m (→Comments) |
|||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
==Guild Wars== | ==Guild Wars== | ||
This could be combined with [[PVP proposal from Crush|Crush's proposal]] where guilds can declare war on each other and have raidable HQs. | This could be combined with [[PVP proposal from Crush|Crush's proposal]] where guilds can declare war on each other and have raidable HQs. Players in guilds who are at war with each other may attack one another freely and players in guilds who are allied with each other may never atack one another (and neutral obviously has no effect). | ||
| Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
===Unfair Kills=== | ===Unfair Kills=== | ||
One problem presented by this system is that high level players could easily attack players of much lower levels if they have PvP activated. This could be solved by there being a restriction on the ability to attack players when there is a certain gap between their | One problem presented by this system is that high level players could easily attack players of much lower levels if they have PvP activated. This could be solved by there being a restriction on the ability to attack players when there is a certain gap between their combat skills. This could be calculated by calculating their skill in all combat fields (melee, ranged, magic, etc.) and taking a mean of them all. A concrete gap can be defined once the combat system has been finished (I don't know enough of the mechanics to suggest one myself). | ||
===Ganking=== | ===Ganking=== | ||
Ganking (acting friendly and then back-stabbing) could be solved by | Ganking (acting friendly and then back-stabbing) could be partially solved by people not being able to attack players in the same guild/party as them or an allied guild. | ||
===Ganging Up=== | ===Ganging Up=== | ||
Revision as of 19:59, 15 May 2008
This article collects information regarding the conceptualisation of the gameplay of The Mana World
This article is currently only a proposal
The features or design guidelines described in this article are only a proposal made by one or some persons. It has not been evaluated or accepted by the core development team yet. Feel free to add your personal opinion about them or make counter proposals.
| People who approve this proposal | People who oppose this proposal |
|---|---|
My idea for PvP is to have an option in the player's setup window to switch on PvP or to keep it off. On a basic level this would mean that people who have activated PvP can attack and be attacked by other people who have PvP activated.
This would mean that people who wish to stay out of PvP can do so and the more competitive people can fight wherever and whenever they want to.
Guild Wars
This could be combined with Crush's proposal where guilds can declare war on each other and have raidable HQs. Players in guilds who are at war with each other may attack one another freely and players in guilds who are allied with each other may never atack one another (and neutral obviously has no effect).
Addressing Problems
Newbies
PvP would be mentioned in the tutorial (or whatever equivelent is implemented) and newbies would be introduced to the idea and warned of the possibilities. When a player then first goes to switch on PvP in their setup window they will be presented with a warning pop-up message which says something along the lines of "WARNING: You are switching on PvP. This means that you can be attacked by other players, even ones of a higher level, and you may be killed!". This warning should pop up each time PvP is activated, but there should be a "Don't display this warning again" option.
Unfair Kills
One problem presented by this system is that high level players could easily attack players of much lower levels if they have PvP activated. This could be solved by there being a restriction on the ability to attack players when there is a certain gap between their combat skills. This could be calculated by calculating their skill in all combat fields (melee, ranged, magic, etc.) and taking a mean of them all. A concrete gap can be defined once the combat system has been finished (I don't know enough of the mechanics to suggest one myself).
Ganking
Ganking (acting friendly and then back-stabbing) could be partially solved by people not being able to attack players in the same guild/party as them or an allied guild.
Ganging Up
Players ganging up on each other could be solved by implementing a party system, where in players may not attack other players who are in combat already, unless they are in combat with another player who is in your party. Also, to prevent a party of people all attacking just one person, players may not out-number each other in one fight unless the out-numbered player(s) are part of a larger party.
Comments
I've decided to list myself under "opposing" because of the following reasons:
- Making declaring war on another guild just symbolic without any real effect on PvP rights would make the whole guildwar concept completely useless. The realism argument is quite nonsensical in this situation because the ability to switch PvP on and off at will and thus deciding freely if others may attack you or not is just as unrealistic. So either remove the "first option" or remove the claim that this proposal is compatible with the guildwars proposal.
- A concrete definition of the level gap under "unfair kills" is missing. Also keep in mind that non-combat skills also contribute to the character level.
- The ability to restrict specific people from attacking you at will ("anti ganking" rule) makes the whole PvP system useless. You could just block everyone who is a threat for you and only fight with people you can beat easily. But these people would then just block you and there wouldn't be any PvP at all.
- The "ganging up" rule lacks a clear definition of "being in a fight" and "being outnumbered" (especially considering the target-less combat system on the new server).
When these problems are solved I might support this proposal. --Crush 00:46, 14 May 2008 (CEST)
