Twilight Forums

I'm a huge PvP buff in KoL because I think it's fun to have a competition between players that's relatively easy to catch up on (you have to work to do ascensions every couple of days to double pick flowers and stuff...but it's still possible to be at the top. In several years. >.>).

I think Ryme (may I call you Ross, dear sir? ) has mentioned somewhere that he wanted to eventually implement a PvP system. I'd love to help out, so if the system is based on winning several minis (or something. There has to be SOME kind of minigame based thing in turn-based MMORPGs, right?), I have some suggestions.

The minis should be VERY chaotic. Meaning that any new player could dominate well, given, say, a month, and an understanding of the PvP system.

However, a current player should not be subject to loss if the player is devoted. Hence the many "within the last month" suggestions I'm making.

Taken from KoL (real AND suggestions)
1) Fashion. Clearly does not require unreachable dedication to win. Attacker should win if a tie happens. Why? "You and your opponent both match in your fashionable suits, but the judges are impressed by your attacking stance."

2) Trophy. In this case, a merit badge mini. Not sure what happens in case of a tie.

3) Stats. Self explanatory. Just put a variance on the compared stats and bam.

4) Purity. Gotta balance those stat minis. This mini is questionable though.

5) A suggested mini. Elemental comparisons. Compares elemental resistance of course.

6) Consumption mini. Compares the number of foods AND drinks (I don't think it's a good idea to separate the two like in KoL) consumed in the last month.

A month would probably be 30 days.


ME! ALL ME! + DGW! For the most part.
1) Player Slayer. Compares the number of unique victories in the past month or so. Ties goto the attacker...maybe.

2) Perhaps add in just a randomly generated mini? Coin flip, possibly?

3) Just...possibly a comparison of the number of quests completed. This is very subject...having more quests that can relatively fit under two weeks seems too much.

4) This is mainly inspired by dead_guys_watch, but it's awesome. Exploration mini. Compares the number of unique visits to ingame locations (that require a turn, minus resting).

5) STOLEN FROM DGW AGAIN. Risk taking. This factors in your opponents level and stuff and compares difficulty scalings. As in, it compares whether you're choosing harder opponents to attack and such.


Now, outside of the battle is the war...
1) Calvinball. This is originally Hogulus' idea, but it ROCKS. There is a special item that can ONLY be transferred by winning in PvP. It can confer some sort of bonus, I suppose. Your "hippy stone" cannot be repaired while in your possession too.

2) Limited number of attacks per day of course. Increasable or not, possibly.

3) Penalties for losing on attack. Maybe defense. If you get KO'd you should receive some kind of beaten up penalty.

4) A hippy stone-like mechanic! Of some sort.

TBC...in later posts.

Suggestions? Thoughts?

I would think that super heros wouldnt pvp each other for anything other than training.

I'd propose a pvp addition to the gaming center where you log in and fight other superheroes in an online type arena via a "virtual arena account" or something functionally equal to the hippy stone in KoL.

I would like there to be, instead of a direct stat comparison, an almost rock paper scissors like relation between the classes so one class has an advantage against another, perhaps level related, and is neutral to some and weak to one. However, you have the option to either strengthen yourself against one class or eliminate your weakness to one class based on some mechanic I havent really thought about yet. Which is just a randomization tactic.

And then add in other character/accomplisment comparisons, perhaps a best transportation comparison/ race across town. And a welding mini based on how many pieces of constructed equipment you have equipped.

I have some more Ideas that I'll try and post later.



EDIT*

How about a protecting your community mini that compares the amount of times you have patrolled your neighborhood, say in the past 5-10 days. This would aid in balancing this pvp a little more toward the lower levels.

Conversly a days in the desert mini, which would balance out the neighborhood mini toward the higher level players.

Also a comparison of the turns spent playing the different games where the most turns wins, possibly including the casino, where the most turns gambling loses.

For the punishment I think getting one of the beaten up penalties is a little harsh. It is kind of the same thing in kol because when I lose in pvp I lose massive stats. I guess these are the two main punishments but maybe with a little brainstorming we could come up with something else.

If I am the only one that thinks this way then by all means follow through with one of those punishments.

Also I guess if pvp were the main aspect of TH not ascension that punishment would be acceptable.

Really, if one wants to be fair to the clubs in terms of representation, there needs to be some capacity for grieving in the PvP system. Without any way to grief, it just becomes *another* diamond aspect and a lot of the people whom it normally would attract probably fall through the cracks.

I had a PvP thread somewhere. Maybe it got lost with the old forums? Dunno.

PvP is something I've been putting off, because I keep hoping for a good idea (or a bunch of 'em). What I'd really like to do is have something where you actually play against other players in realtime. The two main problems are: 1) it's difficult to code that stuff and 2) there's all kinds of problems regarding lost connections versus intentionally disconnecting if you're losing, etc., that I really don't want to have to sort though.

But I still keep hoping I can come up with something different. I've found KoL's PvP system to be fairly unrewarding. Maybe it's simply that I've never dug in enough to really understand it, but I haven't felt much inclination either. I've done it a couple of times for a trophy, but even that seemed like a pain. I'm not saying their system is bad; just saying it doesn't do much for me. So this means I don't necessarily want to start with mini games and work back up, but rather want to start with the broadest questions and work down to the details.

So the first big question for me is:

Is it important if PvP relates to the rest of the game? In other words, is it important that the PvP process can affect your adventuring, leveling, and possibly even ascension? Or, if PvP was completely isolated (you enter an arena, and everything you do there stays there) would it still be fun?

The benefit of an essentially isolated PvP is that you could engage in it regardless of your ascension plans, and it doesn't matter if you're hardcore, softcore, casual, etc. You're still on an equal starting basis with everyone else.

The drawback is, of course, that it then wouldn't *help* your ascension progress if you wanted it to.

I think I'd like to have this answered first before going on with the next steps. Or maybe I just don't know what the next step is yet, but I'd still like to know this.

I am a diamond so I guess I am kind of biased towards the diamond point of view.

Also, I think it would be amazing if pvp could tie in somehow with your progress in the game. Jick always talks about how he is going to redo pvp in kol and I am nervous that when he does we will only see things that vary a little from the new pvp of kol. On the other hand kol does things to make pvp enjoyable all by itself. Stuff like the pvp premiership and yeah I guess thats about it.

So definitely go with tieing pvp into the game and maybe if their was content involved with it. For example, I play world of warcraft a lot and there you can trade your pvp kills in for weapons, armor, etc. Maybe something like that with unlockable rewards and such.



With this you could just get a certain number of points from the VR people after you defeat a person to trade in for rewards.

I totally can relate. ;D

Hey, don't leave me out too!

I'm a diamond too.

Agreed, Ryme. KoL's PvP system isn't very...dangerous, per se. It doesn't really give any feeling of accomplishment or loss (and thus a desire to get better), and that's what I wish to hit on.

And getting beaten up should only come from being KO'd, which, in the KoL system, rarely happens as often as I feel you think it does. And even then, maybe only for the attacker. But then that doesn't allow for some grieving.

My feeling is that PvP shouldn't be required to ascend, but something like WoW's PvP system (special items exclusive to PvP, like semi rares after 100 wins or something, or (TANGENT) maybe 5000 rank increased total, if we were basing it on KoL's system) sounds nice. I don't know how that works, but I'll see if I can look it up sometime.

The thing with PvP, to get all players hooked, is that there has to be a strong sense of continuing to do it. Of course, there are some (dare I say) wimps who will never touch PvP given a million nudges, but really, what game doesn't have that?

I would support optional PvP, ala most MUDs. That is, actual player vs. player combat. The biggest problem with porting that over, is that MUDs are real-time, and this is combat turn based. Then again, I suppose the game could just factor... um... various... er... factors... and automate the whole combat. I don't much care for that, though; I like both players needing to be on at the same time.

Losing should give you a special beaten-up effect, make you lose XP, and probably lose chips, too. And, if you have The Special PvP Item, you risk losing that, too.

And if someone deadheads in the middle, then they're in trouble. In MUDs, if you could log back in fast enough, you might be able to salvage the combat, otherwise you died. It's just one of the things that adds actual risk to PvP.

_________________

The churches are empty / The priest has gone home / And we are left standing / Together alone
--October Project: "Dark Time"

Hehe, I like the ideas you're bringing up Cristiona.

Major question to your suggestions though. For Ryme. Is this game supposed to be a "coffee break game" like KoL was supposed to be or is it dead serious like now? Or in the middle? I feel like you're aiming in the middle somewhere. It can get serious if you really want it to be. In that case, racing to logon is kinda...iffy. Especially for those with crappy schedules.

I think I can see a way to work that out though. If you gave like, an 18 hour period to "respond to the attack", that might fit around schedules much better. I know that I'd still be narrow given only 18 hours to respond to an attack.

Ok, Ross' post has been already analyzed, but I'll give my own point of view:



Indeed, I do agree that this is the best idea. Handling PvP in real time, would give (literaly) a new dimension to the game. For me, there are 3 possible options:

1)Making it like standard combat. Like, someone making himself available for combat, and others choosing to fight him as a monster. This is the easier to code, but it is not actually real time. I'll expand no more because I am sure you know what I am talking about...

2)Making it a special, turn based event, as in, both players fighting at the same time, as if the other was a monster. Very similar to the above, harder to code, but much more fun, because it permits both players to use their skills. (The above could do so too, by calculating what would be the highest damage output and using that skill. Or it could be so that the player chooses the priority of skills to use when 'emmerged')

3)Making it a flash game. Imagine a primitive form of mortal combat, like, a flash game, where stats actually do play a role. In my opinion, this is the most interesting idea, but this means that players have to develop arcade skills (not exactly to the spirit of this game, but a very interesting addition)




Well, even the easiest idea, requires a sever amount of coding, then again, these are things that you do once, and persist for ever, increasing a lot gameplay . So, investing a good amount of time to it, and even assistance from third parties, could be a good idea (especialy for the flash game idea).



Well, just let take a look at how major game houses set these kind of things: in most games, DC (disconnecting) results for loss in the disconnected party. Of course, this is typical to games that a player is found against another set number of players, like strategy games, or football games. MMORPGs, since there is an indefinite number of players, DCing has typicaly no penalties, but I do not think this is the case in TH (even if in theory, it is a MMORPG.)

In short, I would say that: give the loss to the disconnected player. That simple, that effective. In the majority of games that work like that, you see that players, generally get used to it, in contrast where disconnecting results in the battle being cancelled, and the players argue all the time.



Completely and totaly agreed.



I would suggest no game penalties, but only minor boons in case of win. It may seem that game becomes 'sissy', but I see one thing: games that impose great penalties when losing/leaving/etc get very frustrating, even if they give analogus rewards. Instead, games that do not penalize loss, but ther rewards for winning are limited, are much more popular.



Agreed, but it gets boring after a while. I think going the KoL's way (you have to give up ascension to greatly increase chances) is a necessary evil .

Generally, I do think that taking the KoL's approach is completely out of the way for TH. I do believe that a 'serious' combat system where you actually get to fight another player, whether justified as training or actual fight is the best approach.

_________________

This would be so awesome. I can just imagine it you go into the VR and start a flash game. Then your max health damage done, dodge rate etc is all the same as your character. I think this is the best choice sounds just about impossible to code.

The thing is if we can make pvp fun to play on its own like a flash game like this and not just fun because you have the most pvp wins on the leaderboard than people dont need rewards so much and wont care about the losses so much.

So then impose some KIND of penalty but don't make it too drastic. Maybe introduce an NPC who "helps you up" or something. Having no penalties just...doesn't seem right either.



Disagree. Greatly increase chances? Not as much as you think. And in fact, speedier ascensions are better for PvP than just staying in one class.

Otherwise, I'm content with everything else.

Eheheh! So, let me add to and adjust my words



Well, when I said no penalty, I meant mechanical penalty, as in stats/items/exp loss etc. Naturally, a narative "penalty", as in a guy helping you get up, sounds excellent.



Well, I realize that how ascension will affect pvp may vary wildly relative to even minor changes... I might instead say that I simply would prefer a game where stats do play a role (and thus require a certain amount of focusing) to an "isolated" pvp field, that the level of competion among all players is the exact and same (as in a typical arcade game). So, in short, I say, make an arcade game, "enchanted" with the RPG parts of TH. ("One Must Fall 2097" anyone? I might have won a scholarship if it wasn't for that game Oo...)

EDIT: This post was started half a second before clicking "Stand By" so as to get some sleep What? Yes, even programmers get to "turn off" their pcs... Hold on... "Stand by" is NOT "turn off"

_________________

Man, there's even more stuff to sort through here than in the IotM thread.

I wanna back up for a second, because I'm not sure that I explained myself properly with my bolded question way up there regarding my feelings on the amount of connected with the ascension game. (Or maybe I'm just not understanding the answers--that happens enough, too.)

I think part of what I find unsatisfying about KoL's PvP is the fact that it does affect the ascension game, but only by just a tiny bit. For me, that makes it feel like I'd have to put in a huge amount of time just in order to get an itty bitty bit of reward. A few stats here, an item there, or a flower in hardcore for a few extra turns if my liver isn't full. But to do that I've got to understand all kinds of mini games. Outfits. How the attacks work. Pursue different foods and drinks. Maybe even go out of my way for them. A ton of work for what's essentially a small reward if I'm good, and a whole bunch of penalties if I'm not good.

Making the system more integrated into the game seems to cause even more problems for me. First, something that was just optional now becomes required, so everyone has to learn it or be willing to be uncompetitive in ascension because they don't like PvP. Second, if there are more rewards (not just stats and the occasional turn booster, but also items, buffs, and who knows what) I've then got to be VERY careful as a game creator to make sure that this doesn't unbalance the game. Stuff that's useful for a level 11 character may be way too powerful for a level 5 character. For instance, if you get a "free" weapon at an early level, does that give you too much of an advantage? Or, if it doesn't give you that much of an advantage, is it worth getting at all? Stuff like that.

So that's why I'd personally lean towards having PvP being primarily a self-contained arena. That way I'm free to allow all kinds of rewards for playing well, as long as all of those rewards almost exclusively just benefit future PvP events. Being level 1 or level 11 might affect your chances to win or lose a particular match because of your current stats or whatever, but I don't have to worry if the rewards you get are unbalancing, because it would be based on your PvP status only. I think this actually leaves room for more potential fun. For instance, if you can steal items, but they're only PvP items, then you can't destroy someone's leaderboard ascension run, but it can still mess with their next PvP fight--that's fun for the griefers, but fair for the ascender who's a casual PvPer. Right?

I also thing a self-contained PvP system is more inviting to newbies. I wouldn't even go near my hippy stone for months because I thought "oh no, this could really mess me up if I'm bad!" Whereas if you can enter with impunity (other than what it might do to your PvP record, which of course doesn't exist when you start), I think it feels safer to dive into the waters. More beginners means more people becoming good at it, and ultimately (I think) makes for a better competition at all levels.

Does that make sense? Or am I just too out of touch with that particular contest to really understand what people like?

Heck, your ideas sound great to me, Ryme.

However, I don't really have enough of a club mindset to tell you whether or not they would like this idea as much.

I guess it comes down to 'how much grief is too much, how much grief is too little'? We need to recruit some clubs

That is exactly why I don't PvP in KoL.

But then, I don't PvP in KoL, so my opinion probably isn't worth that much.

Sounds like we need an arena.

Oh! Hey! How about an unlockable area in the Cannonball Tavern where you can get into drunken brawls with other players?

_________________

The churches are empty / The priest has gone home / And we are left standing / Together alone
--October Project: "Dark Time"

Ok, lets go to the brainstorming room (I worry that I get in your nerves, Ross, when I do that )



Well, after all, even integrating a basic pvp system requires a good amount of work, let alone fully develop it, while you could easily design a balanced item and postpone your thoughts for a month...



Totaly agreed up to this . Indeed, unless someone is trully a club in his heart (no pun intended) KoL's PVP system requires a lot of study and "suboptimization" to enjoy limited reqards. Essentialy, puttig appart its originality and its funny appearence, it is a game for hardcores (not ascension hc, the true meaning of the word).



The question is: what exactly could make pvp an integral part of TH? I can see many responses. Of course, the most obvious, if for one or another reason, a player would be required to pvp in order to progress in the game, then a fatal mistake would have been made. I do think the answer is "double" and a bit more subtle:

A)How much does one's progress in the game affect pvp?

No affiliation. The fundamental idea that the pvp system is not influenced by other factors except a player's skill in the game itself, summarizes this idea. Personaly, I do not like this concept. There are thousands of games out there that could accomplish the same. If it essentialy becomes a second game, then why not just go play a round of counter-strike? (because it sucks? well ok, appart from that...)

Very limited affiliation. Imagine a system where the only influence a pvper gets from the rest of the game is something as limited as his (level DIV 3). Or the only factor is his attack rating (however this is calculated) with the proper stat for his class added, against the same rating of the opponent. Or a system that all the game stats, equippment included, affect pvp, but then there is very high random factor (I dislike this last idea). In any case, I do think this is one can be either one of the best or one of the worst ideas, realtive to the implementation. The basic reason to use such an idea would be to more or less, to let the game affect pvp, but in such a limited manner even a player who plays half a month could be easily competent without disrupting his usual gameplay.

Average affiliation. The player's stats, as in the three basics, the level and HP/SP, do affect pvp. Nothing else (except the probable arcade skill of the player incase it applies). THis is essentially the approach of a 'friendly heroes arena'. The player's cannot use their equippment and essentially, their skills play no role. This is the critical case, because myabe, the most reasonable solution, lies somewhere in here. Now will follow a distinction that will describe various combinations of stats and their effect.

-3 basic stats/level/HP-SP. This would be the quintessential 'average' solution. It saves many problems KoL has, like requiring farming for specific equippment and consumables, but if someone wants to focus in pvp, he can always go out of his way to increase his stat above and beyond. This is the best solution because it combines a suffiecient influence of the game to pvp while leaving the majority of casual players to the same (more or less) level of competition.

-3 basic stats/NO level/HP-SP. This would be the quintessential 'mortal kombat' system. Strength would define the damage normal hits do, Reflexes the speed of the character and intellect the damage skills (or special abilities) do. The hp and sp would play their traditional role. Of course, the arcade skills of a player would define a lot, thus even a newbie with great arcade skills is given the chance to win. This is the best system because it combines the essential factors of a character and the satisfaction that progressing in the game does affect pvp, without negating the chance for a new player to fare well. (This is the solution I like the most, as far as how much the game influences pvp is concerned.)

-NO 3 basic stats/level/HP-SP. This would be the quintessential 'turn based strategy' game. The level determinates something limited, like initiative (who goes first), while the HP-SP permits for some limited influence into the game, like a 'miracle' or the seer fact of enduring a bit more. This is the best solution because is succeeds in its struggle to make the game even a bit influential but practicaly pvp is 90% isolated and 10% influenced.

-reflex/level/NO HP-SP. This would be the quintessential 'far west duel' game. The level does not influence postively the characters, instead, defines the distance between the two duelists (or practically, the added levels of the two contestants define how small the target will be in the screen). Reflex, as it can be guessed, defines the milliseconds a player can wait before shooting. BUT, there are two details: we are not taking the reflex as is, but only a fraction of it (for example for each 50 points of reflex, you have to wait a milisecond less.) AND the mouse pointer does not appear before you get to shoot! So, practically, you cannot just take aim and clicking like there is no tomorrow. This is the best solution because it combines the bare minimum of influence with an original (as in, 25 years old) arcade game.

-3 basic stats/NO level/NO HP-SP
-NO 3 basic stats/level/NO HP-SP
-NO 3 basic stats/NO level/HP-SP

Ok, this is just for refference, I tried hard to think something that could fit in the three cases, and except repeating solutions mentioned above, yet more limited, there is nothing I could think of . In general, this would be the best solution, in case you liked one of the above mentioned solutions but would prefer even less game influence.

Great affiliation Stats and eqippment OR stats and skills. I cannot see why one would want this solution if he has gone that far, and not take the 'Total Affiliation'. Thought, there is one motivation: implementation issues. Maybe using items in pvp makes it too unbalancing, or maybe implementing skills simply means infinite hours of coding.

Total affiliation Stats, equippment AND skills. Practically, this is the pvp system that best simulates a combat between players, as if they were NPC opponents. The same way you fight a typical opponent in the game, you fight a player opponent. I do know that this case is genrally distatsed, but what would be a complete analysis without complete data? Anyway, it can be surely said that players might feel that the full potential of their abilities does play a role, without having to do weird things like drinking booze and eating so as to fight.

B)How much does one's progress in pvp affect the game?

This is tightly related to the following quatation...



Ok, first of all, we have a level limit. This means that I find no problem in giving a low level player an item he can't use for a few more levels. Or the contrary, maybe the best reward he can get, is something apropraite to his level.

After that, he rewards can vary a lot. It could be as simple as ranking, or as influential as an uber buff. The first thought that comes into mind, is to avoid having a pvp system that is heavily influented by the game, while offers little to none rewards. I would say this: why not have a pvp system moderately influenced by the game, that offers rewards not related to speed ascension or other competitive gameplay? For example, imagine all pvp rewards having a minimum requirement of 15 level (or whatever will be the last quest, plus one.) Imagine good items, such as weapons with 120 power and +10% chips, that cannot be used by speed ascenders. Or even imagine a system, that could randomly fetch you either a rewad apropriate to your level, a reward inapropriate for speeders or a reward that is only symbolic, like ranking and maybe an item that cannot be used (except maybe being referenced to the character sheet for the e-penis of it).



This a is a great idea in all its aspects, and bears only a pair of flaws: the risk of making the game so much independant that players would feel TH is two games, and the risk of introducing sever optimization... A player that succeeds in gathering all the articles that influence pvp, might soon find himself in the top of the ranks, with little to no risk of losing, essentially frustrating the rest of the player base. All in all, defining some specific aspects of this idea, would make clear a possible flawless implementation.



Uhm.. I personally hate a lot the concept of stealing from others, but then again this is the biased me and not the analyzer me .



Well, as long as the game influences pvp even at a basic level, I find this idea compelling. As I repeated multiple times, a s ystem that is pacticaly a second game, with no relation to the main, runs the very real risk of being ignored.



It trully does make sense Given some more brainstorming, it would lead to a very appealing concept..

EPILOGUE

A factor that was left largely uncovered, was the non-game influence factor. To make it clear, there are two cases (and the combination thereof) RNG and Arcade. RNG dictates that along the influence pvp receives from the main game, it is also influenced by an uncontrolled set of variables that lead to two equal players not drawing. On the other hand, Arcade means that the player has to develop keyboard/mouse related skills so as to be more competent, or to make greater use of the stats he possesses. I would like your opinion on these two concepts, because it changes wildly the actual implementation of pvp and thus, productively limits the scope of idea-storming.

Once again, congratulations for everyone that reached this point (By reading from top to bottom, not the contrary ), and my apologies for the ultra extensiveness of the post .

_________________

I don't know if y'all have ever heard of Pokemon Crater? (Or something of the sort; my brother plays occasionally and I don't much care.) Essentially, their PvP system was to make each player choose an action, then when both have chosen, to display the other's choice and take the appropriate action. This fits better with a link cable Pokemon battle system, but since the TH battle format is similar to Pokemon, I sort of figured it'd work if you're doing real-time battles.

Then, continuing to treat it as a real combat, it'd take an adventure, and the winner would gain stats/chips/item(s) from the loser. This probably doesn't work much for griefing, since both players have to agree to the fight, but I'm not a club at heart (pun intended) and I don't know how to think like one.

_________________
Have a nice day.

I'm not horribly clubbish myself, but I do generally enoy PvP systems. I'm torn between the thought of a real-time (sort of) PvP system and a not real-time system. IcyFreak's idea of having PvP work like an actual combat akin to Pokemon link battles sounds awesome. When I first joined KoL, I sort of assumed that PvP would work like that ("You're fighting MagiNinjA the Pastamancer!"), and was kind of disappointed when it didn't. However, I see two major problems.

1. Your opponent has to actually be online. Until the playerbase gets huge (and I mean REALLy huge), it's going to be a major hassle to find competition.
2. I don't think the combat system is balanced for a PvP kind of battle. I'm a level 15 Naturalist, and against a level 13 Psion, the battle would probably go "Trample of the Rhino, Trample of the Rhino, win." That's rather boring.

PvP is probably going to have to use a system specifically made for it, but I would like to see something beyond just 7 minigames that are simply comparisons of statistics. I'll post more of my thoughts later.

By the way, I think I can speak as a primarily club. I've done enough PvPing to know about KoL's system. I think. Feng Shweez and Farchyld (top level PvPers in KoL) can probably account for me.

Also, if I'm not quoting you, Ryme, that means I actively agree.

I MAY come off as very dissenting for all I know, but please understand that I won't make a fuss over the final product. Thanks.



>.> Sorry.



Very much agreed. Like, a lot.



Scaling equipment?



Well, griefers like to screw up ascension runs too, if they could in KoL. Which is at most dignity hits and rank boosting, if the ascender actively collects flowers.

and Gavisi, I don't play myst classes. D:

Continuing on...



I agree. I'm not so sure that it's ideal to allow real time play, because of said playerbase and scheduling and time zone hells. Perhaps it's an option with greater rewards, but otherwise, I don't see too much fun in real time.

IcyFreak's following of Pokemon Crater is probably closest to real time without being pure beat 'em up real time.

Another thing that I've been thinking about: the ascension/role-playing portion of the game tends to assume that you as a player will be up for most challenges, and only occasionally lose and suffer a setback (being beaten up, etc.)

The PvP system is based on a premise that an average player loses about as often as they win, while a really good player still loses some (maybe a lot? I don't really know how much) and a beginner loses most of the time. For this to be balanced within an ascension setting, this means:

1) Winning needs to be more positive than losing is negative. Otherwise, the "average" PvPer is just breaking even by winning half the time. I don't think being better than half the players in a game should be a break-even proposition. It needs to be at least moderately rewarding.

And this then means:

2) Either penalties have to be fairly light (after all, if being beaten up a few times per day is considered a reasonable penalty for taking risks while adventuring, the sum total of PvP penalties shouldn't be any worse than that). Or rewards have to be powerful enough that even though the penalties are pretty stiff, the rewards still outmatch them.

Again, I'm not sure what that means in terms of specifics, but it seems like a piece of the framework that I want to work within.

Part of me thinks it should be the other way around, actually. Your "average" PvPer takes a beating, and only the really good ones thrive. That sets the barrier to entry pretty high, but from my clubby days on various MUDs leads me to believe that a situation like that would appeal to the hard-core clubs.


Heh... "Stun Gas, Stun Gas, Stun Gas, Stun Grenade!"

Edit: This actually reminded me of something... in the MUD I would PvP in (Realms of Despair for all who care), it was straight up class-vs-class, just like when you were fighting a monster. Needless to say, certainly classes had huge advantages. Nobody complained about it, though. The PvPers just played that class.

Or they were freaking monsters and kicked ass as other classes.

_________________

The churches are empty / The priest has gone home / And we are left standing / Together alone
--October Project: "Dark Time"

All right. If that's the case, that means it's even more difficult to tie the system into the adventure/ascend part of the game. If only the top 10-25% are getting anything from it, why would anyone else want to touch it, if it was most likely to just "mess up" their other plans?

Hmm. Gotta keep thinking...

Maybe a minor/major league type of situation, that combines both. One that has the hardcore pvp for those who have achieved a certain # of wins, or win percentage in the lower tier, which carries large risks and large rewards. And a pvp-lite league with no penalties or very minor penalties.

Make the hardcore pvp selectable at a given # of pvp-lite wins, but not manditory, and treat it as a double/triple elimination tournament, where after 2-3 losses you are kicked back down to the lower tier and have to work your way back up.

Civilian, that's a darn good idea. I'd already been thinking about trying to split competition into ranks (probably by number of wins) so that experienced players and newbies didn't mix, but I really like the idea of also splitting it into "safe" and "dangerous" PvP. Sort of like the difference between dueling with padded sticks and dueling with real swords. Or between high-school wrestling and underground Tibetan razor-blade kickboxing.

Of course it complicates things, but I think it'd be appealing to players to have that choice. Certainly it would put *me* at ease about exploring the system.

Exactly, i was very apprehensive about pvp in kol, it wasnt until i got a hobo and was basically forced into it that i took that risk. And now i love it, and wouldnt play a game without some type of pvp.

Yes, dgw mentioned tiers in our talk, and it was a great idea.

*waves the implementation wand to magically conjure a PvP system*

...or not. >.>

I think part of it depends on how key "ascension" is going to be in Twilight Heroes. It's the core of KoL, so everything needs to be designed with it in mind. However, if TH is designed so that there are several paths one could take, and that ascension is but one facet, then integration is much less of a concern. If a bunch of powerlevelers want to get all crazy-go-nuts with PvP, then they can bash each other around as level 50 players. The guy who ascends every 15 levels won't even notice.

Even if PvP hurts, it can still be optional. A diamond/club type could run through ten speed runs, and then go level up and start smacking people around in PvP. PvP doesn't need to speed up ascension, and there's no real reason to make that the case. A hippy stone mechanic will keep anti-clubs from getting pounded on, and range restrictions (ie: can't attack anyone 5 levels lower than you) will keep griefing to a minimum.

Honestly, I think if you make a more aggressive PvP system, you'll have happy clubs. Think about all the clubs on the KoL forums who don't care if PvP fits into ascension. They want to beat people up, take their stuff, break what they can't take, and laugh about it. And then have someone do it right back to them.

And I wouldn't worry about newbs vs pros. There's no way to de-level yourself. Pros are going to get level creep no matter what they do. And since level is more important than stats, crazy KoL stunts (my Disco Bandit has a 12 Moxie but a 3000 Muscle and Myst!) are a non-issue.

Optimizers want tough, difficult choices. PvPers want a system that's unforgiving and brutal. KoL doesn't really have PvP.

_________________

The churches are empty / The priest has gone home / And we are left standing / Together alone
--October Project: "Dark Time"

What I dislike to KoL, is the extend of time you are obliged to participate in PvP, which makes it unappealing to casual pvpers.

I think the best solution is a system where one offers himself for a fight, another accepts, both agree, and *then* they fight. After that, they can both go their ways and not bother about pvp any more.

As for the 'punishment', I think it must be something that disrupts the game little to nothing. Stat loss is out of consideration, the same for random item loss. Give a player a bruised effect, and even give him the choise to pay some chips to heal the status.

Whatever punishment greater than a few turns of unease simple drives off casual players, that form the majority of the comunity.

Now, if you want to insert a more fatal vesion of pvp in addition to the standard, let the hardcores bash the heads of one another without the softs suffering their sadism.

Relative to the rewards, like the punishments, they shouldn't be disrupting. A player should be able to completely ignore pvp without suffering even a turn. Note, that this is not the case in KoL, especially in HC. I would suggest either rewards roughly equivalent to what one can simply buy from a store (for example, an item equivalent to the chainsaw, but maybe with a minor elemental damage bonus) or rewards that simply benefit only pvp, OR rewards that cannot be used for speed ascension, with a level requirement one above the minimum level to ascend.

_________________

Honestly, for hard core clubs, the act itself is sufficient reward. A played on one MUD where looting wasn't allowed, and most PvP took place in an arena. Why? Because the creator loved player v. player combat, but hated having people take all his stuff. XP and chips would be enough of a prize for the PvP system, unless the Trophy Item was introduced. It'd be the only thing that could be looted.

And, of course, if you have the Trophy, you can't fix your hippy-stone (or however you opt out).

_________________

The churches are empty / The priest has gone home / And we are left standing / Together alone
--October Project: "Dark Time"

Hmm... I see the point. In short, you don't need fancy rewards to satisfy a pvper. The seer fact of domination is rewarding.

Well, about experience, I can see two versions: if pvp takes a turn, then reward the player the same exp he would get in the Fiendish Pit. Since even for a level50 player, the chances to lose a battle there are considerable, I think it makes an apropriate comparison. On the other hand, if pvp takes a special kind of turn (like KoL) experience, (and anything that can be used during a speed run) becomes game breaking, so there should be alternative rewards.

As for for chips, the same as above. With the additional consideration that the fiendish pit does not reward chips, so I think both exprience and chips might be unbalancing. Maybe rewarding chips that cannot be touched until after the run has been completed?

Appart from chips, I think that little trinkets, whether completely useless items or whatever (look my above post) are very satisfying and easily prevented from being game breakers.

_________________

Hm. Yeah, the opportunity cost is where my parallels break down. The only limitation in MUDs is the amount of time the player has; there's no turns.

Frankly, I'm at something of a loss on how it should be done. In KoL, I PvP'd a lot more once the adventure cost was removed, but I don't much care for having a separate counter. Personally, I would just make it cost a set amount of time. Maybe 10 minutes (regardless of +/- modifiers). That way, a dedicated PvPer could spend all day beating people up if they want.

What we need here are some hardcore clubs. I'm just a poseur

_________________

The churches are empty / The priest has gone home / And we are left standing / Together alone
--October Project: "Dark Time"

HAI GUYZ. M AI LATE 2 PARTAY?

Yeah, I do agree here, making pvp cost 10 fixed minutes simply solves many issues.

_________________

Why wouldnt there be modifiers on it the 10 minutes though?

Because the major modifier is level, thus granting higher level players a higher advantage. Everything else that lowers time, has disadvantages that it is difficult tobe reflected in pvp. (That's my opinion).

Anyway, I dont think the problem is giving up exactly 10 minutes, but giving up enough time, so as the possible rewards from pvp do not become better than the ones a player can fish from normal encounters.

_________________

The theory was that PvP is an alternative way of spending your time. 10 minutes was largely pulled from thin air, but it was a way to make it expensive, but not overly so. It seemed a good balance between ridiculous amounts of fights, and creating a completely arbitrary counter (just what is the narrative justification for only having 10 fights in KoL?).

My thought for modifiers not making a difference was... um... well, there wasn't really one, exactly. It just seemed like a way to largely even things out across the board. After the first couple levels, everyone has access to Bray, so pretty much everybody is getting the same number of turns a day.

I guess the thought is that it mitigates the value of potential future items that increase efficiency, for instance, an IotM that removes 1 minute per turn.

_________________

The churches are empty / The priest has gone home / And we are left standing / Together alone
--October Project: "Dark Time"

Why not have reducing? There really isnt any justification for not having things reduce it.