Game Development: Duckwall

[derkami]

W16.2 - yes.

But pls not within the first june week. i'm on vacation and couldn't play D:

[linkfanpc]

it will now occur June 1st as a global conspiracy against kami

[Regulus2424]

DO NOT dangle a chance to fuck with custom client devs in front of Jorbtar

[derkami]

Oh No. I might have jinxed it now.

Hätte ich bloß nichts gesagt

[xzo]

And black swan?

lol, are you trying to lure me into the minefield of american identity politics again?

Duck lives matter

[vatas]

I should probably make a stand-alone thread, but to avoid "perfect is the enemy of good" -scenario:

Please abandon the idea of attaching permanent downsides to unlocking Rage.

Both implementations of this idea have been honestly bad. The w16.1 version isn't as horrible, but this isn't saying much.
w11 meta was to avoid buying the Rage unless you REALLY needed it, people kept 30k LP unspent as "rage bank" to unlock it in seconds if the decision was made.
w16 added the highly unintuitive gate mechanic. How do you expect the average player to figure out "because I haven't bought Rage, I can just run to my base through this open heavy gate. When the hostile player tries to follow me, he'll be stopped by an invisible, magical force field." While I can't confirm this with any kind of first-hand experience, apparently it was an epidemic that people would run around with "rageless fighters." This sounds like an oxymoron but because of how Haven combat system works, you kind of have to aggro everyone, you know isn't one of your friends. I can easily imagine this killing or at least severely hurting the faction PvP scene (inb4 "who cares I'm a PvE player, fuck them" -healthy PvP scene, at least hypothetically, deters/punishes overt griefing. When PvP scene is dead, griefers can basically run 100% free.)

Both implementations also had a root issue where the Rage downside applied to PvE as well...
w11: KO protection removed entirely.
w16.1: Can't pass through gates while having any kind of combat relation. I remember clearing cave fauna with a Rage Alt and having to deal with the restriction when using a (palisaded) mine-hole ladder to cheese.

("How dare you want to PvP in a supposed permadeath PvP game!")

Entering the "idea-guy" -zone:
The game already has a template for "take a major debuff for X hours in exchange for increased ability to participate in PvP: Murderous Rage.
>You can toggle it on easily, but only way it toggles off is to wait
>Players affected by it have a clear indicator

[Zentetsuken]

I should probably make a stand-alone thread, but to avoid "perfect is the enemy of good" -scenario:

Please abandon the idea of attaching permanent downsides to unlocking Rage.

Both implementations of this idea have been honestly bad. The w16.1 version isn't as horrible, but this isn't saying much.
w11 meta was to avoid buying the Rage unless you REALLY needed it, people kept 30k LP unspent as "rage bank" to unlock it in seconds if the decision was made.
w16 added the highly unintuitive gate mechanic. How do you expect the average player to figure out "because I haven't bought Rage, I can just run to my base through this open heavy gate. When the hostile player tries to follow me, he'll be stopped by an invisible, magical force field." While I can't confirm this with any kind of first-hand experience, apparently it was an epidemic that people would run around with "rageless fighters." This sounds like an oxymoron but because of how Haven combat system works, you kind of have to aggro everyone, you know isn't one of your friends. I can easily imagine this killing or at least severely hurting the faction PvP scene (inb4 "who cares I'm a PvE player, fuck them" -healthy PvP scene, at least hypothetically, deters/punishes overt griefing. When PvP scene is dead, griefers can basically run 100% free.)

Both implementations also had a root issue where the Rage downside applied to PvE as well...
w11: KO protection removed entirely.
w16.1: Can't pass through gates while having any kind of combat relation. I remember clearing cave fauna with a Rage Alt and having to deal with the restriction when using a (palisaded) mine-hole ladder to cheese.

("How dare you want to PvP in a supposed permadeath PvP game!")

Entering the "idea-guy" -zone:
The game already has a template for "take a major debuff for X hours in exchange for increased ability to participate in PvP: Murderous Rage.
>You can toggle it on easily, but only way it toggles off is to wait
>Players affected by it have a clear indicator

This game have evolved over the last 15 years into a game that just shouldn't be open world forced PVP.

There is an insane amount of content, an infinite grind, and the idea of PVP as a way to fight over resources and space or secure better materials for your own village hasn't been a thing since legacy.
Current day PVP in this game is a minigame enjoyed by factions and participated in for no other reason than to flex on the other faction members. The reward is entirely social and enjoyed out of the game.
After about 1 month, PVP becomes a tool for a few people who actively want to upset other players and if you tell me you don't think its detrimental to the longevity of the playerbase and isn't the reason why loads of new players have quit, you're just being dishonest.

The "but it's a pvp permadeath game, they shouldn't be mad" arguement only makes sense if you can argue unironically, and with a straight face, that the game has been developed with this in mind for any amount of time. (it hasn't)
The game itself is a bait and switch, offering an insane breadth of content and larp, and promise of long term enjoyment, experimentation and grind, with an shallow and innaccessible pvp system stapled ontop that is great for the valhalla style faction pvp that occurs, but literally damages the enjoyability of the rest of the game.

PVP is enjoyed by a very specific group of players that make up the vast, vast minority of overall players.
Players who engage in PVP ignore the majortity of the game's content and largely do not play for longer than a few weeks.
The players who engage in PVP that do play for longer than a few weeks motivated by exactly 2 key drivers: upset other players, and/or upset the devs

If open world PVP must remain in the game, choosing to participate should come with major limitations and restribtion, but I agree that it should be tweaked further to ensure that these same limitations don't cause issues for the rest of the playerbase.


In short, it is a mistake to continue to develop any part of this game with PVP in mind. Keep permadeath, and expand on the survival aspects of the game. Remove PVP or simply keep it as a minigame that doesn't require forced participation.

[vatas]

In short, it is a mistake to continue to develop any part of this game with PVP in mind. Keep permadeath, and expand on the survival aspects of the game. Remove PVP or simply keep it as a minigame that doesn't require forced participation.

Admittedly, I was mostly going off based on Developer Thoughts on PvP and how forum community has been consistent when it comes to shooting down PvE server suggestions.

Giving this some thought, I'm making perhaps the same fallacy as Jorb in that there will be "spontaneous order" and not just random chaos, when you unleash bunch of people into a virtual sandbox.

Your post makes a very good point about how PvP is increasingly small part of the game (at least in terms of feature list/content) that a tiny minority of players seriously engage with, yet it still has the power to make everything else revolve around it.

its okay man its just my idea thats why this is the critique &ideas section plus like i said someone of us would like something like this plus everyone would have a choice PVp or Non-Pvp really simple u could play H&H2 normal or play H&H2 Non Pvp but its up to yall i was asking this cause i was like why dont H&H2 dont have a server dediacted without Pvp

Do I really have to spell it out for you? My point is this: What do you do on a non-PvP server when someone:

• Starts building a village idol to claim the land around you;
• Takes ten alts to block the exit of your palisade gate;
• Builds a palisade around your claim;
• Plants a tight forest all around you, or conversely, cuts down all the trees around you;
• Simply stands in your way;
• Runs away with the carcass of the animal you just killed; or
• Just decides to settle down next to you while you don't like him?

These, and many other conceivable actions, are far easier ways to grief people than is PvP, and PvP is the only thing that keeps them somewhat in check. Therefore, removing PvP results not in less griefing, but in more.

In case it's not obvious, I'm not denying that some people just want to live in peace, and I don't think it would be a bad thing if they could do that. But removing PvP does not result in that.

While I'm skeptical about solutions to this other than "open PvP system" - I have to admit that it's a very blunt system that rewards "sweaty tryhards."

[BigCountry]

PvP is actually "fun" for the first few weeks of a world release. The world is super active, and everyone is sort of in par. if you lose gear or, worst-case scenario, have to bury a character, oh well, it's not that big a deal. It's the next phase, where everyone ventures off to the depths of hell, titans out chars, and the world just all turns to turd.

[linkfanpc]

if you lose gear or, worst-case scenario, have to bury a character, oh well, it's not that big a deal

yea that's the big draw for early game PvP to me. everyone can get a little whacky with it even if one side managed to make really good characters because there's just not a lot to lose until metal gets involved. (and one more reason id love a slowed down world )