I have had some time to think about this and the impacts it may have. I think that it does have the potential to deal positively with some of the issues inherent to past raiding, the main problem of which seemed to be the ability to bleed an organization dry via guard kills because the xp loss was completely negligible.
The hard part, I think, will be balancing it in a fair way. There does have to be a hit to the city in case the defense is lost, which is understandable, but there also has to be a hit to the raiders on a failure. Without including this, there's no reason not to raid as there is no real risk to be had.
XP: I would argue that if the previous limit was 1.25% then 1% is still too low on the xp route. For most of the players who enjoy raiding, this is a drop in the bucket. (Unless I’m missing something here).
No XP loss while defending your city makes sense, as what you should face losing is the objective.
Shardfalls should remain no XP loss. These are a great intro to mechanics for new players, and have historically been fun scrap-fests for most people involved. It would be a shame to see less participation in them.
City loss: 25% increase in cost/upkeep seems on the steep side if that's the ballpark for city penalty on most of the objectives. As I've mentioned previous, city leadership is not super fun. I think this penalty could be kept if there were some positive changes made to the way Trade/Security are handled - would a new thread be best for that?
Guards: I really like the idea of guards automatically arriving at enemies at a predetermined rate in housing, and this change would be even better if it also affected guildhalls.
One of the prime reasons that guildhalls see less use is because they present a security risk. Having some sort of security to them would go a long way towards making them worthwhile hubs of RP once again.
Other penalties: Rubble sounds awful to be honest. I would rather take a financial hit that trudge around my council every day. It would be incentive for people not to visit the council at all, and just sounds endlessly frustrating for new players trying to accomplish anything.
I laid out situations where more serious losses could be justified. I just don't want it day in day out, and I think that is a very, very reasonable thing to want. There are also just plenty of other ways to win and lose. Kyraic isn't wrong about shard falls - getting the shards (or not getting them) is a tangible win/loss condition, for example. It just doesn't force me to go bash.
I always do a bit of bargaining with myself when XP loss is on the table, like it is right now, and it always goes the same. I ask myself "could I get good enough to be one of the PK-ers who can get by in that system? Can I always win more fights than I lose (someone does have to lose EVERY fight, after all), or at least win enough that I don't have to spend most of my play time bashing? Can I do it without being constantly anxious that tomorrow I won't make the cut to be allowed to play anymore? Can I be one of the ones who gets to stay and play, while others get pushed out"?
Let me also just say that I am in the camp that is going to feel like **** if I know I pushed someone out of PK, so it's a bit of damned if you do, damned if you don't. I realize that's an actual plus for some people, but that's a whole other post, and also, screw those people. But it's the reality. Because with a PK system like that you have to have people who are getting pushed out of PK - if not completely, then mostly. It can't EVER be inclusive because the losers are taking real losses, and for many people, it can take a really long time to get even marginally better. It also means the game needs a constant trickle of new would-be PK-ers with stars in their eyes, some of whom might "make it" by displacing existing PK-ers and some of whom will serve as uh, food, at least until they get fed up and realize they either can't get good enough at all, or can't get good quickly enough (which might as well be the same thing, in practice).
It is inherently a system that "eats its young", and if it doesn't eat its young, it must eat its old, so PK becomes a pretty elite thing. And sure, those people play with each other a fair bit? But they also tend to try to engage the now (relatively) huge population of reluctant and (surprisingly!) uncooperative non-coms pretty often, because they're BORED (and also because easy pickings become something you just don't turn down). And as far as I am concerned, it's their own damned fault, because they probably played a big role in absolutely insisting that things be that way in the first place.
I'm already regretting posting this, because I know what the response is going to be.
I have a two-part, actually serious question for you:
(1) - If no xp loss is such a good change, why has it been a complaint for so many new players that came to Imperian? Note, I am saying new, not alts of current people / retirees from other games (myself included). You say the loss alone is big enough, countless others have said it's not. (1a - Why did Jeremy's comment say exactly the contrary of what you've been saying; that it's had an adverse effect than what was intended?)
(2) - If losing experience is as big of a factor for turning people away from PK, as you seem to say it is, why is it that literally every other IRE game has a bigger percentage of people who participate in PK?
If you can properly explain that, without giving a reason akin to, "That's just how they are," then I will take what you're saying with more than a grain of salt.
I do agree 1% is too small, however. Compared to how much you gain from PK kills.
1) This game has been very neglected and has some other serious problems specific to PK and just being way too safey safe. XP loss is a convenient scapegoat and I've already spent too much time explaining why it gets trotted out. There are plenty of ways for players to experience PERCEIVED risk without having to resort to tangible losses most of the time.
1a) Honestly? It probably almost feels like the safest bet because it's such an entrenched idea, especially right now - when it's being scapegoated.
2) convince me the percentage of people who REGULARLY take part over a long period of time, without lots of turnover at the bottom end is bigger, keeping in mind that Imperian has always had a low population, and most especially had a low, demoralized population just before Jeremy DID ditch XP loss. You won't, because I have been to those other games. It can't be bigger because it's unsustainable for anyone not at least somewhat near-ish the top of the pyramid. If you're spending a good chunk of your game time bashing, and you can't change that dynamic FAST, you're going to have to tap out. It's sucky.
This bit takes too much player responsibility out of the guard setups and makes it too hard to single-man raid.
Single-man raids that aren't @Septus being @Septus probably shouldn't being happening anyways.
WRT experience - Just make PK reduce only PK experience. It's utterly meaningless for a basher anyways. I wouldn't have any at all if we hadn't bashed Khizan about a couple times to do the wraith lords.
Edit - I agree with @Etienne wrt Shardfalls. They're a good entry mechanic, so punishing new players for wanting to get stuck in is probably counterproductive. Raiding as the aggressor can be the "big leagues" and have that associated loss for death/failure.
Edit #2 - Making a personal point of not responding to posts that are personal attacks on other posters. It's not cool and you should knock it tee eff off.
Anette, that's what it does now. And I think PK XP loss is no big deal. It's the perfect tool for the job. Some people actually don't even like that, but I do feel like it's the right tool because while reserves can be fairly useful, they don't feel anything like a make or break. Additionally, I have found the PK XP system to be incredibly forgiving. I LIKE that kind of XP loss. It gives the top guys something to feel good about, but in no way makes me feel like I can't fight alongside a ragtag team of magickers against a Septus led team, and have a glorious time doing it.
EDIT: to be very clear, I feel Jeremy has to be talking about "real" XP loss, because I am not sure what else he COULD be talking about.
This bit takes too much player responsibility out of the guard setups and makes it too hard to single-man raid.
Single-man raids that aren't @Septus being @Septus probably shouldn't being happening anyways.
WRT experience - Just make PK reduce only PK experience. It's utterly meaningless for a basher anyways. I wouldn't have any at all if we hadn't bashed Khizan about a couple times to do the wraith lords.
Not sure about that. You shouldn't need to have both the investment in experience and artefacts that I do to go assassinate someone in a city, IMO. That might be an unpopular opinion, but I think it should be doable by anyone with a reasonable amount of game knowledge and a class that makes it viable (assassin, predator, etc). Definitely shouldn't be easy, but there should be a pretty large margin between 'impossible' and 'difficult'.
Not sure about that. You shouldn't need to have both the investment in experience and artefacts that I do to go assassinate someone in a city, IMO. That might be an unpopular opinion, but I think it should be doable by anyone with a reasonable amount of game knowledge and a class that makes it viable (assassin, predator, etc). Definitely shouldn't be easy, but there should be a pretty large margin between 'impossible' and 'difficult'.
Full on raid, probably not.
We're basically agreeing here since I was meaning a raid, not "I want to punk someone who has a monolith who's sitting in Kinsarmar" or the like.
Willing to bet 100 credits I can do it for Aetolia and Lusternia, too. Maybeeeee not Aetolia because I haven't played there in like 6 months, but definitely Lusternia.
The last 6 months have literally been the worst, quietest 6 months I have played... and led very directly to the spate of retirements we just had The time period you're talking about (which really started a bit before) is pretty much why we're here, having this discussion.
tbh, though, that was a bit of a trick question anyway. You'd really have to be an admin to do something like this properly - or you'd have to be logged in ALL the time, but the bottom line is that your methodology is pretty fast and loose to say the least. The most hilarious thing you do though, is calculate Imperian's total out of a possible 179 players, and Achaea's out of a possible 128. LOL.
Can we please have an auto enemy feature or some type of aggressive feature of the defending city against the raiders. So alt abuse and general other means can't be used.
The most hilarious thing you do though, is calculate Imperian's total out of a possible 179 players, and Achaea's out of a possible 128. LOL.
In case you haven't seen my other thread, that's because that 179 'possible' players, comprises 99% of people who have -logged in- in the past 6 months. They're taken directly from my database, which was originally started in March. Not counting retired/inactive people (the number was nearly 290-ish before I removed them). I'm not really sure what you're getting at. Can't really calculate a higher number, when Imperian doesn't HAVE a higher number of players. 128 was of people logged in when I was doing that, since you obviously didn't read it thoroughly enough. (shocking) When the percentage of people currently logged into the game, is higher than another game ENTIRELY, then that does nothing but further prove my point, Jules.
You asked for a percentage, I gave you a percentage. Imperian has the lowest percentage of pker:non-pker ratio of all the games, a fact which has been true since I started playing over four years ago. I don't have to be an admin, when I know how to code properly. As well as know basic math, and have an attention span larger than a rock. Take a look at that youtube video I linked earlier, though. --
To echo @Tyden though; isn't this already a thing? If not, it definitely should have been even before this topic came up. If you're attacking players (against their will)/denizens, then an enemying should be automatic. Regardless of a raid being in place; you're clearly hostile towards the city, so why do guards not recognise this?
Uh yeah, clearly you're code is wrong since I'm not on that list of have PK'd in the past 6 months. So not exactly a perfect system to make decisions on
Whoa. Easy there now, Aysari. There's several alt-posters right now that have thus far been given the old blind eye (and pretty sure most people also know who's who), but you're on at least your third iteration.
Uh yeah, clearly you're code is wrong since I'm not on that list of have PK'd in the past 6 months. So not exactly a perfect system to make decisions on
You're literally right there. Have PK'd was me manually removing the list, not my code "selecting wrong" - Since you evidently didn't read the entire thing, I'll quote the part directly after that which I said:
(I also may have overlooked a few names, but I'm almost certain I could probably count on 1 hand, the ACTIVE pkers)
Keep changing your arguments, though. I'll keep picking them apart. One small (accounted for) error does not invalidate the rest of it.
Honestly I feel like the major problem was the Antioch stack. It made competing against not fun. Going against the odds and winning an outnumbered battle is fun. But having to always fight outnumbered, slowly drips away at your willingness to go to pvp events. Combined with the fact that a lot of the obelisk battles themselves tended to be offhours so that you would lose an obelisk at 7:00 gmt time when 10-15 people are in the realms was not.
What kind of plans do you have for the purpose of caravans? Assuming you fix the fight (very much needed, whether by threat mechanics or wave spawning or anything to stop the derp of trying to fight the caravan and any contestation), quartz doesn't seem incredibly attractive. The quartz either goes into guards or beacon management, so it looks like it needs to be repurposed a bit. I can't think of any reason to bother other than maybe throwing up random beacons on hot spots just to call sentries?
Could the raiding tie into some PvE, maybe? Say, AM goes and raids Schro'vik for a special Horde buff, then other cities could come and raid to grab it away.
Are you still going to allow outside help in the raids per the other thread's OP?
What kind of plans do you have for the purpose of caravans? Assuming you fix the fight (very much needed, whether by threat mechanics or wave spawning or anything to stop the derp of trying to fight the caravan and any contestation), quartz doesn't seem incredibly attractive. The quartz either goes into guards or beacon management, so it looks like it needs to be repurposed a bit. I can't think of any reason to bother other than maybe throwing up random beacons on hot spots just to call sentries?
Could the raiding tie into some PvE, maybe? Say, AM goes and raids Schro'vik for a special Horde buff, then other cities could come and raid to grab it away.
Are you still going to allow outside help in the raids per the other thread's OP?
Caravans are meaningless now, imo. AM finished the extra shard/beacon trees nearly a RL year ago; Magick finished earlier this year, and Demonic doesn't seem to really have any interest in pursuing it (probably because they saw how not-important the shard/beacon trees were to the grand scheme of things). The only reason to go now is for personal achievements or to loot for gold (because the gold drop is pretty good, but the bashing takes forever).
Building beacons is terrible, especially if you don't need caravans for research anymore. It just makes your city channel spammy.
Honestly I feel like the major problem was the Antioch stack. It made competing against not fun. Going against the odds and winning an outnumbered battle is fun. But having to always fight outnumbered, slowly drips away at your willingness to go to pvp events. Combined with the fact that a lot of the obelisk battles themselves tended to be offhours so that you would lose an obelisk at 7:00 gmt time when 10-15 people are in the realms was not.
Yep, that's why we tried to split it up (no one ever wanted to leave, really). I WOULD agree that you were often "against the odds", but I'd say it was more because you didn't have Eldreth (or someone like that) nearly often enough - leadership. Antioch also just started collecting a huge amount of artifact weight. But that's a minor quibble. Antioch was a juggernaut, and juggernauts are tiresome if they last more than a very, very brief moment.
But now, it will be even harder to break up a PK juggernaut like that - because going to a weaker side does usually mean "I know we're probably going to lose a lot". It's already hard to get people to sign up for that, because even if they like that underdog thing, they're probably leaving some friends behind.
Honestly, if there is one thing I would kind of agree with Kiskan on, it's that the games activities kinda need some sort of reason to participate at all. Not just for the purpose of winning, but to actually... Show up... At all...
In the week or two I was back playing and saw shardfalls etc, I piped up and asked Kabaal / Mathiaus if they wanted to go and their response was basically, "Meh. No one else will really go, so not going to bother." -- Shards aren't really enough I think, even with the decaying status now. You basically only need to go to 1 or 2 every week, and that's that. You can do that at like 3am when no one is around, if you really so desire.
Hell, there was a few times where it was just me around and I decided to go out. I'm not going to profess superiority in combat, but the speed at which people ran off when it was -just me- was kinda... Astounding. I'm not even tri-trans'd (almost!), let alone artifacted.
Basically the only time I/we even got a fight, was when Mathiaus capped a monolith and Septus/Pellerin came... It's not even 'juggernauts' that make combat meh to go to, it's moreso that people seem to not have any interest...
Can we please have an auto enemy feature or some type of aggressive feature of the defending city against the raiders. So alt abuse and general other means can't be used.
I don't wanna say "better" because the ones currently in existence are relatively okay, but... Plans for 'better' Aspect powers to go along with them, to make monoliths much more worthwhile to keep / go for? GAZE / INHUME are great and all, but.. I dunno if it's much of a reason for me to want to bother getting/keeping them. Even as an Aspect I basically only ever went after them when people piped up on Ring wanting to fight.
With the monoliths update, can we hope for more after-aspect content? I have far too much exp for my own good and would like a reason(other than gold) to keep hunting.
I know you list this here, but I can't stress how important this is for the obelisk system to see any use. The current powers all fall somewhere along the spectrum of 'not good enough' (nature obelisk) to 'doesn't even work anymore' (aryana attunement 3).
No one is going to invest significant time into a system that gives them no tangible reward. You need the powers to be similarly dramatic, so people get invested.
I find it difficult to comment on the obelisk system as is because I've literally never been able to participate in it. You can't really just do it with you and a couple of buddies and I could never get a coordinated group together that cared enough to try it. I can opine a lot of speculation as to why people said this, but what I can say for sure is what everyone told me was "it's not worth the effort"
in my opinion, the problem is people hold the belief that you don't need to spend money to enjoy the game but some of the mechanics and design are so outdated and frustrating and unworkable that the only solution for a tinkerer to have fun is to generate credits. most people seem to be playing on company time or don't have enough free time because reasons and can get too comfortable being behind a screen. they either lost person skills or never had it to begin with or they are not being properly managed. this small percentage of unpersonable people rise into positions until they are no longer good at what they do. those who care and take care sincerely quit.
for me to go personally into the details of why i didn't quit for a long time, would require a complex and lengthy discussion on healthcare which would be very off-topic.
Comments
The hard part, I think, will be balancing it in a fair way. There does have to be a hit to the city in case the defense is lost, which is understandable, but there also has to be a hit to the raiders on a failure. Without including this, there's no reason not to raid as there is no real risk to be had.
XP:
I would argue that if the previous limit was 1.25% then 1% is still too low on the xp route. For most of the players who enjoy raiding, this is a drop in the bucket. (Unless I’m missing something here).
No XP loss while defending your city makes sense, as what you should face losing is the objective.
Shardfalls should remain no XP loss. These are a great intro to mechanics for new players, and have historically been fun scrap-fests for most people involved. It would be a shame to see less participation in them.
City loss:
25% increase in cost/upkeep seems on the steep side if that's the ballpark for city penalty on most of the objectives. As I've mentioned previous, city leadership is not super fun. I think this penalty could be kept if there were some positive changes made to the way Trade/Security are handled - would a new thread be best for that?
Guards:
I really like the idea of guards automatically arriving at enemies at a predetermined rate in housing, and this change would be even better if it also affected guildhalls.
One of the prime reasons that guildhalls see less use is because they present a security risk. Having some sort of security to them would go a long way towards making them worthwhile hubs of RP once again.
Other penalties:
Rubble sounds awful to be honest. I would rather take a financial hit that trudge around my council every day. It would be incentive for people not to visit the council at all, and just sounds endlessly frustrating for new players trying to accomplish anything.
I always do a bit of bargaining with myself when XP loss is on the table, like it is right now, and it always goes the same. I ask myself "could I get good enough to be one of the PK-ers who can get by in that system? Can I always win more fights than I lose (someone does have to lose EVERY fight, after all), or at least win enough that I don't have to spend most of my play time bashing? Can I do it without being constantly anxious that tomorrow I won't make the cut to be allowed to play anymore? Can I be one of the ones who gets to stay and play, while others get pushed out"?
Let me also just say that I am in the camp that is going to feel like **** if I know I pushed someone out of PK, so it's a bit of damned if you do, damned if you don't. I realize that's an actual plus for some people, but that's a whole other post, and also, screw those people. But it's the reality. Because with a PK system like that you have to have people who are getting pushed out of PK - if not completely, then mostly. It can't EVER be inclusive because the losers are taking real losses, and for many people, it can take a really long time to get even marginally better. It also means the game needs a constant trickle of new would-be PK-ers with stars in their eyes, some of whom might "make it" by displacing existing PK-ers and some of whom will serve as uh, food, at least until they get fed up and realize they either can't get good enough at all, or can't get good quickly enough (which might as well be the same thing, in practice).
It is inherently a system that "eats its young", and if it doesn't eat its young, it must eat its old, so PK becomes a pretty elite thing. And sure, those people play with each other a fair bit? But they also tend to try to engage the now (relatively) huge population of reluctant and (surprisingly!) uncooperative non-coms pretty often, because they're BORED (and also because easy pickings become something you just don't turn down). And as far as I am concerned, it's their own damned fault, because they probably played a big role in absolutely insisting that things be that way in the first place.
I have a two-part, actually serious question for you:
(1) - If no xp loss is such a good change, why has it been a complaint for so many new players that came to Imperian? Note, I am saying new, not alts of current people / retirees from other games (myself included). You say the loss alone is big enough, countless others have said it's not.
(1a - Why did Jeremy's comment say exactly the contrary of what you've been saying; that it's had an adverse effect than what was intended?)
(2) - If losing experience is as big of a factor for turning people away from PK, as you seem to say it is, why is it that literally every other IRE game has a bigger percentage of people who participate in PK?
If you can properly explain that, without giving a reason akin to, "That's just how they are," then I will take what you're saying with more than a grain of salt.
I do agree 1% is too small, however. Compared to how much you gain from PK kills.
1a) Honestly? It probably almost feels like the safest bet because it's such an entrenched idea, especially right now - when it's being scapegoated.
2) convince me the percentage of people who REGULARLY take part over a long period of time, without lots of turnover at the bottom end is bigger, keeping in mind that Imperian has always had a low population, and most especially had a low, demoralized population just before Jeremy DID ditch XP loss. You won't, because I have been to those other games. It can't be bigger because it's unsustainable for anyone not at least somewhat near-ish the top of the pyramid. If you're spending a good chunk of your game time bashing, and you can't change that dynamic FAST, you're going to have to tap out. It's sucky.
WRT experience - Just make PK reduce only PK experience. It's utterly meaningless for a basher anyways. I wouldn't have any at all if we hadn't bashed Khizan about a couple times to do the wraith lords.
Edit - I agree with @Etienne wrt Shardfalls. They're a good entry mechanic, so punishing new players for wanting to get stuck in is probably counterproductive. Raiding as the aggressor can be the "big leagues" and have that associated loss for death/failure.
Edit #2 - Making a personal point of not responding to posts that are personal attacks on other posters. It's not cool and you should knock it tee eff off.
EDIT: to be very clear, I feel Jeremy has to be talking about "real" XP loss, because I am not sure what else he COULD be talking about.
Full on raid, probably not.
tbh, though, that was a bit of a trick question anyway. You'd really have to be an admin to do something like this properly - or you'd have to be logged in ALL the time, but the bottom line is that your methodology is pretty fast and loose to say the least. The most hilarious thing you do though, is calculate Imperian's total out of a possible 179 players, and Achaea's out of a possible 128. LOL.
@Jeremy
Can we please have an auto enemy feature or some type of aggressive feature of the defending city against the raiders. So alt abuse and general other means can't be used.
You asked for a percentage, I gave you a percentage. Imperian has the lowest percentage of pker:non-pker ratio of all the games, a fact which has been true since I started playing over four years ago. I don't have to be an admin, when I know how to code properly. As well as know basic math, and have an attention span larger than a rock. Take a look at that youtube video I linked earlier, though.
--
To echo @Tyden though; isn't this already a thing? If not, it definitely should have been even before this topic came up. If you're attacking players (against their will)/denizens, then an enemying should be automatic. Regardless of a raid being in place; you're clearly hostile towards the city, so why do guards not recognise this?
Mya, Caelya, Claudius, Sumie, Ayden, Vasharr, Caelbrook, Darwi, Livvy, Wysrias.
You're literally right there. Have PK'd was me manually removing the list, not my code "selecting wrong" - Since you evidently didn't read the entire thing, I'll quote the part directly after that which I said:
Keep changing your arguments, though. I'll keep picking them apart. One small (accounted for) error does not invalidate the rest of it.
Could the raiding tie into some PvE, maybe? Say, AM goes and raids Schro'vik for a special Horde buff, then other cities could come and raid to grab it away.
Are you still going to allow outside help in the raids per the other thread's OP?
Building beacons is terrible, especially if you don't need caravans for research anymore. It just makes your city channel spammy.
But now, it will be even harder to break up a PK juggernaut like that - because going to a weaker side does usually mean "I know we're probably going to lose a lot". It's already hard to get people to sign up for that, because even if they like that underdog thing, they're probably leaving some friends behind.
In the week or two I was back playing and saw shardfalls etc, I piped up and asked Kabaal / Mathiaus if they wanted to go and their response was basically, "Meh. No one else will really go, so not going to bother." -- Shards aren't really enough I think, even with the decaying status now. You basically only need to go to 1 or 2 every week, and that's that. You can do that at like 3am when no one is around, if you really so desire.
Hell, there was a few times where it was just me around and I decided to go out. I'm not going to profess superiority in combat, but the speed at which people ran off when it was -just me- was kinda... Astounding. I'm not even tri-trans'd (almost!), let alone artifacted.
Basically the only time I/we even got a fight, was when Mathiaus capped a monolith and Septus/Pellerin came... It's not even 'juggernauts' that make combat meh to go to, it's moreso that people seem to not have any interest...
Yes. I actually do want to think about trenches and stuff. I am not against making some changes with that.
No more talk on the XP thing unless you have something new to add. I think we know where each person stands.
Keep it on topic from this point on please.
As for caravans, I have added that to my list fir its own update. After the obelisk/raid update I also have monoliths on my list.
No one is going to invest significant time into a system that gives them no tangible reward. You need the powers to be similarly dramatic, so people get invested.
for me to go personally into the details of why i didn't quit for a long time, would require a complex and lengthy discussion on healthcare which would be very off-topic.