Enquirer Home Page | Twitter | Back to Improbable Island

 Forum Index > Legacy Forums: Season One > Season Two Planning Forum New Topic Post Reply
 PvP
 |  Printable Version
CheshireCat
 Sunday, November 09 2008 @ 06:53 PM UTC (Read 6911 times)  
Forum Badass
Badass

Status: offline

Registered: 06/29/08
Posts: 73

Given the option to now turn off PvP, I think it wouldn't be a bad idea to raise it back to the 5% wager/10% loss it was before.

This makes is desirable for some, and seeing as they can only turn it off/on once per DK, greater risk bears greater reward, etc.


The Island's Most Married Kittyjoker.
 
Profile Email
Quote
CavemanJoe
 Sunday, November 09 2008 @ 07:10 PM UTC  
Forum Admin
Admin

Status: offline

Registered: 02/24/08
Posts: 2281

I'll have a think about that.


 
Profile Email Website
Quote
Max Dougwell
 Wednesday, November 12 2008 @ 07:08 AM UTC  
Forum Badass
Badass

Status: offline

Registered: 08/28/08
Posts: 100

The number of PvP-able players will probably drop dramatically if this happens. I for one am only in it for the extra turns. (Good old Heidi)

The rationale behind such a change resembles this:
"You were attacked by, and lost to, Hajen. You have lost 5/10% rec in a fight you couldn't have won, even in your wildest dreams. If you had opted out of PvP this wouldn't have happened."


On a side note, it makes sense for people to be angry at Hajen over this whole PvP thing. Who enjoys a game they can't win?

(Apologies if this post seems a bit negative)


 
Profile Email
Quote
Count of S-G
 Wednesday, November 12 2008 @ 09:00 AM UTC  
Forum Improbable Badass
Improbable Badass


Status: offline

Registered: 03/21/08
Posts: 176

Please don't think about CMJ. If we actually have an increased number of PKing the way that we used to, then this would be horrible for Newbie retention. A person I referred (informally, I mentioned it, and he didn't wait for a referral link Frown) got to level 14 and then was PvPed every night, to the point that he needed two weeks to get his first drive kill. This was also before PvPing opting out, but I do believe that Newbies (and others) might have trouble opting out, if they can't get a drive kill to change their decision.


Glory Points awarded for this fight: 0 You have defeated The Watcher! You receive 1377 Requisition! You receive 20193 experience!
 
Profile Email
Quote
crashtestpilot
 Wednesday, November 12 2008 @ 04:06 PM UTC  
Forum Improbable Badass
Improbable Badass

Status: offline

Registered: 10/29/08
Posts: 351

So, why not have PvP activate after the first DK? Or five? I don't care. Call it a newbie shield.

The other bit I've been thinking about of late is this:
a) Right now you can only target for PvP someone who is somewhere near your level.
b) Might it not be interesting to have PvP only work against someone who is near your LEVEL OF HPs?

Point is, for someone who maxed their HPs either through DKs, Improbability Points via DPs, or the OLD ciggie/HP trade off, gutting newbs isn't the challenge. Neither is finding them, really.
So that becomes, I guess, FUN, only in the sense of keeping score, or staying in the HoF in the PKing category.
But as an in-game challenge, it's a bit pointless. I axed a few newbs recently, and even with my modest number of DKs, it was far from a fair fight.
Seems to me, if you make availability of having PvP restricted to someone who is near your overall HP level, then that means TOP-PKers only have the opportunity of seeking out fair fights where they have the option of losing.
In the long-term, I see several effects emerging from the change I'm proposing:
a) People would keep their HP levels lower, and likely enjoy having a more challenging time out in the wilds as well as in PvP.
b) The Old Guard would have a smaller list of people they could PvP, and end up fighting one another to keep their HoF position, which would keep them out of newbie's hair. That would also end the whole newbie killing spree that as others have pointed out make for a retention issue.
c) New players, over time, could begin to challenge the Old Guard in terms of total number of PKs, which would give the otherwise wandering badass class a run for their money. One could no longer rest on one's laurels.
d) This would also likely end much of the whining that's been infesting Outposts of late.
e) All of which would, dare I say it, lead to more fun, because the existing system would be re-infused with a certain degree of fairness.

Have to say it. This is the best idea I've had in a while. Debate and disagreement are more than welcome. How can this be refined and implemented?

All best,

~Crash



 
Profile Email
Quote
Icterid
 Wednesday, November 12 2008 @ 05:38 PM UTC  
Forum Contender
Contender

Status: offline

Registered: 09/01/08
Posts: 59

Could someone clarify what the 5% / 10% rule was?

I've talked about PvP at length in the other thread, so I'll just reiterate my main ideas here:

1. PvP starts for Newbies as turned off (preferable, but not strictly necessary, if point 2 is done).
2. Instate a DK-restriction similar to (but not the same as) the level-restriction.

I see the DK restriction working like this:

1. I can attack anyone that has a higher DK rating than me (as long as they meet the level-restriction requirements).
2. If I'm a Newbie who has switched PvP on, I can only be attacked by other Newbies.
3. As I progress up the DK ladder, I open myself up to attack from a wider DK range. So by time I get to DK 5, players with up to 10 DKs can attack me. By the time I get to DK 10, player with up to 20 DKs can attack me, etc., until I get to DK 20 (or maybe higher?), at which point any player on the island can attack me.

Of course, I don't know how hard any of this would be to code, so I apologize of those are unreasonable. But I think by restricting PvP to DK ranks, we will see the challenge come back to PvP - it won't just be shooting Newbies in a barrel. You'll be matched with players that are better equipped to deal with the threat you pose.

And if a DK-restriction is a Bad Idea, please someone tell me why, and I'll stop suggesting it.


 
Profile Email
Quote
crashtestpilot
 Thursday, November 13 2008 @ 02:36 AM UTC  
Forum Improbable Badass
Improbable Badass

Status: offline

Registered: 10/29/08
Posts: 351

So I guess the outstanding question is which is more likely to ensure fairness in PvP -- No. of DKs, or Total HPs?
I think HPs are, because under the new Cig/Permanent HP ratio, more experienced players have their HP grandfathered in.

Might a rule of thumb be can't target individual unless their total HPs are +/-10-15 percent of attacker's HPs? That way there's fair fights, regardless.

Just my 2 req.

~CTP


 
Profile Email
Quote
Icterid
 Thursday, November 13 2008 @ 04:32 AM UTC  
Forum Contender
Contender

Status: offline

Registered: 09/01/08
Posts: 59

Not every player is going to buy (or has bought) the same amount of HP, nor is going to invest Improbability Points in HP in the same way.

For instance, if I don't buy any HP and don't invest any Improbability Points into extra HP, then even with 20 DKs I could still have 10 base HP at level 1, buy a Riot Hammer and a Force Generator with my Scrap sales (since by DK 20, I'll probable be making decent gear), and still be able to attack Newbies (not to mention that I could have an added 10 att and 10 def from the Improb. Points). That's hardly a fair fight.

But by restricting PvP to DK level, it protects Newbies and lower-DK characters, but then assumes that once you reach a certain point (DK 20, 30, 50... whatever seems reasonable) then you're more likely to be able to handle the Top-level PKers. By that point, you should be able to equip yourself with decent weapons and armor to stand a better chance as well.

Another issue that could come up is that players with a very large number of base HP might end up with no one left to PvP, even with a 10-15% boundary. How many players out there have 500 HP? A handful? Maybe? So once the HP restriction fell into place, that could potentially shut down their ability to PvP completely.

I think I'm also thinking ahead to Season 2, when no one has ridiculously high HP anymore (and can't get it as easily). As thing are now, Hajen (and other grandfathered high-HP players) is still going to be able to whoop a$$ even within a DK restriction system. But it would be a fairer playing ground once we all get Reset.


 
Profile Email
Quote
Count Sessine
 Thursday, November 13 2008 @ 05:36 AM UTC  
Forum Moderator
Moderator

Status: offline

Registered: 08/16/08
Posts: 1402

I think people should be allowed to challenge upward without limit. If I am rash enough to want to take on hajen who has about four times my hit points, I should be allowed to. On my head be it. Since there's an element of random chance, I might even win! (That's a very slender "might," but it exists!)

There should be some sort of fair warning in the bio, though. Number of DKs doesn't quite do it; on DKs, hajen and I don't look that different, but she is, in fact, far more powerful than I am. It would be good to show hit points in there. (Maximum hp, of course, not current hp.)


 
Profile Email
Quote
Deadmeat
 Friday, November 14 2008 @ 11:53 PM UTC  
Forum Contestant
Contestant

Status: offline

Registered: 05/13/08
Posts: 33

This has been a very contentious issue. Some love it, Some hate it. Me, I don't like it, but I don't opt-out, either. That said, there really does need to be some limit on who can attack whom. The way the current set-up works, it encourages anti-social behavior like newb-killing.

With all that as lead-in, how about an old-west gunslinger approach to the problem? Use the players PvP rankings as the threshold parameter.

Thinking this out, and starting it in a new season:
All characters are created with some new parameter variables: PvPrank==0; PvPopt==0 (Rank 0, opted out)
At the end of each Drive Kill, a screen is presented to any opted-out player that informs them of the PvP system, and asks if they want to opt-in. A player may opt-in ONCE per DK.
Any player may opt-out of the PvP system at any time. Their PvPrank is immediately set to 0.
Any zero-rank character can challenge any other zero-rank character who has not opted out. The winner is promoted to rank 1.
Any PvPrank >= 1 character may challenge any other character whose rank is greater than or equal to their own. The winner is promoted to Their rank+1, or the loser's rank+1, whichever is more. The loser loses one rank (to a minimum of 1.)


Folks who were racking up impressively high PvP scores are going to object to this system because they will point out that the top players won't have many, if any, legitimate PvP targets. This is true, but then again, whoever said that they have any right to an easy trip to the top of the lists? Or that staying there should be easy? The fact that a high-rank player will need to search a little harder to find a legitimate target worries me not at all. They can always set aside some kind of dueling ground where promising up-and-comers could be encouraged to come and try their luck.

As an option, and I'm not sure that I recommend this, If a player of higher rank challenges a player of lower rank, then the challenger's Attack, Defense, and HP stats should be reduced to match the challenged. Just to make things fair. If the challenger wins, they are promoted to their rank +1. If they lose, they are demoted to the rank of the challenged player -1. Put some real risk into making the choice to attack below their rank.

Just my 2 req.


 
Profile Email
Quote
hajen
 Saturday, November 15 2008 @ 12:41 AM UTC  
Forum Improbable Badass
Improbable Badass

Status: offline

Registered: 10/26/08
Posts: 146

the PVPopt i like.
having the default being PVP turned off, means a newbie would have to be aware of the concept before engaging in the activity; and allowing them to opt out at any time, means if they realize they ain't got the guns for it yet, they can still go into protected mode and protect their XP (and req) and get to that first DK.

the PVPrank, so so.
if i understand the system as presented, the player in first place can never initiate another PVP, unless they get unseated; the second place player can never initiate another PVP except against numero uno.
if they 'worked' that hard to make it to the top of the ranks, i don't think they're gonna want to wait and twiddle their thumbs for the next PVP (which will be passive an their behalf).
i agree that huge disparity between combatants must be controlled some how, but we don't need to coddle them too much, they did opt in for the carnage. control it by allowing there to be a band of eligible contestants: allow a ranked player to initiate PVP against another ranked player at some arbitrary lower number, say 10 ranks. the HoF already does ranking, just need to code an algorithm to check the ranking of the victim, and if its within the parameters, allow the attack to proceed.
as an aside: if possible targets are going to be limited; possibly institute a change to domicile security, i.e. if you opt in to PVP, security no longer works for you. actually this would negate the need for the security option. if you opted out, you're not going to get attacked anyway; and if you opted in, you don't deserve it.


"tis better to be thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt"
 
Profile Email
Quote
Count of S-G
 Saturday, November 15 2008 @ 01:45 AM UTC  
Forum Improbable Badass
Improbable Badass

Status: offline

Registered: 03/21/08
Posts: 176

I am of the opinion that being able to opt out PvP solves ranking issues. My problem with limiting out on drive kill is that if you limit it to 50 drive kills, there are 6 or so people I can attack. And not all of them have opted in to PvP.

And I'm sorry, but I want to be able to pvp some people.


Glory Points awarded for this fight: 0 You have defeated The Watcher! You receive 1377 Requisition! You receive 20193 experience!
 
Profile Email
Quote
Deadmeat
 Saturday, November 15 2008 @ 05:35 AM UTC  
Forum Contestant
Contestant

Status: offline

Registered: 05/13/08
Posts: 33

My point is that there must be an element of risk in the act of initiating a PvP. Even if you're the ultimate 800+ HP beast, equipped with the very best weapons, armor, and equipment, and you challenge the rawest noob, you should have at least the possibility of losing that fight, if only because you picked it.
If you don't like the idea of handicapping the challenger, then how about buffing the challenged so the fight is fair and interesting? Make it kind of like a Failboat cage fight. The way things are now, the challenged cannot refuse combat. At least give them a fighting chance.
When you take your environment for granted, when you get too cocky, you should lose. At least some of the time. I thought that was the whole point of the combat system. Why should PvP be different?


 
Profile Email
Quote
Max Dougwell
 Saturday, November 15 2008 @ 05:54 AM UTC  
Forum Badass
Badass

Status: offline

Registered: 08/28/08
Posts: 100

Ohh! As a bonus for those at the top (who cannot challange many people) perhaps Joe could make more NPC's like the Watcher, one's that only those at the top could fight. It would avoid attacking those pathetically weaker then you, and provide the chance to defeat important figures.


 
Profile Email
Quote
Hermein
 Saturday, November 15 2008 @ 09:03 PM UTC  
Forum Improbable Badass
Improbable Badass

Status: offline

Registered: 09/11/08
Posts: 126

Is everything going to reset at the beginning of Season Two? If so, the whole problem of the highest-level players being unbeatable (in the current system) or of not having anyone to fight (based on some of the proposals) would go away, at least until the field started to separate out. I realize that doesn't necessarily lead to a stable answer unless some changes are made based on the experience in this Season, but it at least would mean that we don't have to adjust the new system because of the current state.


 
Profile Email
Quote
Hairy Mary
 Saturday, November 15 2008 @ 09:44 PM UTC  
Forum Improbable Badass
Improbable Badass

Status: offline

Registered: 08/17/08
Posts: 1083

Can PvP fans say what it is about it that they like so much? I'm not criticising here, I just think it would be worth exploring. It's probably different for different people.
The two possible reasons that I can think of, are
I) Useful source of exp.
II) It's a way of getting 'hands on' interaction with other players.
There are probably other reasons as well.
Different reasons lead to modifications of the current system.


 
Profile Email
Quote
hajen
 Saturday, November 15 2008 @ 11:25 PM UTC  
Forum Improbable Badass
Improbable Badass

Status: offline

Registered: 10/26/08
Posts: 146

i can think of at least three reasons:

1: the XP - if i can attack a fellow badass 2 levels above me (so as to gain the level bonus), i have gained anywhere between 3,500 and 4,000 XP.

2: if your victim is approximately the same level, the fight has a little more thrill and hazard than a normal jungle fight; closer to a mutant tattoo fight, and if they are significantly higher than you - then like a magpie fight.

3: its a HoF screen; maybe not as communally appreciated as the others, but it is bragging rights.



addendum: some may use it to harvest req, but you'ld have better odds on the stock market.


"tis better to be thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt"
 
Profile Email
Quote
hajen
 Sunday, November 16 2008 @ 01:43 AM UTC  
Forum Improbable Badass
Improbable Badass

Status: offline

Registered: 10/26/08
Posts: 146

curse the timer on the 'edit' button.

after rereading, realize line two uses 'level' incorrectly, should be 'rank' (so as to avoid confusion)


"tis better to be thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt"
 
Profile Email
Quote
Hairy Mary
 Sunday, November 16 2008 @ 01:49 PM UTC  
Forum Improbable Badass
Improbable Badass

Status: offline

Registered: 08/17/08
Posts: 1083

Am I right in thinking that the first two reasons would indicate that a few more boss monster fights out there would be to your liking?
The third reason is firmly PvPing, however it might be altered (within some sort of limits)?


 
Profile Email
Quote
Anonymous: Moo
 Wednesday, November 26 2008 @ 03:12 AM UTC  



I don't think that I would mind getting PvP'd so much if the people who kill me didn't always walk away with all the HP they started with. The only way that could be more insulting is if they started out with less than their permanant HP, and had somehow gained it back during the fight (medi-kit, anyone?)

I think that PvPers shouldn't get to use Buffs or Items during PvPs. Just like in the Dojo. (Wait; is that the way itis now? I don't know...I don't PvP very often.)



 
Quote
Content generated in: 1.55 seconds
New Topic Post Reply



 All times are UTC. The time is now 12:46 AM.

Normal Topic Normal Topic
Locked Topic Locked Topic
Sticky Topic Sticky Topic
New Post New Post
Sticky Topic W/ New Post Sticky Topic W/ New Post
Locked Topic W/ New Post Locked Topic W/ New Post
View Anonymous Posts 
Anonymous users can post 
Filtered HTML Allowed 
Censored Content