Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

kang

Tester
  • Content Count

    167
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

76 Excellent

About kang

  • Rank
    Ensign

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  1. kang

    New ROE discussion

    Yeah, god mode alliances will help to some extent. There are some problems with counting on them to fix underlying issues though. Alliances need to solve a number of things: General Population issues Timezone issues Territorial issues Others? So an alliance that may solve one of those may not solve the others or may actually exacerbate them. Certainly better than nothing though. The population and timezone issues would come up even with a small number of nations but the underlying statistics work out that you have more disparity the more nations you have. So a smaller number of nations doesn't solve the problem it just means that the problem won't be as severe as it would be with a larger number.
  2. kang

    New ROE discussion

    As a final remark, I would say that it's entirely possible that there's sufficient demand for an age of sail simulator with an historically accurate level of ganking to keep a server full. So if the devs do decide to keep the ganking friendly map layout, I'd say skip the MM and most of the BR AI dogpiling stuff. You're trying to swim upstream as the saying goes. And maybe try to figure out a way to leverage the ganking into the gameplay. But you do have to figure out a way to make it worthwhile for the gankee otherwise you may end up with nothing but bots to gank. That's where it gets to be a little head scratchy but of course there is always the gratification of participating in such grand endeavors itself! Maybe that will be enough? Who knows...
  3. kang

    New ROE discussion

    Jack: Yeah, with any of these external reward/penalty systems, I'm reminded of the freakonomics dude who set out to devise a system to promote potty training for his infant and the infant intuitively figuring out the way to exploit the economist's system. That's why I think your best bet is to build the mechanics into the world itself. Leverage travel times\size of map and teleporting mechanics on death to make an extended ganking trip a risky affair. The cracks will still be found and exploited but you now have a way to up the ante (increasing the risk maybe with ai patrols etc) and you also can use honor systems and so forth to put the finishing touches on whatever level of ganking is appropriate to keep people playing.
  4. Yeah, the problem with any game is that you get used to a certain play style and then something comes along that changes that completely. Usually it's in the form of the nerf bat in a released game. But in an alpha, the whole game tends to change with every patch. Alpha testing is sort of like you get 10% of the good stuff (because 90% of the content isn't in place) and the bad stuff is magnified by 10X (because it changes all the time forcing you to give up beloved placeholders and such). It's still better than watching youtube videos from the outside wishing you could get in though...
  5. kang

    New ROE discussion

    Jack: Yeah but having ports from all the nations spread out amongst each other with neutral ports everywhere is really the perfect setting for the ganking to get entirely out of hand. There's no doubt that extra systems will come on line to help in that respect but currently what we have is basically the ultimate ganking simulator. Which I suppose is a testament to the realism aspects that are represented in game as historically the gank was the order of the day. The problem is that because the map aspects support the ganking so strongly, you're left with needing a strong counter to that if the ganking gets out of hand. Which leaves you contemplating horrors such as MMs and so forth. Which is what then leads me back to the map... --Removal of reference to moderated content.--
  6. kang

    New ROE discussion

    Sure, you could layer on some sort of additional mechanics to deal with it. Something like an honor system or, god forbid, some sort of matchmaker. But, imo, you'd be far better off making your anti-ganking mechanic a more intrinsic part of your overall game design. That's where the map comes in. If there were fewer, larger nations where all ports are contiguous (at least as a starting point), you build in safer zones where a gank squad would have to sail for some time in enemy territory to get to where the newbs\pves congregate. If they get sunk, they respawn back in their territory and would then have to solo it back to the squad thereby placing themselves in the gankee position on the way. You would also be building in border areas where pvps could congregate on both sides. Anyone sailing alone in a border area would pretty much be asking to get ganked. Maybe there's a good reason for it or maybe not but, either way, you have a tactic (staying out of the border areas) to fall back on to avoid perma ganks. Neutral ports would fall between the various nations. These and the border ports would likely be the primary points of contention between the various nations. Unfortunately, this map doesn't really lend itself to that sort of setup without dramatically reducing the number of nations. But there is an additional benefit, there, regarding timezones. One of the issues that US players face is that most of us are playing for the US which means that the majority of pvps on in US primetime are US players. If the nations were GB, France and Spain for instance, we would all have to choose one of those nations and so likely there'd be a better distribution of US players across the available nations. It would also be a benefit to the Euro/non-US players as we would be making up their night shift (as opposed to raiding all their stuff when they are sleeping) and so from that perspective you'd be spreading out players better across the various timezones and eliminating some of the alarm clock raid issue. It's definitely a big change, but it solves many problems intrinsically without having some external gameplay mechanic added on to fix what are actually underlying issues with the map\nation design. If you really must stick with the map/nation distribution as it is, I think you'd be better off just going strictly pve or maybe pvp lite in some way. To some extent that would free you up regarding many of the other realism issues as well since adding pvp in the mix really steps on your ability to add realism without excessive aggravation.
  7. kang

    New ROE discussion

    I think admin's suggestion was kinda spur of the moment. All this hand wringing may be a bit premature. For my part, I simply took it as the devs may not yet have a grand plan in dealing with some of the potentially game killing aspects of pvp.
  8. kang

    New ROE discussion

    Yeah that would sort of be like a starter area. Which would certainly be helpful for the first few hours in game but you're a newb for quite some time. My point though about map redesign forces the ganking out to the borders where it belongs and builds in a large "safer" zone where the newbs and pve'ers can level in relative safety. So by being flexible on the map, you eliminate two problems (rampant ganking and newb areas) with one change. It also would tend to focus the pvp into smaller areas such that people with a pvp bent would be more likely to find another group of pvp'ers and not have to pick off stragglers as they run into them while looking for another group to fight.
  9. kang

    New ROE discussion

    It's entirely possible that the devs are way ahead of us on all this and have the newb thing all figured out. My concern is that, if they haven't, with the state of the map as it stands, there is very little they can do to avoid a gankee/ganker/anti-gank spiral that I see coming which is applicable to everyone and not just the newbs. This MM thing that admin is proposing is perhaps the one thing you could do. And I'm really not a big fan of that idea at all. I'd probably rather just let the ganking run it's course. I do have other ideas that might work though if we're willing to be a little flexible map-wise.
  10. kang

    New ROE discussion

    So, you don't necessarily have to go to shooter levels of arcade-ness to avoid newbs getting perma ganked and becoming second class citizens until they manage to break through the rank\skill wall. A good game provides that without diluting the end game. The thing is though, you have to design your game from the ground up to provide newb levels\areas of some sort. I think part of the problem is that most of us on the non-dev side haven't really spent much time considering the newb game and instead tend to focus on the end game or at least the non-newb levels of the game. If you don't build out a sub game for the newbs though, it's quite possible that the vets will end up facing an ever shrinking pool of other vets to fight since there aren't enough newbs filling in the gaps in the vet ranks as people leave/take breaks. Or, when the COOP server gets plugged in, you could have a mass exodus away from the non-newb friendly server and because of the persistent elements of the game people may end up staying over there rather than having to grind up new characters on the pvp server (this is probably the main reason i think you'd be far better off building a coop mode into the current game rather than carving out the coop population into an entirely different instance). Another problem is that no one really knows how popular this game is going to be. Maybe it will be wildly popular and these concerns will have been without merit. But if we assume that it's mildly popular in a niche sort of way, you could see these attempts at introducing some newb/non-hardcore friendliness into the game as a way to save it in the long term even for the hardcores. So even if you find a certain detour from the original concept as a major transgression, it could be that's what is necessary for all the things you do like about the game to be possible.
  11. kang

    New ROE discussion

    Yeah my thought along this line would be that anywhere within visual distance of land (maybe excepting pirate\strategic ports) is a "controlled" area where pvp can only occur under certain proscribed circumstances (incursion is under way, infamous enemy of some sort is plaguing the area, etc). Once you're out of sight of land, anything goes. The downside is that pretty much puts a damper on locking down resources and that sort of thing. I still prefer my 3 faction concept which would be pvp anywhere but that's a pretty significant change.
  12. kang

    New ROE discussion

    Generally speaking, a game's ability to attract new players to replace the normal and expected attrition of existing players is what keeps it alive\growing. And, to a certain extent, making a game attractive to new players requires de-hardcoring the game somewhat. It's a fiendishly difficult path that a developer has to follow and is almost guaranteed to upset pretty much everyone in one regard or another. But, compromise is like that, whether it's a an age of sail video game or a democracy...
  13. kang

    New ROE discussion

    I really do think you need to restructure\realign the world in some fashion. I don't think there's a bandaid fix for the situation as it stands.
  14. kang

    Ganking Petition

    You'll never get rid of ganking in an open world situation. What you can do is make it not the order of the day. The way all the nations are thrown together and the piecemeal way that players enter the "world" (different times, different ports) virtually ensures an epic gank fest. I would agree that glomming on some sort of matchmaker would kill the spirit of the game. But I do think something needs to be done. I'd probably restructure the world in some way...
  15. kang

    New ROE discussion

    Also, the thing about honor systems is that they work best on the honorable type players. Can they have a marginal impact on negative behavior? Sure. But you do need strong counters to that sort of thing otherwise you do risk a negative pvp feedback loop.
×