A Possible Solution to The Problem of PvP

[Winstonian]

Again, the structure of this would be defined to prevent some of these clear exploits. For example, it wouldn't work with knives, daggers, clubs, wands, etc. It wouldn't work in houses. Hell, you could even put a cap on the experience gained against one player during that span. Whatever the restrictions, it wouldn't be hard to develop a system that limits exploitation and vastly improves structured PvP.

 

[drasked]

You already have militia with a point system, why not use that?

 

[girana]

Sure. It would be defined as an exploit (because it clearly is) and you could be permanently banned.

no it cant defined easy

 

[Winstonian]

You already have militia with a point system, why not use that?

I mean, absolutely. Not against that at all. If such rewards were attached to damage done in militias over a period of time, the participation would greatly increase.

 

[GoD PaRtiCal]

So, help me with this.

Players know that their account will be deleted if they exploit this system. The numbers will easily show if a player is exploiting the system. Conditions can be established (ex: doesn't count damage done in houses) to help keep the system honest. Lastly, players can report abuse.

IF players still managed to exploit this system, they'd only have a chance at getting a reward. Yet the structured PvP on this shard would vastly increase in popularity, improving the overall health of UOF.

Where's the downside?

You have no idea what people will go through to gain even a small reward. I think staff said one time that a guy had like 300+ accounts for some cheat or another and just moved the stuff around before the accounts got banned.

My problem with your suggestion isn't any of that though, it is that you are going to incentivize people to gank in large groups because they won't be there for the pvp, they will be there for doing damage and moving on to deal out more. Sounds like it will ruin pvp.

 

[Winstonian]

no it cant defined easy

I don't agree. It's a smart playerbase... they'd be able to come up with reasonable parameters.

But if two guys were sitting on the outskirts of town, hitting each other with wands for hours, with absolutely no interest in killing each other, a reasonable person would believe that they were exploiting the system.

 

[girana]

I don't agree. It's a smart playerbase... they'd be able to come up with reasonable parameters.

But if two guys were sitting on the outskirts of town, hitting each other with wands for hours, with absolutely no interest in killing each other, a reasonable person would believe that they were exploiting the system.

you just cant stop the abusing so its a shit system.

 

[drasked]

I mean, absolutely. Not against that at all. If such rewards were attached to damage done in militias over a period of time, the participation would greatly increase.

Why does it have to be damage done? The current system seems like a solid foundation to build on.

 

[Winstonian]

My problem with your suggestion isn't any of that though, it is that you are going to incentivize people to gank in large groups because they won't be there for the pvp, they will be there for doing damage and moving on to deal out more. Sounds like it will ruin pvp.

I disagree completely. In all actuality, it would benefit the individual over the group. In a 5v1 "fight", each person in the group of 5 stands to deal less individual damage than the solo player. A solo player, running around with a war hammer, could total some pretty significant damage numbers despite the fact that he really stands no legitimate chance of killing entire waves of enemies.

And that's a good thing.

 

[girana]

Why does it have to be damage done? The current system seems like a solid foundation to build on.

you just cant add good rewards to pvp its too easy to abuse.

 

[Winstonian]

Why does it have to be damage done? The current system seems like a solid foundation to build on.

Because damage done gives the solo player an incentive to participate in structured PvP. Otherwise, there's no reason for casual players to pretend that they'll be effective against the big guilds.

 

[Winstonian]

you just cant add good rewards to pvp its too easy to abuse.

Not only do I disagree completely, but adding good rewards to PvP is the exact thing that would greatly increase the amount of PvP on UOF.

 

[drasked]

Because damage done gives the solo player an incentive to participate in structured PvP. Otherwise, there's no reason for casual players to pretend that they'll be effective against the big guilds.

If you attach actual rewards that ppl want, and purely base it on damage done, you will have an exploit race between some ppl and an ebolt rail between others.

 

[Winstonian]

If you attach actual rewards that ppl want, and purely base it on damage done, you will have an exploit race between some ppl and an ebolt rail between others.

Short answer: define exploit and ban the exploiters.

If smart members of the playerbase sat down and tried to come up with solutions for this, they'd be able to in short time. It's not difficult.

 

[AreYouKidden]

I've struggled with this for 11 months here on UOF, every suggestion is met with, too hard to define, move along.. Regardless of the actual benefit that could come from such a system... People are so quick to give up on good suggestions, it's incredibly. Many games out there actually give incentives to PvP - be it building tokens, to purchase PvP based gear, or gaining reputation for other rewards...

An example:

1) PvM - boss fights, collect gems, put them in an altar, for a chance to have a relic drop to your bank... This occurs daily - the chance of drop is very low, 20% chance for a relic drop, your weighting based on how many gems you put in the altar..

Why couldn't PvP be the similar - hell you could even create an altar gem on death - that can't be looted if afk building damage... But even without an altar gem - Daily scores based on damage / healing (capped so abuse couldn't advantage you too much), lottery based system for the relic reward. Everyone over 3000 damage, capped at 9,000 damage (tweak the numbers) get entered into the lottery, weighted by their actual damage, for a chance at a relic. (daily) The relic drops 50% of the time (so 3-4 relics a week). The person putting in the 9,000 damage, have 3x better chance than people just reaching the minimum. Also vet the list of who they did the damage to, if 30%+ of their damage was done to a single person, take them out of the draw, and flag them for abuse to be monitored...

 

[AreYouKidden]

If you don't want to flag for abuse, then remove any damage that is over 30% of their total damage (or 10% of their total damage), figure out a number that works. That way GM's don't even have to get involved, while you can abuse it in the sense you can get a better chance than a person just hitting the minimum daily damage, the max daily damage is achievable just by fighting... Again tweak the numbers to something that works if 3k/9k doesn't feel right.

 

[GoD PaRtiCal]

I disagree completely. In all actuality, it would benefit the individual over the group. In a 5v1 "fight", each person in the group of 5 stands to deal less individual damage than the solo player. A solo player, running around with a war hammer, could total some pretty significant damage numbers despite the fact that he really stands no legitimate chance of killing entire waves of enemies.

And that's a good thing.

Really? Because its easy mode to gank in a group of 10-15 for a little bit of damage vs having to 1v1/2v2 etc. People choose easy mode all day long and go with quantity over quality. It's been proven before with faction bonuses and it will be true again if staff listens to this idea.

Quit trying to fix something that is not broken. IMO I think you cannot really do this sort of thing outside of tourneys because PVP is built into all other aspects of the game and the second you try to split it out into its own category is when you screw yourself over with bad solutions.

 

[girana]

Short answer: define exploit and ban the exploiters.

If smart members of the playerbase sat down and tried to come up with solutions for this, they'd be able to in short time. It's not difficult.

its not easy.

noone has enough time to monitor it

 

[AreYouKidden]

Quit trying to fix something that is not broken. IMO I think you cannot really do this sort of thing outside of tourneys because PVP is built into all other aspects of the game and the second you try to split it out into its own category is when you screw yourself over with bad solutions.

To be honest I'm within Winstonian on this - one of the reasons I don't PvP more, is because PvP at it's core, is a drain on resources, while yes PvP'n is fun, UO is the type of game where people have goals they set, and unless you are a 2-3 year vet (and depending on your play times), PvP'n 7 days a week, is a losing venture.

If I could achieve something beyond fights while PvP'ing, I'd absolutely PvP more, even if that something was less effective.

In regards to the comments of ganking, Militias was originally implemented with a 10 person guild cap, to limit the ganks, lower that to 8 people, with multiple objectives, and give people some incentive to PvP by not making it such a huge drain, and I think you have more action, more teams, less potential ganks (because there are more teams)... Like any solution it'll need to be tweaked to make it work, but there's a starting point and something to work with...

 

[Winstonian]

Really? Because its easy mode to gank in a group of 10-15 for a little bit of damage vs having to 1v1/2v2 etc. People choose easy mode all day long and go with quantity over quality. It's been proven before with faction bonuses and it will be true again if staff listens to this idea.

Quit trying to fix something that is not broken. IMO I think you cannot really do this sort of thing outside of tourneys because PVP is built into all other aspects of the game and the second you try to split it out into its own category is when you screw yourself over with bad solutions.

But that's exactly my point: if it's 5v1, all damage dealt by the 1 counts towards his individual numbers, while the damage dealt by the 5 is essentially split among them. I know that, if there were incentives, I'd happily run around and solo PvP, knowing that whatever damage I'm dealing actually counts for something, and isn't just another opportunity to get ganked and griefed.

PvP on UOF isn't broken? Seriously? If you don't think this isn't broken, then you appear to be the minority. Large waves of players come to this shard interested in a legitimate UO experience, just to realize that there's outstanding PvM and minimal legitimate PvP. Then, of course, they leave.

This wouldn't "split PvP into its own category"... it would merely provide an incentive to what already exists in game. That incentive is gravely needed.