Noteworthy:
I warezed the first Sims, and uninstalled it about 2 hours after trying it. That is not a game, it’s a fucking pixel aquarium full of semi-realistic looking retards who piddle on the floor and talk with emotes. It’s an ant farm with a sex drive. I’d rather watch webcams and masturbate than spend time nudging AI to feed itself while playing virtual Barbie’s Malibu Beach House decoration.
Updated.
I’m roleplaying as a designer again. This is my “Honor System” for WoW.
This is a rough plan of how I would try to design the whole “honor system”. It tries to address all the problematic issues that the players are bringing up but still mantaining a focus: to be fun.
So far, these are the issues:
1- Prevent to assign penalties if the attack is a mistake
2- Allow an high level character to defend itself if attacked by a low level opponent without incurring in a penalty
3- Not reward a zerg of players killing a poor guy wandering alone, even if on the same level
4- Avoid to penalize support classes and incentivate the players to group
5- Make a dishonorable action have a greater impact if done by a player high on the honorable ranks
I’m not a mathematician so I’ll try to explain how the general system should be built.
The first part is about how we assign the points and when. In this system I won’t address external goals like accomplishing a mission. I’ll just include player-killing. So, the honor points should be assigned when an enemy DIES. This is the first step. Attacking someone doesn’t imply a gain or loss of honor. The honor changes only if the enemy actually dies. So we solve the (1) point.
The second step is to determine if the honor we are going to change after a kill will be a penalty or a reward. My idea is to simply determine this part by “tagging” the enemy. It means that who starts the attack is responsible for it. If an high level player starts an attack to a low level player it will incur in a penalty when he kills it. Instead if it’s the lower level player to start the attack, the high level player will be able to defend himself without incurring in a penalty (neither a reward since the low level player isn’t worth much). Following this idea we solve the (2) point.
The second point also leads directly to the third. This point is only partially solvable and my first plan isn’t playable as I expected. Basically two players level 55 attacking a single enemy level 55 won’t receive a penalty because the system would never be playable and fun. Still, the reward will be scaled and splitted (so not as high as if the fight was more “fair”). Nothing can work better than this and on the other side we have a positive effect: players will be encouraged to play in groups for a better protection. So the (3) point is only partially solved, the “balance check” will be done by comparing the “average” level of a party with the target to determine if the result is a reward or a penalty. But the number of players won’t directly affect this check. To prevent “zerging” the reward should be “scaled” between all the groups that took an active role when damaging the target. This means that the reward will still be very low when “zerging”. Best design scenario possible, I think.
For the fourth point we delve more into the math. Support classes won’t kill directly the opponents. This means that if the honor is assigned “per kill” these classes will be penalized. It’s not all. Because we should also push the players to play together. Casters will more likely die first considering their weakness. If we reward only who is alive we’ll finish again to penalize these classes. How to prevent all this and reward the group? The idea is to reward group survival. If a group survives an encounter (51% alive) it will gain a bonus multiplier (with a diminished return softcapped at 2.5). The more a group survives the more the bonus builds up (and the same group will be worth more if killed). If the group flees from a PvP battlefield OR is defeated (only if 50% or more of it dies) the bonus is lost and resets to zero. This means that the reward (or penalty) will be equally distributed for all the group. Both to those alive and those who died. On the same time the reward will depend on the “group performance” as a whole and NOT tailored and measured for each participant. This solves the (4) point.
The last point is about how we calculate the penalty. Not only the “honor points” should behave in a similar way to a normal exp table. But the final result should be adjusted a last time before being assigned. This last modification depends on the level of honor of the player. This means that as a player climbs up in the honor ladder, the honor points should slow down, progressively. Accumulating more honor should become harder as you go up. At the same time a dishonorable action should have the opposite impact. It should increase as the honor increases. So, while the reward should be achieved as an inverse proportion, the penalty should work as a direct proportion. This solves the (5) point.
Ahh. I’m tired. I wrote and read too much on this and other forums for a lot, a lot of hours. I hope it will be somewhat useful. Really hope.
—
I wrote down an algorithm to explain the plan I posted above:
1- A battle begins.
2- The server registers which *group* does the first attack and “flags” that group as “attacker” and the other as “defender”. Every other group joining the same battle executes this point again to be flagged properly.
3- The fight takes place. The server registers who damages who, based on the groups and not on the single character. Also registering the total damage (in %) for *each group*.
4- Someone dies. The server considers each group that damaged the target and starts the following procedure for each:
a- A “balance check” is done by calculating the average level of the two groups (attackers and defenders).
b- The two average levels of the two sides are compared to measure the “fairness” of the combat. Determining if there will be a reward or a penalty.
c- The reward/penalty status is once again modified by checking if the winning group is flagged as “attacker” or “defender”.
d- The amount of “honor points” (to add or detract) will be calculated based on the “value” of the target and the % of damage dealt by the group to this target. then split equally between every member of the winning group.
e- For each player the amount of honor is adjusted again by considering the rank (as described at the (5) point of the plan I posted above).
– |a to e| Are repeated for each group who damaged the target.
This is the whole algorithm. The only part that it is missing is the modifier that I desribed at the (4) point of my plan that I let out to not make things too complex.
I’m roleplayng as a designer again. This is my “Honor System” for WoW. Perhaps they’ll steal this too:
This is a rough plan of how I would try to design the whole “honor system”. It tries to address all the problematic issues that the players are bringing up but still mantaining a focus: to be fun.
So far, these are the issues:
1- Prevent to assign penalties if the attack is a mistake
2- Allow an high level character to defend itself if attacked by a low level opponent without incurring in a penalty
3- Not reward a zerg of players killing a poor guy wandering alone, even if on the same level
4- Avoid to penalize support classes and incentivate the players to group
5- Make a dishonorable action have a greater impact if done by a player high on the honorable ranks
I’m not a mathematician so I’ll try to explain how the general system should be built.
The first part is about how we assign the points and when. In this system I won’t address external goals like accomplishing a mission. I’ll just include player-killing. So, the honor points should be assigned when an enemy DIES. This is the first step. Attacking someone doesn’t imply a gain or loss of honor. The honor changes only if the enemy actually dies. So we solve the (1) point.
The second step is to determine if the honor we are going to change after a kill will be a penalty or a reward. My idea is to simply determine this part by “tagging” the enemy. It means that who starts the attack is responsible for it. If an high level player starts an attack to a low level player it will incur in a penalty when he kills it. Instead if it’s the lower level player to start the attack, the high level player will be able to defend himself without incurring in a penalty (neither a reward since the low level player isn’t worth much). Following this idea we solve the (2) point.
The second point also leads directly to the third. The level confrontation between two opposite groups is GLOBAL. It means that the server will calculate the global level of the whole group. So more players in the same group will make the global level to rise. Two level 55 will make a group with a value of 110. If now these two guys attack a SINGLE player level 55 the system will calculate the encounter as: 110 versus 55. And it means that the two guys will receive a penalty if they’ll kill the enemy playing alone. More and more players grouped together ganking a guy alone will recieve a greater penalty. This will solve the (3) point.
For the fourth point we delve more into the math. Support classes won’t kill directly the opponents. This means that if the honor is assigned “per kill” these classes will be penalized. It’s not all. Because we should also push the players to play together. Casters will more likely die first considering their weakness. If we reward only who is alive we’ll finish again to penalize these classes. How to prevent all this and reward the group? The idea is to reward group survival. If a group survives an encounter (51% alive) it will gain a bonus multiplier (with a diminished return softcapped at 2.5). The more a group survives the more the bonus builds up (and the same group will be worth more if killed). If the group flees from a PvP battlefield OR is defeated (only if 50% or more of it dies) the bonus is lost and resets to zero. This means that the reward (or penalty) will be equally distributed for all the group. Both to those alive and those who died. On the same time the reward will depend on the “group performance” as a whole and NOT tailored and measured for each participant. This solves the (4) point.
The last point is about how we calculate the penalty. Not only the “honor points” should behave in a similar way to a normal exp table. But the final result should be adjusted a last time before being assigned. This last modification depends on the level of honor of the player. This means that as a player climbs up in the honor ladder, the honor points should slow down, progressively. Accumulating more honor should become harder as you go up. At the same time a dishonorable action should have the opposite impact. It should increase as the honor increases. So, while the reward should be achieved as an inverse proportion, the penalty should work as a direct proportion. This solves the (5) point.
Ahh. I’m tired. I wrote and read too much on this and other forums for a lot, a lot of hours. I hope it will be somewhat useful. Really hope.
EDIT: I’m not completely convinced about the third point. The math involved should be tweaked so that group play is still incentivated without being a problem. So that part should be reworked.
I posted this on the beta boards:
My idea is that they’ll release the game by the end of November or the first week of December, with the Korean release before christmas and the European launch back in January or February.
This means that they can push a patch the next week or so, another in October, another in November, then launch the open beta around the middle of the month and a fourth, smaller patch right at launch.
Walter Yarbrough is the content producer and part of the design team of Dark Age of Camelot and he comments Blizzard’s debacle along the same lines of myself:
Taking this a step further,
WoW’s population peaks and valleys will be worse than most other MMO’s out there.
Having a worldwide server – like EQ – means that population lows in Europe, East Coast, West Coast and Asia don’t coincide – the servers remain relatively populated as players log in and log off throughout their peak playing hours.
WoW won’t have that – when they are at off-peak, they will *really* be off peak, and their server populations will be very low.
Not predicting this as a bad thing or good thing – just noting it.
-Walt
I’m too busy but I’ll paste here an intelligent comment from a random guy on the beta boards:
No doubt some of their time is being spent discussing how to respond to this. The question is are they deciding how best to “handle” the PR issue (possibly by just not responding), or if they are honestly considering what seems a trivially easy-to-resolve situation. Prepare to be handled.
I want one, just one, die-hard Blizzard fan to come on and defend this from the community’s point of view. If this is the Blizzard you rave about, that always puts the customer first, then explain this. The problem is, you can’t. You can say that you don’t care, but obviously lots of people do (this thread is longer than anything in recent history). You can say that for isolated groups of players (who statistically speaking will be the ones who spend the least) there may be some pluses (eg: being able to pretend that the world doesn’t exist, not having to deal with those English butchering the American language etc. etc.), but you know you wouldn’t really believe it… You might put up a fair showing, but in your heart you’ll know you’ve been had. Blizzard, who famously “never releases a game until it’s ready” (interesting I haven’t heard that quote much recently) is obviously releasing this game to a timetable. I understand that, as I didn’t have any illusions to begin with. Blizzard is a business I have great respect and admiration for. One aspect of that respect concerns their business acumen. Writing and operating an MMORPG, however, is an exercise in pragmatism, and a completely different animal to a fps or even a multiplayer strategy game. As such it will test that acumen – specifically, are they capable of building a community. Time will tell – days, not weeks or months
Not different from what Dave Rickey wrote on F13:
It’s just another set of MMO developers about to take their trip through the meatgrinder. We’ve done this dance before, but they still have to go through the steps.
–Dave ($40M budget means they need 400K sustained subscriptions to make the kind of money VU wants….)
I’ll probably post an overall summary of comments and things I’m writing later.
Fuck you Blizzard.
It seems that Blizzard won’t allow foreign players to choose where to play. They’ll enforce the servers by checking the credit cards.
This means that I won’t be able to play.
FUCK YOU.
Funny pic of Lum the Mad, taken by Div Devlin at GenCon and published on Gamerifts.
How can it be real? Lum goes crazy in the middle of the crowd and *noone* seems to react.
I’m spending more time reading the cesspits like DAoC’s Vault forums. This is a comment from a player to the question “What most needs to be changed by Mythic?”. This is the answer and his signature:
Their attitude.
Mythic: “How can we make this take longer?”
Cryptic: “How can we make this more fun?”
And this is a “review” of World of Warcraft. I find it interesting and valualble, typos included. So, here it is:
after playng the stress test there is no way in hell i will let my DOAC accounts renew the subscription. i doubt even catacombs will bring me back, since by that time there will be other games far better on market, or close to being out. even if i could come back to DOAC what do i have to look forward to ? 14-50 hour artifact camps ? RvR ? what RvR ? i play nid i get one shotted by infs, scouts, sorc’s and the horde of the remaining godmode alb classes, or close enough to geting one shotted all the time that it feels nearly so.
because of that DOAC has lost all its fun. add to that level grinding, add to that artifact level grinding.
during teh stress test i had 2 mai ncharacters which i was playing around with, alliance mage, and a horde warior.
things i have noticed that have immediately grasped me:
1. crafting in WoW is FUN and ENJOYABLE and produces immediately usable and usefull items. vs DOAC green bar —–> snore ….
2. items and levels have come to me naturally, as i was simply exploring, doing things which are FUN and INTERESTING to me. this is really the most important thing. i like it that the levels and gear came to me by themselves as i was having a blast, rather then the otehr way around as is in DOAC. in DOAC you have to grind for them, then camp, then grind, then grind, then camp, then grind some more —–> again, snore ….
3. Never got 1 shotted in PvP. even when my mage was lvl 13 and got jumped by a stealthed 23 rogue, he almost had me, but i still menaged to down a potion and get away from him. its nice if you are for example a healer, to be able to actually move your mouse over the icon and cast a heal spell before you die. or if down a potion or have some sort of action you can take, evenm if you do bite the dust.
4. graphics are better. they are crisp, textures are great, zones are fantastic, the graphics in WoW blow away DOAC a hundredfold. the capital cities as well as EVERY zone has some majestic site if not multiple sites which make you just stand there a while and stare like you do at sme incredible artists painting.
5. THERE IS NO NEED FOR BOTS !!!!!!!!! you dont need a 2nd account or bot to be functional. what a novel concept, mythic oughtta really study this one.
6. i havent lagged once. as in zip, zero, zilch, nada. i was runing 1600 x 1200 @ 32 bit, all options highest possible with 8x AA and i had no lag !!!!!!
7. this beta test is far more complete, bugfree, and hell of a lot more fun then a whole slew of MMORPGs i have played before, DOAC included, when the ylaunched retail ! QUALITY. what a novel concept for game developers.
but the overall fun of WoW is just so incredible that after it goes live, you couldnt pay me to play DoAC. literally. when i logged on today for teh 10 minutes it was similar to loging onto SWG, i was in a land of camping, grinding and boredom.
