Greetings, glorious adventurers! If you're joining in our Alpha One spot testing, please follow the steps here to see all the latest test info on our forums and Discord!

PVE Focused Player idea (Player Protection)

There are a lot of PVE Andy's out there who don't like player combat.
It's been established that PVP will be a core feature in ashes, this is not the point of this topic.

I understand both perspectives, I have played on PVP servers in games like WOW and absolutely love the additional player interactions that spring up because of it, but take someone for example, like my parents in their late 40s who also play MMORPGs, they just didn't grow up with games like that, and are gimped as a result.

So still, to be clear, I'm not suggesting a fundamental change to the way the game works, but what if there were in game systems that allowed you to "hire" player protection for in game currency. The reason I think it's important that this be an ingame thing and not a social through text sort of interaction is because I think it would grant validity to the practice and normalize it.
It could be as simple as players who need gold and are good at PVP walking up to an NPC to offer services, and players who aren't, who are attempting to complete a quest, or a gathering run, caravan, ect, purchasing those services at said NPC.
I predict the following benefits:

-Larger group sizes on average, contributing to the large scale PVP focus in the game
-Another economy driving feature that would otherwise not exist
-Less frustrated "PVE players" if their "bodyguard" is successful in protecting them
-An additional way to interact with other players, something to do if you run out of content as a PVP player

The only "downsides" I can honestly see to a system like this would be the un-assuredness of the hired players competence, but I see that as a risk factor the the "PVE players" would have to accept.

What are everyone's thoughts on this?

Comments

  • NiKrNiKr Member
    I see no difference between a social-based contract and this. Either the employer pays money upfront and could potentially be fucked over (applies to either method) or they pay money after the fact and the success depends on what kind of reputation the employee wants.

    If anything, a social contract would create a more natural network of helpers, rather than randoes just going up to npcs to, theoretically, get some money for doing nothing.

    Also, how would you even put a system-based price on helping someone out? Does the gatherer want that help for 10 minutes or for 3 hours? What if there's literally no pvp around the gatherer throughout those 3 hours? Does the gatherer still have to pay the full amount? And if there's any upfront cost - the pvper might just leave with the money and do nothing.
  • I don't think a fully automated / game run system to oversee contracts between players can be implemented. Without a legal system that can arbitrate what to do, or even tell what constitute, a breach of contract it would only take a few bad actors on either sides to give it a bad reputation and being ignore in favour of direct social interactions.

    What could be put forth thought, is a node public board where players could either offer their services for specific tasks or post "job" offers. For anyone watching anime, that would be the equivalent of the quests board in a typical adventurers' guild, but on a node level. A tool to help players get in touch with other players.

    It's not a perfect solution, and players wanting to know who's doing what in the area could use it as an easy spying / information gathering tool. Advertisers on the board should be aware of the risks.

    Usually, I guess that all this could be done internally within a guild, but for smaller ones it could be a way to get extra hands at need, or for bigger ones to subcontract (for diversion or keep their hands/name clean).
    Be bold. Be brave. Roll a Tulnar !
  • NiKr wrote: »
    Also, how would you even put a system-based price on helping someone out? Does the gatherer want that help for 10 minutes or for 3 hours? What if there's literally no pvp around the gatherer throughout those 3 hours? Does the gatherer still have to pay the full amount? And if there's any upfront cost - the pvper might just leave with the money and do nothing.

    I imagine it to be gold per 15 minutes or so, some short interval like that. It would function just like hired protection does IRL, the goal isn't to find PVP but to be glad you hired a bodyguard when it happens, paying the same price regardless of whether it happened or not.

    I don't think there should be an upfront cost, the PVPer gets paid the amount when he leaves the group or is kicked, that is hidden as an automatic deduction while he remains in the group that goes back to the npc or gets sent in the mail.

    You could do some things to incentive a better job, like a player rating system, so players get reviews about whether they preformed well or not, if a player tried to scam you or wasn't properly helping you to many times, that would show up to any potential customers. I imagine a player that attempted these things to often would find they wouldn't be getting hired anymore.
  • Percimes wrote: »
    What could be put forth thought, is a node public board where players could either offer their services for specific tasks or post "job" offers.

    I was thinking it would be a cool freehold thing you could make as well, and I think opening it up to multiple job offers other than just PVP protection makes a lot of sense.

  • I still like the idea of subterfuge and covert "agreements" in addition to more traditional interactions. Maybe?
  • NiKrNiKr Member
    Vissox wrote: »
    I imagine it to be gold per 15 minutes or so, some short interval like that. It would function just like hired protection does IRL, the goal isn't to find PVP but to be glad you hired a bodyguard when it happens, paying the same price regardless of whether it happened or not.
    But this then would imply that there's gonna be a shitton of PKing in the game, which Steven kinda wants to prevent.

    I guess it could maybe work in a node war situation, but at that point all the node citizens should just be working together to protect each other, rather than paying to each for help.

    In pretty much all other cases you should've either had a party or a guild or simply wouldn't be killed because corruption penalties are too strong. And if that is, in fact, the case then people just wouldn't use the system-based protection because paying a ton of money for useless protection would be silly (and low amounts of money would most likely not get you any help, cause why would randoes help out for barely any money).
    Vissox wrote: »
    You could do some things to incentive a better job, like a player rating system, so players get reviews about whether they preformed well or not, if a player tried to scam you or wasn't properly helping you to many times, that would show up to any potential customers. I imagine a player that attempted these things to often would find they wouldn't be getting hired anymore.
    I could definitely support a system like this, but as its own system rather than smth connected to protection contracts. Obviously there'd be some abuse issues, so that would have to be solved through design tricks (if possible).
  • Yea, I would rather have Intrepid focus on more important things rather than something that can be just as easily done over discord and trades. Maybe once the rest of the game is done they could do something like that and incorporate it into the bounty system.
    GJjUGHx.gif
  • tautautautau Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    Here is an idea: Make friends.

    When you are heading out, ask them along. When they head out, you go with them. No gold exchanged, just play with friends.

    You could even make a more formal structure for your group of friends, and call it something like, uh, a Guild?
  • Agreed. Ashes favors groups. A feature like this deviates from that direction. Great to augment more solo-focused games.

    Here - you’re going to need to make friends, join guilds, and work with others for a smoother experience.
    AoC+Dwarf+750v3.png
  • just make friends @_@

    also, that increases the price of everything, because now you have to factor in the fee that you are paying the bodyguard to protect you.

    what if the bodyguard tells his friends that a guy with 9274754754 materials is going to be walking from a to b. they could intercept you, kill you and get your stuff.

    so next time you have to hire more guys, making goods cost more.

    and doesnt matter anyways because if a large group wants you dead, you will die.
  • SolvrynSolvryn Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    Just get a really big stick and swing it really hard across peoples skulls while screaming “GET OFF MY LAWN.”

    No one will mess with ya.
  • tautau wrote: »
    Here is an idea: Make friends.

    When you are heading out, ask them along. When they head out, you go with them. No gold exchanged, just play with friends.

    You could even make a more formal structure for your group of friends, and call it something like, uh, a Guild?

    Everyone is parroting this, but if that so easily solved player turnback in PVP MMORPGs we wouldn't even be discussing this. Many will not play the game if they think they have no counterplay to a gank, and as easy as it is for everyone to say "fuck em", we lose in the long run if noone is playing the game.
    NiKr wrote: »
    But this then would imply that there's gonna be a shitton of PKing in the game, which Steven kinda wants to prevent.

    I just don't see how this is possible. You can make player combat and griefing as unattractive as you'd like and people will still do it, because they are assholes and it's fun. I don't think the amount of player killing in a game is something that can be soft controlled.
    Then again, we could get lucky. Absolutely noone PVPed when warmode was added to WoW. Hopefully ashes is a better game.
  • VaknarVaknar Moderator, Member, Staff
    Interesting discussion! I love seeing thought-starters like this! Some good points being brought up - I think the idea of this being a social, hand-shake kind of contract could result in some interesting relationships being developed.. and possibly broken! :)
    community_management.gif
  • DygzDygz Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
    Not a feature I would want.
    I have no need for gamers to "protect" me from PKing.

    But, again... this is the kind of suggestion that is typical of gamers (especially PvPers) who play MMORPGs on PvP servers.
  • Dygz wrote: »
    Not a feature I would want.
    I have no need for gamers to "protect" me from PKing.

    But, again... this is the kind of suggestion that is typical of gamers (especially PvPers) who play MMORPGs on PvP servers.

    I mean yeah because we did it lol. Had some primarily PVE players in Crowfall, we just hung out and watched their back when they farmed.(it was worth it for the guild)

    If the PVP becomes too much for Stevens liking though. Maybe adding an NPC that protects you? Only assists if you are a Non Combatant? I dunno, either would be counter productive to being social. I am sure someone would find a way to abuse it too.
  • the funny thing is if the PvE players came to gether in any PvP game they would general win all fights agaist more PvP orinated player base since they tend to outnumber PvP players if they organised they would be a force to wreckon with but they never do
  • DygzDygz Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
    edited August 2023
    Fiddlez wrote: »
    I mean yeah because we did it lol. Had some primarily PVE players in Crowfall, we just hung out and watched their back when they farmed.(it was worth it for the guild)
    And... this is one of the reasons Crowfall failed.
    Not enough people interested in playing like that.
    If that kind of gameplay was desired by PvEers, in general, NW would not have added an option to not flag for PvP. And Throne and Liberty would not be trying to find ways to make PvP less intense and focus more on PvE.


    Fiddlez wrote: »
    If the PVP becomes too much for Stevens liking though. Maybe adding an NPC that protects you? Only assists if you are a Non Combatant? I dunno, either would be counter productive to being social. I am sure someone would find a way to abuse it too.
    Don't need NPCs as "protection" from PvP either.
    "Protection" is not the issue.
    Again... that's like people at a wedding trying to protect me from having cake shoved down my throat when I'm not in the mood to eat cake. Or wanting to have an entourage who will protect me from having cake smashed in my face. I don't need or want to have people around to protect me from that.
    There should be a punishment for that behavior that is severe enough to disincentivize that behavior.
  • FiddlezFiddlez Member
    edited August 2023
    Dygz wrote: »
    Fiddlez wrote: »
    I mean yeah because we did it lol. Had some primarily PVE players in Crowfall, we just hung out and watched their back when they farmed.(it was worth it for the guild)
    And... this is one of the reasons Crowfall failed.
    Not enough people interested in playing like that.
    If that kind of gameplay was desired by PvEers, in general, NW would not have added an option to not flag for PvP. And Throne and Liberty would not be trying to find ways to make PvP less intense and focus more on PvE.


    Fiddlez wrote: »
    If the PVP becomes too much for Stevens liking though. Maybe adding an NPC that protects you? Only assists if you are a Non Combatant? I dunno, either would be counter productive to being social. I am sure someone would find a way to abuse it too.
    Don't need NPCs as "protection" from PvP either.
    "Protection" is not the issue.
    Again... that's like people at a wedding trying to protect me from having cake shoved down my throat when I'm not in the mood to eat cake. Or wanting to have an entourage who will protect me from having cake smashed in my face. I don't need or want to have people around to protect me from that.
    There should be a punishment for that behavior that is severe enough to disincentivize that behavior.

    That is definitely not one of the reasons why Crowfall failed. There are a lot of players who loved Crowfall but couldn't get past the terrible design choices. That was where it succeeded was the social PvP gameplay. You wanted to because it meant better gear/character too. It was high conflict too so we often got in to fights over farming mats. If they had better PVE and focused on small scale it would have been fine. It still has some of the best combat too. Ashes has some very similar mechanics and that's a good thing.

    Basically you are trying to have a wedding with out people. Cake isn't the comparison it's the people. People are saying you need to socialize. People are going to talk to you even though you don't want to talk. You don't want to be there because people will talk to you. Which oddly enough comes as a direct comparison because I find myself not needing to open chat once when I play WoW. PVE, at least recently is designed with complete anti social mechanics.
  • Fiddlez wrote: »
    Dygz wrote: »
    Fiddlez wrote: »
    I mean yeah because we did it lol. Had some primarily PVE players in Crowfall, we just hung out and watched their back when they farmed.(it was worth it for the guild)
    And... this is one of the reasons Crowfall failed.
    Not enough people interested in playing like that.
    If that kind of gameplay was desired by PvEers, in general, NW would not have added an option to not flag for PvP. And Throne and Liberty would not be trying to find ways to make PvP less intense and focus more on PvE.


    Fiddlez wrote: »
    If the PVP becomes too much for Stevens liking though. Maybe adding an NPC that protects you? Only assists if you are a Non Combatant? I dunno, either would be counter productive to being social. I am sure someone would find a way to abuse it too.
    Don't need NPCs as "protection" from PvP either.
    "Protection" is not the issue.
    Again... that's like people at a wedding trying to protect me from having cake shoved down my throat when I'm not in the mood to eat cake. Or wanting to have an entourage who will protect me from having cake smashed in my face. I don't need or want to have people around to protect me from that.
    There should be a punishment for that behavior that is severe enough to disincentivize that behavior.

    That is definitely not why Crowfall failed. There are a lot of players who loved Crowfall but couldn't get past the terrible design choices. That was where it succeeded was the social PvP gameplay. You wanted to because it meant better gear/character too. It was high conflict too so we often got in to fights over farming mats. If they had better PVE and focused on small scale it would have been fine. It still has some of the best combat too. Ashes has some very similar mechanics and that's a good thing.

    Basically you are trying to have a wedding with out people. Cake isn't the comparison it's the people. People are saying you need to socialize. People are going to talk to you even though you don't want to talk. You don't want to be there because people will talk to you. Which oddly enough comes as a direct comparison because I find myself not needing to open chat once when I play WoW. PVE, at least recently is designed with complete anti social mechanics.

    Also I still think that having multiple rewarding PvP options is a bigger deterant then punishment. That's why I also am curious how much OW PvP we will see. Why be penalized when I can do the same thing and be rewarded?
  • VeeshanVeeshan Member
    edited August 2023
    I will say something in regards to protection via NPC there should be upgrade to towns like a barraks or guardhouse that increases guards and thing around town, patrolling paths and things like that so if somone does jump somone out in the field close to raods and thing they might be able to make it to a guard for assistant that patrolling nearby they could just patrol the roads back and forth between nodes potentially so players could use them to walk between nodes for a slight incrrease in safety for cost of slower movement since the guards will walk and not run for example.
    I feel they should be ways to fortify node agaist PK/skirmishes nearby in the form of nodes upgrade sacrafice something for increase security could also add guard towers (could be a delayed notification to node too if PK happens within the vacinity to alert people in town) as checkpoint too with these upgrades on roads that are always there with a few guards. But i feel these should be choice of mayors of node that has to sacrafice a build slot of upgrade spot for these features (they could also help incase of node wars too).

    Also guards dont guarantee safety either its just a NPC of X level that will fight to kill any combatants but can be killed in return but you could add additional upgrade to increase there strengths aswell to make them more formitable. but they should never been super overtuned and 1 shotting people at max level can make them a group iencounter though if there full upgraded (Upgrade might be stronger in node seiges though) since they just get zerg down otherwise without being a threat so i feel the upgradde should be 10% stronger outside node wars or 50% in a seige type thing
Sign In or Register to comment.