PvP Balance - A Modest Proposal

[jkg8787]

After a brief Discord discussion where most participants seemed to agree I figured I'd make a forum post to get other input in a better discussion area.

I am proposing what I believe to be a few slight changes to PvP that I believe are oriented more towards "fairness" and a leveling of the playing field. By fairness I mean reducing aspects of a PvP fight that tip the balance to another players favor based on things that are WILDLY out of proportion to their opponents. I.e. Max Out Defense Talisman Red vs Blue with no Talisman. ORRRRR Blue with Maxed out Talisman vs Red with no Talisman.

Talisman's are the most extreme example as they are lottery based (relic drops), gold based (millions) and time based (experience to level).

I guess in general there is two thought styles for PvP.

1. Gear should matter. (i.e. bigger difference than store bought leather vs barbed exceptional leather. I'm talking about Purple Gear Drops that only a level 65 Troll Shaman can equip and no other person can).
2. Gear shouldnt matter (things should be level, or at least REASONABLE (I.e. its reasonable to expect someone to afford a full suit of Invuln, its NOT reasonable to expect everyone to have a full blessed 80AR suit that only spawned 1 time off Lord British himself).

Most UO PvPers who like UO:Ren era PvP probably fall more towards 2.

That's why PvP here should strive to be balanced more towards 2 rather than 1.

And it mostly is. Were almost there. Wands are still iffy. Heal still works on a factioner whos engaged with non factioner. Should be cleaned up.

Thats another thing if we want to do Militia only systems where wands work and people can wear talisman and fight other talisman. That's sort of another story to me and a different thing.

Most people seemed to agree that having Talisman de-equip when you flag aggressive on another player isnt a bad idea.

Thoughts?

 

[jkg8787]

Also are there other less extreme examples?

Someone else mentioned Swamp dragons with armor. Should that be treated similarly in a PvP aspect?

 

[Streets]

I think gear should matter, maybe not an extreme but if a player out the time in to get the equipment and takes the risks of loosing said equipment there should be a risk vs reward ideology used. I'm not suggesting a player with great armor should be able to take on a small army but there probably should be a noticable difference. Skill should make up for alot of game play mechanics but some people are naturally better than others and, in my opinion, should have some in game mechanics (equipment) to help balance. It's a fictional trophy.

I like the idea of talismans in pvp but with maybe a slight change. Make pvp specific talismans. The effects only work on others that have the talisman equiped. Much like jousting this way purists that don't want game play changed do have to alter but those that do will automatically have the options applied. If a PvPer attacked a player without said talisman it's just a normal attack.

I really think combat skills need to be looked at though. I won't go into deep on this as there are other topics discussing this and I don't want to derail the idea of this post but if you are basing a game play aspect (PvP) you really have to make sure the foundation is level.

Hope this helps get the ball rolling?

Disclaimer: the thought and opinions of this post do not represent the majority of uof players and is solely a personal opinion.

 

[Chediak]

The most reasonable solution would be to chop up the pauper children and serve them in a fricassee or ragout.

 

[jkg8787]

The most reasonable solution would be to chop up the pauper children and serve them in a fricassee or ragout.

I was going to try and do something more clever but I cant be arsed to make too mcuh effort

 

[jkg8787]

I think gear should matter, maybe not an extreme but if a player out the time in to get the equipment and takes the risks of loosing said equipment there should be a risk vs reward ideology used. I'm not suggesting a player with great armor should be able to take on a small army but there probably should be a noticable difference. Skill should make up for alot of game play mechanics but some people are naturally better than others and, in my opinion, should have some in game mechanics (equipment) to help balance. It's a fictional trophy.

I like the idea of talismans in pvp but with maybe a slight change. Make pvp specific talismans. The effects only work on others that have the talisman equiped. Much like jousting this way purists that don't want game play changed do have to alter but those that do will automatically have the options applied. If a PvPer attacked a player without said talisman it's just a normal attack.

I really think combat skills need to be looked at though. I won't go into deep on this as there are other topics discussing this and I don't want to derail the idea of this post but if you are basing a game play aspect (PvP) you really have to make sure the foundation is level.

Hope this helps get the ball rolling?

Disclaimer: the thought and opinions of this post do not represent the majority of uof players and is solely a personal opinion.

I tried to give room for your gear ideas. Maybe I wasn't as clear as I could be. Certainly if a player happens to spend all day killing monsters and gets a nice Invuln plate set they should be allowed to wear it in PvP vs someone who didnt bother to wear anything.

But I think there are certain examples that push this boundary. On the low end are things like barded swampies. They reduce damage by monsters but they are fairly plentiful, don't cost extreme amounts and don't require any additional training.

The extreme end are Talismans/Relics. As mentioned above they are extremely lottery based. Cost extreme gold and then require levelling up after.

I wouldnt be against PvP talismans per se, but I'd prefer that be a limited environment like militia only. I dont think its healthy to end up in a state where certain things that are very costly or time intensive become mandatory for PvP. I see that as ending up with a big pyramid with people with $/time/experience played dominating which isnt conducive to player growth and retention. Keeping things level allows the shard to grow and attempts to balance towards the "everyman".

 

[healmagePRO.]

I wouldnt be against PvP talismans per se, but I'd prefer that be a limited environment like militia only. I dont think its healthy to end up in a state where certain things that are very costly or time intensive become mandatory for PvP. I see that as ending up with a big pyramid with people with $/time/experience played dominating which isnt conducive to player growth and retention. Keeping things level allows the shard to grow and attempts to balance towards the "everyman".

I understand staff is busy with marketing, events, other projects but this is a VERY easy to code fix that could SIGNIFICANTLY reduce barrier for entry in the PK/PVP realm along with making some of these PKs weaker, providing better defense for farmers. Very quick fix to increase both new and veteran player retention from a business standpoint. I'd go on a limb and say the majority of the community agrees with these points and I am pretty sure when implemented the goal was for these PVM custom items to have 0 effect on the PvP aspect of UO that we all love. Two birds with one stone by accomplishing your original goal and also balancing for the better. Good ideas.

 

[GoD PaRtiCal]

Regardless how this is dressed up, it looks like all you are trying to say is:

"Defense Talismans give advantage to pvpers in dungeons or vs tamers"

Does that sum it up? I mean why make this more complex then it should be. The only solution I see above is to de-equip the talisman upon being agressor - but that doesn't solve it does it? The person being attacked then has the advantage. This approach only works if it is standard across the board -- everyone fighting loses their talisman. Oh but then griefers have the advantage...

Next solution?

 

[parsnip]

Also are there other less extreme examples?

Layered robes with AR patches

 

[drasked]

All of the "meta pvm content" (including swampy bonus) should be disabled upon engaging in PVP, be it attacking first, or fighting back. (if you are tanking a champ with def tali and some PK flags you, the talisman should NOT be disabled, only if you fight back)

 

[jkg8787]

Regardless how this is dressed up, it looks like all you are trying to say is:

"Defense Talismans give advantage to pvpers in dungeons or vs tamers"

Does that sum it up? I mean why make this more complex then it should be. The only solution I see above is to de-equip the talisman upon being agressor - but that doesn't solve it does it? The person being attacked then has the advantage. This approach only works if it is standard across the board -- everyone fighting loses their talisman. Oh but then griefers have the advantage...

Next solution?

Thats a fairly accurate summation, but your tone suggests aggression like you disagree with me but go on to list points that I agree with.

That was pretty much the agreement across the board in Discord. Talisman's should be de-equipped on aggressive flag.
Someone else mentioned Swamps.
I have the pet peeve about Heal Wands being in limbo status.

That is what the thread is about. Tweaking aspects to be more flat.

There is a discussion that could be had about if two people have talisman and attack either should both just de-equip. or only aggressor.

 

[jkg8787]

Layered robes with AR patches

Yes. Probably less extreme than a swampy but still in that same area.

So maybe we have 3 step example now. AR patch clothes. Then swampies. Then talismans.

 

[K A Z]

All of the "meta pvm content" (including swampy bonus) should be disabled upon engaging in PVP, be it attacking first, or fighting back. (if you are tanking a champ with def tali and some PK flags you, the talisman should NOT be disabled, only if you fight back)

I do not agree. Swampys AR can be damaged, a talisman cannot.. so that's whole different story!

 

[jkg8787]

Oh also the point of the thread was I was told that was the proper place and Discord wasn't. Whether the griping is true or not I heard lots of "this is the same suggestions from 2 years on now" and about how the forums is the place but no one uses the forums. Whatever the truth is thats why i made the thread. Because I think these are SIMPLE things. That are MOSTLY agreed on. But SHOULDNT take 2 years.

 

[jkg8787]

I do not agree. Swampys AR can be damaged, a talisman cannot.. so that's whole different story!

Good point.

There is an underlying question to all this. I think most can agree that Talisman/Relic push the limit for reasons pretty self evident. But as you step away from Talisman/Relic and start looking at other things you bring in more aspects to consider. It's easy to spot the extremes but not so much the outliers.

Again sot of my point. These extremes are easy to spot and shouldnt be that hard to sew up and fix. The smaller details can always be debated back and forth and added or deleted but I think most can agree that out of my 2 "gear" scenarios in my OP most here are probably closer to 2 than 1 and that should be the overall goal.

Doesn't really matter the timeframe but lets at least keep marching to the goal

 

[Streets]

Layered robes with AR patches

Hey hey hey now those patches are not easy to come by the cost me a ton of gold for the measly +3 armor which is negligible. That kinda falls into the investment vs reward in my opinion very small.

 

[drasked]

Layered robes with AR patches

Did this not get disabled?

I do not agree. Swampys AR can be damaged, a talisman cannot.. so that's whole different story!

I dont understand why it being able to get damaged is relevant, perhaps you can elaborate further.

 

[K A Z]

I dont understand why it being able to get damaged is relevant, perhaps you can elaborate further.

it means that it needs maintenance etc. etc.

but in general I'd say that in every decision made we should always look into the past and see what OSI had. It's the custom content (armor patches, talisman, pokemons etc.) that are unbalancing the game even further. Those are the things that we need to take a look at!

 

[drasked]

it means that it needs maintenance etc. etc.

but in general I'd say that in every decision made we should always look into the past and see what OSI had. It's the custom content (armor patches, talisman, pokemons etc.) that are unbalancing the game even further. Those are the things that we need to take a look at!

Are swampies not along the same line? (i have never played OSI)

 

[Streets]

Did this not get disabled?

They stopped coming into circulation when they disabled conquest but a few are floating. A patch will set you back about 1 mill for miniscule +3 armor. But some of us will min/maxamize where we can over 1 point of difference.