Leif_Roar

[ QUOTE ]
I don't understand, could you please be more specific?

[/ QUOTE ]

It's the difference between "Go there. Do this." and "Heeeey. If I put these things together like this, I can do that." In the latter case you're acting and driving the story; in the former you're only reacting and you're being driven along by the story.

[ QUOTE ]
How about making mission chains which are unlockable only with a certain number of clues, an example might be something like this:

You need to find more clues about the [missing_widget_name]:
[ ] Clue: You might find a clue somewhere around [area_name].
[x] Clue: You found a [item_name] in [area_name], [zone_name].
[ ] Clue: The Outcast graffiti in The Hollows tells tales of woe.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, I don't think that would be very fun. You want the illusion of your character is pieceing together the clues and is the protagonist who drives the story. A "gather these clues" check list is reactive. It's an NPC, or the game, sending you out to collect shards of a red key before letting you open the red door. You're no longer driving the story, you're being driven by it, which is the problem I have with the way missions are given by NPCs today.

A while ago, I read the book The world's worst warships. A common, almost routine pattern was that poor warships are made when a nation hurriedly tried to meet the rumoured threat of another nation's new super ship -- which in all cases turns out to be not nearly as super as the initial, fearmongering reports assumed it would turn out to be. The first nation thus ends up with a lumbering hulk that's overengineered, overpriced and only fit to meet a rumoured threat that never actually materialised.

CO and DCUO are not here yet. Yes, if either of them launch to great acclaim and huge success, then NCSoft needs to come out with all guns blazing. For now, though, they are only potential threats, somewhere on the horizon. It's impossible to gauge how serious they will turn out to be, or what their actual weaknesses will be. At this time, what NCSoft should be doing is to entrench their position by keeping their current player base happy and trying to attract new players without overextending themselves and getting ready for battle by "clearing the gundeck" -- setting aside funds and resources for battling both the initial media-hype and also for meeting the actual threats that the two other games will turn out to pose, and to take advantage of whatever weaknesses those games will, inevitably, turn out to have.

Because of the latter part, NCSoft should, if anything, play with their cards closer to the chest now than they have in the past. Firing the full broadside now, while the other games have not even been berthed yet, would only serve as saluting the enemy and giving them a chance to ram.

Oh, also: Arrr!

[ QUOTE ]
Ah, Honoree is an exception to my comment above, just because of his high resistance to the most common damage meaning you dont have to be so unlucky not to get enough damage with a random team.

Because blasters are played more than anything else (or were last time they did a post about AT popularity) it should be relatively simple to have a high damage team, and quite likely if you picked at random too.

[/ QUOTE ]

I suppose one way to deal with the requirement for "correct" teams for some AVs would be to provide temporary powers during the task force / strike force that provides the very minimum of capability needed. Would make it easier to balance AVs for all comers, if nothing else.

AVs should also be able to suppress or change the context of the player characters' abilities. Maybe you can't teleport to hospital until the fight is over; maybe every hold cast on an AV is also cast on a PC; maybe fire damage hurts him to begin with, but then starts healing him; maybe turning on stealth reduces his accuracy by half but doubles the damage he does.

GM I don't really think need to be more challenging as much as they need to be more epic. When Paladin stomps through Kings Row I want the ground to shake half a zone away. I want power lines to snap, sending sparks and arches of lightning everywhere. I want cars flying through the air, exploding on impact. I want tanks trundling laborously through the street to get in position to fire, only for Paladin to shrug off their grenads as so much chaff and beat the tanks into plowshares.

I want GMs to be rare enough that they'll still be a treat after years of playing -- once a month top, for each. I want there to be foreshadowing, so people are forewarned and can gather in the zone on short notice once the rampage starts. I want there to be explosions, shrapnel and sparks flying, players being thrown around like tennis balls, fires running wild, broken fire-hydrants spraying water high in the air, skulls and hellions using the mayhem to rob stores.

[ QUOTE ]
Announcements about Issue 13 will be made when the NCNC team feel that the time is right, and not a moment before.

[/ QUOTE ]

You misspelled 'stars'.

[ QUOTE ]
AFAICS Leif and a few others do think we're obliged to do something we don't want to (i.e. fight back), though.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, I'm saying that it's unsporting to not at least try to fight back, and I think it's quite reasonable that the people who are there for PvP gets annoyed with you if you don't.

[ QUOTE ]
I'll attack someone a few times even if they don't fight back. The first few times could simply be me getting the drop on them and killing them before they can find me to retaliate.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, I'd assume that for someone playing a stalker it can be difficult to tell the difference between someone who doesn't fight back and someone who's just inexperienced and not used to the tempo yet.

[ QUOTE ]
Really? My builds are thoroughly unoptimised for PvP, and I myself have next to zero experience of it.

[/ QUOTE ]

So's the case for me and my characters. I still try my best to present a challenge when becoming involved in PvP fighting -- sure, sometimes "my best to present a challenge" involves trying to stay hid and unseen while furthering a badge, but I do so outside the base and when I'm caught, I go down fighting.

No, I'm not much of a challenge, but I try. I participate.

[ QUOTE ]
A PVE build can't defeat a PVP build so why even bother trying when you have gone there for PVE reasons?

[/ QUOTE ]

Common courtesy. Good sportsmanship.

[ QUOTE ]
Actual PvPing doesn't appeal to me in the slightest though, so even if I do encounter someone that's determined to have a go I won't be hitting back.

[/ QUOTE ]

Then, frankly, you're being a poor sport.

[ QUOTE ]
Funny enough hey those badges don't require you to actually PVP ZOMG WHAT A SUPRISE!

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, they do. You're in a PvP zone, you're open to attack from other players and you have the ability to attack them in return. You can get the badges without attacking anyone else and, with some luck and hiding, without being successfully attacked yourself. But you're still engaging in PvP play simply by being in the zone.

[ QUOTE ]
Again if we are considering the PVP to be the marathon race it would be, wanting to do something in London during that day, but being forced to run 'cus ZOMG YOU IN LONDON ON RACE DAY!

[/ QUOTE ]

No, it's equivalent to wanting to do something in the middle of the race track, during the race. You're in the way, you're affecting the runners.

[ QUOTE ]
As for the gun to the head?

The devs did that when they put PVE material in a PVP zone, yes it was a failed attempt to get people interested in a flawed and tacked on PVP system, but all it does is provide a negative view on the games PVP system.

[/ QUOTE ]

There is a subtle, but important, difference between "enticing" and "forcing."

Okay, so it's not all that subtle.

[ QUOTE ]
Now if your saying by entering the zone we have to compete then well,

[/ QUOTE ]

No, I'm saying that if you want to be in a PvP zone you should participate. You don't have to run to win, but, come on, it's a race. At least jog.

[ QUOTE ]
All would be true if there was no PVE aspect to the PVP zones.

[/ QUOTE ]

There isn't. What appears to be PvE elements in the PvP zones are intended as part of the PvP game. The badges are PvP badges, the mobs are there to affect PvP fights, the missions either have direct effects on PvP or are intended to steer players so that PvP fights are more likely to occur.

They're like obstacles in the steeple race -- they're there as part of the competition, not as additional, non-competitive elements unrelated to the footrace.

[ QUOTE ]
Common courtesy would also say you don't force people into joining in your game also would it not?

[/ QUOTE ]

Who, exactly, is holding a gun to your head, forcing you to enter the PvP zones? Oh, you just really want the shiny London Marathon participant medal? Well, then run the race already!

[ QUOTE ]
No, in entering a PvP zone you've acknowledged that you're open to PvP attacks (not that you have any choice).

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, "signing up for PvP." Signing up for the London Marathon doesn't mean you have to try and win it -- it's acceptable to join it for the excersise -- but you should respect that it is a race. If you don't intend to run at all, don't sign up.

[ QUOTE ]
That doesn't oblige you to go out and hit people though,

[/ QUOTE ]

PvP zones are intended for competitive play. When we enter an area set aside for a game, common courtesy, not the EULA, obliges us to take at least some part in the game or stay out. To insist on entering the game area but refuse to take part in the game at all is being a spoilsport.

[ QUOTE ]
Or are you saying we should join in with any sport we encounter in life? Even if we find it pointless, unfun or even distasteful?

[/ QUOTE ]

When you've signed up for the sporting event, yes. And for PvP you sign up for PvP by entering the zone.

Entering a PvP zone and then refusing to take any part in PvP is rather like entering a softball field and sitting down to have a picknic, refusing to move when people want to play softball there. Your presence is disturbing the game. You're in the wrong. If you don't want to play, please get out of the field. If you want to stay in the field, please take part in the game.

[ QUOTE ]
Because for some pie-faced reason the devs put PVE content in the PVP zones?

[/ QUOTE ]

So either go to the PvP zone and fight back when you're attacked, or suck it up and forego the badges.

I don't much care for PvP -- but when I'm in a PvP zone hunting for badges, I accept the PvP as a cost of admission and when I'm attacked I try to at least make it as much of a challenge for the attacker as I can. Anything else would be rude and poor sportsmanship.

[ QUOTE ]
To be repeatedly attacked after showing that your not willing to fight back, just shows poor moral character on the part of the attacker.

[/ QUOTE ]

To repeatedly not fight back, after having been show that you're being attacked, just shows poor moral character on the part of the defender.

It's a zone for fighting. At least pretend to fight when you're (implicitly) asked to. Anything else is poor sportsmanship.

[ QUOTE ]
So, if that player is not doing that because the fun of Player *versus* Player fight, what's the reason he/she is doing that?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know, why would someone not fight back in PvP? Whatever the reason, it's pretty bad form. Rather like Sunday-driving in the middle of the Monaco Grand Prix or sticking to water during a drinking game.

Oh, great. Now we're getting our own version of the Eternal September. City of Heroes? It's going to be City of Noobs, with blind invites galore and incessant "hai! I can has Nemesis staff?" over broadcast. Dammned it! And we'd worked so hard to get the riff-raff out.

[ QUOTE ]
How long does NCsoft vetting take?

[/ QUOTE ]

I have to join in to this question, I think. Or have they already posted it, and I've just missed it?

[ QUOTE ]
Edit: Interpret that how you will btw.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hmmm. I think I'll interpret it thusly, with a little help from the Waaagh translator: "[i]Alsa, nah well okay. In reeel life fights they are bedda, ya kan lern ter appreciate da wurd "stop" an know wen sumone doesn't wan ter be clomp anymore. In Pvp zonz oftun da wurd no doesn't mean no, stop doesn't mean stop an in reeel life if yer a guy dat doesn't appreciate dem wurdz den ugh meeb be goin' ter rip yer 'ed off.[i]"

"Handbasket quotient"

"Hat shade"

"Kant's imperative categorizer"?

Scruplemeter.

This is a semi-formed idea that's been rattling around in my brains for a couple of days.

Today we have four main ways of getting missions: regular, progression based NPC contacts, repetetive NPC contacts, newspaper / radio and Oruborus. I'd like a fifth way: getting missions by gathering and combining clues.

I'd like to see a new type of salvage, "Clues", specific to enemy groups and city zones. So you'll have Skull clues, Nemesis clues, Crey clues, Kings Row clues, Crey's Folly clues -- each gathered by defeating enemies of the appropriate faction and street hunting in the appropriate zone (and perhaps sometimes supplied as a set-pieces in regular missions or achieving badges.)

To combine clues, you have to build a clue chain. In addition to having a parent faction, each clue has a list of factions it "links to". A "Skull: Base Location" clue might only link to other Skull clues, while a "Skull: Rumour" might link to "Skull, Troll, Hellion, Kings Row, Perez Park" clues. To build a clue chain you start with one of your clues, add another clue that's linked from the first clue, add a third clue that's linked from the second clue, and so on until you either hit on a valid combination that'll provide a mission or run out of linkeable clues.

Special content can be opened by combining clues along special (hard-coded) clue chains. "Skull -> Kings Row -> Clockwork" might provide the the Skulls vs. Clockwork mission that gives you the negotiator badge. Other combinations might provide new, story-thick missions or even story archs. Some clue chains might not provide missions at all, but instead temporary powers or badges.

It should always be possible to combine two or three clues from the same category ("Skull -> Skull", "Perez Park -> Perez Park") for a newspaper / radio type mission against that enemy or in that zone.

Personally, I'd like to see clue salvage being transferable in person, but not sellable on the consignment house or black market.

A lot of the stand-alone, regular missions could be shanghaied into a clue-based system, but to be worth it, there would have to be made new content only available through clues. I'd particularly like to see missions and story archs that delves into the background and history of the various enemies / zones.

Perhaps this could even be made into a way of integrating player-made content in the game? When making a mission you also specify a clue-chain that can trigger it, and when a player creates a clue-chain the game selects one of the available missions that matches it.