My suggestion for PvP reform:
No PVP in town, or the immediate outlying suburbs - because if you don't get the nice houses in town, which tend to get bought up within a week of the game starting, you should at least be able to run to your home in relative safety.
No ghost kills.
Perhaps a no-chatting-to-the-entire-server-at-once mute on both parties for up to five minutes (maybe one minute per 10 levels?) after a player kills another, with notification to both parties that the mute begins and ends. Of course both players could whisper and talk to their parties, but not to the entire population.
Receive notification when:
* Someone has set OR unset you to hostile
* Someone logs in that has you set to hostile
* You login and someone playing has you set to hostile
Penalties for killing a player based on the EXP difference - not level difference, since a 50 with five times the needed EXP probably has better gear than someone who just dinged 50.
A way to avoid the penalty-and-mute by both sides mutually agreeing to a duel. This could be done with a flag (actually, the code structure) similar to Hostile - you could "Set Duel" from the same menu and then would only auto-attack when the other player agrees to duel by setting duel on you, then it would expire after one or the other of you dies, and instead of dying you would just get a full heal, and teleport away if you're in town. It would be good to have it send you a message stating that "$player has challenged you to a duel" and "$player has accepted your challenge." You could have it announce that one player chickened out if one player cancels Duel flag, so that everyone knows who the chicken is. This could be easily done with our existing codebase, and I can't believe it didn't hit me how easily it could be done until now.
I will post details on creating a guild-like party system with relative ease later. I have an idea how it could work.
PVP Reform
PVP Reform
By appreciation, we make excellence in others our own property. (Voltaire)
Re: PVP Reform
It looks like a good plan to me. If the duel system is added, could an arena be added as well? In my mind, it would go something like this:
It would be a shop, which upon entry would teleport the player into a waiting area where they can wait for an oppenent. If there is someone already competing, they would be able to watch. If two players with duel set to each other are in the room, they would be teleported into the arena, which would be reset, and then battle.
Randomly generated arena
Each player must pay the sum of their levels * 100, which is awarded to the winner.(even though this might lead to problems of no money, so maybe an informal betting system would work better)
Other players can observe these matches, but cannot interfere.
Players can use only books, weapons, and ammo from their inventory.
Since the money aspect opens up the possibility for cheating, a limit should be added, maybe once every hour or, which would make it(somewhat) unprofitable for people to exploit it.
It would be a shop, which upon entry would teleport the player into a waiting area where they can wait for an oppenent. If there is someone already competing, they would be able to watch. If two players with duel set to each other are in the room, they would be teleported into the arena, which would be reset, and then battle.
Randomly generated arena
Each player must pay the sum of their levels * 100, which is awarded to the winner.(even though this might lead to problems of no money, so maybe an informal betting system would work better)
Other players can observe these matches, but cannot interfere.
Players can use only books, weapons, and ammo from their inventory.
Since the money aspect opens up the possibility for cheating, a limit should be added, maybe once every hour or, which would make it(somewhat) unprofitable for people to exploit it.
Re: PVP Reform
a colloseum! perfect. i think it sounds like a perfect idea.
Re: PVP Reform
I would keep bet money out of it, unless people want to appoint someone else who's playing to be the treasurer of the bet pool. If people are broke, like maybe if they just died and got a set of backup gear but no money and now they want to check it out... then we still want to allow dueling.
Let's start small. Queues are a little bit much for this point. Perhaps in the future we could do something if demand is high enough. I don't see how having multiple duels on a level would be a problem, since they probably wouldn't be right next to each other! A level in the wilderness could be staticed, and a colosseum generated on it. Perhaps an empty GV would work. But I kinda like the idea of being able to use everything you've got - it would put a money sink into the game, because people would then spend lots of money to win.
Maybe in the future after this has been implemented and all the kinks worked out, we could have more than one colosseum level: one that allows unrestricted combat, one that allows only hand-to-hand, and one that allows ranged weapons and spells from books so that all classes can use their abilities. I've done similar things with a fortress level in the wild before, so I know it's possible.
Let's start small. Queues are a little bit much for this point. Perhaps in the future we could do something if demand is high enough. I don't see how having multiple duels on a level would be a problem, since they probably wouldn't be right next to each other! A level in the wilderness could be staticed, and a colosseum generated on it. Perhaps an empty GV would work. But I kinda like the idea of being able to use everything you've got - it would put a money sink into the game, because people would then spend lots of money to win.
Maybe in the future after this has been implemented and all the kinks worked out, we could have more than one colosseum level: one that allows unrestricted combat, one that allows only hand-to-hand, and one that allows ranged weapons and spells from books so that all classes can use their abilities. I've done similar things with a fortress level in the wild before, so I know it's possible.
By appreciation, we make excellence in others our own property. (Voltaire)
Re: PVP Reform
That sounds like an awesome target with a few milestones in there. Crimson boiled it down exceedingly well at the end of the PK thread. This would make an ideal first milestone for the overall plan.
If you need any more development resources I'm game. I doubt it though, a project of this size can't have too many people stiring the pot.
If you need any more development resources I'm game. I doubt it though, a project of this size can't have too many people stiring the pot.
-
Avenger
- Skeleton 2-Headed Troll
- Posts: 191
- Joined: Wed 04.12.2002, 21:42
- Location: Wisconsin
- Contact:
Re: PVP Reform
Just a thought on PvP reform.
In Runescape, Player Killing can only take place in certain areas. The most common(and most dangerous) is the Wilderness, which ranges in levels from 1 to 55 or so. However, to restrict unmatched battles, Runescape only allows players to fight if the difference in their combat levels is less then or equal to the current wilderness level(ex:at wilderness level 25, a level 50 character can attack and be attacked by anyone from level 25 to level 75).
Something similar to this might be implemented in MAngband based on dungeon level; for example, in town, you could only fight with people of the same level as yourself, and in the dungeon you can fight anybody within the dungeon level(depth in feet divided by 50) of your own level, or some variation of this system. In this system, a level 50 would have to start a new character if he wanted to kill a level 18, since most level 18s will not be playing below 1600 ft.
A problem still occurs between level 50s with different equipment, so possibly a net worth calculator might come into play in these situations.
Our wilderness right now is not really conducive to this type of system, in fact I've always found the wilderness levels a bit odd. However since most pking takes place in the town and dungeon anyway, this wouldn't be much of a problem.
In Runescape, Player Killing can only take place in certain areas. The most common(and most dangerous) is the Wilderness, which ranges in levels from 1 to 55 or so. However, to restrict unmatched battles, Runescape only allows players to fight if the difference in their combat levels is less then or equal to the current wilderness level(ex:at wilderness level 25, a level 50 character can attack and be attacked by anyone from level 25 to level 75).
Something similar to this might be implemented in MAngband based on dungeon level; for example, in town, you could only fight with people of the same level as yourself, and in the dungeon you can fight anybody within the dungeon level(depth in feet divided by 50) of your own level, or some variation of this system. In this system, a level 50 would have to start a new character if he wanted to kill a level 18, since most level 18s will not be playing below 1600 ft.
A problem still occurs between level 50s with different equipment, so possibly a net worth calculator might come into play in these situations.
Our wilderness right now is not really conducive to this type of system, in fact I've always found the wilderness levels a bit odd. However since most pking takes place in the town and dungeon anyway, this wouldn't be much of a problem.
Re: PVP Reform
Shut up Avenger. No one cares about Runescape.
Re: PVP Reform
Doesn't matter if "no one cares about Runescape" as long as the idea is good. And it is. And at the moment it appears that "no one cares about MAngband" either...
-- Mangband Project Team Member
-
Avenger
- Skeleton 2-Headed Troll
- Posts: 191
- Joined: Wed 04.12.2002, 21:42
- Location: Wisconsin
- Contact:
Re: PVP Reform
Oh joy. Lord Ruin is back. I think I might have to start being more active here, and hopefully other veteran players will too, so things don't get out of hand while Crimson is (to all appearances) inactive.
Anyway, the point wasn't about Runescape, it was about an idea that might alleviate some of the problems with player killing in MAngband. And in any case it was merely an idea to hopefully be considered if an attempt is made to alter the PVP system.
I fail to notice Lord Ruin putting forth any ideas which were relevent to the topic of this thread. There is therefore no reason for him to be posting here, particularly if his only intention is to flame.
Anyway, the point wasn't about Runescape, it was about an idea that might alleviate some of the problems with player killing in MAngband. And in any case it was merely an idea to hopefully be considered if an attempt is made to alter the PVP system.
I fail to notice Lord Ruin putting forth any ideas which were relevent to the topic of this thread. There is therefore no reason for him to be posting here, particularly if his only intention is to flame.
-
Big_Juan_Teh_Furby
- Iridescent Beetle
- Posts: 244
- Joined: Sun 27.10.2002, 21:16
- Location: Eugene, OR
- Contact:
Re: PVP Reform
It's all good. I check the forums every now and again. Just lemme know if Paco gets outta hand. I'll deal with him.
When the winds of change blow hard enough, the most trivial of things can turn into deadly projectiles.
Re: PVP Reform
Thinking along the lines of more minimal additons that perhaps wouldn't be too time intensive or difficult to implement, I'd be a fan of a basic set of paramters that a server operator could set, to tailor some general PvP behavior as deemed needed. A lot of people do like having PvP on, and have different ideas about its use. So, maybe a more nuanced pick-n-choose approach could be useful.
Here are some things that could each be turned on in certain combinations, to let a server op get just the behavior that's desired:
Here are some things that could each be turned on in certain combinations, to let a server op get just the behavior that's desired:
- 1. Global: turn pvp on/off server-wide.
- 2a. Level range clamp: set the maximum number of character level difference between two players that are allowed to damage eachother. For example, a value of 5 would mean that a level 10 and a level 15 player could attack eachother, but a level 10 and level 16 player could not.
- 2b. Percent range clamp: similar to above, but treat the range as a percent. So, a value of 10% would mean that a level 10 and a level 12 player could not attack eacher (10 perecent of 10 char levels is 1, so the max range here would be 1 level difference). However, a level 50 and a level 45 could ( 45*.1=4.5 rounded up to 5).
- 3. PvP in town On/Off: to make town as a safe haven or not.
- 4. PvP in dungeon On/Off: to force PvP to town only or not.
- 5. PvP target warning: When the hostile flag is set, warn the target of the hostility.
- 6. PvP global warning: When the hostile flag is set, notify all players on the server of the action and the target.
- 7. Duel mode: Require that two players each set hostile flag on eachother to be able to damage one another.
- 8. PvP Safe mode: Killing blow does not kill target. Instead they are teleported away (PernMangband has this I believe).
- 9. Sanctioned User flag: allow an individual player to be flagged as always able to attack other players, for use with a sanctioned admin type of user (ie, so a senior 'admin' player could squish problem players if needed on a PvP-limitted server).