PVP: how is it these days?

[Brian]

I'm trying to get a general consensus on what people think/what they actually do, and this is what I'm coming up with. Please feel free to correct if this doesn't seem like an accurate summation.

You can try to RP out a PvP encounter, but the other side is under no obligation to oblige you. If you do this you're taking on the responsibility for relinquishing any coded advantages you might have had and allowing the other side to respond as they will.

If you use the archery code, whether to fire a single arrow or to sneak sniper, the most likely response to happen is that if/when you are caught proceedings will go immediately to code, without preamble emoting of discovery etc. Archery = instacombat.

If a player gets burned by trying to RP a scenario with someone and that someone takes advantage of it to get away/get the drop on you, generally that character won't be offered a second chance.

If a player has been the victim of several instances of feeling like they've been twink ambushed/archered/fled upon they will generally shift towards a "Shoot first, ask questions later" mentality for their own play style.

Coded combat is the primary goal of PvP. Emoted/speech based roleplay is a secondary consideration, desirable, but not of the same primary importance as making sure you're able to engage in coded combat. I'm getting this from the statements that people have made about how players will be given one chance and then zero leniency, or that using the archery code means you'll get rushed, etc.

Are these reasonable conclusions to draw as to the opinions presented by the section of the pbase that has replied here?

[Songweaver]

I'd say so, Brian.

And like I also mentioned earlier in the thread, meaningful roleplay does result in more than just the actual PVP encounter in three ways. The entire atmosphere of the shared story is affected because PVP exists, meaningful roleplay often is the post-result of PVP, and PVP reduces the workload on the RPA staff that would be normally responsible for creating any combat antagonism for the game. In short, it's worth it, even if it's rarely perfect. IMO.

[radioactivejesus]

Brian summarized things nicely. An emoted buildup to a combat encounter is a rare, but cherished thing. Most players would love to give that archer that ambushed them a few emotes back and forth before they charge in, but when the last 4 encounters with archers that group had have lead to the archer running off as soon as they entered the room and then plugging them with even more potentially fatal arrows, they won't want to take the risk. Sadly it's impossible to know who's out there looking for a drawn out encounter and who's just interested in jumping straight to code just from an sdesc. I've grown pretty pessimistic about any combat where I'm up against a character my pc hasn't known beforehand

[cfelch]

Indeed, the crunch to code is a major concern, across the board.
But its an issue for AI as well.

Perhaps if there was a delay between entering a room, and when combat could be initiated (yanno, an engagement system), then there would be time to allow more emotes without as much fear of twinky death (and no, that's not overeating).

It would also give those of us who type less than 100 wpm a chance to escape before the homing wargs are at your throat.

[tehkory]

Coded combat is the primary goal of PvP. Emoted/speech based roleplay is a secondary consideration, desirable, but not of the same primary importance as making sure you're able to engage in coded combat. I'm getting this from the statements that people have made about how players will be given one chance and then zero leniency, or that using the archery code means you'll get rushed, etc.

This is a misunderstanding, in my opinion, despite you getting agreed with. It's a cause of how PVP works, but not representative of players' true desires, and I'm not sure how eloquently I can express this, but I'll try(I'm not entirely sure how important my distinction is, but i find it to be pretty important, and far less cynical).

Coded combat has a consequence of character death in some scenarios.
My character does not desire death, and will act consciously and subconsciously against dying.

This means that as a player, I'm willing to play a scene, and go into coded combat, but I'm not so willing to put emoting first once someone else has stopped doing that. Certain coded commands are going to push me over the threshold to where *I* will stop putting emotes first. This doesn't mean that I'm not willing to engage the other player, and I might even have a lovely PvP scene where we engage/retreat across 3-4 different rooms, with emotes and pmotes, attacks and fleeing. But my character is automated in many ways during combat, and I need to enter the actions to activate my character's behavior(such as fleeing) before I emote, or else my character simply ISN'T acting in-character. And even worse, many commands are NOT automated. Ward, strike, bash, feint, all these are manual and require upkeep. Unless you type them, your character won't do them. This all happens differently than you might remember in SoI because, for every PC, combat is deadlier than it was in SoI. There's less leniency and ability to emote because of this, but the coded actions are part of what my character -would- be doing.

It doesn't mean that coded combat is the primary goal of PvP. It's just the most NECESSARY IC action once it's initiated, unless your PC is either utterly unskilled or comletely apathetic to either their own survival or the death of their enemies.

Sidenote: So one of the problems with this game's code is that archery is ripped straight from Atonement with almost 0 modifications, except that we don't have kevlar, we don't have more than one shot per weapon, and we don't have burst-fire/automatic weapons. #1 matters, #2 is of debateable value, and #3 matters. #1 'nerfs' defense signficantly, #2 comes without a whole lot of effect, #3 'nerfs' offensive power a little. And I should really post this in the other 'balance' thread, but...well. I will. But 'guncode'/archery is above everything an incredibly clear indicator that someone wants my PC dead more than they want me alive(and more than they want to roleplay with me). Aim is deadlier than kill ever was.

[krelm]

snarfagling Kory beat me to posting again, with all my ideas, but I'll post anyway:

Archery = instacombat.

As Kory said, with how deadly archery is, this is unfortunately the case. A single arrow in this engine can kill your PC. So, if someone shoots an arrow at me, that's the equivalent (again, in my opinion) of running in and spamming kill with no emote. It's kill or be killed, and I'd rather be alive than dead.

[Grommit]

So would damage adjustments rehabilitate archers in your mind, or is archery just never part of PvP?

What if they, say

Code: Select all

pmote is willing to RP this out, OOC

before shooting once?

[WorkerDrone]

Because of the way bleeding works, in relation to archery, no, unless that person is entirely willing to let you sit down and bind before making any other emotes or actions, and why do that? That takes away a coded advantage, one of the only, and you'd have been better off not shooting the arrow to begin with. After an arrow is shot, you either go to code, and that either means fleeing or fighting, or you die.

[krelm]

It depends. If someone shoots at me and hits me for a grevious+ wound, at gushing or higher, my first instinct (not that I'll act on it) is going to be to spam across the forest and try to bind it up before it bleeds out because, if I remember correctly, bleeds from arrows will wreck your shit if not immediately seen to.

Then, also, if you're leading a group, you have to think of what they're gonna do if they get hit by an arrow. Most likely (from personal experience leading groups in this incarnation of SoI) the answer is going to be "Keep yelling at the leader to run," or "immediately sit and bind." So sure, I type scan and I see the archer with that pmote, but I've got 3 guys telling me to run, and 3 other guys telling me to charge, and, maybe 1 or 2 ballsy people who just outright break and run at the archer.

The damage from the actual arrow isn't so bad (I've seen severes from arrows that did 1 star, and terribles that did 2), but the bleed damage is what kills you.

Also, just for the record, I hate OOC pmotes like that. But that's just me.

[radioactivejesus]

So would damage adjustments rehabilitate archers in your mind, or is archery just never part of PvP?

What if they, say

Code: Select all

pmote is willing to RP this out, OOC

before shooting once?

if you want to fix archery, you just need to do a couple things.
1) make it so that shields can block arrows
2) make it so that arrows do more initial damage, but less bleeding damage. The bleeding damage should be comparable to the bleeding damage caused by a spear, rather than the hemmorhaging bleeders from a severe wound that need 5 guys binding you or you're dead thing we have now.

[tehkory]

So would damage adjustments rehabilitate archers in your mind, or is archery just never part of PvP?

What if they, say

Code: Select all

pmote is willing to RP this out, OOC

before shooting once?

if you want to fix archery, you just need to do a couple things.
1) make it so that shields can block arrows
2) make it so that arrows do more initial damage, but less bleeding damage. The bleeding damage should be comparable to the bleeding damage caused by a spear, rather than the hemmorhaging bleeders from a severe wound that need 5 guys binding you or you're dead thing we have now.

Ideally slowing it down a loooooot would help, too. Doubling, tripling, or quadrupling aim/reload time would help.

[Melkor]

So would damage adjustments rehabilitate archers in your mind, or is archery just never part of PvP?

What if they, say

Code: Select all

pmote is willing to RP this out, OOC

before shooting once?

if you want to fix archery, you just need to do a couple things.
1) make it so that shields can block arrows
2) make it so that arrows do more initial damage, but less bleeding damage. The bleeding damage should be comparable to the bleeding damage caused by a spear, rather than the hemmorhaging bleeders from a severe wound that need 5 guys binding you or you're dead thing we have now.

This. Gunshots cause a lot of bleeding because they punch holes straight through with nothing then blocking the veins/arteries.

When you're hit with an arrow they are still stuck inside all the way across the wound, likely putting a plug into the wound and keeping you from bleeding out all that much. They shouldn't be doing anywhere near the bleed damage they are now. They aren't gunshot wounds.

[Tepes]

Don't alter the reload time of bows, unless you're going to start having AIM be a factor in it.

[tehkory]

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2167&p=26441#p26441
There's a thread for weapons/balance. I think this PvP thread is pretty good/useful so far(I've found it so), both for venting complaints and for me getting an idea of how the game's going. Wouldn't want it drowned in the archery balance suggestions.

[Justanothacivy]

Two of my favorite scenes were from PvP. One was an internal conflict and the other was when I and another player bumped into another pair in the bogs. One thing that was most appealing was that I got to communicate before the conflict so it drew me in to the reason for the conflict. It gave me a sense of personal attachment because in both situations death was the risk and the reward was untold amounts of glory for taking the risk and succeeding.

I understand you cant emote at someone before you fire an arrow or bolt into their guts but if you are ever in a situation when both sides roleplay before engaging you will create a fond memory of "Hey, remember that time when.." which is all that I ask for from my free to play MUD.

Standards should be put in place. Even though several players died in the first encounter and the grievously injured pair set jog an swam across a river until they were in Utterby I had fun. I'm sure others did too which is sorta the whole reason we're playing, right?

[Patty]

Lets just let code sort it out from now on.

[Gobbo]

I just had my first experience of pvp. It left a bad taste in my mouth. I mean I love that I finally got some pvp. But I had a pc warg and pc orc search me out while I was hidden in a room. When I was revealed the warg gave a 1 liner emote then immediatly attacked. I was typing out an emote because I really wanted to rp it out.

I had to flee and spam run away because I simply wasn't going to get the rp. I felt dirty spam running, but they were dirtier for not rping it out.

The truly annoying part is that WARG players should have LOTS of RPP and the admins trust them. Why not act like it.

[Songweaver]

Part of the problem with PVP is that bad behavior begets bad behavior. Pointing fingers (no offense, Gobbo) is actually part of the problem here.

Example: I get screwed in PVP scenes a couple of times, blame the other players involved, and change how I choose to participate in PVP. I, in turn, screw other players in PVP, which then changes their approach to PVP.

It's why it's just not feasible to have high expectations of PVP scenes. Sure, if you get a great scene, awesome. Otherwise, let the code act as your roleplay during the encounter as necessary, and make sure the post-PVP roleplay is significant and meaningful.

As I've said elsewhere in this thread, there is meaningfulness for PVP beyond the actual roleplay during the PVP encounter. It takes pressure off of the RPAs to create a dangerous environment, it allows for planning/strategy/preparation roleplay from both sides, sometimes culminates in meaningful RPTs, creates meaningful dialogue back at home base for both sides, creates ongoing enemies on both sides worth talking about, and instigates loss and character death in a game that is - for the most part - far too safe and death free.

Don't underestimate the value of these things, and don't get bent out of shape when a PVP encounter isn't the best roleplay you've had in months. It rarely will be.

[Gobbo]

Part of the problem with PVP is that bad behavior begets bad behavior. Pointing fingers (no offense, Gobbo) is actually part of the problem here.

Example: I get screwed in PVP scenes a couple of times, blame the other players involved, and change how I choose to participate in PVP. I, in turn, screw other players in PVP, which then changes their approach to PVP.

It's why it's just not feasible to have high expectations of PVP scenes. Sure, if you get a great scene, awesome. Otherwise, let the code act as your roleplay during the encounter as necessary, and make sure the post-PVP roleplay is significant and meaningful.

As I've said elsewhere in this thread, there is meaningfulness for PVP beyond the actual roleplay during the PVP encounter. It takes pressure off of the RPAs to create a dangerous environment, it allows for planning/strategy/preparation roleplay from both sides, sometimes culminates in meaningful RPTs, creates meaningful dialogue back at home base for both sides, creates ongoing enemies on both sides worth talking about, and instigates loss and character death in a game that is - for the most part - far too safe and death free.

Don't underestimate the value of these things, and don't get bent out of shape when a PVP encounter isn't the best roleplay you've had in months. It rarely will be.

You are right. I'm sure there is plenty of others who would've got into that situation and instant sprinted home before the enemy even finished searching. Meaning the aggressor has to attack without much rp or miss their chance.

[Brian]

Part of the problem with PVP is that bad behavior begets bad behavior. Pointing fingers (no offense, Gobbo) is actually part of the problem here.

Example: I get screwed in PVP scenes a couple of times, blame the other players involved, and change how I choose to participate in PVP. I, in turn, screw other players in PVP, which then changes their approach to PVP.

It's why it's just not feasible to have high expectations of PVP scenes. Sure, if you get a great scene, awesome. Otherwise, let the code act as your roleplay during the encounter as necessary, and make sure the post-PVP roleplay is significant and meaningful.

As I've said elsewhere in this thread, there is meaningfulness for PVP beyond the actual roleplay during the PVP encounter. It takes pressure off of the RPAs to create a dangerous environment, it allows for planning/strategy/preparation roleplay from both sides, sometimes culminates in meaningful RPTs, creates meaningful dialogue back at home base for both sides, creates ongoing enemies on both sides worth talking about, and instigates loss and character death in a game that is - for the most part - far too safe and death free.

Don't underestimate the value of these things, and don't get bent out of shape when a PVP encounter isn't the best roleplay you've had in months. It rarely will be.

You are right. I'm sure there is plenty of others who would've got into that situation and instant sprinted home before the enemy even finished searching. Meaning the aggressor has to attack without much rp or miss their chance.

The real trick now Gobbo is to try and find that RP the next time that you are placed in that position. It's hard, because in all likelihood it will play out the same way, but keep on trying to be a good example and maybe that new behaviour will spread!

[Doublepalli]

I just had my first experience of pvp. It left a bad taste in my mouth. I mean I love that I finally got some pvp. But I had a pc warg and pc orc search me out while I was hidden in a room. When I was revealed the warg gave a 1 liner emote then immediatly attacked. I was typing out an emote because I really wanted to rp it out.

I had to flee and spam run away because I simply wasn't going to get the rp. I felt dirty spam running, but they were dirtier for not rping it out.

The truly annoying part is that WARG players should have LOTS of RPP and the admins trust them. Why not act like it.

Hey. I'm the warg player you encountered. This post does tick me off, but I wanted to clear things up for you, and hopefully sweeten this situation for you. To begin - I have the logs, and I threw in more than a one liner emote (I was even emoting during combat). Hey, it's easy to miss stuff in such a heart-racing situation. We also rolled in on you doing a craft that creates noise. I didn't codedly search for you. (I also codedly typed "hit" and not kill on purpose) I got tracks, a scent (warg), and you revealed yourself. If we /had/ captured you, my intention was to use you as bait to get more tasty humans. But you high-tailed it outta there. And, (no offense) But over the past few pvp situations that I've personally experienced, including one just a couple RL days ago, despite all roleplay involved, its either insta-kill or ignore all emotes/rolls for roleplay and high-tail it outta there with arrows or bolts in them, wargs with their teeth sunken in them, half-dead, sprouting two more legs and such in such states and out-running the wargs who are rping/unharmed. And despite all this happening, I still put effort to roleplay everything I do, and so this post right here, really irks me. I understand alot of stuff can happen both-sides, but if you have
such high roleplay standards for wargs, then please give us the benefit of the doubt that we're going to make things fun for you.




And as Songweaver says, I agree. And when I run into a pc who screws me over by shrugging off any attempt at roleplay, then I add them to my "kill on sight, not attempt to rp on sight" list.

[Gobbo]

Its fine I understand the situation.

I was just half way through typing an emote about the situation before it went to code and I had to delete the whole emote and flee for my poor little life That got me pee'd. I have no problems with how you found me.

But at least with me, you would've had me no problem if you never went to code. I would've rp'd my obviously hopeless situation accordingly and liked the bait idea. I realize others would not feel the same so your hand is forced to go to code preemptively. I only spam fled because I still like my character too much to get murdered without a nice rp scene. It would've been a poor death. (Not realizing you may have just uncon'd me and used me for bait)

[Doublepalli]

I understand. I've been in your shoes before too! I'm glad this is cleared up either way.

[tehkory]

Its fine I understand the situation.

I was just half way through typing an emote about the situation before it went to code and I had to delete the whole emote and flee for my poor little life That got me pee'd. I have no problems with how you found me.

But at least with me, you would've had me no problem if you never went to code. I would've rp'd my obviously hopeless situation accordingly and liked the bait idea. I realize others would not feel the same so your hand is forced to go to code preemptively. I only spam fled because I still like my character too much to get murdered without a nice rp scene. It would've been a poor death. (Not realizing you may have just uncon'd me and used me for bait)

I won't flee automatically. I might set autoflee, depending upon how my character feels. If people start shooting at me, I'm out, or jump straight to melee, well, I'm off. If people feel like emoting, I'll stay until they've proved they can't be trusted, and flee in what I think is a reasonable manner. And if I die? See you next month.

[Icarus]

Kudos to Double and Gobbo for being able to discuss this thing respectfully and equitably here on the forums. PvP is a divisive issue, and having players that can discuss it without getting riled up and clear the air. So cheers. +1 Icarus Points to both of you.