Game balance: character development vs raiding

[Swordmage]

This was originally part of another thread; however, the posts that I was reacting to disappeard and it no longer made any sense there. So here goes:

I think there is a balance problem with the raiding mechanic within the game. I find the death penalty and other losses too extreme for an open ended sandbox game with crime and murder.

If the intention of the game is to support and encourage raiding, murder, and pillaging, then the cost to the target of said destruction needs to be low enough that a player can shrug off the setback and go off and rebuild (else there will never be anything worth raiding). For many of us players, the joy of carving a new life out of the wilderness and developing a character is what attracts us to the game. If a raid can set us back 6 or 8 months of game time as the seeds, trees and livestock we bred are destroyed, maps and equipment are gone, and most of our skills are lost, why would we want to redo the same actions for another 6 or 8 months just to get back to where we are (with the expectation of yet another raid on the horizon); I can understand why some murdered players don't come back again for another go.

I really think the basic crafting/hunting/farming/resource-hunting game is fun. It fits very well with my interest in character development. However, I find myself wondering if it is worth my time to develop high quality trees or cattle or even crops when I have to constantly worry that someone may raid my farm and destroy it all just for the fun of it.

I realize that the villagers in Northern Europe were under the same threat all the time and in some way the game is a reflection of how life was, but there is one thing to keep in mind. Those villagers probably didn't enjoy the threat under which they lived any more than we do in-game; however, for them it was the only game in town.

[Jackard]

I believe the developers are aware, but their schedule is unable to address everything as quickly as many would like. If you examine the history of this game you'll find pvp has existed since near the beginning, but several countermeasures have been put into place by the devs. From claims to tracking to increasing the cost of black arts and the durability of walls (several times!)

Myself... I am an advocate of there being less focus on individual advancement, more on the group. The sheer amount of time invested in each of these characters discourages real combat from taking place, prevents harsher survivalist gameplay from being implemented and makes permadeath sting that much more.

[Avu]

They are aware but don't really care that much. They clearly do not consider it a priority.

[jorb]

Pvp is... late game content... so to speak. Most of our users are unaffected by it. It has also been a stated intention of mine for some time that we actually try to work somewhat on earlier resources/stuff, since the game is still lackluster early on. It is also true that I can only afford to have so much sympathy. The main issue, however, is that we haven't yet thought of a good enough mechanic for what we want to accomplish: namely claims defending themselves. Unless I have a stroke of genius, I wouldn't expect much to change here in any immediate future, though I do agree wholeheartedly that there is an issue here.

(Not that I don't have *any* ideas. I have lots of them.)

[ThirdEmperor]

I've got an idea for self defending claims. A object buildable only on claims called a "Ancestor Shrine", the way it works is this, you fuel it by investing numen in it, whenever someone leaves a scent on your claim it spawns a enemy called a "ancestor spirit" which only attacks those who have left scents on your claim. This ancestor spirit would be more powerfull the more numen is in the shrine, and will not spawn at all if there is no numen invested. Thieves could sneak past the spirit if their stealth is higher tham the shrine Q. Obviously the shrine would lose numen every once and a while, and the numen would go down a lot of the spirit is destroyed.

[jorb]

That is actually precisely what I don't want. I don't want it to feel "magical".

[Allumeuse]

Perhaps you could give to the players the combat bonus for being within their own claim. And to other players a combat penalty for being in the claim of another person? This is not magic but I think what they call, 'the home team advantage'.

[ThirdEmperor]

That is actually precisely what I don't want. I don't want it to feel "magical".

Doesn't seem any more magical than ancestor worship giving you bonuses in combat, but hey, you're the dev.

[Potjeh]

I'm with Jackard. Conflict should be about expenditure of resources, and wars should by won by attrition.

[Lothaudus]

BEAR TAMING. Chain them up on your claim and they attack trespassers.