Author Topic: The difference between PKing and PvP Combat  (Read 3151 times)

L7

  • Wayfarer
  • *
  • Posts: 2
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #15 on: February 22, 2002, 05:52:10 pm »
I dont know if anyone reads this, or if there is going to be PvP in PS, but I will copy+paste some thoughts that were so eloquently stated by another Pvper. ;)

He was talking about Shadowbane[SB] on the Darktide[DT] (DT is the Asheron\'s call pvp+ server) being the \"next big game\" since all of the pvp guilds and players were going to meet there and establish themselves therein.


\"i think a lot of DTers who think sb is gonna be the shit will be pretty disappointed..

First of all, it\'s gonna be a class system, which has both good and bad points going for it. The main \"bad\" thing is it doesn\'t lead to balanced 1vs1 pvp and they wont even try to balance it in that way. The good thing is it gives you lots of different character types to play.

The thing that made ac pvp so good was the lack of defined classes. All chars can heal themselves which is essential to good pvp and you don\'t see this in any other game unless you go back to uo. For pvp to be really good, you have to have do-it-all characters. They have to be able to deal a fair amount of damage, take some and heal themselves. Within that it doesnt matter if they\'re melees or mages or what but if they can\'t do that then it wont be as much fun.

After i left ac i played eq and then daoc. While the pvp in those games was generally fun, classes take out any skill factor associated with pvp and i suspect this will happen with sb too. i played a cleric in eq so i basically hit the heal key in pvp (i know it takes skill). In daoc i played a bard, so i mezzed, healed and did the occasional dd shout. Point is, everyone in the group was doing 1 or 2 things max and that\'s all they had to think about. Sure, some groups worked better together than others but in the end it was nothing like ac pvp.

The other thing that\'ll be kinda gay in sb is the numbers game. The devs tell us how they envision these huge battles etc. Well, having played daoc and seeing huge battles in that game i don\'t see how much different they could be in sb. I don\'t care what kinda engine or how leet it supposedly is, having 100 players on the screen casting spells is gonna cause massive client-side lag. I played daoc with a athlonXP 1800, 768megs of ddr and a geforce3 and i still got bad slowdowns at times. Ppl with 1ghz and geforce 2s were crying ;p

While these huge battles can be fun at times, there is nothing more satisfying that small-scale pvp. I dont care how good a gamer you are, in a battle with a couple hundred ppl in the immediate area, whether you get ganked or not has nothing to do with skill. All it takes is 1 caster out of the opposing 100 to pick u out of a crowd and hit the nuke key. That\'s why people didn\'t mind dying in that game, it had nothing to do with skill and the same will hold true in sb.

That\'s not to say sb won\'t be fun (for a while). But holding territory and castles for the sake of nothing else gets old after you\'ve proven you can do it for a while. The game is gonna have to have a lot more than that to keep people interested in it or it\'ll end up like daoc. I\'m actually more excited about ac2 than i am sb now...\"
-Scytale


Hope that was as enlightening to you game designers as it was to me. ^_^


ParaSite

  • Hydlaa Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 430
  • Ancient
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #16 on: February 23, 2002, 06:08:25 pm »
As said before, there will be at least an ability to fight other players.
<Worf> These are the moments when my ego gets put back on the ground. I use linux for quite some time, and am soon 2 years maintainer of a linux distribution. I started to think I would be good at it. But then I tried to get planeshift running.

Kiern

  • Forum Addict
  • *
  • Posts: 2680
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #17 on: February 23, 2002, 06:46:35 pm »
It seems the problem everyone is having with the losing is people getting disconneted/disconnecting theirselves and since i have a dial-up modem and get disconnected about every hour or so......it is really hard to be able to fight fairly, SO why not stop the problem where it comes in......when a person is disconnected their character stays where it was (well, not actually THERE but thats where they reappear) and the person they are fighting can choose to walk or wait :D  8)  8o

meket

  • Hydlaa Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 311
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #18 on: February 23, 2002, 11:20:42 pm »
along with gettin disconnected comes the prob of people X\'ing out of the game..which makes setting stuff like that a pain in the ass..how to stop those from X\'ing out  yet those that get disconnected shouldnt sit around and die for shitty connection.. :O ..why is everything gotta be so hard? :O

Dumb Woob

  • Hydlaa Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 346
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #19 on: February 24, 2002, 12:57:39 am »
i\'ve found cussing at the modem dosn\'t help...

Lenric

  • Hydlaa Resident
  • *
  • Posts: 191
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #20 on: February 24, 2002, 08:04:58 am »
Hmm the only graphical game i know you can eaisly x out in is rs or other java games.
Other games you kinda gotta exit first.
Unless your talking about people pulling thier connections.
Some people will have to log out from time to time.Plus getting disconnected sux.Ive seen many a weaker fighter make kills simply because thier opponet got Disconnected.
I feel it is a problem but it is one im willing to deal with until a solution is available.

David_HD

  • Hydlaa Resident
  • *
  • Posts: 147
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #21 on: May 25, 2002, 06:43:17 pm »
I think you should DIE when you die. It makes the experience much more intense, and if we\'re focusing on actual roleplaying, rather than hack\'n\'slash, I think this will improve it. If we were focusing on hack\'n\'slash, it\'s far more debatable. I never did get around to playing a \"Hardcore\" character on Diablo II...

Death being \"real\" would mean a further reduction in the amount of PK\'ing going on, if we don\'t explicitly ban it, because you know that if you kill someone and wind up with a bounty on your head, that\'s a BAD THING. You\'re not just going to get the shit kicked out of you a few times... You\'re going to DIE when some higher level character decides that it\'d be fun to go after your bounty.

Also, arena combat and duels is a great idea. In such settings, it should be possible to set the terms of the match. ie, to the touch, until someone gives, or to the death. The game should be able to tell the difference. A fight until forfeit would add some really interesting aspects when combined with paxx\'s idea about not having a numerical representation of your players current health. That way you\'re really uncertain about whether that next blow will do you in, and you\'ve gotta weigh how much this victory is worth to you against the fact that you MIGHT die (likely only if the healers can\'t get to you in time, but if your opponent does ENOUGH damage...).

Also, death would make the whole marriage & family portion of the game, disscussed in a few places, MUCH more interesting; you could actually be preparing your next character.

NightSage

  • Traveller
  • *
  • Posts: 11
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #22 on: June 09, 2002, 03:08:37 pm »
Quote
Originally posted by Dumb Woob
lol nightbird you\'ve caused too much thinking in me small mind...

lol i understand what they are saying but boy does my head hurt now.
LIfe is good life is great so why hate?  8)

NightSage

  • Traveller
  • *
  • Posts: 11
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #23 on: June 09, 2002, 03:14:51 pm »
Quote
Originally posted by L7

From reading some of the previous posts, it seems that alot of players reading this board (and maybe the developers? Hrrm, not sure.) do not know what the difference between \"Pking\" and \"PvP\" is. The term \"PK\" came about in UO when there was unrestricted PvP+ tags on all characters, such that anyone could be killed by anyone else. It was often seen as something \"bad\" to do, because in UO your status is/was determined by the items that you had and all the items that you had were left on your corpse when you died. So that \"PKers\" could kill someone, take thier goods. The victim\'s items were lost, and the \"PK\" got the nice items with zero work put into it at the expense of the player that they killed. Hence, Player Killer. Hence the negative connotation. Hence the success of games that disallowed pking, namely EQ.


PvP on the other hand is Player versus Player Combat. This is differnet than \"PvM\" (player versus monster/mob) in a sense that your opponents are  constrained by the same rules as you, span all levels of the intelligence bracket (with no AI), and you can communitcate with them.  PvP is consensual, like the duels considered before: both parties must be willing to fight, or at least be willing to accept the consequences of thier death to another player.  These systems are usually governed by some type of switch to allow you to fight other players.


From a personal experience, some of my best online moments have been in PvP situations where the challenge is not only comparing the statistics and abilities of my developed characters, but my intelligence of the game system and the familiarness to my character in situations where all of those are needed to overcome real-time, real-intelligent, player controlled opponents. It gives you a better sense of accomplishment when you realize that you have beaten another player instead of a computer controlled AI drone. Then again, I was never one to play the computer chess games. =/


Just dropped in to post to try to clarify the differences and stereotypes.








well put i really couldn\'t of said it better myself
LIfe is good life is great so why hate?  8)

Frealis

  • Wayfarer
  • *
  • Posts: 9
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #24 on: June 09, 2002, 07:11:09 pm »
not trying to nitpick, but the PK acronym originated in MUDs

Ozzie

  • Wayfarer
  • *
  • Posts: 4
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #25 on: June 10, 2002, 04:45:36 am »
As for me PK and PvP should work like this:

If someone kills another player without his permission :P
he becomes a criminal and would be chaced by guards in any city for some time (maybe 3h and maybe in some places outside the city too).
After PK, victim dies in a normal way and loses equipment and stats (PK can steal all of his victims stuff).

But after doing it, PK will be forced to live outside the city for about those 3h.
if he commits another PK in that time he becomes a murderer ----> UO.

Murderer should last for about 9h, then he becomes a criminal and after next 3h he returns to law abiding character...

As for PvP, if both side would agree to fight, winner should get little expirience for his fight and loser shouldn\'t lose anything.

As for guild wars, itr should work as PK but winners shouldn\'t be chaced by guards (but they can steal the stuff).

Maybe it should change if for example: chaos guild attacks guards or something.
Then chaos should be chaced by guards for every kill.



Sorry for my english.

O_o |  o_O

Moblie Armoured Nintendo

Lithos

  • Wayfarer
  • *
  • Posts: 5
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #26 on: June 10, 2002, 08:36:10 pm »
a wise man who was very skilled in the art of pvp once said
\"a online game with out PvP is just a fancy chat channel\"

Ozzie

  • Wayfarer
  • *
  • Posts: 4
    • View Profile
(No subject)
« Reply #27 on: June 11, 2002, 05:24:00 am »
That\'s right!

I would also say that PvP should be \"open\" not only at arenas but everywhere...

O_o |  o_O

Moblie Armoured Nintendo