Thoughts on The Black Arts.

[sami1337]

But jorb, if very strong players get to defend themselves, they would be nigh unbeatable and would thus be able to steal as much as they wish. While weaker summoned players would remain as vulnerable as normal, since most rangers are atleast intermediate in power. Wouldnt that only increase the gap between strong and weak? Unless the fighting-back part was not at full strength or something.

Because obviously stronger players didn't invest as much time into the game as newer players. This can't be right. We should be able to make an alt and just force summon those ranger bitches while they are offline. Everything is so unfair!

[jorb]

@ poltifar: I think there's a bit of back and forth on that. On the one hand, newbies are extremely vulnerable, especially since they lack social support in the form of other players when they get hurt in game. On the other hand, I don't think it's at all reasonable if someone who has been playing casually for a few weeks has even the shadow of a chance to hurt seasoned veterans like Rift, Blaze, Raephire and their likes.

The Goontown massacre of a few days/weeks ago is a good example of a group of newbies getting a really, really raw deal. I would like to prevent these types of edge cases, but I'm not set on a model for doing that yet. It should also be noted that the GoonTowners did receive help from veterans (Blaze, I believe?) in killing the Scourge of Goontown, which means that the self-regulating model of justice that we're aiming for, to some extent, did fill it's purpose, even if the response did take eight hours.

[Delamore]

Jorb, you're right, that problem kind of negates my suggestions usefulness.

Maybe the issue could be approached another way, apply a 30% reduction in LP lost if the death is offline and the player has been offline for more than a specific amount of time?


Quick, someone tear apart that suggestion! :p


Or do it based on crime

Murder = 100% of LP lost before the % usually lost based on tradition/change
Battery = 60%
Theft = 50%
etc etc.

To expand on this, possibly have the thief lose all theft based skills depending on the crime?

[Delamore]

@ poltifar: I think there's a bit of back and forth on that. On the one hand, newbies are extremely vulnerable, especially since they lack social support in the form of other players when they get hurt in game. On the other hand, I don't think it's at all reasonable if someone who has been playing casually for a few weeks has even the shadow of a chance to hurt seasoned veterans like Rift, Blaze, Raephire and their likes.

The Goontown massacre of a few days/weeks ago is a good example of a group of newbies getting a really, really raw deal. I would like to prevent these types of edge cases, but I'm not set on a model for doing that yet. It should also be noted that the GoonTowners did receive help from veterans (Blaze, I believe?) in killing the Scourge of Goontown, which means that the self-regulating model of justice that we're aiming for, to some extent, did fill it's purpose, even if the response did take eight hours.

The could have escaped with no loss due to full tradition had he not come back.
Numbers need to count for more than skill, right now what we have is super heroes rather than warriors of higher strength.

[kobnach]

15) Crime is not as big a deterrent from playing H&H as are: Poor UI, the (relatively) high system requirements for the game client, the relatively small amount of (especially late and early game) content, and the lack of proper introductions and tutorials.

I have lost more to bugs than I have to criminals - unless you count losing my first homestead, which became non-viable due to persistent vandalism. However, most of my major bug-related losses were due to measures taken to avoid crime. (Storing the good stuff in your inventory when logged off, then placing it in a container when you log in, is extremely high risk, particularly right after a dev session.)

If every criminal in the game lost internet access, I'd celebrate.

The presence of crime is my main reason for exploring a large number of strategies normally considered black - none of which involve harming non-criminal players. Basically, I don't feel I can simply play the game - but instead need to rape the system for all I can get.

[Hamel]

I'm more in favor of not being able to kill thieves at all, but instead to get back our items if the thieves are found. Thus, maybe a timer should be put each time an item is stolen, and the thief can't drop this item until the timer is done, and when a clue is used to summon/attack him, he can be beaten unconscious to make the stolen items appear? That way, we address the issue of the high risk of thieving (you wouldnt lose your character, just your stuff), and the we-need-a-timer part. Also, since the thief's inventory gets clogged up by undroppable stuff, stops him from 'stealing the whole hen house'.

Theft needs a large potential loss to counteract its large potential gains. Death, is the only loss that is sufficient, so far.

TOWN 2, in fair combat could never have beaten TOWN 1, but thanks to offline summoning it is not an issue, as player skill is completely negated.

Character skill. Player skill is not a factor.

[kobnach]

@ poltifar: I think there's a bit of back and forth on that. On the one hand, newbies are extremely vulnerable, especially since they lack social support in the form of other players when they get hurt in game. On the other hand, I don't think it's at all reasonable if someone who has been playing casually for a few weeks has even the shadow of a chance to hurt seasoned veterans like Rift, Blaze, Raephire and their likes.

The Goontown massacre of a few days/weeks ago is a good example of a group of newbies getting a really, really raw deal. I would like to prevent these types of edge cases, but I'm not set on a model for doing that yet. It should also be noted that the GoonTowners did receive help from veterans (Blaze, I believe?) in killing the Scourge of Goontown, which means that the self-regulating model of justice that we're aiming for, to some extent, did fill it's purpose, even if the response did take eight hours.

What bugs me with regard to newbies is not the massacre - most of the really new ones lost only a little bit of character development, and kept the knowledge they gained. I've lost a lot more playing time than that, to unwanted pvp activity, and no one seems to be considering that to be unjust, let alone a problem. What bugs me is that nobody seems to care about people stealing from (or griefing) newbies. "If it's not in a claim, it's fair game". Newbies don't have yeomanry. Or they don't have the LP to claim more than the basic 5*5 with a few baskets. In particular, they cannot claim fields - and probably have so few seed that some clown harvesting and dropping things can completely wipe them out. Much the same applies to someone deciding to chop down the one apple tree in their vicinity, or to destroy the house they are laboriously building.

That's where newbies can really get hurt. It's relatively easy to get one's initial LP, once one knows where to go and what to do, and a brand new character is 50% tradition. Even with the RoB as a total wasteland, an new character just has to walk out to less spoiled territory. Get 200 LP for pottery (the reincarnated newbie will already have it), and spend an hour or three beside a clay pit, making teapots. But replacing one's tiny stock of seeds and tools, or finding a new site because trees or boulders have been destroyed - that's a problem.

[Rugs]

You are a carebear find a different game.

[Ruggan]

You can't attack while low on stamina, right? Nor can you run quickly? And you lose combat initiative when you aren't attacking? The following partial-solution to the balance issue seems simple:

Attacking should use less stamina. In place of this, stamina should additionally be consumed from a successful defense attempt. (perhaps 1 stamina per attack, 1 stamina per successful defense). Here's an example:

• I'm a really strong player! I can kill this newbie very easily. But when his friends gang up on me, I do fine until they drain me of my stamina, at which point I'm overpowered!

This would add a numerical advantage to group combat and allow masses to overpower individuals. It could use some fleshing out, but you get the idea.

[kobnach]

You can't attack while low on stamina, right? Nor can you run quickly? And you lose combat initiative when you aren't attacking? The following partial-solution to the balance issue seems simple:

Attacking should use less stamina. In place of this, stamina should additionally be consumed from a successful defense attempt. (perhaps 1 stamina per attack, 1 stamina per successful defense). Here's an example:

• I'm a really strong player! I can kill this newbie very easily. But when his friends gang up on me, I do fine until they drain me of my stamina, at which point I'm overpowered!

This would add a numerical advantage to group combat and allow masses to overpower individuals. It could use some fleshing out, but you get the idea.

If masses can overcome individuals, then we get situations like the goonies under JTG's leadership, where they (some of them?) were attacking (mobbing) people passing through - and people who'd come to complain when clues led back to JTG's Goonheim. You also get griefers bringing on herds of alts to commit mass murder.

A better idea, IMNSHO, is to give a significant advantage to the _defender_. That makes it easier for anyone to protect themselves, and harder to be a professional murderer. To my tastes, this advantage would be negated by the presence of a summonable clue, whether or not the target was logged out - but as we all know, I'm no fan of anyone who _initiates_ pvp aggression... from vandalism on up.