Suggestion PvP exp and spawn campers

[j2gay]

I am posting this here as a suggestion as it was posted in another thread and received a positive response. I am not a PvP oriented player. I do however feel that it adds something to the RPG experience. I know that Kainzo has removed Pvp experience on PvP kills. While this will help to curb the negative aspects of PvP on HC, I believe it will also curb the legitimate PvP as well. It will also make leveling combat specs even more grind-like and punish those from the PvP community who behave respectively.

What I suggest is an Exp system that encourages and rewards PvP, and the Hardcore experience of HC, while discouraging and penalizing behaviors like spawn camping and newb/noob hunting that discourage positive player interaction and drives away new players.

The result of such a system, I believe, will be an increase in PvP, that at the same time is more balanced. It will combat spawn camping, noob camping, and lone high level spec players waltzing into newb groups and butchering them repeatedly for easy exp. At the same time such a system will encourage large groups of low and mid level players to band together and pursue higher level players who have wronged them.

While it would remain profitable for highwaymen and the like to ambush lone players and small groups who they may suspect of having good loot. the senseless killing of every random player one may come across, as well as the repeated slaying of them upon finding them weak, would now be desirable behavior only for the truly diabolical.

The solution is a simple formula: Where A = the player making a kill and B = the player being killed Exp = ((A-B)*-3)+40

With this formula a level 30 spec killing another level 30 spec receives 40 exp. A level 30 spec killing a level 60 spec would receive 130 exp. However if that same level 30 spec were to kill a level 10 lost soul they would receive -110 exp. Not enough loss to stop them from killing someone they find mining, but certainly enough to discourage them from following them home and continuing to harass them.
Crime may still pay but it will now come at actual risk. This will cause people to be more selective in their targets and allow for some positive interactions between travelers. Such a system I think will improve player retention moving forward and make HC a more enjoyable experience for all involved.

 

[Kainzo]

The code for getting exp within X level range is already in the game - it's just never worked for us. Removing EXP was a temporary solution to a surmounting issue.

We will review and fix the "Only get exp if within X level" code.
@Delfofthebla | @gabizou

 

[macura]

The code for getting exp within X level range is already in the game - it's just never worked for us. Removing EXP was a temporary solution to a surmounting issue.

We will review and fix the "Only get exp if within X level" code.
@Delfofthebla | @gabizou

This system is extremely easily breakable especially when people keep their weapon after they die. Lets say i am a level 65 class and i encounter a level 20 lostsoul. The level 20 lostsoul feels like the king of the world right now because he just got kick so he comes at me, i have to kill him because he is the aggressor.

Furthermore this could be used to xp bomb someone. I personally don't care about /pvp so if this was in and i (if i wanted to be a dick) could xp bomb someone. Aka graveyard rushing them repeatedly, where the are put into a difficult position. Choice A for them would be kill and continue to lose xp for doing so. Choice B would be to do nothing and it is possible to kill a specced person as a low level. Option c, they could run away. It seems kind of silly that if i found a low level in the wild who attacked me and keeps graveyard rushing me that i would be forced to leave my current area or face being deleveled.

Finally, i don't think that not having xp gain from pvp is that significant to the leveling process as a pvper. It is a nice touch because as a 65 master pvp xp kept me at full bar 65 because i avoided mobs. However i think that this would hurt pvp more than help it. While i do believe that it would be cool if you would only get xp if you killed an relatively equal or higher level player, however pvp kills of lower levels giving negative xp would not be a smart route to take.

 

[j2gay]

This system is extremely easily breakable especially when people keep their weapon after they die. Lets say i am a level 65 class and i encounter a level 20 lostsoul. The level 20 lostsoul feels like the king of the world right now because he just got kick so he comes at me, i have to kill him because he is the aggressor.

Furthermore this could be used to xp bomb someone. I personally don't care about /pvp so if this was in and i (if i wanted to be a dick) could xp bomb someone. Aka graveyard rushing them repeatedly, where the are put into a difficult position. Choice A for them would be kill and continue to lose xp for doing so. Choice B would be to do nothing and it is possible to kill a specced person as a low level. Option c, they could run away. It seems kind of silly that if i found a low level in the wild who attacked me and keeps graveyard rushing me that i would be forced to leave my current area or face being deleveled.

Finally, i don't think that not having xp gain from pvp is that significant to the leveling process as a pvper. It is a nice touch because as a 65 master pvp xp kept me at full bar 65 because i avoided mobs. However i think that this would hurt pvp more than help it. While i do believe that it would be cool if you would only get xp if you killed an relatively equal or higher level player, however pvp kills of lower levels giving negative xp would not be a smart route to take.

Most of your argument is irrelevant as the advantages would far outweigh the disadvantages. You can never get rid of all the a**hats so there may be a few yahoos that try to harass people in such a manner, however the likelihood of the situation you are describing happening on anything nearing the scale of the harassment that currently goes on is infinitesimal, as the aggressor in this situation would find themselves at the GY quickly and repeatedly. If such a thing were to become an issue the solution is simple. We are already using a combat tag system and a karma system that tracks the aggressor. Simply negate exp loss when defending.

 

[Jack_Reacher]

This is a neat idea, but experience numbers would have to be adjusted to make this a viable system for leveling. I'm not going to spend an hour looking for PvP, only to receive 40 experience if I kill someone my same level, or 130 experience if I kill someone 30 levels higher than me (this would be a very rare occurrence). I will instead kill two zombies.

 

[macura]

Most of your argument is irrelevant as the advantages would far outweigh the disadvantages. You can never get rid of all the a**hats so there may be a few yahoos that try to harass people in such a manner, however the likelihood of the situation you are describing happening on anything nearing the scale of the harassment that currently goes on is infinitesimal, as the aggressor in this situation would find themselves at the GY quickly and repeatedly. If such a thing were to become an issue the solution is simple. We are already using a combat tag system and a karma system that tracks the aggressor. Simply negate exp loss when defending.

If you put in a system that can be abuse it will be abused. Also the first hit karma plugin is not reliable at all. Example: I am a level 10, i run around w/ flint and steel or a lava bucket. I never hit the person so they will be forced to him me first.

 

[j2gay]

If you put in a system that can be abuse it will be abused. Also the first hit karma plugin is not reliable at all. Example: I am a level 10, i run around w/ flint and steel or a lava bucket. I never hit the person so they will be forced to him me first.

So they are running around with 10 lava buckets trying to harass high level players into killing them so the high level people will lose exp? What happens when the high level kills them once and their lava is gone?
@Archestro warned me that if I made a suggestion that could allow the exp that has been removed from PvP to be returned that it would be the PvP people who argued against it. Perhaps PvP exp should stay gone. You don't deserve it.

 

[Jack_Reacher]

So they are running around with 10 lava buckets trying to harass high level players into killing them so the high level people will lose exp? What happens when the high level kills them once and their lava is gone?
@Archestro warned me that if I made a suggestion that could allow the exp that has been removed from PvP to be returned that it would be the PvP people who argued against it. Perhaps PvP exp should stay gone. You don't deserve it.

Calm down there, feller. He's just pointing out possible flaws. Critique is valuable if you want your idea to actually go somewhere.

 

[Ultimate_N00b]

What about exp depending on the rarity of what they have?

For example the player has a sharp II diamond sword. You would get more exp for killing him.

 

[j2gay]

Calm down there, feller. He's just pointing out possible flaws. Critique is valuable if you want your idea to actually go somewhere.

I'm only funny huckleberry.
On a serious note.
Every system is exploitable and will be exploited. The question is what is less exploitable, and does the potential upside outweigh the potential downside?
Currently no exp is granted for PvP. This does not affect me in the least as I generally avoid PvP and will head in the opposite direction when campers are around. What I have seen is that since exp was removed from PvP GY camping is at an all time high (I have been repairing GY as of late and have seen the carnage first hand), when it was designed to stop it and similar behaviors.
Even with an increase in such undesirable behaviors the result of no exp for PvP is still an improvement over what was, as now at least the campers will not me rewarded with higher abilities as well as amusement.
PvP is not intended to be a path to leveling. It never has been. It should however be one of the many ways a player can gain exp. What I am proposing is a way for that to happen, while discouraging the undesirable behaviors. Is it possible, if you are a complete a** to exploit the system? as with any system of course it is. Every system has exploits and a**hats to exploit it. But what would be the gain of the above stated exploits? I would hope that any player who would exploit such a system in the ways described by macura, because they dislike another player, will likely engage in enough other undesirable behaviors that they wont be around long.
Critique is valuable when it is relevant, reasonable and constructive.

 

[Jack_Reacher]

I've never understood how people can get "camped" at a graveyard. You can buy redstone in a GY. If you can't purchase it, you can vote and you'll have enough to purchase redstone for a recall. If you don't have a recall marked, get one marked. Don't complain about getting camped, because there IS a workaround!

Yes - if you're a n00b, you may not understand the recalls, marks, redstone, voting, souls, etc. However, these are just n00bish growing pains, and should not be extrapolated to the playerbase as a whole.

 

[j2gay]

I've never understood how people can get "camped" at a graveyard. You can buy redstone in a GY. If you can't purchase it, you can vote and you'll have enough to purchase redstone for a recall. If you don't have a recall marked, get one marked. Don't complain about getting camped, because there IS a workaround!

Yes - if you're a n00b, you may not understand the recalls, marks, redstone, voting, souls, etc. However, these are just n00bish growing pains, and should not be extrapolated to the playerbase as a whole.

Camping does not only occur at a GY, this just seems to be the most prevalent. And generally yes, noobs are the ones being camped. Still even players who are not noobs can be caught at a GY without enough for redstone, or without the desire to purchase it. Why should you have to buy redstone every time you go to the GY? Why should you have to log out or move your base every time a high level player finds it? Being a noob is not illegal. Spawn camping and harassing players for your own amusement both are. They are also however difficult to police. You cannot legitimately argue that thousands of player do not quit each map because of the harassing style of PvP that is prevalent here.
IRL people can live outside the law and do well for a time. Ultimately though they all end up dead at an early age or rotting in jail. Undesirable behaviors always carry negative consequences to balance with the potential rewards. It is what holds the world from Anarchy.
In games we must create fictional negative consequences to balance the rewards. If we were to ban every player who behaves undesirably (dead early) or Jail them (in game jail) we will run out of players quickly. If we do nothing the players who want no part of it will leave and there will be no one left to make positive contributions.
Fictional situations to mimic real life scenarios RPG

 

[Jack_Reacher]

Camping does not only occur at a GY, this just seems to be the most prevalent. And generally yes, noobs are the ones being camped. Still even players who are not noobs can be caught at a GY without enough for redstone, or without the desire to purchase it. Why should you have to buy redstone every time you go to the GY? Why should you have to log out or move your base every time a high level player finds it? Being a noob is not illegal. Spawn camping and harassing players for your own amusement both are. They are also however difficult to police. You cannot legitimately argue that thousands of player do not quit each map because of the harassing style of PvP that is prevalent here.

Tough shit. It's a game, and the people are what make it exciting. Difficulties like this make the game more fun for me, honestly. People who can't appreciate the experience of an hardcore MMO should just go play single player. Your paragraph just sounds whiney and lazy. Thousands of n00bs quit because they get camped, sure. Out of those thousands, my guess is that most of them couldn't properly fill out their "special key" on their whitelist application, and just decided to pay for premium access or have the mods give them repeated hints and chances until they finally got it right. The spirit of your paragraph could also be used to complain about the fact that you have to mine to obtain resources or pay to spec your class. "But I don't have the DESIRE to do anything that is difficult." Go play some mind-numbing game like solitaire.

IRL people can live outside the law and do well for a time. Ultimately though they all end up dead at an early age or rotting in jail. Undesirable behaviors always carry negative consequences to balance with the potential rewards. It is what holds the world from Anarchy.
In games we must create fictional negative consequences to balance the rewards.

I do agree that changes like this could enhance the game, but the section I quoted earlier is just a silly premise for doing so.

If we do nothing the players who want no part of it will leave and there will be no one left to make positive contributions.
Fictional situations to mimic real life scenarios RPG

You are implying that the whiney n00bs that ragequit because they are camped will go on to contribute to the server. This is a tenuous proposition in my opinion. This also implies the inverse, that the people doing the camping won't contribute anything positive to the server. Yes, camping is kind of a scumbag thing to do, but this blanket statement about campers should not be made.

 

[j2gay]

Tough shit. It's a game, and the people are what make it exciting. Difficulties like this make the game more fun for me, honestly. People who can't appreciate the experience of an hardcore MMO should just go play single player. Your paragraph just sounds whiney and lazy. Thousands of n00bs quit because they get camped, sure. Out of those thousands, my guess is that most of them couldn't properly fill out their "special key" on their whitelist application, and just decided to pay for premium access or have the mods give them repeated hints and chances until they finally got it right. The spirit of your paragraph could also be used to complain about the fact that you have to mine to obtain resources or pay to spec your class. "But I don't have the DESIRE to do anything that is difficult." Go play some mind-numbing game like solitaire.


I do agree that changes like this could enhance the game, but the section I quoted earlier is just a silly premise for doing so.


You are implying that the whiney n00bs that ragequit because they are camped will go on to contribute to the server. This is a tenuous proposition in my opinion. This also implies the inverse, that the people doing the camping won't contribute anything positive to the server. Yes, camping is kind of a scumbag thing to do, but this blanket statement about campers should not be made.

Your implication is that I wish to the a**hattery out of the game. I do not. I think it adds something. I wish only to buffer it by creating negative ramifications for negative actions. While I would agree that there are many PvP ers that contribute positively to the server, even the "evil ones" there are ways to do this and add the element to the game you are looking for while still being respectful and respectable. Harassment just isn't one of them. Please don't pretend like it doesn't happen.
Mining, mob hunting, the grind of money making, these are part of the game and are accepted. I agree that those whoa re too lazy to do these things in the manner and method required on HC should seek MC elsewhere. The behaviors we have been discussing however, are acknowledged to be undesirable and unacceptable. They have also proven very difficult to police and discourage. I have seen many threads attempting to address and or complaining about these issues in my time here. Most with responses from the founders looking for viable ways to defeat or discourage these behaviors.
This very suggestion was spawned from a thread where a player was complaining about the harassing behavior of certain elements of the server. A thread in which Kainzo proclaimed that the staff has been searching for a way to discourage these behaviors because they chase players away, damaging the server.
This thread is about a way to do that. If you think the behavior is OK and should continue then say that, or start a new thread that says that. I have seen many players leave for the above stated reason who were not "whiney noobs" as you describe them but were indeed experienced MC players who just grew tired of a**hattery, or scumbaggery as you dub it, being the most profitable MO on server.
My suggestion will have little if any negative impact on the people who are engaging in PvP as part of a legitimate MMORPG experience. Nor would I wish it too, as highway men and such add to the experience, hence contributing positively if they do nothing else at all. There is however a line between being an "evil" player playing a vital role within the MMORPG, and being the player that kills someone for the loot, then runs to the nearest GY for which they have a waypoint in order to kill them some more, then tracking them to their home in order to kill them some more, and repeatedly killing them there again and again and again long after all the loot is gone. The people who are doing this(and please don't try to pretend like it isn't happening) whether they do it for kicks, or are bullied IRL and are trying to return the favor unto others, need to be discourage in someway in order to limit the behavior.
Do not misinterpret this as me whining about a personal problem. I have no problem. This is not happening to me. It is happening though, we should chose not to be blind to it.

 

[Jack_Reacher]

Well put. I really do agree with the core of your argument, I just don't like that people pretend like there's nothing they can do when someone's waiting outside of a graveyard (as well as other thinking along those lines - i.e. n00bs that seem to ALWAYS play the victim).

 

[macura]

It is true that there needs to be done about the noob camping but this is not the way to fix it.

 

[j2gay]

Well put. I really do agree with the core of your argument, I just don't like that people pretend like there's nothing they can do when someone's waiting outside of a graveyard (as well as other thinking along those lines - i.e. n00bs that seem to ALWAYS play the victim).

I was pretty sure we were on the same page just trying to clarify it.

It is true that there needs to be done about the noob camping but this is not the way to fix it.

Do you have another idea that is viable, or should we try this one?

 

[macura]

I was pretty sure we were on the same page just trying to clarify it.

Do you have another idea that is viable, or should we try this one?

This isn't a "well we have no better ideas on the table so lets wing this" type thing. If herocraft has survived so far without this, then i think that it can survive a little longer until something that is not able to be abused is developed.

Complete spitball here, but how about when you kill someone who is unspecced who is >30 levels lower than you, then you get a temporary sort of bounty that degrades over time. No one has to accept the bounty and the bounty would not give the slayer the money, the person who killed unspecced people and died would lose money though. Maybe the value increases by 5 every time you kill a noob and would decay at a rate of maybe 1-2 an hour. So that killing of noobs is in some ways punished but is not catastrophic. However if the person camped noobs then they would get a pretty high bounty on their heads. If they continued their ways then they would eventually lose a good portion of their money. Also it is possible to go negative in money so people purposefully having 0 coins would not be protected from this.

 

[j2gay]

This isn't a "well we have no better ideas on the table so lets wing this" type thing. If herocraft has survived so far without this, then i think that it can survive a little longer until something that is not able to be abused is developed.

Complete spitball here, but how about when you kill someone who is unspecced who is >30 levels lower than you, then you get a temporary sort of bounty that degrades over time. No one has to accept the bounty and the bounty would not give the slayer the money, the person who killed unspecced people and died would lose money though. Maybe the value increases by 5 every time you kill a noob and would decay at a rate of maybe 1-2 an hour. So that killing of noobs is in some ways punished but is not catastrophic. However if the person camped noobs then they would get a pretty high bounty on their heads. If they continued their ways then they would eventually lose a good portion of their money. Also it is possible to go negative in money so people purposefully having 0 coins would not be protected from this.

The idea here is to make noob hunting/camping less fun and less desirable, not more. Also talk about exploitable, player A makes 100 noob kills through camping over the course of an hour, player B, his good friend, kills him and collect 500s. Your not even in the ball park dude.
As far as my suggestion being exploitable, the current system is exploitable and is currently being exploited. Any system no matter how thorough or intricate is exploitable and will be exploited, as we have already covered here.
The question is: what is the likelihood, or more importantly how exploitable is a system? What are the potential reasons for, and benefits of such exploitation?
The answer in this case, again as we have already covered here, is that the potential for exploitation is infinitesimal (in case you didn't know that means extremely small) because Firstly it would be very difficult to do, secondly there is very little reason to do so, and thirdly there is little to no benefit to such exploitation.
The argument that we should not test a system that is very likely to fix a known problem while carrying very little potential risk, because it may be exploitable, whilst participating in a system that you have already acknowledge is broken, and is currently being exploited, just is not sound logic.

 

[macura]

The idea here is to make noob hunting/camping less fun and less desirable, not more. Also talk about exploitable, player A makes 100 noob kills through camping over the course of an hour, player B, his good friend, kills him and collect 500s. Your not even in the ball park dude.
As far as my suggestion being exploitable, the current system is exploitable and is currently being exploited. Any system no matter how thorough or intricate is exploitable and will be exploited, as we have already covered here.
The question is: what is the likelihood, or more importantly how exploitable is a system? What are the potential reasons for, and benefits of such exploitation?
The answer in this case, again as we have already covered here, is that the potential for exploitation is infinitesimal (in case you didn't know that means extremely small) because Firstly it would be very difficult to do, secondly there is very little reason to do so, and thirdly there is little to no benefit to such exploitation.
The argument that we should not test a system that is very likely to fix a known problem while carrying very little potential risk, because it may be exploitable, whilst participating in a system that you have already acknowledge is broken, and is currently being exploited, just is not sound logic.

If you would kindly reread my post, you would see that i said that "the bounty would not give the slayer the money" aka if you killed the bountied person, you get no money but the person loses the bounty's equivelant value of souls. So what you just posted doesn't make any sense.