PvP, PvE players and interactions - Suggestions

[Reiber]

Just because ganking is in the game doesn't mean it's good design and should be part of the game. It's a one sided mechanic, the aggressor has nothing to lose and the defender has everything to lose. It's objectively bad design. If you think new players are killed for their gildless spruce caps, then you are honestly delusional. There is no gain for the aggressors to gank. And there are cases such as being in a lake or ocean where it is completely due to rng. Unless all watercrafts have same movement speed.
This is almost the equivalent of playing world of warcraft and getting spawn camped by a max level character at the starting area. No way of playing against it.
Ganking is only fun for the aggressor while it is the aggressor, if you change the roles around it stops being fun. The loss of players being on the recieving end far outshadows any enjoyment the 0.1% of the players ganking get. When there's a 1k AI bot zerg killing everyone with 10k stats 1st day, everyone would cry for it to be nerfed.

then find some autistic game without pvp, or a pvp game without autistic progression,
nobody is spawncamping you, unless you base is without pali right outside snails base, and he stands next to your hearthfire all day.

the autistic gankers, is litterally the only reason why you have walled off settlements, and learn how to build them, they are why you dont use dugouts anymore, why you walk instead of boat, and why you shit your pants while doing so. even bears arent dangerous, if you manage to click on cliffs, or caves on the minimap.

but because the playerbase has every right and opportunity to fuck you over in this game, you have to learn the game, and interact with it, sometimes it gets iffy, and shit gets abused, but in general, your playstile evolves, because of the pressure of your fellow players. and that builds the only bit of tension or grief in the game.

pvp. might be the driving force in this game, even for the large population of players who never interact with it willingly.

[Kaios]

Even in Ultima Online a player could put a bounty on the one that killed them. Players in this game have literally no options for recourse and that's including during the fight as well. There's a difference between saying pvp is bad and the pvp mechanics are bad, I hope you know that.

What's the general reaction when someone tries to make things more interesting? Well check out this thread for example, but I'm sure you are already fully aware of how childish the so-called "pvp"ers act. The players complaining about the lack of content in The Moot are the same ones that troll and ruin every other thread, post utter garbage themselves, harass the player base in-game and outside of it, and are nothing but a burden on the community and the development process.

[jpjpjpppjp]

Just because ganking is in the game doesn't mean it's good design and should be part of the game. It's a one sided mechanic, the aggressor has nothing to lose and the defender has everything to lose. It's objectively bad design. If you think new players are killed for their gildless spruce caps, then you are honestly delusional. There is no gain for the aggressors to gank. And there are cases such as being in a lake or ocean where it is completely due to rng. Unless all watercrafts have same movement speed.
This is almost the equivalent of playing world of warcraft and getting spawn camped by a max level character at the starting area. No way of playing against it.
Ganking is only fun for the aggressor while it is the aggressor, if you change the roles around it stops being fun. The loss of players being on the recieving end far outshadows any enjoyment the 0.1% of the players ganking get. When there's a 1k AI bot zerg killing everyone with 10k stats 1st day, everyone would cry for it to be nerfed.

then find some autistic game without pvp, or a pvp game without autistic progression,
nobody is spawncamping you, unless you base is without pali right outside snails base, and he stands next to your hearthfire all day.

the autistic gankers, is litterally the only reason why you have walled off settlements, and learn how to build them, they are why you dont use dugouts anymore, why you walk instead of boat, and why you shit your pants while doing so. even bears arent dangerous, if you manage to click on cliffs, or caves on the minimap.

but because the playerbase has every right and opportunity to fuck you over in this game, you have to learn the game, and interact with it, sometimes it gets iffy, and shit gets abused, but in general, your playstile evolves, because of the pressure of your fellow players. and that builds the only bit of tension or grief in the game.

pvp. might be the driving force in this game, even for the large population of players who never interact with it willingly.

My problem is not PvP, the problem is how one sided ganking is. Ganking gives little to no benefit to the ganker and ruins the experience to the people on the receiving end. Ganking should really only occur between pvp factions.

Walled off settlements exist to protect from stealing, not from ganking itself.
Not using water ever seems absurd, seems more like an issue with ganking and the solution isn't to just ignore complete mechanics of the game.
The spawncamping was just a metaphor, the result is the same, you harass someone into quitting the game.
Ganking, for the most part, is not pvp, it's just harassment.
I'm all for pvp in this game, however the bar of entry is huge and it should pose risk to both sides in a pvp encounter. People not wanting to fight should be able to detect ganks before they happen. Power tripping in a pvp game with these severe consequences should not happen and is poor design.
If you really want a power trip experience where skill is irrelevant and you can feel good for making other players quit, you can also check other games... However I am not completely sure which other games do it as this is an inherently flawed and unsustainable idea.

[boshaw]

Even in Ultima Online a player could put a bounty on the one that killed them.

There's literally nothing stopping you from offering bounties on people in hnh. Track your killer, find their base, and make your offer for someone bigger to come in help. You people have so little creativity despite this game being so open to what you can do. Do your really need your hand held that much to offer someone a token or goods?

[Kaios]

Even in Ultima Online a player could put a bounty on the one that killed them.

There's literally nothing stopping you from offering bounties on people in hnh. Track your killer, find their base, and make your offer for someone bigger to come in help. You people have so little creativity despite this game being so open to what you can do. Do your really need your hand held that much to offer someone a token or goods?

Have you ever created a thread on this forum that is even remotely as creative as the one I linked? Not saying it's great, but please provide one example of anything you've done in that regard that is better.

[yuuya331]

This proposal essentially advocates for "punishing crimes more severely while encouraging the misuse of alternate accounts."

It’s clear that the person who made this suggestion doesn’t understand the game at all.

The karma system designed to punish "crimes" is fundamentally flawed in this context. In this game, "crime" isn’t inherently a bad thing. Rather, it’s a debuff that occurs when someone acts according to their own sense of justice, such as defending their territory.

Your suggested karma system would only work if alternate accounts (alts) were banned and players were limited to one account and one character per person. In reality, however, players frequently exploit multiple characters to attack or harass others, making this proposal entirely meaningless. Ironically, when someone puts a stop to such harassment, their own karma drops as they are labeled a "criminal" (quite amusing, isn’t it?).

Honestly, if you dislike being ganked, it would be far more constructive—and fun—to focus on strengthening your community or improving your own skills, rather than introducing nonsensical mechanics.

[jpjpjpppjp]

This proposal essentially advocates for "punishing crimes more severely while encouraging the misuse of alternate accounts."

It’s clear that the person who made this suggestion doesn’t understand the game at all.

The karma system designed to punish "crimes" is fundamentally flawed in this context. In this game, "crime" isn’t inherently a bad thing. Rather, it’s a debuff that occurs when someone acts according to their own sense of justice, such as defending their territory.

Your suggested karma system would only work if alternate accounts (alts) were banned and players were limited to one account and one character per person. In reality, however, players frequently exploit multiple characters to attack or harass others, making this proposal entirely meaningless. Ironically, when someone puts a stop to such harassment, their own karma drops as they are labeled a "criminal" (quite amusing, isn’t it?).

Honestly, if you dislike being ganked, it would be far more constructive—and fun—to focus on strengthening your community or improving your own skills, rather than introducing nonsensical mechanics.

These problems can be worked around with nuances and other mechanics, disregarding any solutions at the first problem is a defeatist mindset.

Creating new characters and village/claim and grinding stats and lp to get it able to gank other people could be cumbersome enough to deter a large amount of ganks.

Getting a large group of people on the same page to be competitive is not doable for 99.99999% of people. Skills take no part in this. Essentially get a group of 100 people to play the game lol.

The suggestions were made with goal of being built upon, I am aware they have ways to be exploited but it can all be mitigated and worked around. If your contribution is negatively destructive, reeking of ad hominem, you may as well not post here and spend your time anywhere else.

[Sephiron]

Even in Ultima Online a player could put a bounty on the one that killed them. Players in this game have literally no options for recourse and that's including during the fight as well. There's a difference between saying pvp is bad and the pvp mechanics are bad, I hope you know that.

What's the general reaction when someone tries to make things more interesting? Well check out this thread for example, but I'm sure you are already fully aware of how childish the so-called "pvp"ers act. The players complaining about the lack of content in The Moot are the same ones that troll and ruin every other thread, post utter garbage themselves, harass the player base in-game and outside of it, and are nothing but a burden on the community and the development process.

You can literally already put bounties on players. Just build a notice board with a description of the player and a promised reward outside of your base lol.
The reason you won't do that is because you know, nobody is going to actually follow through with it. And if they added an actual mechanic to the game I don't think that would change anything.

I am supportive of balancing PVP, because the difference between someone who is actually interacting with the mechanics and spending the time and effort to work towards cheese and hard metals, versus someone who just gets everything to boost their stats by using bots and stealing shit, is astronomical. But punishing players for participating in PVP is retarded, and going through the effort and taking the risk of actually murdering other players should be rewarded

[Kaios]

You can literally already put bounties on players. Just build a notice board with a description of the player and a promised reward outside of your base lol.
The reason you won't do that is because you know, nobody is going to actually follow through with it.

Aren't the reasons why no one is willing to follow through worth some consideration?

And if they added an actual mechanic to the game I don't think that would change anything.

I do agree, I'm not suggesting a bounty system would be a good implementation. Only that other pvp oriented games like Ultima Online did include systems such as players going red from PK and bounty rewards. Of course there are fundamental differences between the core concepts of those games and this one, such as criminal actions not being inherently "good" or "evil" in relation to how those actions are performed. I also think it would be difficult to implement in a way that would prevent a friend/villager or an alt character of the criminal from claiming such a reward. That was an issue in UO as well where red players would have blue alts or have someone they know claim the bounty rewards.

[Sephiron]

Aren't the reasons why no one is willing to follow through worth some consideration?

Yes. I personally think that a soft stat cap during pvp is what this game needs. You can still grind STR and AGI but during pvp have only maximum 100 points of each stat actually be available to both participants. That way even if you have 800STR you still have an edge vs weaker players beyond a certain point, but you're on equal standing with people who have 100+ str/agi. That would reduce the need for botting in order to keep up with and participate in PVP.

I don't think it'll ever happen, though, it's against the design philosophy of the game