Forums » Suggestions
To make death a bit more scary, how about imposing a small xp point penalty when you die... something like -5% to -10% on your license xp.
The way things are right now, I'm tempted to just self-destruct before someone kills me, just so I can deny them the kill.
The way things are right now, I'm tempted to just self-destruct before someone kills me, just so I can deny them the kill.
This post was originally in response to Furious's post http://www.vendetta-online.com/x/msgboard/1/8803#101517
[Original post]
You're right, Furious, there's not much to lose when you die, which does mean there's very little incentive for traders to hire escorts. But there's a very good reason dying doesn't have a very big penalty: people die a LOT. Especially those who get really involved in PvP combat, which for many players in the most fun in the game. Any type of XP loss is a bad idea, IMO. There are some other things that could be implemented to make dying more expensive, but almost any penalty above the little we have now will be either too much or too little, depending on each players opinion, and IMO it's better to stay on the too little side where we're at now.
[/original post]
One thing I did mention in the original post, but that I feel very strongly about, and so I'm going to repeat: ANY XP LOSS IS A BAD THING. Personally, I don't even like the XP penalty that accompanies a bounty, although once we get the illegal bounty system, hopefully I won't mind as much.
As an alternate way to make dying more expensive, I'd suggest the player drops a crate with say 10% of their credits, that the killer could pick up.
[Original post]
You're right, Furious, there's not much to lose when you die, which does mean there's very little incentive for traders to hire escorts. But there's a very good reason dying doesn't have a very big penalty: people die a LOT. Especially those who get really involved in PvP combat, which for many players in the most fun in the game. Any type of XP loss is a bad idea, IMO. There are some other things that could be implemented to make dying more expensive, but almost any penalty above the little we have now will be either too much or too little, depending on each players opinion, and IMO it's better to stay on the too little side where we're at now.
[/original post]
One thing I did mention in the original post, but that I feel very strongly about, and so I'm going to repeat: ANY XP LOSS IS A BAD THING. Personally, I don't even like the XP penalty that accompanies a bounty, although once we get the illegal bounty system, hopefully I won't mind as much.
As an alternate way to make dying more expensive, I'd suggest the player drops a crate with say 10% of their credits, that the killer could pick up.
Furious, please see the recent posts about the induced behavior. (example: http://www.vendetta-online.com/x/msgboard/7/8779?page=2 )
Beolach, the credit penalty could be easily avoided if you put your cash to a guild account. That does not mean this is a bad idea though.
Beolach, the credit penalty could be easily avoided if you put your cash to a guild account. That does not mean this is a bad idea though.
Sounds cool, and encourages Guilding - great!
@Sun Tzu-- I presume you are referring to the increased likelyhood that players will disengage instead of sticking around to get ripped....
It seems to me that people do this already. How about instituting a challenge system. If you want someone to stick around you issue a challenge... sorta like dueling. If the enemy runs, they suffer a faction loss of like -100 with their home faction. If they stay and fight, the winner gets +100.
This would need to be tweaked a bit since it makes no sense to challenge a miner or trader.
This way there is a penalty for fleeing battle (you coward!), and a penalty for dying.
Overall it makes people consider what they are doing a bit more carefully, and adds some excitement.
It seems to me that people do this already. How about instituting a challenge system. If you want someone to stick around you issue a challenge... sorta like dueling. If the enemy runs, they suffer a faction loss of like -100 with their home faction. If they stay and fight, the winner gets +100.
This would need to be tweaked a bit since it makes no sense to challenge a miner or trader.
This way there is a penalty for fleeing battle (you coward!), and a penalty for dying.
Overall it makes people consider what they are doing a bit more carefully, and adds some excitement.
I don't like that last suggestion, Furious. Basically, as I see it there's two types of 'runners'.
Traders who (at least at the moment) are not interested at all in fighting. Their one and only goal is to get away without dying. As I read the thred Sun Tzu linked to, I think most people don't have much of a problem with this.
What I think people do have a problem with, is people who start a fight, and if it looks like it's going bad for them, then they run.
The problem I see with your suggestion, is that it would punish both types of runners, and IMO the trader doesn't deserve it.
[edit @Sun Tzu]
Oh, and as for using guild accounts to avoid a credit drop, I think that's actually a good thing. It would give players a way to hedge their loss, but they would generally not want to deposit all their money, unless like n00b they like to fly freebuses all the time. I haven't used any guild accounts yet, but I'm guessing that they're much easier to deposit money into than to withdraw money out of.
[/edit]
[edit 2]
Oh, and also on the issue-challenge-runner-loses-standing, that would throw a lot of chaos into CtC.
[/edit]
Traders who (at least at the moment) are not interested at all in fighting. Their one and only goal is to get away without dying. As I read the thred Sun Tzu linked to, I think most people don't have much of a problem with this.
What I think people do have a problem with, is people who start a fight, and if it looks like it's going bad for them, then they run.
The problem I see with your suggestion, is that it would punish both types of runners, and IMO the trader doesn't deserve it.
[edit @Sun Tzu]
Oh, and as for using guild accounts to avoid a credit drop, I think that's actually a good thing. It would give players a way to hedge their loss, but they would generally not want to deposit all their money, unless like n00b they like to fly freebuses all the time. I haven't used any guild accounts yet, but I'm guessing that they're much easier to deposit money into than to withdraw money out of.
[/edit]
[edit 2]
Oh, and also on the issue-challenge-runner-loses-standing, that would throw a lot of chaos into CtC.
[/edit]
Yeah, I did try to point out the difference between runners. There would have to be some way to distinguish between traders/miners and combat ships... perhaps you can't challenge someone without weapons.... that part needs some work.
I suppose another solution would be to set it up so that if you fire on an enemy you take a faction rep hit if you don't finish the job...
Perhaps each ship could have a 'transponder' slot that you could mount an item into. The transponders could come in a variety of flavors... bounty hunter, combat, pirate, trader, miner, etc. someone with a trader transponder would be immune to challenges, a ship with a pirate transponder might get a rep boost for killing a trader, etc..
Since this would be a per ship thing, you could change your role by changing your ship. Special transponders could be given out as awards.
[edit: you could set up the system so challenges are not allowed in the system/sector that the CtC transport is in]
I suppose another solution would be to set it up so that if you fire on an enemy you take a faction rep hit if you don't finish the job...
Perhaps each ship could have a 'transponder' slot that you could mount an item into. The transponders could come in a variety of flavors... bounty hunter, combat, pirate, trader, miner, etc. someone with a trader transponder would be immune to challenges, a ship with a pirate transponder might get a rep boost for killing a trader, etc..
Since this would be a per ship thing, you could change your role by changing your ship. Special transponders could be given out as awards.
[edit: you could set up the system so challenges are not allowed in the system/sector that the CtC transport is in]
Death penalties are so 90s.
Differentiating between combat/trading/mining ships: exploitable, people would use ships for the "wrong" purpose, in order to avoid the penalty.
Can't challenge someone without weapons: Gives pirates an unfair advantage. Traders traditionally carry concussion mines and/or swarms in order to gain time to escape.
Fire on an enemy you take a faction rep hit if you don't finish the job: How does it determine that you don't finish the job? If your target jumps away, have you 'not finished the job'? If your opponent destroys you, have you 'not finished'? If it's only if you jump away before your target, then if you have a faster ship, you can just outrun them within the same sector, and wait for them to jump first.
Transponder: Interesting, but possibly exploitable as above.
No challenges in the same system/sector as the transport: It would have to be system, not just sector, and what about after the transport has been destroyed? And what about people who want to fight in Sedina B-8 (the traditional stomping grounds), but don't care jack about CtC?
As far as I can tell, there's really no way for this to really work out well. The best I can think of would be to only invoke the penalty if there was a mutual challenge, issued by both sides, similar to /duel, but even that I don't think would really solve the problem, because people would just not use the challenge, and continue attacking & running away if they wanted to.
Can't challenge someone without weapons: Gives pirates an unfair advantage. Traders traditionally carry concussion mines and/or swarms in order to gain time to escape.
Fire on an enemy you take a faction rep hit if you don't finish the job: How does it determine that you don't finish the job? If your target jumps away, have you 'not finished the job'? If your opponent destroys you, have you 'not finished'? If it's only if you jump away before your target, then if you have a faster ship, you can just outrun them within the same sector, and wait for them to jump first.
Transponder: Interesting, but possibly exploitable as above.
No challenges in the same system/sector as the transport: It would have to be system, not just sector, and what about after the transport has been destroyed? And what about people who want to fight in Sedina B-8 (the traditional stomping grounds), but don't care jack about CtC?
As far as I can tell, there's really no way for this to really work out well. The best I can think of would be to only invoke the penalty if there was a mutual challenge, issued by both sides, similar to /duel, but even that I don't think would really solve the problem, because people would just not use the challenge, and continue attacking & running away if they wanted to.
* players with a trader transponder would get no benefit from killing things, and might suffer a faction rep loss if they do.
* perhaps players with pirate transponders get a bonus for killing trader/miner/combat transponders, no loss for running.
* Trading with a combat transponder gets no benefit... a courier transponder could be used to fly armed and get trade benefit but no kill benefit.
* transponders could limit what equipment you can mount
* some ships could have fixed transponders... like a mining ship or cargo ship.
* in fact the whole challenge thing could be automatic with the transponders in place. You would probably have to adjust the penalties in the CtC sector as the point is to get the transport to it's destination safely and not kill things (nice, but not the objective).
It's not perfect, but I also don't think we've considered it carefully enough to know if it will work or not.
* perhaps players with pirate transponders get a bonus for killing trader/miner/combat transponders, no loss for running.
* Trading with a combat transponder gets no benefit... a courier transponder could be used to fly armed and get trade benefit but no kill benefit.
* transponders could limit what equipment you can mount
* some ships could have fixed transponders... like a mining ship or cargo ship.
* in fact the whole challenge thing could be automatic with the transponders in place. You would probably have to adjust the penalties in the CtC sector as the point is to get the transport to it's destination safely and not kill things (nice, but not the objective).
It's not perfect, but I also don't think we've considered it carefully enough to know if it will work or not.
Personally, I'm strongly against any sort of Death Penalty.
First, players die all the time. Look around at player stats. Most of the deaths are in the 100's or 200's, or even 500's. Even a small penalty would add up.
Second, penalties would discourage all forms of PvP. If player's lose points for losing, who would bother trying? PvP is a main fun point in the game, and shouldn't be tampered with.
Third, it would give veterans an even greater advantage. Eventually, the best dueler in the game would become supreme will all other players crippled from constant death penalties.
Fourth, player kills would be IMPOSSIBLE to get. Players would simply run at 40%.
Fifth, griefing and group killing would become an even bigger problem. What easier way to destroy a character than to set mines by the exit ports of their homestation, and watch as everytime they try to undock, they blow up and get a faction/credit/experience hit. Eventually, they'll be as good as dead.
Sixth, slightly further down the chain of events induced by a death penalty, power trading would come to a standstill. Players would be too afraid to enter a non-safe sector and all trading between multiple systems would cease.
Seventh, even further down the chain of events, ship variety would minimize. All players would use the same ship: the one with infiniturbo and the highest top speed. That wouldn't be very fun.
Eighth, enjoyable, in-game rivalries with other players would cease. What is a rivalry but fighting another player multiple times for "bragging rights?" With death penalties, fighting players over and over would destroy your own player.
Ninth, transponders would severly limit gameplay. Part of the fun of Vendetta is being able to choose what you want to do at any given time, without having to to go a station and change ship "transponders" around.
Tenth, I don't know why I didn't think of this earlier, but license levels would become even HARDER to come by. I don't know a single player who hasn't died botting. Player's would have to be extremely careful while botting, leaving the sector around 50%. Getting combat licenses would be even more tedious than it already is. Also, one renegade Apu-tech can come up from behind you and before you know it...kablam! And a death penalty.
Eleventh, it would make the game harder for n00bs. I know that the devs have worked pretty hard making this game easy to start out on, and have done a very good job. But with the death penalty, as soon as a n00b ventures out to practice player kills, they'd get blown up and ding! Death penalty. So..they work up what they lost and go out again and ding! Death penalty. No one would ever learn to duel.
As you can see, I'm against Death penalties =p. A good set of ideas though, especially the transponder. Perhaps an offshoot of that idea could be used for something else.
First, players die all the time. Look around at player stats. Most of the deaths are in the 100's or 200's, or even 500's. Even a small penalty would add up.
Second, penalties would discourage all forms of PvP. If player's lose points for losing, who would bother trying? PvP is a main fun point in the game, and shouldn't be tampered with.
Third, it would give veterans an even greater advantage. Eventually, the best dueler in the game would become supreme will all other players crippled from constant death penalties.
Fourth, player kills would be IMPOSSIBLE to get. Players would simply run at 40%.
Fifth, griefing and group killing would become an even bigger problem. What easier way to destroy a character than to set mines by the exit ports of their homestation, and watch as everytime they try to undock, they blow up and get a faction/credit/experience hit. Eventually, they'll be as good as dead.
Sixth, slightly further down the chain of events induced by a death penalty, power trading would come to a standstill. Players would be too afraid to enter a non-safe sector and all trading between multiple systems would cease.
Seventh, even further down the chain of events, ship variety would minimize. All players would use the same ship: the one with infiniturbo and the highest top speed. That wouldn't be very fun.
Eighth, enjoyable, in-game rivalries with other players would cease. What is a rivalry but fighting another player multiple times for "bragging rights?" With death penalties, fighting players over and over would destroy your own player.
Ninth, transponders would severly limit gameplay. Part of the fun of Vendetta is being able to choose what you want to do at any given time, without having to to go a station and change ship "transponders" around.
Tenth, I don't know why I didn't think of this earlier, but license levels would become even HARDER to come by. I don't know a single player who hasn't died botting. Player's would have to be extremely careful while botting, leaving the sector around 50%. Getting combat licenses would be even more tedious than it already is. Also, one renegade Apu-tech can come up from behind you and before you know it...kablam! And a death penalty.
Eleventh, it would make the game harder for n00bs. I know that the devs have worked pretty hard making this game easy to start out on, and have done a very good job. But with the death penalty, as soon as a n00b ventures out to practice player kills, they'd get blown up and ding! Death penalty. So..they work up what they lost and go out again and ding! Death penalty. No one would ever learn to duel.
As you can see, I'm against Death penalties =p. A good set of ideas though, especially the transponder. Perhaps an offshoot of that idea could be used for something else.
if there was a xp demotion for dying id be 0/0/0/0/0!!!
ingame:Dasus Vanos
ingame:Dasus Vanos
Hmmm I have 317 deaths at the moment. I think that a death penalty would cause me to leave the game.
Seriously, if you get involved in PvP, CtC or any other risky business you'll find that dying does hurt more than enough. It doesn't take too many good ships to rack up several hundred thousand credits worth of replacements
Seriously, if you get involved in PvP, CtC or any other risky business you'll find that dying does hurt more than enough. It doesn't take too many good ships to rack up several hundred thousand credits worth of replacements
Having had experience with a game that actually has a harsh death penalty involved, I feel like I have an idea of how it affects gameplay.
It can have a very positive effect on gameplay without becoming too onerous, but the entire game needs to be adjusted and balanced for it. It does make the entire game more challenging, and it also encourages players to group together to accomplish common goals. There's no adrenalin rush quite like limping back to base in flames after you and your squad just spent 15 minutes in close combat with a capital ship.
I actually find this sort of thing much more entertaining than PvP, which can easily result in people getting pissed off at each other. (For the record, a carefully designed system can take care of griefing... we've NEVER had a complaint about griefing on our server... it's just too hard).
That doesn't mean everyone in that game likes the death penalty, many raised exactly the same concerns many of you have.
I think the Devs will understand this one, but some gameplay adjustments will not be popular, but will improve the overall gameplay. Something drastic like a death penalty will always meet with opposition, mostly by people whose current game tactics get them killed a lot.
Well, I'm going to drop the subject. Too many changes would be required to make it work properly.
It can have a very positive effect on gameplay without becoming too onerous, but the entire game needs to be adjusted and balanced for it. It does make the entire game more challenging, and it also encourages players to group together to accomplish common goals. There's no adrenalin rush quite like limping back to base in flames after you and your squad just spent 15 minutes in close combat with a capital ship.
I actually find this sort of thing much more entertaining than PvP, which can easily result in people getting pissed off at each other. (For the record, a carefully designed system can take care of griefing... we've NEVER had a complaint about griefing on our server... it's just too hard).
That doesn't mean everyone in that game likes the death penalty, many raised exactly the same concerns many of you have.
I think the Devs will understand this one, but some gameplay adjustments will not be popular, but will improve the overall gameplay. Something drastic like a death penalty will always meet with opposition, mostly by people whose current game tactics get them killed a lot.
Well, I'm going to drop the subject. Too many changes would be required to make it work properly.
"Having had experience with a game that actually has a harsh death penalty involved, I feel like I have an idea of how it affects gameplay."
Yah, I was a coder on a MUD back in the early 90s. We had permadeath.
"the entire game needs to be adjusted and balanced for it"
Exactly. On said MUD the point was to keep most of the action -away- from combat. That's what harsh death penalties do: keep you away from combat.
VO is more like Quake or Counter-Strike. The main point of the game is to get into PvP combat. Any death penalty will work against that.
Yah, I was a coder on a MUD back in the early 90s. We had permadeath.
"the entire game needs to be adjusted and balanced for it"
Exactly. On said MUD the point was to keep most of the action -away- from combat. That's what harsh death penalties do: keep you away from combat.
VO is more like Quake or Counter-Strike. The main point of the game is to get into PvP combat. Any death penalty will work against that.
Well, you could institute a death penalty in your mission effecting the size of the reward or the number of bots you need to kill (as exists already).
In for example ctc you could for instance make every time you get killed one of your units of cargo that you delivered will be deducted from the amount you brought already.
Seeing as that you can easilly get off with 4 units of cargo from the transporters, and 8 is no exception it might be a good method of instituting a deathpenalty. Naturally this only works when you are carrying ctc cargo. (to make griefing the person with the most ctc captures and units delivered not common practice...)
cheers
In for example ctc you could for instance make every time you get killed one of your units of cargo that you delivered will be deducted from the amount you brought already.
Seeing as that you can easilly get off with 4 units of cargo from the transporters, and 8 is no exception it might be a good method of instituting a deathpenalty. Naturally this only works when you are carrying ctc cargo. (to make griefing the person with the most ctc captures and units delivered not common practice...)
cheers
No death penalty. It's hard enough to do CtC now. But if after 10 deaths I could no longer use any of my ships because I had no xp? No thanks! Or if we lost CtC because people died? Nope! The devs have said that there are not meant to be serious death penalties besides time and money. And there should not be.
Renegade, supporting things like this, I'm starting to doubt that you've played recently. What makes this game fun is PvP, especially in things like CtC. We shouldn't be penalized for that.
Renegade, supporting things like this, I'm starting to doubt that you've played recently. What makes this game fun is PvP, especially in things like CtC. We shouldn't be penalized for that.
No XP loss for deaths, that's just a bad idea. Who likes to bot? If I were to be loosing combat xp on a regular basis strictly because I was getting killed because a pie rat was coming after me, then I would just stop playing VO. BUT, I do think that there is not enough incentive in the game to make it worth while for people to fear death. Right now, you die, you buy new ship, you die, you buy a new ship. I'm not going to rehash what others have said in previous post about this subject but I believe that there have been several suggestions that would work to tweak this issue better. The challenge system that you suggested though Fur is not one of them. Any system where the agressor gets to set who looses xp is a bad system. And anyone who thinks that someone who runs from a fight before they die is lame or is a "runner" is just trying to save his/her ass, what the heck is wrong with that. By what you say it's better to stay and die then it is to run and live, kind of reminds me of a lemming following it's friends off a cliff with no regard for it's life at all.
roguelazer im not supporting a deathxp penalty.
But seeing as there is a penalty for dieing during botmissions, I presumed it wouldn't be that big of a deal to have one in here.
And no, haven't played for a while.
But seeing as there is a penalty for dieing during botmissions, I presumed it wouldn't be that big of a deal to have one in here.
And no, haven't played for a while.
All of your complaints about a harsh death penalty are based on the game as it is now. To properly implement this would probably require a complete overhaul of the system to get the balance right. That's one reason I now think it is a bad idea for Vendetta right now.
Yeah, the challenge system as I described it was just a thought on how to address certain issues. It would need to be refined before it could be implemented.
The threat of death doesn't keep me (nor anyone else on my server) away from combat, I just make sure I have the right equipment and a plan to get out of dodge when necessary.
I just find it annoying that I can go into the most dangerous places in the game in a bus without fear. What's the worst that could happen? I might have to travel from my home base for a couple of minutes to get back there....
Heck, I've been flying around greyspace for two weeks now and have only been attacked once. I don't even bother with weapons now if I'm trading or mining.
If faced with a superior opponent that I can't outrun, my best option is to kill myself so he doesn't score the kill. It isn't going to cost me that much if I am careful to not put all my money into the cargo..
Yeah, the challenge system as I described it was just a thought on how to address certain issues. It would need to be refined before it could be implemented.
The threat of death doesn't keep me (nor anyone else on my server) away from combat, I just make sure I have the right equipment and a plan to get out of dodge when necessary.
I just find it annoying that I can go into the most dangerous places in the game in a bus without fear. What's the worst that could happen? I might have to travel from my home base for a couple of minutes to get back there....
Heck, I've been flying around greyspace for two weeks now and have only been attacked once. I don't even bother with weapons now if I'm trading or mining.
If faced with a superior opponent that I can't outrun, my best option is to kill myself so he doesn't score the kill. It isn't going to cost me that much if I am careful to not put all my money into the cargo..