Suggested Ideological Rebalancing of Zone Design
ArchivedUser
Guest
@Rune_Relic writes:
We have heard very loud voices from a small minority sect of PvP that demand the right to harass flame and troll other players at leisure for no real reason than a right to grief. We have heard the RP community that just want to do their thing in peace. We have heard the voice of many in the middle that want concepts like a fair fight and civilisation. This is my expansion of IS concept to enable all of them to coexist. It is not perfect, nor without flaws. I put if forward as an improvement only.
This system identifies 5 zone types and 3 zone states that have their own unique rules of conduct.
This
framework is envisioned, to allow us to evolve beyond the 'if it moves
kill it' mindset that dominates practicaly every MMO game to date, where
many players just cant see anything beyond combat.
Maybe even be bold enough to suggest alternative methods to achieve an objective.
However, player activity is not compelled, merely deterred through personal acceptance of in-game consequences.
Even
if only the stupid and desperate would accept such a price, choice
always remains an essential part of independant thought (with surprising
choices).
This is designed to allowing a PvP server, PvE server and
PvX server to all exist in the same world at the same time in a dynamic
ever changing way.
The PvP players that want to **** pillage and murder at leisure...war zone.
The PvE players that want to conduct role play ceremonies and get a general quiet life...peace zone
The PvX players that want honourable dueling and a civilised world between the two extremes in open world.
1. War only zone
2. Neutral+War flippable zone
3. Neutral only Zone
4. Neutral+Peace flippable zone
5. Peace only zone
The WAR ZONE:
1a. Static War zone - Castle grounds or similar, for combat use only
1b. Transient War zone - Conditional, temporary, neutral zone changes to combat zone, for siege or similar
1c. Mobile War zone - Temporary, designated routes and pathways, for caravans or similar.
Enables PvP looting system.
Enables PvE looting system.
Disables PvX corruption system.
Disables PvX outcast system.
The NEUTRAL ZONE:
2. Neutral Zone - All areas not specifically designated for peace or war as a zone or route.
Disables PvP looting system.
Enables PvE looting system.
Enables PvX corruption system.
Disables PvX outcast system.
The PEACE ZONE:
3a. Static peace zone - Sanctuary grounds or similar, for peaceful use only
3b. Transient peace zone - Conditional, temporary, neutral zone change to peace zone, for RP ceremonies and similar
3c. Mobile peace zone - Temporary, designated routes and pathways, for ceremonial RP procession or similar.
(Player generated content should not be the sole reserve of combat focused players)
Disables PvP looting system.
Disables PvE looting system.
Enables PvX corruption system.
Enables PvX outcast system.
The OUTCAST SYSTEM:
Makes all wildlife, all NPC, all PC and all the Gods hostile toward the player.
Friendly fire is enabled against them.
They become kill on sight, with the bounty system enabled to everyone/everything and not just the legitimate bounty hunters.
Corruption is set at maximum.
Guild memberships and similar are all revoked and denied.
All
in-game possession are forfeit in the case of active
sanctuary/procession combat and the procedes split between the sanctuary
members as compensation.
Additionally, all in-game skill and XP progress is forfeit and locked in the case of a player sanctuary/procession death.
The
outcast can only gain progress redemption by begging for and gaining
clemency from 'all' of the sanctuary members present, at their
discretion.
How they achieve such a feat is left to their own in-game endeavour.
Redemption does not return forfeit goods, only a percentage of progress.
The
captured outcast will be publicly paraded on a walk of shame, before
official summary public execution, to ensure everyone knows them (logged
on or not).
This process will repeat on every capture until redemption is obtained and the player is no longer an outcast.
May the gods and players have mercy on your poor and wretched soul.
The CORRUPTION SYSTEM:
The
Neutral zone is neither a heavenly sanctum of peace nor a hellish war
zone where the brutality of the wild rules (without the niceties of
common law that come with civilisation).
The Neutral zone is a place
of civilisation where humanity conducts its efforts towards building a
nodes society through its citizens collaboration and coordination.
As such, antisocial conduct is heavily deterred, if not denied.
Where
Death is unremitting in the war zone and not tolerated in the
sanctuary, it is conditionally permitted here in a very limited form.
Where
looting is unremitting in the war zone and not tolerated in the
sanctuary, it is conditionally permitted here in a very limited form.
Death and looting beyond the limitations and conditions results in increasingly punitive corruption.
Corruption
should penalise both progress and possessions in a similar vain to the
outcast system to a lesser but escalating degree.
A forgiveness system should be put in place as the primary way to remove corruption.
How a player gains forgiveness from the other players is left to them.
The
captured corrupt will remain in the node city stocks for 1 hour, for
target practice, to ensure everyone knows them (logged on or not).
This process will repeat on every capture until forgiveness is obtained and the player is no longer corrupt.
The LOOTING SYSTEM:
The
idea here is to allow a full on thieves guild structure, but it
regulates against who, where and when thievery is tolerated and where it
is not.
War zones are places where your valuables and your life is not safe.
People
should take care to not store their valuables in war zones or places
that could become such, by moving them to safer areas while in a neutral
state.
Sanctuaries should be able to hold a very limited number of
very rare possessions but not materials nor common items. Especially
rare community artefacts that cant be contested
What becomes potentially sacrificial is left to player choice.
The PATH SYSTEM:
For obvious reasons, ceremonial routes should not pass through war zones, nor should caravan routes pass through peace zones.
Both may pass through neutral territory but will maintain their respective war zone and peace zone rules.
TL;DR
They call that A.D.D. 
Trying
to balance PvP PvE and PvX ideologies. Those who break the rules of
civilisation suffer. Redemption and forgiveness systems are the main
means to remove corrupt and outcast status. This eliminates gaming the
system with any kind of exploit.
Comments
to late now...
I might further add that there are have been many games that have separate zones much similar to what you talk about. This would surely segregate the populace. This is supposed to be a PvX game. A mixture of all aspects of game play and a reason most people are here supporting Ashes.
With Ashes concept of an every changing world and the idea that actions have consequences a system like that would not work. Intrepid is trying to encourage player cooperation not separation. Choices and consequences in world wide immersion. How would you classify OW dungeons? Put up a neutral fence/zone around it? Dungeons will spawn in different zones. Mines in different locations. Should they have one path only to get to them? A no kill path? Do we discourage players from exploring just because an area is called a "War Zone"? Because that's what would happen.
I give you much credit in trying to resolve an issue that just a few are trying to disrupt.
But it takes too much away from the game that most people have come here for and gives much more work to the developers. In the long run, those few who are crying loudest right now will never be happy.
System said:
Would be great if this could be a discussion point with Geoffrey, Steven and IS generally on a live stream...? But I suspect they'd say something like 'Foundational systems are already in place and may be tweaked and adjusted but not totally re-vamped at this time.'
The Pragmatist in me says we need to play it first before that can better happen.
The Realist in me says whatever they do, a vocal minority will always be shouting at the devs about something. Some people will always be moving on in the varied world that is humanity. Perfection is not possible in this world.
If you're a PvP Idealist, I can only say, this is my view. 'Discuss.'
However, I also genuinely Respect @Rune_Relic for putting great thought into this.
@Rune_Relic put in much thought and effort to present his ideas.
@Glosterian
@Annatar
@Wizard_Beard
@UnknownSystemError
Thanks everyone for you responses.
They are always much appreciated.
My point of view was that the war zone system and neutral zone system is pretty much here already. I was merely trying to balance that out by adding a complementary and opposing sanctuary system to add balance to the war zone and allow for all the varied personae out there. I disagree that it would fracture the community with respect. I believe, in contrast, that it exposes alternative playstyles to people that would never otherwise try them. A pure RP server would avoid all PvP and PvE. A pure PvP server would avoid all PvE and RP. A pure PvE server would avoid all PvP and RP.
The other main problem for me was that I dont see how the corruption system (as is) can not be exploited. Players and team mates can always impersonate friend and foe and can thus break the systems designed to prevent exploitation. Plus it is not the whole community that has been 'wronged' if you like by player actions. It is a personal grievance between two people...or more in the case of a RP event. So for 'justice' to be served as such, the victim must have a say on if that justice has in fact been served to their satisfaction as the aggrieved party. The outcast and corruption system are just naturally extensions of that logic. This system is beyond exploitation. It also provides a very public face to the people that deliberately harass others, rather than hide behind anonymity. It also eliminates the necessity of violence to solve disputes for everything...especially for players with crafting builds unsuitable for combat..
All this aside, yes it is a large invasive core idea. One that could not be easily implemented, unless the bulk of the framework was already implemented anyway. So I put this forward on the off chance that was the case. If it stimulates nothing more than discussion and the exploration of core system design philosophy.....that ok. This was just as much an exercise on what balancing a community necessitates. Is forbidding certain playstyles really appropriate for a community game ? Or is regulating them the way to go ?
Warring guilds want a place to discuss peace negotiations without combat.
Where do they go in game ?
Players want to go to places to discuss in peace without harassment.
Where do they go in game ?
Players on this day just want to explore some places of extreme beauty without that moment being spoilt.
Where do they go in game ?
Players want to go to a place to celebrate their victories in peace and have a party.
Where do they go in game ?
I mean i guess you could make the argument that ganking gathers around a node is a form of war but lets be realistic the big advantage to this system is that pvp is not free of consequences neither is gathering resources. So this solves the problem with pve safe zone bots and pvp super gankers all at once.