Ithaca said:It could be all based on faction so the system would run by itself.
Would a system like that work? What flaws can you guys think of?
The only issue I see with this. Is that you dont really have a way to exact your revenge on the player. I think that's the beauty of the player run system. The players are the ones that police it. If you dont care about what's going on... you dont have to contribute.
And also, in a game that is mainly centered around killing mobs and grinding... I dont wanna see people feel forced to quest incase they need to take part in this.
Pradah said:
3) Voting: It makes me wonder if there should be a counter-balance in place (allowing players to vote AGAINST the petition)? Would this just create chaos and would rarely allow this system to result in any real repercussions.
I like this. If the threshhold is 1000 votes (example) and 1034 vote for and 50 vote against it fails. You need a positive of 1000 votes. This makes it so you can rally your allies to your defense. Someone with a good server rep could get some real support in the event that the complaint being filed is false. Likewise if the guy being accused is a bad guy and the whole server knows it even by mobilizing his own guild it won't save him. Idea being the side that is lying or trying to game the system will be less likely to win over the masses that are seeing things as they really are. Reputation would really matter in a meaningful way. Be a nice respected guy and you are always safe. Be an ass and you are always in danger, unless the server is massivly full for bad guys. In that case all is lost anyway.
Sabot said:I like this. If the threshhold is 1000 votes (example) and 1034 vote for and 50 vote against it fails. You need a positive of 1000 votes. This makes it so you can rally your allies to your defense. Someone with a good server rep could get some real support in the event that the complaint being filed is false. Likewise if the guy being accused is a bad guy and the whole server knows it even by mobilizing his own guild it won't save him. Idea being the side that is lying or trying to game the system will be less likely to win over the masses that are seeing things as they really are. Reputation would really matter in a meaningful way. Be a nice respected guy and you are always safe. Be an ass and you are always in danger, unless the server is massivly full for bad guys. In that case all is lost anyway.
It shouldnt be something where you have to rally people to your defense. Votes should only come in situations where people have been affected by this person. It shouldnt be... player a says in guild "hey. This guy trained me" and the entire guild comes to prosecute this person.
Same thing with "false" accusals. Maybe the accuser can get some friends and guild mates to vote. But if this person isnt actually affecting other people the warrant will never pass. Also like you said. If a player has a good enough repuatation... people would be more forgiving anyways. If I'm the most liked on the server and I train you... you're more likely to believe it was an accident.
Pradah said:My problem with starting at one day is, it's easy enough to just logout for a couple days and avoid the penalty. I'd rather it be a progressive "played hours" situation so they are actually forced to experience the impact of their punishment.
This is a good point. What would be a good starting point. 8 hours of played time? 4 hours of played time??
Each subsequent warrant will increase (4, 8, 12, 16...)
kreed99 said: If it is implemented correctly this could be cool. I dont know how you would do a regional PVP flag so this might have to just be serverwide.
Yea, I always assumed it would be serverwide. Being able to move continents to avoid the punishment would be lame lol.
This could almost be like a faction mechanic in an expansion city or something, where if you annoy enough NPC's you are KoS, but this city has extradition agreements with all other cities and provinces and monsters so if you are found in another area, an "extraditioin" team would come after you, (unkillable spawned guards in blackrose keep, unkillable orcs in havenders pass) kill you, and throw your dead body in jail (auto-port your corpse from extradition team to expansion city that hates you- separating you from your group). Then you would need friends to come with good faction, rez you and get you out of there- oh and they all see invis.
You can log in, but you have to cower in the corner or else the guards will kill you again if you get too close. There would be a stiff price to pay for clemency, but only on certain in-game days where you can get another player to petition the King or ruler on your behalf. They still hate you, but you are able to at least start building newbie faction with the poor side of town while avoiding the guards because the guards will still kill you. Extradition teams will still spawn, but because you are flagged with "clemency" they will only auto-port your living body to the jail, they wont kill you. Once you can get your faction high enough, then the extradition teams stop spawning. Once faction is maxxed, you can sell, but at lower prices and the NPC's comment out-loud on your misdeeds. so two could walk in, guard says "Hello manouk! welcome to our city!" and in the same breath "hello...newman...black-hearted son of a misbegotten jackal that ninja-looted"
or whatever creative but clean insults the devs can come up with.
Actually the comments might be a nice way to include MMORPG nostalgia on the unique vocabularym teach the young whippersnappers about trains, ninja-looting (whats that?), KS'ing, Camps, Zerging (but I think that is more of a finesse thing can't really stop zerging but just use it as a critique or playerability)
How about the "bandit player" loses faction when killing a guard at a city/village. This disables him to trade and interact with npc's relating to those factions/cities/villages.
But the players who have good faction with those npc's, would no longer be able to trade with him either. Not untill that person regains his faction with those institutions he has wronged.
That "bandit player" could just wonder of to the next city and do the same thing there.
But if you implement the same rules there, he'll become isolated through his behaviour and will either have to come to terms with "the game dissaproving his playstyle", since he'll gain less and less as he's not able to sell/trade/interact with the game (npc's that regain faction through questlines or such not included ofc, otherwise there wouldn't be a way back into the game for that player). Or he has to change his hat and play more polite.
The players themselves would not feel that much harm, seeing that would not be able to trade with that player anyway.
For those that do want to team up with him, they still can. If they, in group, harm a city/village in the style the "bandit player" is using, they will suffer the same fate in time.
Regaining faction would be a solo thing and should not be allowed to be helped by others. Otherwise you could just have a highlevel player train you through some faction boosts and you'll not have seen the wrongs of your behaviour.
I don't see that petition thing working out wel, there are always players out there that will know a way to grind or corrupt the portion of the game and abuse it. Either by selling their votes, grinding factions for players or pestering people that they don't like for random reasons. And definatly not allow for people to buy faction with ingame or real life cash. This again would be easely corrupted by players and the actual meaning and use of faction restrictings/penalties would be pointless. In every game you have people who grind cash and buy their way out of everything with little to no regard to other players.
Barin999 said:I don't see that petition thing working out wel, there are always players out there that will know a way to grind or corrupt the portion of the game and abuse it.
Thats why we are trying to come up with a way to avoid that as much as possible. Buying 250 votes is not something that's realistic if the votes also cost money. And typically the type of person who would buy votes is also the type of person that would be getting the warrants against them anyways. So their "buying" would not serve a purpose.
I dont want to see something automated... like other players unable to trade. Or other players also attacked if they group with this person. It's supposed to bring attention to this person for being a griefer... if others still want to play with him/her that's fine.
Also, typically killing guards in a city would already reduce the players factions. So that's not necessarily something we need to add as well.
Larr said: For non PVP ers, 6 guards with advanced AI's spawn within aggro range of the outlaw whenever he stands on kingdom soil. Every 60 seconds, the server checks for all 6 guards and immediately respawns any that have died. The player gets aggravated and leaves or quits. Any outlaw would be so disruptive to groups and raids it would be impossible for them to play. /byebye
But this is not fun for the community that this person has disrupted. Idk, maybe it's just me. But getting your revenge on someone in the form of pvping them to death is extremely satisfying.
Porygon said:What do you mean one sided?
I mean roleplaying as a villain should definately be tolerated in a roleplaying game, within limits of course.
However, the system proposed here, is completely punishing the outlaws, with zero counterpart/benefit.
I don't mean going villain should be encouraged, but I mean it should be a choice for a player that is willing to go on this path.
And since it is a harsh path to go, there should be some sort of a little compensation, making it interesting if one is willing to take the risk of the penalties.
bobwinner said:Porygon said:What do you mean one sided?
I mean roleplaying as a villain should definately be tolerated in a roleplaying game, within limits of course.
However, the system proposed here, is completely punishing the outlaws, with zero counterpart/benefit.
I don't mean going villain should be encouraged, but I mean it should be a choice for a player that is willing to go on this path.
And since it is a harsh path to go, there should be some sort of a little compensation, making it interesting if one is willing to take the risk of the penalties.
I get what you mean. But the purpose of this was more so to be able to have a way to police people who are going against what the community etiquette is made to be. I mean theres not many games where you can go out and act like a jerk and people are just ok with it.
Noones gonna stop you from roleplaying a villain, it's just going to suck for you when you have your warrant out :p
I like the original posters direction. Though one thsousand signatures is way too steep in my opinion. Even one hundred signatures is alot. Have you ever tried making a guilding in WoW? Getting six signatures was tough most of the time though I know this would be very different. Fifty signatures seems like something you can get if it were on a town bulletin board.
Jails are also something I wouldn't mind seeing come back. Its something that use to be in older MMO's. The Realm for example did just that. GM's would lock players in a dungeon for 15-30 mins for ksing, harrassment, racial slurs in world chat or other misbehaviors. I have always been an advocate of in-game jails for players who do things they know is wrong.
Perhaps throwing them into a dungeon filled with experience stealing monsters would work too ;) ( kidding of course )...or am I? muhahahahahaha
Using the petition approach is a nice way to allow players to guard themselves from bad players in a way that is interesting. It also allows more time for the GM's to help us with something else instead of policing the bad eggs of gaming society.
-Bronsun
bobwinner said:Porygon said:What do you mean one sided?
I mean roleplaying as a villain should definately be tolerated in a roleplaying game, within limits of course.
However, the system proposed here, is completely punishing the outlaws, with zero counterpart/benefit.
I don't mean going villain should be encouraged, but I mean it should be a choice for a player that is willing to go on this path.
And since it is a harsh path to go, there should be some sort of a little compensation, making it interesting if one is willing to take the risk of the penalties.
I think idea/ruleset would be best applied to PvE servers, not so much for RP and/or PVP servers.