Suggestion for Caravans

Hello,

Not sure where to make a suggestion so making a post here.

I think the idea of a menu when going near a Caravan for Attack / Defend / Ignore is a bit tacky and also brakes immersion.

If you attack a caravan you can be classed as an attacker, If you attack people who have attacked a caravan or followed a caravan for a duration of time you can be classed as a defender and if you walk past it and don't interact or follow it for a while you can be classed as ignoring it so i don't think there is a need for the menu.

Thanks!

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

cNr

I agree! That would definitely ruin immersion imo

squeetee

The menu option does kill immersion but it's also a super simple way to get everything running. I do hope eventually they make it a smoother system.

CaptnChuck

Sometimes player convenience is more important that realism. This is one such case.

Also, this is quite difficult to code as opposed to just having a system that classifies people as attackers, defenders or ignorers.

Dummo

Takes the idea of an ambush away too.

I thought this was just a (pre-)Alpha thing, guess not.

Kesarakk

I agree and would prefer a system similar to that. It is kind of silly to see a group of players run-up to your caravan and be like "Ay! Stop this caravan! We need to toggle to attack it!"... I also just got major Monty Python vibes from my own example.

Only question I would have is how would players who join in to help the caravan be safe from being registered as an attacker? One Aoe spell from a mage would ruin the whole thing.

One way around this that I see, is players toggle this on or off before they leave their city and is a standing option in the UI. It would be annoying having to run back, or to the nearest town, to switch it, but it gives Marauding players that Ambush fantasy.

Whatever the decision is from Intrepid I do believe the formula should be Immersion> Convenience.

Hellfar

Eh that's a shame. I hope they lean more towards the OP's idea instead of the menu. It definitely does eliminate the ambush mechanic from them and that's a bit of a bummer.

apmax

You could just flag people who approach the caravan as a kind of combatant automatically to simplify everything. Maybe give players an individual 'autoflag near caravan' setting as a kind of Ignore toggle.
It gives a bit more freedom to players and lets you, for example, try to defeat a group attacking a caravan so they don't get to loot it just so you can destroy the caravan and loot it yourself.
Using AoE abilities near a caravan could be dangerous with this system, but maybe it's just kinda dangerous to use AoE abilities near a caravan unless you're super careful and that's not really a bad thing.

Yuyukoyay

It's necessary for both sides to be even. Not flagging yourself for Caravan gives the attackers an advantage since you won't know what they are doing until they attack.

I think it's important for people to make their intention known for fair PvP.

I don't care about immersion in situations where balance in involved.

Xenotor

If you enter a certain radius of the caravan you should be forced to choose one of the 3 options.

This is so attackers cant just run with the caravan until suddenly deciding to choose attackers.

apmax

Yuyukoyay wrote: »

It's necessary for both sides to be even.

Not really. Anybody can just show up and choose to attack or to defend at any time, there's no need for both sides to be "even". You're talking about fairness in PVP regarding a system where 15 people can show up to you running your caravan and deck you basically uncontested.
My suggestion is that instead of forcing people to pick a side through a menu, the choice is to ignore or not and that's a toggle setting for every player. If you choose not to ignore you get flagged to fight around the caravan and are free to attack or defend at your whim.

Yuyukoyay

No I'm talking about avoiding a system where 15 people can pretend to defend it until they are within melee range of it and then just instagib it. I'd like to avoid that situation by keeping the menu. If you don't choose in a time limit then it selects the no pvp option.

Dummo

Yuyukoyay wrote: »

It's necessary for both sides to be even. Not flagging yourself for Caravan gives the attackers an advantage since you won't know what they are doing until they attack.

It's called an ambush.

WickerMan

Interesting feedback, I guess this would need some kind of internal clock to be ticking after being in range of the caravan, Maybe also if a player ignores that player can maybe return later if they change their mind and attack or defend.

I think the AoE issue as a defender might be eliminated after an internal clock hits 0 either way i think it could just be a case of watch your AoE's.

WickerMan

I wonder what if the attacking and defending was just left to those who have an interest in the caravans safty to defend and the attackers are those who want to try there luck or just go for the loot,
This would remove the whole attack defend ignore system but the only defending reward would be the caravan makes it safely to its destination.

Maybe this event type and the menu system just fits with the whole game design that intrepid has in mind

Dummo

The attackers should just be able to attack the people defending the caravan. The hard thing is that the attackers would get Corruption, which is not supposed to happen, and it would be hard (I guess) to give loot of the caravan to the attackers if they're not as obviously marked as attackers as in the system in place now.

Yuyukoyay

Well it's why the menu pops up to begin with. You don't get corruption in caravan fights.

Atama

Caravans are supposed to be a form of consensual PvP. I am not sure what I think about bringing in people as guards that can turn on the caravan and rob it. On the one hand it sounds like cool drama, on the other hand I think this is the kind of griefing that Intrepid wants to discourage.

I’d make it so that everyone that joins the caravan as a guard is on the same team and can’t attack each other or loot the caravan. I’d also make it so there is a “purple bubble” around the caravan and people get a warning if they get too close. If you go into the bubble you are flagged and can be attacked as an enemy.

This wouldn’t prevent ambushes; you can still stealth or attack long range with spells and arrows. It just prevents a group flagged green from walking right up to the caravan and then bursting out all at once before the guards can do anything without risking corruption.

Zhab

@Atama isn't a big moving purple bubble serving as an indicator of a PvP zone (a game concept) be an even bigger immersion breaker than a one time quick popup that gone and done with afterward ? Shouldn't a caravan be able to pass by peaceful lumberjacks working by the side of the road without the lumberjacks suddenly dropping everything and run away to avoid entering the purple bubble that would make them free game on PvP ?

Once you start to think about this in depth and run various scenarios in your mind a whole bunch of problems pop up with would be "automatic system".

Atama

Zhab wrote: »

@Atama isn't a big moving purple bubble serving as an indicator of a PvP zone (a game concept) be an even bigger immersion breaker than a one time quick popup that gone and done with afterward ? Shouldn't a caravan be able to pass by peaceful lumberjacks working by the side of the road without the lumberjacks suddenly dropping everything and run away to avoid entering the purple bubble that would make them free game on PvP ?

Once you start to think about this in depth and run various scenarios in your mind a whole bunch of problems pop up with would be "automatic system".

I don’t find it immersion-breaking at all. It’s the opposite. Those caravan guards are going to be paranoid and won’t trust anyone who gets in range. Those “peaceful” lumberjacks might be axe-wielding thugs laying in wait and pretending to be cutting wood as they wait for the caravan to draw near. I think what I describe is exactly how it would play out, as those responsible for protecting wealth demand that everyone scatter or face the consequences.

3am

You could have an item to be worn that would flag you as either trader defender or attacker. Allowing defenders to path ahead and clear attackers, and allowing attackers to ambush caravans. It would also add more dynamic oot in world pvp

Child Item