Non-lethal guild wars

[Orgonwukh]

In the past I've tried to start several attempts to practice PvP fighting in groups. ICly, this was the idea of a training camp for fighters.
First, we created two groups, then made everyone challenge everyone from the other group. But this is very frustrating, because you have to be in range to target the opponent and the number of challenges increases dramatically with the number of players involved. So I recently created a dummy guild, so some guild members could join the second guild and we could start a guild war. Unfortunately, challenges in guild wars are always lethal, which should not be the case for IC practising.
What do you think about non-lethal guild wars? It could be an option when you start the war.

[Rayken]

You mean in Guild wars you don't have the option to kill or not presented at the end as you now do in regular 1 on 1 PvP?

[Dajoji]

Works like when you attack an NPC. No need to challenge, no prisoners taken. Perhaps there could be a /challenge group thing. That would spare players from forming guilds for OOC reasons.

[Izzabella]

well it was not so much as forming a 'guild' we made it hidden and it was more along the idea of having teams like in basket ball..skins and shirts or whatever.. we were going to have our guys  split up evenly on two teams for an IC guild event training camp type thing and then when it was over we'd all be in the same guild again anyways..however it was kinda squashed by the fact that we killed each other rather than just a knock out  and having the death curse and having our members all diffrent races spawning at diffrent locations kinda killed the fun aspect of it all.. but yeah the group challenge would be great on many scales..

[Dajoji]

I meant that players shouldn't be forced to form a guild and pay 20k when what they really need are groups. The guild system currently makes up for several missing organization methods and levels, and that could be prevented if groups had a little more functions.

[Zan]

Agreed, group challenges would be handy.

Still even in guild wars one should be able to knock someone unconscious instead of being forced to kill opponents.

[Prolix]

I think what you really want is a guild action: training. By selecting this action you could then fight with any other member of your guild also training. During this fight only imaginary hit points would accrue and any blow that does more than half a players hits knocks him down and any blow that puts him more than 3/4 'dead' also knocks him down. After a you get knocked down your imaginary hits are full on regaining your feet.

Outside of guilds this could be extended to groups as well.

[Orgonwukh]

Thanks for all your responses. I agree, group challenges is what is I am actually looking for. However, I also think that even in war someone should have the choice to only knock someone down or kill them. For your info, here is the Outlaw's training camp idea (taken from the Outlaw's forum, slightly modified):

Outlaws Training Camp

This is the first attempt to help our guild members develop better abilities in case of emergencies like they have occured in the past and will surely occur in the future, too. The aim of the Training Camp is to simulate typical situations and give our members the opportunity to train their abilities in dealing with them.

The Training Camp will simulate the following situation in a game called 'Hostage Getaway' (a minimum of six members in total is required):
There are two groups: 'the hostages' which is played by two Outlaws and 'the hostage takers' which is played by the remaining (at least four) Outlaws. The hostages were able to free themselves after they were hidden in the Outlaw's hideout on the road to Ojaveda [ojaroad1] and now they try to flee. The hostage takers have to prevent that any of the hostages reaches the paths to either Hydlaa or Ojaveda [the passages to Hydlaa and ojaroad2]. While the hostages start at the hideout, the Hostage takers have to start at either the passage to Hydlaa or the passage to Ojaveda (They are free to decide if they want to start at the same position together or split in groups).
Once a player is defeated in combat, they are not allowed to move or communicate [ICly] with other guild members anymore. This is a simulation of catching or killing a hostage in a real situation. Real killing during the game is strictly forbidden and will be punished by death [it is only fair to even the death penalties]. Usage of magic is allowed, usage of potions is forbidden.
Every group will have a leader who organises the group. In case one of the hostages reaches a passage to a city, the hostages win. When all hostages are defeated, the hostage takers win. [Please don't cheat by using /tells, this would spoil the fun.]
This game is mainly based on combat [Hostages have to put auto-accept on, hostage takers may, but don't have to. A /challenge shortcut would be helpful, though.]. It is clear that the fighting abilities differ among our guild members. Therefore, adaptions will be made by restricting armor and weapon usage for the stronger players. Additionally, members whose fighting skills are not well developed will play important roles as scouts and couriers, maybe even baits and distractions.

In the end the first attempt failed, because of the fact that we have to meet alltogether to challenge each other, then go to our positions and start the next round. So we spend most of the time running around, which was boring. Also, the area was too huge for six players only. The second attempt was to create a separate guild, so we would not have to meet and challenge, but then we would have to kill each other and would be handicapped in the next training round.

[Waoknie]

I think that by fighting this way for practice creates sort of a paradox.. (I dunno if it's the correct word).

Being a game, the nature of PlaneShift is still based on rules that in many ways evoke the 'mechanics' of reality. That's what makes it a good MMORPG.. the fact that the Rp experience is intended to be most immersive and that in someway it has to be attached to those rules.. the rules of a real world.

There must be something final or lethal that has to be left aside of the games within the game. What I mean is: What if this idea becomes so popular that most of the players get into it?.. What part of IG reality about war would be lost by replacing it with a game within the game?..

I understand the challenge system a bit and as part of the game as it is, I still don't agree 100% with it.. for a simple reason: It takes the place of 'real' fighting. Then, as a source of confrontation that will not have serious consequences, it becomes a hobby. And the real fighting disappears. If it was for me, I'd wipe off the 'challenge' for good.

If the fighting skills depended at least 50% on the user's skills.. or if the fight mechanics were more user friendly, with 'real' control of the actions of fighting, then yes.. I would agree to have sparrings or practice zones for fighting.

I did some testing of the capabilities of diferent users with same standards (statswise) from different locations and we concluded that we don't have good control of the fight itself.. that it depends on many other things like lag for example.. some players have a huge advantage just because their combination of hardware, location, etc.. gives them an unexpected leap which chances of beating are quite slim.

Don't get me wrong.. I enjoy the challenges and it's cool when we bet and stuff.. but let's face it: It's not the real thing.

To surround the fighting mechanism with a pinch of reality, picture PS w/o challenges, PVP areas and stuff like that.. People would really become aware of the reality within the game.. The meaning of fatality.

I'd say not only 'no' to the idea but 'no' to all things that attempt to help you avoid the 'natural laws' within the game. If you get into a fight, you have to face the chances of getting killed.. not some sissy chance one after the next to secure your prevail even defeated.. not some "ok, we fight here but not there cuz it's forbidden"  If there is a war, why should the list of terms of engagement be so long?.. why should there be so much agreement?.. War should be as fatal and realistic as possible for it to be serious enough as to become the last resource for solving a conflict. Everything that happens before that should be pure RP enrichment of the game experience.

Now, I know that some will take advantage of it and like in the past, some will start abusing power.. but that's another topic.. If the system gets twisted for punishing the 'illegal' fights (powerful against weak), it would very well avoid those possible issues. I have some ideas and I'm willing to discuss them if you desire to.

This doesn't mean it would not be fun.. just that IMO it may take us a step farther from an ideal of mine based on simple observation.

[Orgonwukh]

Good arguments, Waokie. But I think they don't apply to the idea of pracising war. Armies and police units practiced and still practice situations they might get into. They pretend deaths when someone is hit (be it a sword in the past, or a gun in the present). Deaths are played by sitting down at the spot where someone is hit. So I think roleplaying death in a roleplay game is not unrealistic. However, I agree that the challenging system is not realistic. There has to be a tradeoff between gameplay mechanics and realism. My proposal would be to provide more PvP areas. Maybe every space outside the cities could be attack zone, except the main paths, which would be protected by guards.

[Waoknie]

Thank You..

Ok, now I se better what you mean.. If the objective of the training group is to improve strategy, then it would be welcome but I don't think guilds will agree to reveal them.. not even to allies (just speculating). I was thinking more as a war practice scenario between guilds -attacks and all- which is what I don't believe in.. Remember.. I agree it would be fun but I still think we need to limit the chances of allowing things like fight, war and death to be taken lively, or as an IG hobby.

It feels weird because you know I'm shooting myself on this one cuz I love to fight, challenge, etc.. check out my post about an alternative of punishment for the power abuser.. I know it's raw but I still have no feedback on that one..
http://hydlaa.com/smf/index.php?topic=32394.msg372964;topicseen#msg372964

Keep in mind my wishlist (on this topic.. I have more!)   :

1. No distinct areas. All areas should share the same rules.. Unless some magic happens.. Nothing would be more attracting than more magic affecting the rules a bit.. That would be.. well, magical!. The only area that would have twisted rules would be DR. In there, no one should be able even to think of attacking another player. To me, the present rules in that area are out of context.

2. Transform the death curse.. (perhaps replace Dakkru's one) Please read the post I mentioned.

3. Get rid of the challenge's sissy options: Not the mechanism of challenging (we need the option of not fighting and the challenging repetition-abuse is already well handled).. The challenge call warning is ok but since this point works in consonance with the no. 2, then powerful players will avoid attacking weaklings or face degradation. I call it the REDNALHGIH effect. For it's inverted somehow to the Highlander's movie figurative power bestowing. So, perhaps the challenge call would have a bit more info about the contenders.. (not sure)

4. Elliminate the suicide. This one only possible when unavoidably stuck. This one is completely out of context and it's still abused by some around.

5. Orgonwuk's wishes, as well as anyone interested (GM's opinions welcome).

The goal of these settings is to give the fatality triad (fight, war & death) a new, more realistic meaning with some 'real' consequences.. I think that in time, these settings will increase the interest in RPing the conflicts.. simply because realistic death will become a tool for regrowing the natural law of self-preservation.

BTW, we have to see the far side of the coins.. vanquishers, conquerors and defeated will have a field day mostly between their own segment (powerwise). This will secure that at all levels of power,  all will have fights, wars, etc... As the characters evolve, so does their responsabilities and the respect for their paths in the game.. We could start to get real heroes on all levels and who knows, some legends here and there..

EDIT: Insert point no.4: When falling, no death.. just recovery period according to your injuries.. (I have to think a bit on this one) There are areas where you fall and there is no way out of.. like being stuck..

[Orgonwukh]

It feels weird because you know I'm shooting myself on this one cuz I love to fight, challenge, etc.. check out my post about an alternative of punishment for the power abuser.. I know it's raw but I still have no feedback on that one..
http://hydlaa.com/smf/index.php?topic=32394.msg372964;topicseen#msg372964

I don't like the idea of stats degraded for power abusers. You would train all day to get stronger, then you would be punished if someone challenges you who has put no effort in their training.
But maybe your evil faction could be incremented if you do such a thing?

1. No distinct areas. All areas should share the same rules.. Unless some magic happens.. Nothing would be more attracting than more magic affecting the rules a bit.. That would be.. well, magical!. The only area that would have twisted rules would be DR. In there, no one should be able even to think of attacking another player. To me, the present rules in that area are out of context.

Magic is a good idea to explain unrealistic game mechanics. The reason why noone should fight in cities is that settings tells us that they are heavily guarded. Another idea: If someone fights in a guarded area, the nearest NPC guard will come and attack the one who started the challenge. To represent a group of guards, the NPC guard could have superior powers, making it impossible to defeat it. So the only option would be running away.

3. Get rid of the challenge's sissy options: Not the mechanism of challenging (we need the option of not fighting and the challenging repetition-abuse is already well handled).. The challenge call warning is ok but since this point works in consonance with the no. 2, then powerful players will avoid attacking weaklings or face degradation. I call it the REDNALHGIH effect. For it's inverted somehow to the Highlander's movie figurative power bestowing. So, perhaps the challenge call would have a bit more info about the contenders.. (not sure)

Agreed, I made a suggestion here:
http://hydlaa.com/smf/index.php?topic=32392.0

In summary, I think the general requirement is a redesign of the challenge/war system as well as a redesign of the settings which could allow more violent conflicts. I know, the settings say, that there is a totalitarian system in Yliakum. And because of this, noone dares to start violent conflicts. Alternatives:

1. The government is only interested in ruling the cities, laws are not applicable outside city walls.
2. An opposition takes over power in one or two cities. For example some rebels could take over Ojaveda. A conflict between two different government (maybe with different laws) would allow players to get involved in it. If Ojaveda would be ruled by the rebels and Hydlaa by the Octarchs, the roads between could be area of constant conflict. This does not have to be final either. Maybe the rebels take Hydlaa over for some time. There might also times of peace and war between the two sides. Also, players could be able to join the one or other force. I think only one ruling totalitarian regime gives us too little space for conflict.

[Prolix]

Seeing as how the merchant class has significant input to the governments structure ... voting for new octarchs and whatnot ... it would appear that rather than rebel forces different merchant houses could be associated with the various towns authorities. Thus, Mikana might have supreme influence in Akkaio but only be a minor factor in Hydlaa. Something analogous to the system in the Dune series or other literary precedents.

[Waoknie]

It feels weird because you know I'm shooting myself on this one cuz I love to fight, challenge, etc.. check out my post about an alternative of punishment for the power abuser.. I know it's raw but I still have no feedback on that one..
http://hydlaa.com/smf/index.php?topic=32394.msg372964;topicseen#msg372964

I don't like the idea of stats degraded for power abusers. You would train all day to get stronger, then you would be punished if someone challenges you who has put no effort in their training.
But maybe your evil faction could be incremented if you do such a thing?

Well, I haven't figured out an idea for the opposite: I think that when U have a trained char and it gets defeated by a weakling, then other aspects of the data may come into account.. for example, Who challenged who?.. If the weaknling challenges the +pow, then his/her braveness should be awarded (factions are too complicated.. they may end up segregating.. yet, it's a good idea). And if the +pow is defeated, only a portion of it's levels is decreased (don't forget about the chances of this to happen non-permanent).

On another side of this trilema, there is the possibility of being defeated for unexpected reasons, like some system problem..  this is an obstacle.. I'm sure we may find a way around but.. well, I wonder how many things are waiting on line that can't be implemented because of system bugs we are unaware of.. but hey.., that's another part.


I'm glad we're building something here.. at least hypothetically. I think these are good ideas..

You guys know much better about the PS world than I do. The chances of a city-scale conflict are slim atm.. One thing we need to have very clear.. There are not many reasons to engage in a conflict like this.. (non that I'm aware of atm) and there are many things that cannot become reason for it either.. i.e. race.

The poll about conflict has me a bit confused for it's a complicated question based on my limited knowledge of the world's power equilibrium..

To make it simpler: Give me some (or at least one) good reasons for having such up-scaled conflict.

So, I see this more like a huge event than like  a chance of changing the overall rules.. It's ok for me.. I will help you because I believe that something must happen either way. And that's another topic anyway.

Bad thing is.. you may have noticed my part on forums have increased.. well It's cuz I can't play these days (my puter's psu blew) so, I'll be pulling the strings from here.

[Orgonwukh]

I agree, there are some ideas with potential. I would like to hear some responses from the settings team. Is anything we are discussing here applicable?
I also recognised, we are currently discussing this topic here: http://hydlaa.com/smf/index.php?topic=32387.0

Moderator?