Solving the So-Called PK Crisis

[Tard the Paladin]

Yes but if that's the case whats to stop people from just going back to OSI? I think a lot of people (including my self) found UOF shard to be more enjoyable because it wasn't like OSI with Tram and Fel. I believe if you take Fel away and turn it in to Tram it would drive a lot more people away and not just people who want to Pk or PvP.

UO has twenty year old mob AI. Without the risk of PvP this game is pretty dull in my opinion. Trammel killed OSI and that PvM-only mentality is creeping in here as well. The current system is fine. All I'm saying is that Trammel sucks but what staff has been proposing is probably worse because it has no Felucca area at all.

Ners and punishments typically drive players away. There are other servers and other games to play. The entire idea of a time out corner for reds is fundamentally flawed game development. The intelligent solution to a play style problem is to look at the player base that is causing a disruption and find a different avenue for them to focus their attention. Incentivized PvP is that solution in this scenario. The nerf and punish mentality is knee jerk and reactionary not to mention inherently lazy. Sure it might get a lot of 'likes' from players who want to stick it to the reds but in the end what happens when you implement a system that sticks a player in "time out" thereby begging them to go play another game/server? Eventually, they do just that. The better approach is to just implement something that keeps them happy. Many of us have been offering detailed solutions to do that. However, do you see any staff responses here?

 

[GluttonySDS]

That leaves #3. If success rate could be increased somehow -- if it could be made easier to transition from PvM to PvP without having to start from scratch and learn an entirely different game, if people could taste the thrill of victory occasionally rather than being ground into the dust of defeat -- PvMers might come to enjoy PvP. Which would create a positive feedback loop where they do it more, learn it better, succeed more, like it more, etc. Instead of the negative feedback loop we seem to have now. That trajectory is not going to change unless energy is put into changing it.
.

This is exactly what EQMS has always done -- simplify our PVP tactics so that people who are new(new to PVP, new to UOF, even new to UO itself) can quickly learn the basics of PVP and contribute to field victories over the most "l33t" of opponents.

People should be looking for ways to get newbs more involved in PVP -- instead they try to keep the barrier to entry and skill gap extremely high so they can shit on newbs and fill their ego thinking theyre 'the best'.

 

[Tard the Paladin]

This is exactly what EQMS has always done -- simplify our PVP tactics so that people who are new(new to PVP, new to UOF, even new to UO itself) can quickly learn the basics of PVP and contribute to field victories over the most "l33t" of opponents.

People should be looking for ways to get newbs more involved in PVP -- instead they try to keep the barrier to entry and skill gap extremely high so they can shit on newbs and fill their ego thinking theyre 'the best'.

I totally agree.

One common complaint that we hear is that group combat takes no skill. You and I argue that the nuances of group combat are understated. We understand that calling a big battle takes experience and that positioning and timing are vital. The biggest complaint is usually about ebolt rails being effective. Its an absurd claim that we are at fault for using effective means of combat. If ebolt rails are such a problem then wouldn't the better approach be to make group combat more dynamic? We are players not developers. If there's a problem with group combat game mechanics then the blame isn't on the guilds that fight in groups but rather on the developers that have yet to make group combat dynamic. Yet we don't hear players arguing against the group combat system but rather we see players hurl insults at EQMS. Its time to criticize the game mechanics rather than the players forced to use them.

So if group combat is not dynamic enough then what is the solution? I believe that wands and bolas would be a welcome addition. One major benefit is that bolas actually give dexers a legitimate role in group combat. I wonder what other additions could help.

 

[K A Z]

I totally agree.

One common complaint that we hear is that group combat takes no skill. You and I argue that the nuances of group combat are understated. We understand that calling a big battle takes experience and that positioning and timing are vital. The biggest complaint is usually about ebolt rails being effective. Its an absurd claim that we are at fault for using effective means of combat. If ebolt rails are such a problem then wouldn't the better approach be to make group combat more dynamic? We are players not developers. If there's a problem with group combat game mechanics then the blame isn't on the guilds that fight in groups but rather on the developers that have yet to make group combat dynamic. Yet we don't hear players arguing against the group combat system but rather we see players hurl insults at EQMS. Its time to criticize the game mechanics rather than the players forced to use them.

So if group combat is not dynamic enough then what is the solution? I believe that wands and bolas would be a welcome addition. One major benefit is that bolas actually give dexers a legitimate role in group combat. I wonder what other additions could help.

splash damage on pots, true AOE, wands, bolas

basically anything that makes this game a bit harder.

 

[Tard the Paladin]

splash damage on pots, true AOE, wands, bolas

basically anything that makes this game a bit harder.

How should AOE work? Meteor swarm would actually do damage to a lot of players at once?

 

[K A Z]

How should AOE work? Meteor swarm would actually do damage to a lot of players at once?

yes. Same for EQ. Same for explopots. Explopots should hit everyone (prevents people from spamming them, makes zergs less useful etc. etc.)

 

[Tard the Paladin]

yes. Same for EQ. Same for explopots. Explopots should hit everyone (prevents people from spamming them, makes zergs less useful etc. etc.)

Any ideas for expanding the roles of dexers and tamers in group PvP?

 

[K A Z]

Any ideas for expanding the roles of dexers and tamers in group PvP?

why? tamers are already stupid as fuck because 2 years later we're still stuck with a pay 2 win template. Dexxers just were buffed.

 

[Tard the Paladin]

why? tamers are already stupid as fuck because 2 years later we're still stuck with a pay 2 win template. Dexxers just were buffed.

Yeah, I hear that. Non-meta tamers might be interesting though if they're using young dragons or nightmares like back in the day. Dexer's got a buff but I'm wondering if there are ways to make them viable. For example using bolas or para blows with spears.

 

[K A Z]

Yeah, I hear that. Non-meta tamers might be interesting though if they're using young dragons or nightmares like back in the day. Dexer's got a buff but I'm wondering if there are ways to make them viable. For example using bolas or para blows with spears.

dexxers are also pretty good in groups man.. not sure about bolas, too. Theyre kinda cool, but also lame as fuck.

 

[Vorax]

Axer's are hitting for 40+ damage(on good hits) on people wearing barbed ar, I think an axer in any group is a viable thing.

 

[Caso]

Last night was a great example of the problem on UOF concerning PK'ing. A single party of reds stopped the double champ spawn - a server wide event. To me its kinda sad that a single party of reds can stop the entire blue population in their tracks. Let's save the flamey debate over whether or not reds should be allowed to do what and when. Rather let's focus on finding a solution that keeps blues and reds happy. I firmly believe that the Kingdoms idea can do so if it properly incentivizes PvP. In other threads players have expressed skepticism over whether Kingdoms will become popular. They feel it could become exploited or zerg-tastic. There's also the fact that many players don't want to PvP under any circumstances. These are legitimate concerns that are easily remedied.

Consider that the Kingdom's stuff could be balanced several ways. Guilds that join Kingdoms could automatically go to the smallest Kingdom to prevent the largest guilds from making one huge Kingdom. This would provide balance on the number of guilds in each Kingdom.

The only way the Kingdom stuff will actually become popular is if it properly incentivizes blues to join the action. PvM bonuses and pixels would be the way to achieve that. The incentives would also need to be based on the number of members in a Kingdom. This would give an edge to the smallest faction and make the largest faction less appealing in terms of gaining pixels. This provides balance for incentives.

The other concern besides numbers is abusing the Kingdoms system. IE having different accounts in different kingdoms. Providing incentives based upon a players activity will prevent players from leeching off the work of others. A player in a Kingdom that doesn't pull their weight shouldn't receive bonuses like the players that do. Putting that in context would be akin to a faction player with a low punkte score receiving very little silver from mobs where a player with a high punkte score would receive a lot of silver. The punkte score type system prevents players from running up their score by killing alt characters.

Those are just some ideas in my head about balancing the new faction-type system. I'm sure there are other good ways to prevent imbalances and exploits.

The Kingdoms idea is a great way to get blues involved in PvP. Their involvement in PvP will allow them to get better pixels when they PvM. The Kingdoms system can be balanced in terms of numbers and participation.

If Kingdoms becomes popular then it will solve the so-called red crisis. We reds will be doing Kingdoms rather than raiding the dungeons. It will also encourage blues to join the fun because they will have incentive to do so. They surely don't have to PvP because there's nothing to make them. However, if they want the shiniest pixels and the best bonuses then the amount of work they do will determine their rewards.

I think eventually Kingdoms would become contest to see who can create the smallest Kingdom with the best players. This is because remaining smaller and having active hard-working players will result in better rewards. Having a small group of PvP'ers scooping up the bonuses for the hordes of PvM'ers in the same Kingdom simply wouldn't work.

Mate most examples are the reds outnumbering the blues (eqms). The fact 1 party of reds took over blues that had several times their numbers is terrible though. Shows you most of the server are trammies who are cattle waiting for the server.