PvE "pacifist" defense: Grudges and Curses

[Sevenless]

So here's my attempt at "Nidbanes clearly don't work, what else could we try?"

1/ Players can choose to defend themselves with curses that will be dealt to people who Use combat moves/KO/Murder them. The penalty applied to their attacker scales with the offense committed.

(Not applying this to stealing because theft alts are too convenient)

2/ Curses require some degree of setup/LP investment to start. Can't be too early world or it'd get abused by alts. Can also give players the option to enhance the potency with stat/LP investment like Will/Psy/Lore. Highly invested PvE players being hedgehogs that come at a notable cost to down or murder sounds kind of neat.

3/ The attacking player will be informed in the combat window what types of defensive curses their target has activated (and how powerful they are). Simply aggroing a curse bearer won't activate anything.

One edge case would be griefing the PvE player by locking them in combat but refusing to attack. I'm not convinced this needs addressing since this is already possible and no one does it?

4/ Curse carrying players cannot initiate combat with other players, or take any aggressive combat moves with players as their current target possibly not defend either if the combat system works that way (player+animal aggro being weird?). This is technically the "PvP opt out" PvE players ask for. Applying and removing curses take a long enough time that it can't be used by active pvpers or they'd brick a character for a sudden fight (I'm thinking 24 IRL hours). Possibly other self chosen debuffs to create more potent curses as well.

As much as the "no defending" worked in my head, animals sharing the same openings just makes this too wonky. Not worth modifying the combat system for this idea.

5/ Multiple types of curses to choose from giving the defending PvE player a bit more agency in what they want. Likely handled by the wound system, curses would be magic resistant with no healing boosts of any kind speeding up them going away. But all curses would heal over time.


I'm not convinced this is perfect, but I think this idea of "self limitation for passive defense" is a very useful one. It's very much a desire path for pve types: They want defenses, but they don't want to fight or interact with the combat system. It also gives PvPers choices, you can still ko a guy for his merchant robe but it comes at a cost.

Please feel free to tell me why this is a horrible idea.

Edit:

I never talked about what these curses actually do, and the reality is... I can make suggestions but ultimately the pvpers are the ones who need to honestly suggest things that limit them without being ridiculous. The same pvpers who, by the nature of who we're trying to limit, are the ones actually attacking hermits for entertainment. Catch 22 really.

Suggestions off the top of my head: % stat penalties, things that hurt LP or FEP gain, lower effective quality of gear when worn. None of this stops them from hermit murdering though. All it does is hurt them fighting other pvpers... which many people state effectively stops happening after 1-2 months.

Things that might annoy someone who's purely dedicated to being a hermit murderer would maybe be restricted inventory size? Movement penalty with things lifted overhead? Basically things that make looting inconvenient.

[DDDsDD999]

1. Opt-in systems often don't protect the players most vulnerable, simply because they don't know about them/can't afford them (see: old claim boosts siege system). Especially since the system is designed to protect those disadvantaged to be deemed not worth koing and stealing from.

2. I'm doubtful this system could be implemented in a way such that they're affordable by the people they're designed to protect, and not be abused by the people wanting to grief others with alts that inflict punishments for attacking.

[animary]

A Corbomite spell. Only works against PvP attacks, reflects all damage back to the attacker.

I've always thought PvP action should be for the PvP crowd, let them hack-and-slash each other; so allow hearthing from a PvP attack (the aggressor could not hearth, only the person attacked). This would give a way out for the peaceful folk while allowing combat between those who want it.

[Sevenless]

1. Opt-in systems often don't protect the players most vulnerable, simply because they don't know about them/can't afford them (see: old claim boosts siege system). Especially since the system is designed to protect those disadvantaged to be deemed not worth koing and stealing from.

2. I'm doubtful this system could be implemented in a way such that they're affordable by the people they're designed to protect, and not be abused by the people wanting to grief others with alts that inflict punishments for attacking.

One truth about this suggestion: This isn't meant to protect sprucecaps. This is for pve players accustomed to the game.

There's literally nothing I can think of that'll help sprucecaps without the eternally cursed alt problem rearing its head. Even things like realms where they generate valuable resources, it just changed which group of players was killing them.

[joojoo1975]

I kinda agree with triple D here in the fact those who would be unaware of it. Also the entrenched PvE player would prolly rarely leave his Village. Only my forager/fighter leaves the village now.

Plus you already stated the main problem when related to the "alt" situation.




Has it ever been discussed about having there be a Main starter island be non pvp, Kinda like the eve online concept where the middle is basic non pvp while the outlying areas be as it is now? How to implement? Dunno kinda like make the that continent have a realm bonus of Rage will not work while in that realm?

[guterpop]

"Nidbanes Guard"
Using the scent of a criminal that attack you summon a nidbane to help fight when aggroed by them.
Could use the material cost of a nidbane and also sue the EXP and cause a debuff for the user maybe they use more stamina when running for a short while, or they deal less combat damage of some form, ext ext Nidebanes might not be harmful to most players but would 100% throw a player off to suddenly have one attacking them at the start of a fight and could give players time to run away while the nidbane fights them, would be worthless in large group PVP to unless everyone had a nidbane on per target.

[Granny]

One truth about this suggestion: This isn't meant to protect sprucecaps. This is for pve players accustomed to the game.

There's literally nothing I can think of that'll help sprucecaps without the eternally cursed alt problem rearing its head. Even things like realms where they generate valuable resources, it just changed which group of players was killing them.

I think we/the game/Jorbtar have two problems on their hand, or maybe it is really one. The first being the consequence of the other.
1. New players might not get enough time in the game to get hooked, before they are "greeted by the community" of the game in an unfriendly manner and thus turned away in disgust.
2. There are no consequence for criminal acts.

The suggestions so far have been too convoluted I think, where too much stuff to do is laid on the victim. A much simpler answer is to limit it on the perpetrators end so to speak.

One solution might be to limit rage etc. Make it so it can only be bought and used on accounts with either a subscription or those who use game token. The idea being that if you are going to be asshat, you should at least be paying for it, offsetting the potential loss of players because of your actions.

[yym331]

One solution might be to limit rage etc. Make it so it can only be bought and used on accounts with either a subscription or those who use game token. The idea being that if you are going to be asshat, you should at least be paying for it, offsetting the potential loss of players because of your actions.

An interesting fact is that the perpetrators (I’m not a fan of this term, as it implies weak players are necessarily innocent or deserving of protection) are more likely to be on a subscription than the victims.
When fighting with fighters and knocking them out, I’ve noticed that most of them are subscription players. On the other hand, characters that don’t have subscriptions seem much more common among non-fighters.

[loleznub]

Making this 'useful' in any way would make it an alt related thing. LP/Stat requirements are nothing when I can boost any alt over the course of a week to 200+ relevant stats and 1m LP passively

Just another thing that'd benefit people that know how to play in any degree, and wouldn't change anything for those that are already failing because they can't get forgager credo, wear bunny slippers, and run properly.

Example: Meteor fight? alts dressed as miners and placed around the metoerite to inflict curses on opposing faction. Main miner also covered in the best curses. Basically a freebie to the meteor, if this is even worth doing in the first place at all.

Please try again!