they moved away from them as only option is long gone.

I always thought that if you die you could slowly recuperate back to 100% over the course of two weeks or so. It would be a pretty good way to do soft-deaths. And then of course having the body and funerals could accelerate the process.
Also, committing crimes could possibly add negative modifiers to the process.
It keeps the pain of death, but it doesn't destroy all your investments. And it gives you incentives to keep going since you'll eventually get back to where you were.

This.

[Rance-sama]

A change I'd like to see for inheriting a dead character is you don't have to rediscover all the items you previously have.

[ricky]

...

I could see the concept work if it simply hardcapped your stats to the base of your opponents, for instance if you have 1000 stats and your opponent has 100 stats, with the cap being 25% of the lowest stats, your effective stats would be 125. of course you run into the problem of constitution. you cant simply lower your constitution in a fight

perhaps it could go the other way, however. that your opponent recieves 75% of the highest stats, where in the same scenario above the weaker character is given a handicap of sorts and his stats are 'raised' to 750 to meet your opponent.

Ultimately, however, these are just workarounds with the numbers and dont solve the problem, and only try to fix it.

Interesting points but my idea had nothing to do with capping stats while in combat but rather had to do with being able to enter into combat at all...?

sorry, I forgot to mention that.
see, if you cant enter combat, that essentially means no pvp, and when we dont have pvp, we get weird alt griefing where people spawn dozens of sprucecapped alts and surround you/your gates/your loved ones. so simply denying pvp based on your stats isnts a viable solution.

[Kirche]

I always thought that if you die you could slowly recuperate back to 100% over the course of two weeks or so. It would be a pretty good way to do soft-deaths. And then of course having the body and funerals could accelerate the process.
Also, committing crimes could possibly add negative modifiers to the process.
It keeps the pain of death, but it doesn't destroy all your investments. And it gives you incentives to keep going since you'll eventually get back to where you were.

I love this idea, death should not come without penalty, but the penalty should not be so steep as to lose the character forever

[Granger]

if you cant enter combat, that essentially means no pvp, and when we dont have pvp, we get weird alt griefing where people spawn dozens of sprucecapped alts and surround you/your gates/your loved ones. so simply denying pvp based on your stats isnts a viable solution.

viewtopic.php?f=48&t=52584

[Atamzsiktrop]

Full PERMAdeath is the heart of this game and it's fine as it is, maybe with exception of state funerals being a bit too strong.