But wouldn't that make zones one-way death traps? Zone in, realize 3 guys camp the sync with AoE, turn around and: Death-by-Waiting...
Printable View
But wouldn't that make zones one-way death traps? Zone in, realize 3 guys camp the sync with AoE, turn around and: Death-by-Waiting...
Would there be a way to prevent people zoning into clubs whilst under fire? In an RP sense, if you were the bouncers in a club, you wouldn't let a load of blokes fighting each other into your bar now would you?
The below is my personal opinion and only intended to further the discussion, it's not a indication of intent by the team as a whole.
As the idea of preventing people zoning for a variety of reasons is a heavy feature in this thread, it is not unreasonable to theorise that the same implementation could prevent zoning into sectors of a certain type.Quote:
Originally Posted by RogerRamjet
The above is my personal opinion and only intended to further the discussion, it's not a indication of intent by the team as a whole.
Hey shadow,Quote:
Originally Posted by Cursed Shadow
Actually this is not a bad idea but it wouldn't solve the main problem. PPUs as a whole are strongly overpowered while weapons as a whole make too much damage.
PPU shields give a bonus of 30% to your resist. Together with foreign PPU buffs a PPU is mandatory in fights because the weapons do too much damage. Take the beretta as an example. Even Tanks drop after a few shots when not shielded.
You need a PPU so that fights are lasting longer and you get more fun out of the neocron pvp experience.
The solution for this problem is not to change buff behaviour when synching but to decrease the importancy of the PPU in combat situations.
If you wouldn't really need a PPU (enhancement is cool but why dual logging when you can have good fun without) you wouldn't bring one.
I think we have to seperate the PPU issues from the whole thing.
The discussed problem is constant safezone synching.
The PPU buffing problem is because of PPUs being too important in PvP.
If you zone into a new sector, you start behind the closed door. Opening the closed door to find people there means you can quickly run back through the zone line, as you are already behind the door.Quote:
Originally Posted by RogerRamjet
This would prevent zone line camping.
Maybe I'm mistaken, but couldn't zoneline campers just hold said door open. This was the case in Neocron 2.1 when MB was the Zonewhore PVP area. People kept the door open. Some people did die, but infrequently.Quote:
Originally Posted by SilentEye
This thing with the doors.
Do you know how many safezone sync possibilities we have where you can huddle into a safezone to prevent being killed?
There are like a hundred.
And you want to put DOORS on each of them?
Like in between Plaza 1/Plaza2 sync?
Or in between DRE HQ ?
And let's say there are doors. There would be ways to keep the doors open. Or you click on them, run another round and then sync.
People just would sync earlier which would make the fight last even less long.
When this was the case with MB, some people would regulate the doors and if you timed it just right you could shut the doors in someones face, forcing them into a trap.Quote:
Originally Posted by nabbl
If you're one of the people above, or reading this that thinks these doors are a good idea, I would strongly recommend you to take a couple of friends to MB or down into the Gaia Mines where there are doors right in front of the sync lines, and see if you can viably exploit the doors. Pretend to be a runner who is trying to run from one place to another and you come under attack before the door, do the doors open fast enough that you can choose not to PvP and escape the zone?
If you're gonna put slow opening doors in PvP sectors, I'd bet people will stop running through there altogether, because groups of people will make use of those slow doors to kill people who are harmlessly running through.
So stop people from zoning within a few seconds of being damaged then? Say you take damage - anything except falling damage - and then for the next X seconds you cannot leave the zone? Same with heals possibly? Make it impossible to zone if a 3rd party heal is running I mean. It would allow people to self heal before zoning and it would also allow people to still buff before leaving a zone.
However a third party heal would imply some form of combat and therefore be ineligible to zone.
To counter any kind of issue with this could we also have self heals be able to overwrite foreign cast heals of any sort. To prevent griefing I mean. Or possibly have a self cast heal cancel the foreign heal?
I don't think you have fully considered the implications of this.Quote:
Originally Posted by William Antrim
Elaboration below:
- I could heal my opponent to prevent them from escaping.
- As a Spy/PE/Monk I can cast Heal Sanctum to prevent opponents Spy (including stealthed runners) from escaping.
- I could be harmlessly running through and somebody shoots me, your suggestion forces me into a PvP scenario without any option to escape.
This change should only affect runner which are SHOOTING! (and not getting shot)
If you get aggressive you should not be able to escape combat by synching after you've got your ass beaten.
Heals and Buffs have nothing to do with that.
Keep it simple but effective. The ruleset shouldn't be too complicated. We have to be able to understand them. New runners have to be able to understand them and Alduin has to be able to implement them.
Getting "Combat-Flagged" when shooting a weapon shouldn't be too hard to do.
Combining it with a seperate Timer for synching in to a levelzone (Sewer, Cave whatever) whe should be able to prevent zone whoring.
Decreasing the importancy of the PPU should be a part of the major balancing for Spart shouldn't it?
I am gonna trust the volunteer guys to do that right, as we had a lot of threads regarding the PPU.
I've already said I agreed with Triv's opinion, and I am glad that you do too.Quote:
Originally Posted by nabbl
They are not the simplest solutions, but they are effective and I cannot think of many ways to exploit them.
Rather than make this just an agreement:
I think people who are 'In PvP' *Flagged* should not be able to GR either. Discuss?
Makes sense.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cursed Shadow
The below is my personal opinion and only intended to further the discussion, it's not a indication of intent by the team as a whole.
As for the doors approach: that does not solve the main problem in my opinion, the problem of switching back and forth between zonelines would still persist. Additionaly, placing doors at each and every inner city zone line would completely break the flow when traveling through the city. Apart from that, it would involve a lot of work placing doors everywhere.
Let me quote Trivaldi here, because I think he broke the problems down pretty well.
The first problem would be solved by a sync cooldown upon entering a zone. I like the idea very much and usually, in case you travel through the city, it would not break your "flow".Quote:
Originally Posted by Trivaldi
The second problem however I would tackle differently: don't allow the combatants to enter safe zones as long as they are flagged for pvp. Instead they should be bounced back by an invisible wall. The pvp flag should only be triggered in case you use aggressive stuff or in case you heal/buff someone who is flagged for pvp.
The above is my personal opinion and only intended to further the discussion, it's not a indication of intent by the team as a whole.
I'm probably with nabbl on this. Being damaged, under 3rd party effects and similar properties out of your control will only bring up possibilities for abuse by other players. The old problem of n00b buffing is brought back to mind.
A 5 second cool-down (or whatever time we find to be appropriate) from making an aggressive action (Ie. firing a weapon, entering stealth) to before you can enter a safezone seems like the simplest and least abusable solution until there comes a time such that we can remove zoning completely.
Personally, I think this is a really smart approach. Ideally it would involve a little polish on the GUI side of things (maybe something less prominent/intrusive than a buff/bonus indicator, but still visible when looked for).Quote:
Originally Posted by Trivaldi
I like this idea very much, because it does not further cripple the open world flow and freedom that players experience in Neocron.
It makes sense in terms of gameplay and also logically: Someone shooting other people could be dangerous.
Any sorts of gagging and crippling of movement, especially involving invisible walls or "you cannot sync for x seconds" type approaches will do more harm than good, for they impact everyone and draw even more attention to the "sync" that is already in its current form breaking flow when moving around.
One thing I would like to add is that it might be good if only the noweapon AI responds to the PvP-Attacker(!)-Flag.
That way you can still defend your base territory with a home advantage, while clubs and general safezones are less viable for sync whoring.
So if it is possible to have a pvp attacker flag would that mean that you can have a pvp defender flag? Could this open up the possibility of receiving some form of bonus for beating your attacker if they try to jump you and you end up killing them? (I realise that this could be exploitable in some situations - financial recompense for example) but it might be nice to reward the defender for fighting back.
I think the best thing they could do if a pvp defender flag is possible is to not penalize you if you kill someone that attacked you. No SL or faction hit for self defense. The only way you could exploit it is by running infront of people while they're fighting, trying to get them to shoot you by accident. If you manage that you get to fight them and if you win you won't lose SL, however if we make the pvp defender flag go away if the person doesn't attack you for 10 seconds it becomes much harder to exploit this. If the attacker just hits you once by accident and doesn't try to hit you again you'd have to kill them within 10 seconds, any longer and you would still recieve the regular penalties.
Sorry to go off topic a bit but this idea has been said many times before, we just didn't know if it could be done and if the work is being done on pvp flags anyway for this, then some more good might as well come of it.
The below is my personal opinion and only intended to further the discussion, it's not a indication of intent by the team as a whole.
This is something I'd considered going into in my original post but felt it was getting into the realms of TL;DR. I agree, only guards who react to drawn weapons should behave like this. Regular faction guards should stick to simply killing their enemies. This would make raiding (and more importantly defending) locations work correctly, with guards focusing on the right people.Quote:
Originally Posted by aKe`cj
The below is my personal opinion and only intended to further the discussion, it's not a indication of intent by the team as a whole.
If you have the capacity to make this work it would revolutionize the way PvP in nc works. Roleplay would go through the roof too. It could be the single best thing about nc.
As I think that Trivs ideas are very good and guards would make sense in safezones to prevent low hp - evade synching I am still all for blocking zone whoring on Levelareas.
Synching in and out of sewers constantly to evade fire and heal yourself can't be a viable option.
The below is my personal opinion and only intended to further the discussion, it's not a indication of intent by the team as a whole.
While I agree with aKe`cj - that preventing zoning makes the jarring experience of zoning more intrusive on the flow of movement - I still believe the zone entry cool down is the best option in this situation. As I said in my original post this would mean (if they decided to do so) players would have to commit to zoning during PvP, as the rest of the fight would likely occur over that zone line.Quote:
Originally Posted by nabbl
The decision of Fight or Flight remains firmly with the player, the only difference being they have to flee through zones and not run around in circles in the same 10 feet of gameworld as they do at the moment. This, for me, is a vital point. We cannot force people to stay in a zone with their back to an invisible wall and die. That is just stupid.
Preventing people from zoning at all (be that to just dungeon, safe or all zone types) is a very bad way to solve the issue. Allowing people to zone but not do so constantly to abuse the mechanic, is probably our best bet to resolve the problem in the current architecture.
The above is my personal opinion and only intended to further the discussion, it's not a indication of intent by the team as a whole.
This raises the scenario:Quote:
Originally Posted by Trivaldi
I am a CA runner, my opponent is a Tsunami runner.
We do battle in PP1, the enemy is low on health and runs into the Tsunami HQ (thus activating his zone-entry cooldown, because he has a PVP flag).
I could follow him, but the Tsunami guards are going to punish me, and I will also get my zone-entry cooldown, preventing me from escape.
I like the RP aspects of this. I was a CA in Pepper Park, of course I'm going to run into people who aren't happy to see me.
If I'm beating someone and they retreat to the safety of their Faction HQ (Fortress) then I should know better than to follow that mouse, into that hole.
This does open up the question as to what we do about inter-faction feuds where two Tsunami Runners can still zone whore along their HQ zoneline and fight, without being penalized by the guards.
I think that could be acceptable, and kind of makes sense from an RP point of view.
Additionally, and this isn't my opinion, but is an additional step that could be taken.
The PVP flag could be aware of all factions that you have attacked during the time in which your PVP Flag activates.
Thus when two Tsunami runners run for refuge within the Tsunami HQ, they are met with force, after all, inter-faction quarrels will not be tolerated in the HQ?
I'd really like to hear peoples views on the above points.
There are two different kind of synchs anyway:
We have zonelines where you have to actively click to enter a zone.
And we have zonelines where you can just can run through.
Zoneline #1 is predestined for Timers. When you sync into a levelzone you have to commit to that zone for X seconds.
But it would be a gamebreaker to implement the same behaviour for Zoneline #2 as it would feel totally uncomfortable.
Guards in safezones which directly shoot on sight on PvP-flagged players would be awesome.
I have never really seen this as an issue that needed fixing.Quote:
Originally Posted by nabbl
If a player zones into a cave and finds a bunch of crawlers nibbling on his legs when he wakes up on the other side, I would assume it to be a rather frustrating experience if the game was to further cripple his abilities to master that situation. It is not uncommon that a damage dealer will try and clear that entrance, involving the sync in/out of that area to heal up. This is a micro challenge for this player which will keep him busy, entertained and may be a rewarding experience if he manages to stay alive and advance. I really dont see how this has a negative effect on anyone else or on the game balance.
Solo-PvE has been a strong point in NC and that also included the tricky part of soloing dangerous caves/areas without a PPU-bugplutt (and no, I do not refer to or endorse people abusing safespots and the like to solo caves - which is a very different issue imo)
I believe nabbl was referring to people using levelling area synch lines to evade PVP, not PVE.Quote:
Originally Posted by aKe`cj
If the player has a PVP Flag they should either be prevented from entering sewers etc, or should be followable and killable without a loss of soul light or sympathy.
Thx for clarifying. This is exactly what I meant.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cursed Shadow
I think mob damage should definitely NOT trigger any kind of flag. I guess thats what Ake'cj is worried about. I like the idea of flags though, anything to stop the cowardly twats running.
From nabbl's original post it was not clear that any such sync policy would be limited to PvP context only (and more importantly: how so), thus me voicing my concerns.Quote:
Originally Posted by William Antrim
I agree that this might also a case where it would be useful to have a PvP-Attack-Flag to allow for a more granular ruleset.
Something that has been suggested countless times over the years albeit in a slightly different context: smarter SL rules. (cases that allow players to purposely paint a flag on others, like AoE should be considered though)
Yeah, that's been discussed already. I'd suggest reading back, if you have the time to, although there have been a good few lengthy posts.Quote:
Originally Posted by William Antrim
We could do with a recap of all of the ideas proposed thus far really.