Posts made by Whisper

@eurav said in The Tides of PVP:

Well, but I expect there to be a member limit... just like in every other mmorpg...
Also we still don´t know how sieges work...

And... every city has a value
And... just like there are people who would want to join the best guild, there are also those who do not want to...

@whisper said in The Tides of PVP:

maller guilds joining them so they don't get theirs destroyed

Cities can´t be "destroyed", they can only be claimed / overtaken. But I guess you coult take a city and then kick every player out, which will make the city go back to a hamlet, or even the thingy before that, so destroying is kinda possible...

Well, I doubt anything I say is going to change your mind, so I will stop here.

We don't know the limit though. It's possible it is 100, it's possible it is 500. Ah, if you were trying to change my mind that would be a problem. We don't know the details so my mind is not set, "This will be a problem and the game is DOoommedd" is not the message I hope I set out.

My message is, "This is a constant problem in SandBox games that are based on PVP with the ability to build/take cities. How can we fix the problem before it starts?".

I would agree with setting a player limit on guilds is a viable option for that. Far simpler than the two I suggested as well.

@eurav said in The Tides of PVP:

need (going with a small Town Area) at least 5 Players for each City they overtake, to keep it at least as a Hamlet (which they need, otherwise other people have the chance to get governor). So with 46 Members left they could

Well, I was going with the current population guild wise. I imagine when the game releases there will be more members that are currently interested in a game that is in pre-apha.

But even assuming the game was released today and no one new came (Not enough people to populate every city on a planet) the situation would be exactly the same.

Except instead of owning every land plot they would own every major city spot. The situation would still be the same with new players going to them so they can experience the major city, and smaller guilds joining them so they don't get theirs destroyed, etc.

I am not sure if you noticed but in my example I never stated their member size would stay the same or decrease, I think I mentioned with every victory their member count would increase. Dramatically if they get a steadfast hold on content. Even more dramatically if entire guilds/cities start joining them for safety.

And if member count is all they needed it becomes an easier for them (and more problematic). I have seen people spend thousands of dollars on games for slight advantages. But like I said previously they wouldn't even need control of every plot. Just the control of every major city (theirs) and the ability to destroy anyone else who starts progressing toward their own.

But like I said, with each victory they would get more members, and eventually they would start absorbing entire cities/guilds to their team.

In a snowball like effect of starting relatively one size and increasing exponentially as they progress.

@eurav said in The Tides of PVP:

@whisper said in The Tides of PVP:

I think both of those scenarios would work pretty well to fix this issue.

And I don´t think issue exists...

As I explained there is no way that this is actually going to happen, with the current system in place. And additionaly to what I explained in my previous post a guild "needs" to make a big city, because that gives a lot of advantages (advanced buildings...). And for this you also already need a lot of work and people.

There is no way one guild is going to control one planet, unless there are only 5 active players and they downscale the map to one city spot

Can a guild take/destroy a city by force? If they can than the size doesn't matter, unless I am missing something. It's a sandbox PVP game. If you can gain resources you will gain resources. If you can limit others from a resource you will limit others from a resource. Or at least any guild trying to be #1 will do this. Which is the type of guild that will want to control a Planet. These guilds will take a spot even if they have no plans to make it a huge city.

@eurav said in The Tides of PVP:

I don´t see how one guild can snowball... maybe you can explain this to me?

Sure. Lets use the current guilds as an example. Demon Planet.
Exploited 96 Members.
Demon Kings 46 Members.
Demon King has half the members and 1/4th of the points (We will use this as resources)
All the other Demon guilds have 20 or less members.

If at the start of the game both Exploited and Demon King rush to make the best cities and expand their territory they will both grow in power. People will flock to them because of their numbers and sphere of influence.

This will result in some pretty fun PVP for all involved. When Exploited wins they would destroy/take Demon Kings capital. So now on top of their number advantage they have a resource advantage (Building up like a snowball does). People who haven't joined a guild will see a guild who won a huge battle on stream, on youtube, or on reddit and will try to join that guild as well.

At this point Demon King would still have a lot of members and might try to take it back. Now they have less resources though, and less people and less likely to win that battle.

With their main rival hurt Exploited can decide to finish them off taking every city they had (if they had more than that one) or move to the next person on the list of guilds. A guild with nearly only a 5th of their members and a 6th of their resources. These people won't stand a chance.

With each victory they get they have the option for more resources (Snow balling) and even worse though is their competition loses out on those resources (Snow balling). And then you will have people joining them because they are doing well (Snow balling) and if the people who are losing their cities have no way to take them back now that they are weaker there is a chance some of them will stop playing (Snow Balling advantage).

And this keeps compounding with each victory. Each victory nets them more people/influence/options for resources.

And this is not even taken into account some of the shenanigans that tends to happen in sandbox pvp based games that have cities that can be built/taken (Ie. Join my guild and have your city join my empire are we will destroy it)

@eurav said in The Tides of PVP:

As for why I think this won´t happen, has different reasons on each Planet. Also there is one uncertainty that we have... the max member count for Guilds. But let´s assume it´s somehwere around 100 - 200.

One reason, which is the same for all Planets, is:

One Guild can´t really control a lot of towns. Every account can only have one house per Planet. So the best, or worst, that could happen is that each Member of a guild is Governor of one Town. (The Pre - Alpha map as about ~ 40 Town Spots, so I think the whole currently planned complete map would be about 150 - 200). Now.. you need 5/10/20 residents to make a Town Spot into the first "level" of a town (called Hamlet; where it can then be declared a Guild Town). So you would either need 2000+ guild members, or you attract NPCs and you have to make sure every one from the Guild get´s voted for Governor. This would be a hell of a lot of work, and surely not desireableas it would surely be boring for that Guild anyway, to have no "enemy". But.. this will never happen because:

• Assuming all town spots are free, and the Guild tries to occupy every spot, other players could just go and build their house in those town spots and organize themselves to vote one of them as Governor.
• A Guild with a lot of Town Spots won´t be able to take over a Town from a Guild which has only one spot in a Siege, because that one Town Spot will be better advanced and have far better defences, more players to defend...

On Tartaros it´s all about full on PvP. So there is one additional reason I could think of which will prevent one Guild dominating the Planet:

• While guild members can still fight each other in open pvp, not having guilds as enemys takes away too much PvP fun

On the Human planet I would say an additional reason is the variety of gameplay one can choose from, which will automatically create different guilds with different goals.

On Arboreus I don´t really know... since it´s a full PvE Planet, are there even Town Sieges? If not then it´s most likely just first come first serve there? <- Which also leads to one guild won´t control all spots, unless you manage to get every governor to join your guild. But... since there is no pvp anyways, only having one Guild on Arborues does not seem to be a problem anyways.

I agree with you completely in regards to Arboreus. I don't think this will be an issue there at all.

On Tartaros your reason why it shouldn't happen is the reason I am bringing up this discussion. I want to maintain that fun.

And on the human side it still just takes one slightly large guild to get that edge to snow ball into more. And if one sides starts dominating it becomes easier. At a certain point I imagine they won't even need to fight to get some cities. They could just tell someone, "Join our guild and make your city guild only or we will take your city by force and you lose it".

I think two solutions come to mind. I don't know if anyone here has played Civilization 6 but they have these events called Emergencies that are triggered when a civilization takes another players capital and everyone else in the game is given the option to fight back that player and give back what they took. People who join in on the fight are given slight buffs. And if they win they are given a huge chunk of gold/rewards. I can see this working if Guild A keeps taking city after city and a server wide emergency is given and people who try to 'liberate' the last city are given a buff and an incentive to help in it. This encourages PVP and acts as a natural counter-balance for trying to control the whole map. If people lose the emergency in Civ 6 the player who triggered it gets rewards based on the people who joined to try and stop them. Not sure if that would be needed here but... Not a bad idea either.

Or.

Another decent solution if a guild takes a control of a whole planet. Maybe a GM event where the rules/limitations from other planets is removed on that planet and havoc is allowed against that specific guild and their cities. As you said a guild that takes control of a whole planet will be spread thin so the likely hood that they can defend against the two other planets AND their planet mates would not be a likely situation. So as they lose their cities/claims others from their planet can sprout up there. When the event is over I feel like they should be given a reward buff wise, or in game resource wise since triggering the event is akin to saying, "We won the game but don't want to destroy the game".

I think both of those scenarios would work pretty well to fix this issue.

@jetah said in The Tides of PVP:

@whisper
that happens when the world is one zone.

how will a pure demon guild control a human planet village? they can't. How will a Human guild control a beastkin village. they can't.

there are game mechanics that prevent negative karma demons from staying on either other planet, same with other neutral or high karma from staying on other planets.

in Eve Online, it's been speculated that the developers get into big alliances and try to break them up or help other alliances to break up the big ones. CCP knew it was bad when 1 alliance controlled majority of the null space.

https://fracturedmmo.com/feature-spotlight-7-towns-governors-politics/

We can take towns by force. Say Guild A is a Human Guild. The best human guild. The largest Humand Guild. And they decide every town that is on their planet will belong to them. Lets say they accomplish this goal. Every Town belongs to them, and they decide every town will be a guild town (They can kick people out). They will have a lot more resources to themselves than any other guild and people on their planet and likely the other planets. The people not in their guild are going to have to either A) Join them. (They Get Stronger) B)Accept they will never get a town for themselves or as a guild C) Switch Planets and hope the same thing didn't happen over there (In Which Case Guild A gets stronger with less competition or D) Stop playing. (Still strengthens Guild A but also a lost for the game in general)

My point. Is what stops this above situation?

And people can change their alignments if I am not mistaken. So it is completely possible a human/demon/beastman guild does what I suggested. Takes over every city on their planet and then start shifting their alignment so they can do the same on the other Planets they want to take over next (Or does changing alignment not allow that kind of transfer? In which case we would only have to worry about one guild taking over an entire planet).

@pluto said in The Tides of PVP:

@gothix
I don't think the issue is avoiding PvP, but rather avoiding a game where it's all about who has the largest organization.

I've always liked PvP, but it also always seems to be about who has the most numbers. Leads to pretty boring gameplay imho. If I'm roaming around with a pack of 10, it's likely nothing less than 5 will be a threat. Etc.

Edit: I suppose I should clarify. Obviously territory control and such should be all organization play. However, it seems like standard PvP also gets lumped in as well.

I believe Shadowbane made it so if a group of 100 decided to siege a city (Destroy it/take it) and the group defending it only had 50 people the defenders got a buff relative to the ratio they were out numbered by (there was an upper limit to this obviously).

It is a decent way to fight off people just relying on a zerg. But still doesn't really address what happens if one group dominates the playing field.

@gothix said in The Tides of PVP:

@Whisper if you wish to completely avoid all PvP while wanting to experience full game content, you are out of luck i guess, because that can only be done in pure PvE game.
You said it yourself "PvP games".. the point is for PvP to happen and not to be avoided, lol.

Still Fractured is kind enough to offer you a whole PvE planet. So hopefully that will be enough for you, if it's not then I don't know what to tell you. Search "PvE MMO" in google next time.

There is plenty of PvE to be done in Fractured, and you can avoid PvP by raoming around PvE planet. But if you will chose to travel to another world, then you will just have to take a risk, like everyone else.

I fear you didn't read what I wrote, or strongly misunderstood it. I love PvP games. I don't intend to avoid it at all.

I listed multiple PVP games where I dominated among top (with the help from organized guilds of course). I am not saying, "How can we hide from it".

I am asking, "What is preventing one group from dominating with such an iron fist that others stop playing or switch sides".

Because I have seen what happens in PVP sandbox games when one side/faction dominates.

This won't be like instance pvp where matches are 50v50. If one sides dominates it skews things heavily. In Tales of Toast for example (Open World PVP with full inventory/loot drop mechanics) the game started off crazy fun. Lots of people everywhere. But then slowly it really became a game of two guilds. And then as one of those two guilds started losing it gave the winning guild an advantage the 2nd guild never could recover from since every victory made one side stronger and the other weaker. Eventually everyone in the 2nd guild stopped playing except maybe like 5-10 who then joined the other guild.

Because of that the top players on the server were all in the same guild and for us it was fantastic. We could go anywhere and do anything. We would do our exp grinds and then back track to other areas and just completely wipe people out, and then do a patrol of the resource areas to get the people trying to get resources for crafting. Because of this people fell further behind in both xp, and in crafting.

There was literally 0 way anyone could compete with us.

TLDR; You have no idea what you are talking about. I want PVP. I just don't want it to destroy a server/game to the point where there is no pvp anymore.

@jetah said in The Tides of PVP:

3 planets. limited time on another planet when you're not within the correct karma amounts.

demons can invade beastkin planet but will only have 30 minutes on the planet.
demons and humans will invade each other but more frequently.

Crowfall will have temporary worlds which prevents your issue.

So the only two factions that might have this problem is Humans/Demons. If either population got a group big enough to continuously invade the other side with coordinated attacks.

Though I guess if humans/demons cannot stay in the opposing planet it kind of takes care of that issue all together. So maybe my biggest worry for PVP game is avoided with this style. Maybe.

Skip to the bottom for a too long didn't read.

I love PVP games.

My favorite was ShadowBane (Open World PVP with city building, and sieges), and most recently Tale of Toast (Ignore the name the game was bloody open world PVP with full loot drops) and a slew of games in between.

What I notice most often sandbox games that allow open PVP is someone comes out ahead. And when the tides turn in their favor the tides are near impossible to stop. You see people jump ship into the winning sides factions/teams and it makes matters worse. You see people get frustrated and stop playing and it makes the tides even more lop sided. Then once the game is too lopsided the game starts to cannibalize itself population wise.

This was really bad on Bless Online on my server. I was in the Top Guild on my factions side on my server and we constantly farmed/xped in the best spots and if the other faction tried to farm/xp there we destroyed them. After our first 2/3 groups hit max level the other factions top group just started reaching the last xp/farming area we were still there farming on our down time and help the slower members get there and pushed the other faction further down.

We had a grand time but the tides were too much in our favor. When they released the next content patch which included a larger pvp area and instance based pvp we had no one to play with. We literally had to let people run around taking objectives so we could take them back lol. The other faction didn't have enough people level appropriate to start the pvp instances (We only got an hour to do it so bad game design as well imo)

Same thing happened in ShadowBane but much worse. In Shadowbane you could occupy mines you need for resources for crafting and could port to your cities which meant the people in charge dominated the map and resources and you either joined them, or got squashed by them.

Seen the same thing in Tales of Toast. When it launched lots of people were PVPing and it was a fun time. One side ended up destroying the other and pretty much everyone in the destroyed guild would stop playing. It got to the point where even though it was a open world PVP game I could farm by myself without a worry because I knew no one in my level range (That would attack me) existed in the game. The only people in my level range in that game were guildmates.

I know Crowfall (the successor to ShadowBane plans on solving the problem with having end conditions for their map. Ie. Own the capital for x amount of time, and offering alternate server rule sets going on at the same time so if you lose your city you can just to a different server to have fun until the reset).

TLDR; Games that allow open PVP tend to get dominated by one group/faction and tend to be what ruins PVP games. Is there a mechanic to mitigate this in this game?

Crowsfall way is a simple one but I feel it is not the way I want to see a game do it. Any suggestions?

I don't believe I saw this addressed yet.

@roccandil said in Preventing Bots in Arboreus:

If I ever design a game, I've decided I'll do everything I can to balance it around the mechanic that player's toons are -always- skilling up, regardless of whether or not the players are actually on, and thus organically bypass the bot issue.

That sounds like a pretty awesome way to do it. But sounds like you would need a pretty robust skill system built around that concept.

I like it though.

Daily post

Daily post

Daily post

@specter

I got 16k likes/reblogs this week. I only started my tumblr last month so it is just starting out. I will private message you the link

@kralith said in Search by Dev/Admin:

Thats quite easy, just use their Profile Links.

For Prometheus, the God of Devs
https://forum.fracturedmmo.com/user/prometheus

For his Community Voice, Specter the Bannhammer
https://forum.fracturedmmo.com/user/specter

Looks like I got some reading to do! Buutttt... I still think my idea is a good one convenience wise and fairly easy to do. But for now this will work

Can we get a forum feature to allow us to see what devs/admin have posted recently? Or allow a search option for it.

Either one would be nice.

I did a search on the forums and found a lot of debates about the topic but none by devs, or stating if the game goes one way or the other.

Do we know if the game will have instance content, or not, yet?

@evolgrinz said in Preventing Bots in Arboreus:

The best way to prevent bots is to just not make it profitable to bot.
For instance, killing and farming in the same spot over and over in a certain timeframe will give diminishing returns.

But you can never get rid of bots completely, there will always be those people who want the shinies while not doing anything for it.

I feel like that is impossible in a player based economy driven game. And yeah, I imagine it would be impossible to get rid of them but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try to curb it. My suggestions are way to curb it, so even if they exist they don't ruin the gameplay.

I am not suggesting these ideas as an alternative to reporting/banning them but a layer on top of it. A double whammy if you will.

@trelia

I have never seen either system (the one I suggested or the one Jetah suggested).

But if other games have used them I think the more important question would be did it work, and what could be improved on it, don't you think?

Because if either of these suggestions have proven to work then..... It makes sense to use them, haha. But like has been pointed out both systems are open to abuse/griefing (I personally still think it is worth that effort though. Griefing is a better problem than bots taking over)

@jetah said in Preventing Bots in Arboreus:

@Whisper
there were npc's in one mmo i played where the item was immortal and used as a bot trap. if you continued to attack it it would eventually flag you as a bot. the tutorial even said "there are mobs like this that are specific to flag bots, DONT ATTACK IT". you could of course attack it as it would take a some duration of time to flag you.

That is a nice idea as well. It is still open to use as a griefing mechanic and might need to be limited in how much can be placed in a certain spot. But I 100% prefer these type of methods over limiting trade or making drops bound to characters like other games do.