Accept Current Combat

[VDZ]

Even if you made the most convincing escape possible, it could still be attributed to my incompetence in the attacking role. (And yes, I should've gone to sleep earlier.)

Maybe if you recognize you're shit at something you shouldn't try to act like an authority figure on that something. I'm not sending Tiger Woods 3,000 word emails about how his opinions on golf are wrong.

This is more like burglary victims complaining to police that not enough is done to keep burglars from breaking into their homes while the burglars argue 'dude, do you know how difficult it is to get away with breaking into your home?'. I'm sure the system is fine for people who enjoy chasing people for half an hour straight with the prospective reward of getting to loot them dry. That does not mean the system is also fun for the people who have to run away for half an hour for no reward whatsoever. You don't need to be a mugger to complain about an area being unsafe and you don't need to be a driver to complain about the lack of bicycle lanes on busy roads. The aggressor opts in to PvP, the victim is forced into it. It being fun for the aggressor does not necessarily make it fun for the victim. I have to engage with the system even if I am not the aggressor.

I'm gonna put forward kind of a weird game design point on this: What purpose do PvPers serve to the rest of the playerbase? It's obvious that PvPers gain content from attacking non-PvPers (and from fighting between each other), but what is the rest of the playerbase gaining from PvP?

In haven's case, PvPers serve as the persistent threat that makes the world feel dangerous, and by extension "real".

In game design, challenges are coupled with rewards. Even in games where e.g. killing/avoiding enemies does not yield an explicit reward, they are part of a larger challenge (e.g. making it to the end of the level) which does provide a reward. Even in games about pure survival, your survival time (or things done during the survival challenge) is your score. Challenges without a reward are only issued as a punishment (e.g. invincible ghosts appearing if you take too long during arcade platformers). Getting chased by a PvPer, however, yields no reward. In all cases, you would have been better off never getting attacked. It cannot be considered a punishment (unless 'going outside of your pali' is intended to be punished by the game design) and there is no indirect reward in escaping them. (In many games enemies wander a certain area, and escaping them provides access to the area beyond it, but in Haven the PvPers wander everywhere and you can also reach the area beyond by just going there at any other time and not having the bad luck to run into PvPers. The one exception is when you actually trespass into the vicinity of a large village (which has a huge, area-bound risk), but that's totally fine and not the issue being talked about here.)

So the only part of that argument that makes sense is that it helps 'immersion'. I find that gankers help immersion in much the same way midge swarms do; technically you are correct in that it makes it more realistic, but more realistic is not always more fun. Sometimes you want to move away from realism to make things more fun.

what is the rest of the playerbase gaining from PvP?

PvP is above all a method of conflict resolution. That is the reason PvP exists in this game. Ganking-style PvP and 'proper' competitive PvP are merely side effects of it, the latter inarguably a good thing and the former arguably being a bad thing. I think there is great value in being able to draw my sword to tell someone to fuck off, and I similarly think it's a good thing large villages can attack you if you get to close to their territory. But I don't think wandering griefers benefit anyone other than the griefers themselves and possibly viewers/readers if they're streaming/retelling their hunts.

There's a fine balance to be maintained though between PvPers and non-PvPers in games that try to have diverse communities. Too many killers will kill out the normal playerbase, and eventually get bored without prey and quit.

The population already collapses over time. Some argue ganking-style PvP is (part) of the reason for that, which I doubt, but the problem is definitely not the lack of ganking-style PvP.

Long term, AI and hazards eventually either get beaten thoroughly or are impossible to beat in a way that feels "real". Trolls are an example of this. Some players cheese them into non-existence, the rest of the playerbase just considers that location lost until they can find a troll slayer.

How is that different with players for non-PvPers? People who either massively outstat you or have superiority in numbers run onto your screen and the only thing you can do is run away.

Not enough PvPers and they don't serve their purpose as a challenge to the non-PvPer playerbase.

There are various reasons why players quit, but I've never heard of 'lack of risk when just walking around' being one such reason.

Since most of the PvP oriented players seem to be happy with the PvP system, I think we should respect their wishes. By haven's nature, many players who come into the game will never enjoy any form of PvP anyway.

That reminds me of the crude joke, 'most people involved enjoy gang rape'. There are various degrees of 'not enjoying' something, and the degree of enjoyment by one party should be balanced with the degree of dislike by the other party.

I'm not saying action should be taken to prevent ganking-style PvP as that's pretty hard to do without compromising legitimate uses of PvP, but if it could be made to suck less. But again, that's only if a good opportunity arises. Proactively trying to address the issue is likely to backfire, so there shouldn't be any drastic changes.

[SnuggleSnail]

There is a big difference between "I don't enjoy PVP", and "PVP is bad because XYZ", especially when XYZ are absurdly, retardedly wrong. Every single quantifiable thing you've said has been just wrong, and it's a waste of everybody's time.

If you want to make an emotional/anecdotal argument make one. Don't pretend to be an authority when you clearly have not participated in what you're talking about at all. It's a waste of everybody's time... Like, obviously?

[VDZ]

If you could catch people easily then everyone is just automatically dead when they get ganked, is that fun?

The ideal system is one where players arent automatically dead when some gankers roll up but also have to work hard to survive and use skill.

I really don't get this weird insistence I keep seeing that getting KOed leads to death with any regularity (often implied to be frequent or even always). I've been ganked enough times in Hafen but I haven't died to PvP even once (other than one instance near the Altar of Ruin at the end of World 8, where I got completely gangbanged on a low-statted character by a group of probably top-tier characters, and I wasn't even trying to survive, I just wanted to get close to the altar). The worst I ever get from getting KOed is a Wretched Gore which are admittedly a bitch to heal but even those I usually don't get. The wounds from getting ganked aren't that bad, the only part that sucks is losing all of your gear.

Are you guys all constantly playing at 30% HHP or something?

Case in point, I got KOed six times in a row at the Ring of Brodgar stream party and only died on the sixth KO, when my HHP was at 9.


^ These were my wounds after the fifth KO.

[Zampfeo]

I like the current combat system, but adding more moves/cards would probably just make PVP even more confusing to nabs. There's plenty of complexity to master with movement, water management, and timing anyway.

[Audiosmurf]

I've got two words for you boys: turn based combat

[Finigini]

I've got two words for you boys: turn based combat

based

[DonVelD]

Case in point, I got KOed six times in a row at the Ring of Brodgar stream party and only died on the sixth KO, when my HHP was at 9.


^ These were my wounds after the fifth KO.

post stats

[Sevenless]

Gank pvp is not a fun challenge: PvP in the context of haven is a significantly larger concept than just ganking. I am not specifically talking about gank style pvp, I'm talking about PvP as a whole. Ganking not being fun for the gankee is only a small facet of pvp as a whole, and honestly written into the name. It is never fun to be ganked, if it is it isn't called ganking.

My argument is that engaging in the act of PvP only needs to be fun for the PvPers. The impact of PvP extends vastly beyond just ganking, and arguably with current death mechanics ganking is no where near as devastating as it used to be.

PvP is for conflict resolution: The intentions of a system and the impact on a game are not always the same. The impact of PvP on the gameplay system is definitely further reaching than the initial intentions.

Population collapse: I'm talking long term, haven's population at world start continuing the hit the cap of server capacity indicates it's not dying out. Many sandbox MMOs depend on resets (of some kind) to maintain longterm interest, Haven is by no means unique. Rust and Wurm are a couple examples. EVE not needing resets is actually the unusual contender.

PvPers are stat monsters you can't cheese: You can't do diplomacy with a troll. Counter to popular belief, some PvPers aren't trolls.

Tasteful joke: I've made it pretty clear that PvE player don't enjoy the act of PvP, otherwise they wouldn't be PvE players. I'm not talking out my ass though: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1drDuaQXm_U This is a known game design balancing act.

[Halbertz]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1drDuaQXm_U This is a known game design balancing act.

Yeah, but in my experience the "Explorers" and the "Killers" in haven are the same people. Well, or close to the second ones. The model is so-so, to be honest.

It is never fun to be ganked, if it is it isn't called ganking.

In most cases yes, but if you somehow manage to get out of the situation (alive or even knock down one of the pursuers) - this is the best feeling you can get from pvp in online games, trust me.

[VDZ]

Tasteful joke: I've made it pretty clear that PvE player don't enjoy the act of PvP, otherwise they wouldn't be PvE players. I'm not talking out my ass though: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1drDuaQXm_U This is a known game design balancing act.

According to that video, 'killers' are only really necessary to keep 'socializers' in check (they can be slightly beneficial to 'achievers', but only slightly). Do you really think Haven is at risk of having too many friendly interactions? Just today at the Ring of Brodgar stream party you saw a clear example of the 'killers get in the way of socializing' element when griefers just started spamming the chat and destroying the benches people were sitting on. If we go by that video's theory, Haven is a clear case of having too many killers resulting in the socializers leaving the game. We're talking about a game where community projects get griefed because the person running it should just git gud and half of the active forum posters agree with that.

But your argument that gankers are required for challenge misses both my point and the point that video was making about 'killers' providing additional challenge for 'achievers':

A long time ago, I played an obscure MMO called 'Dransik', and it had a high-level area called 'Hell'. The entrance to that area typically had PKers roaming about and attacking people who tried to enter Hell. (They were likely incentivized by the traffic of high-level players, meaning better chance of getting good loot if you PK someone there.) I found it fun to go to Hell as a low-level nab and to try to get as deep in as possible before inevitably dying. The high-level monsters were the game-provided threat, but having PKers who could easily kill you added to the experience. Slipping past the PKers felt good, it was a challenge I overcame and I was rewarded with entry to Hell.

This worked because the PKers were in a specific area, they were consistently there, and the penalty for death was relatively light (you drop some stuff and respawn at the nearest spawn gate). Had those same PKers instead visited the newbie hunting grounds near the starting town every now and then, meeting them would have been a miserable experience. They would not be a challenge that would feel rewarding to overcome but instead be like random punishment for hunting at the wrong time. The 'trick' to overcoming that challenge would be to simply play at the times they aren't present. Since we're talking about Extra Credits, check out their video 'When Difficult Is Fun - Challenging vs. Punishing Games'. The first rule they list, and stress, is consistency. A challenge that is not consistent is bullshit. If gankers showed up every time exactly 15 minutes after leaving my palisade like timer ghosts, that would be a fair challenge to play around. But gankers showing up everywhere at completely random times is not a challenge, it's pure punishment. In fact, the scenario of 'gankers attacking you while you're trying to do stuff' fails every single one of the criteria mentioned in 'When Difficult Is Fun'. A PvP system can provide additional challenge to 'achievers'. But Haven's PvP system does not do that.

The system needs to be balanced for both sides. 'Dislike of being ganked' is not a binary state where the details are irrelevant to gankees and you only need to consider the needs of the gankers. On the one extreme end you have slap-on-the-wrist punishments like only being forced to hearth back without any wounds, loss of items or other penalties, and on the other extreme end you have Legacy combat where having a titan touch you even once means instant permanent death. Gankees would be less opposed to more PvP freedom in the former case than in the latter case. The amount of frustration caused by being ganked is tweakable. And for the getting KO'd part, I think it's mostly in a good state (though losing your tools - useless to the ganker but vital to the gankee - is kinda bullshit, the belt system encourages having all your main tools on you at all times because it's the only autoswap system and you can't unequip a belt without removing each tool one by one so dropping off tools you're not going to need is a hassle). It's just the chase part that's fucking tedious, and you're locked into it the moment the ganker comes on-screen (i.e. it's entirely inevitable).