Thoughts on The Black Arts.

[Potjeh]

Yeah, I'm just saying that in the end Town 1 wins, and you were implying it doesn't.

[kobnach]

I completely disagree with your analysis of my idea, Kobnach. It's true that it would make the game a little bit more dangerous, but any player would be able to defend himself if attacked. The murderers or thieves now can fight back when "summoned," and people who are stolen from can always get their goods back.

Someone with an alt will not be able to defeat a sleeping player, and if the griefer uses their main, they will leave a murder clue and be trackable. With good reason, I'm sure a powerful posse would be happy to quickly track such a clue.

I believe that summoned players already try to defend themselves. They just don't do it very well. Fixing that requires significant AI improvements. Those can be done whether or not every other logged off player is made equally vulnerable.

[kobnach]

I've been thinking about this for a while, but really once dev sessions turn to focusing on villages/towns again, we might well see some kind of 'war' declaration ability. So, Town 1 would declare war on Town 2, which means both towns are officially at war with eachother, until some kind of peace deal is brokered. There would need to be some kind of meta UI for this, but there are heaps of examples from other games.

Anyway, as I see it, if you belong to a village, and kill a person belonging to a village you are at war with, it should leave no scents. Likewise, if you cause destruction to the village you are at war with.

IMNSHO, this is just a way for bullies/thieves/murderers to avoid leaving scents. It's fine if the target village needs to accept the war - as done, for example, in Ikariam - but until it's accepted, and a grace period expires (for all villagers to be aware of the war, and leave the village if they want to) an attack on a whole village should be treated just the same way as an attack on one or more members of that village.

[kobnach]

Ok, maybe if I respond to every bit of the OP where i disagree, I'll stop boring you all responding piecemeal. Note by the way that I think this is overall a good summary, and don't disagree with the basic message.

This is being discussed everywhere, so, in the spirit of that, I'm making a completely new post on the topic instead of replying to a relevant thread. When in Rome. Here are some extended thoughts on Crime & Punishment in Haven & Hearth.

Currently held beliefs:

7) Player retribution by and large works fine. Players are not afraid to exact justice, they feel safe behind their walls, and are not afraid to leave murder scents outside of them. Leaving a murder scent is often something you get away with. Rangers go to work with some sense of personal security intact, and this sense is not illusory.

True for those with high stealth. I think. Not so true for most of the rest of us.

8) 7 does not mean that law abiding players lose developed characters left and right. It happens, there have been some unjustified murders, but by and large this is not a problem.

It's a pretty big problem for those whose characters are killed.

9) Thieves have no personal motivation to develop characters, because it is nigh on impossible to get away with theft without "cheating". Ranging is too easy. Thief scents must decay in inventories.

If there's any risk at all for the developed character, and alts are workable, they will use alts.

10) Players with high public/forum profiles get hit. Casual players are left alone 99 times out of a hundred. The thief problem is overstated due to the newsworthiness of thief incidents. Normal play time is severely underreported in the forums.

I don't believe this, which is why I suggested you check it. Note that I am particularly thinking of griefer attacks here, but "if it's not in a claim it's fair game," i.e. anyone pre-yeomanry is a target.

13) It should be possible to keep indefinitely a small amount of goods that you cannot lose without consent.

Emphatic agreement. I'm glad someone heard me beating on that drum - I mostly got told this was equivalent to removing risk from the game entirely.

16) High stakes and tough brakes, open PvP and permanent death, and the general ability to affect other people, for good or for bad, is what makes Haven & Hearth more interesting than Habbo Hotel. The prospect of death, more than anything else, makes your character seem alive and meaningful. No one really wants these aspects gone.

I think there is severe disagreement over the extent to which these are good, from those who wish mechanisms for attacking others without leaving clues, attacking innocents while logged off, and generally making H&H into an always-on war game - to those who think that things are quite dangerous enough already.

Feel free to opine. I am especially interested in hearing from people who actually try to engage in criminal activities. How hard is it? Is it profitable? How goes the alt farming? Etc. etc.