Fun With Content

Flari-Merchant 07.16.2020 06:56
	Also agree with Edam here if I am reading him right. I was VERY attracted to the concept of mass unit style battles in a territory control, yet RPG element style MMO. We haven't even received our "Daily Deal" rewards from the kickstarter yet so such seriously more complex coding/mechanics are just silly dreams at this point. The "Random" player killer's ability to log out at whim, appear to wreak havoc at will and again disappear almost at will has been a real problem in open world PVP games. One of the "checks" here was supposed to be that such players would be locked into a settlement or group onto which pressure could be applied to counter such behavior. That might make such play more rare but some studies(I have read and conveniently not site) suggest it only takes a few bad actors to sour a game atmosphere. Sadly we have not seen a really active, large enough population, to see how that would work out. Quote

Flari-Merchant 07.16.2020 06:56

Also agree with Edam here if I am reading him right. I was VERY attracted to the concept of mass unit style battles in a territory control, yet RPG element style MMO. We haven't even received our "Daily Deal" rewards from the kickstarter yet so such seriously more complex coding/mechanics are just silly dreams at this point.

The "Random" player killer's ability to log out at whim, appear to wreak havoc at will and again disappear almost at will has been a real problem in open world PVP games. One of the "checks" here was supposed to be that such players would be locked into a settlement or group onto which pressure could be applied to counter such behavior. That might make such play more rare but some studies(I have read and conveniently not site) suggest it only takes a few bad actors to sour a game atmosphere.

Sadly we have not seen a really active, large enough population, to see how that would work out.

Quote

Bob 07.16.2020 12:16
	NightmareSr I think it could add to new players trying the game if there was more info available to them on how often PvP actually occurs. Maybe with some published stats or just with less emphasis on the open world PvP function in the player guide. (Not to mention that guide is horribly outdated and I don't think it requires any coding from Cole to update it) That is in fact one of the things I'm hoping to work on over the next few months. PvP risk is a little tricky because I can't really keep updating that info as it shifts dynamically in-game, but I think the current text doesn't even take into account some of the mechanical changes we've already made to PvP risk since it was written, like Security Settings and making Thornkeep completely safe. Quote

Bob 07.16.2020 12:16

NightmareSr
I think it could add to new players trying the game if there was more info available to them on how often PvP actually occurs. Maybe with some published stats or just with less emphasis on the open world PvP function in the player guide. (Not to mention that guide is horribly outdated and I don't think it requires any coding from Cole to update it)

That is in fact one of the things I'm hoping to work on over the next few months. PvP risk is a little tricky because I can't really keep updating that info as it shifts dynamically in-game, but I think the current text doesn't even take into account some of the mechanical changes we've already made to PvP risk since it was written, like Security Settings and making Thornkeep completely safe.

Quote

Bob 07.16.2020 12:38
	Flari-Merchant Might be very interesting and possibly even subscriber attractive if the alignments actually had some "meat" on their bones. I'm NOT talking about depictions of torture or baby killing for "evil" types. If Evil types could seek out and bust escalations of "good" NPCs and both could attract NPC guard/soldier types more representative of alignment. Spells and crafted items tied to aligment and actually system enforced, etc… Let Evil play their natural bad side a lil bit and let Good be their more direct opposition. Just an idea but might be a great way to make the game more exciting and open up more definition to play styles. Would be kinda unique too and might attract more TT players, if done well. We definitely have longer-term plans to incorporate alignment into the gameplay in meaningful ways. Adding it into a few of the enchantments was a first step, hopefully we can find other convenient places to make more use of it. Technically, I think I could make some spells and feats alignment-dependent without any additional code, though not all effects/feats can currently handle conditionals. Those feats would effectively get rebalanced as a result, with whatever effect becomes alignment-dependent getting a boost because it doesn't always apply. Probably work out great for those characters whose feat choices matched their alignment story well (and that of their enemies), less so for those characters with less consistent choices. One possibility would be to just create new feats with alignment dependencies, but there are probably several existing feats where alignment would make sense to include. Another would be to just create a feat variant that's automatically learned whenever the original feat is, giving players a choice of which version to use, but that does increase the ability to bypass alignment whenever it's inconvenient, making it a less interesting/ongoing choice. Definitely worth considering though. Quote

Bob 07.16.2020 12:38

Flari-Merchant
Might be very interesting and possibly even subscriber attractive if the alignments actually had some "meat" on their bones. I'm NOT talking about depictions of torture or baby killing for "evil" types. If Evil types could seek out and bust escalations of "good" NPCs and both could attract NPC guard/soldier types more representative of alignment. Spells and crafted items tied to aligment and actually system enforced, etc…

Let Evil play their natural bad side a lil bit and let Good be their more direct opposition.

Just an idea but might be a great way to make the game more exciting and open up more definition to play styles. Would be kinda unique too and might attract more TT players, if done well.

We definitely have longer-term plans to incorporate alignment into the gameplay in meaningful ways. Adding it into a few of the enchantments was a first step, hopefully we can find other convenient places to make more use of it.

Technically, I think I could make some spells and feats alignment-dependent without any additional code, though not all effects/feats can currently handle conditionals. Those feats would effectively get rebalanced as a result, with whatever effect becomes alignment-dependent getting a boost because it doesn't always apply. Probably work out great for those characters whose feat choices matched their alignment story well (and that of their enemies), less so for those characters with less consistent choices. One possibility would be to just create new feats with alignment dependencies, but there are probably several existing feats where alignment would make sense to include. Another would be to just create a feat variant that's automatically learned whenever the original feat is, giving players a choice of which version to use, but that does increase the ability to bypass alignment whenever it's inconvenient, making it a less interesting/ongoing choice. Definitely worth considering though.

Quote

Maxen 07.17.2020 11:44
	Rynnik NightmareSr Might be a dumb question, but Why does there need to be a constant risk of open PvP in this game? Because Player versus AI games are INCREDIBLY expensive and intensive to maintain. WoW taught gaming companies pretty quickly that NO MATTER how 'difficult' or intense new content was on release it would be devoured by players in less time then it took to develop that content in the first place. Thus the rise and fall of the themepark MMO. If PFO ever went straight PVE it wouldn't have a chance of competing or coming back in this game market. Players versus Player however is an endless provision of 'free' content from a development perspective. The design and programming balance then moves to endlessly tweaking and refining of the set of rules the players interact in, a much easier and achievable set of goals for a development team. A long term model is then possible within the world the players of the game create without the content being 100% development driven. PFO doesn't have the budget or scope to be a game sustained solely on the amazingness of its PvE, it DOES have good fundamental bones for a PvP sandbox. Open PvP is utterly critical to its survival imo. I'm in complete agreement with Rynnik. I've played a number of theme park MMOs and once the content is done, I get bored. I didn't pledge the Kickstarter because of what was originally promised (mass combat, factions, feuds, etc.) My Pathfinder tabletop group and I pledged because this was supposed to be a complete sandbox. Having other PCs running around the map with the chance for random encounters and PvP was supposed to make Golarion about as real as you could in a virtual environment. There was no GM to oversee the action. Just a bunch of PCs running around trying to make their way in the world. We were also just starting the Kingmaker adventure path at the time and thought it would be a neat way to experience the pen and paper concept of building and running a 'kingdom' in a virtual setting. Fast forward to today. I am the only one of my group left playing the game. I still want the random player versus player action that should make this world feel alive. Along with that, I want a thriving economy so my gathers, refiners, and crafters can actually feel like they are contributing to a living world instead of just stockpiling stuff. I understand there are players who are PvP adverse. My answer to that is that in the 'real world', you need to hire protection. Need to mule a bunch of goods or gather in an unfriendly territory? Now there are jobs for mercenaries. You don't need PvP flags as long as there are solid rules in place (like hits to Reputation) for doing what many people would see as "evil" or at least on the wrong side of justice. The main problem with the game right now is population and quality of game experience issues like documentation and tutorials. Until Paizo gets the game to a point where they feel they can spend the money to market the game and get players to stick, that will continue to be the main problem. Quote

Maxen 07.17.2020 11:44

Rynnik
NightmareSr
Might be a dumb question, but Why does there need to be a constant risk of open PvP in this game?
Because Player versus AI games are INCREDIBLY expensive and intensive to maintain. WoW taught gaming companies pretty quickly that NO MATTER how 'difficult' or intense new content was on release it would be devoured by players in less time then it took to develop that content in the first place. Thus the rise and fall of the themepark MMO. If PFO ever went straight PVE it wouldn't have a chance of competing or coming back in this game market.

Players versus Player however is an endless provision of 'free' content from a development perspective. The design and programming balance then moves to endlessly tweaking and refining of the set of rules the players interact in, a much easier and achievable set of goals for a development team. A long term model is then possible within the world the players of the game create without the content being 100% development driven.

PFO doesn't have the budget or scope to be a game sustained solely on the amazingness of its PvE, it DOES have good fundamental bones for a PvP sandbox. Open PvP is utterly critical to its survival imo.

I'm in complete agreement with Rynnik. I've played a number of theme park MMOs and once the content is done, I get bored. I didn't pledge the Kickstarter because of what was originally promised (mass combat, factions, feuds, etc.) My Pathfinder tabletop group and I pledged because this was supposed to be a complete sandbox. Having other PCs running around the map with the chance for random encounters and PvP was supposed to make Golarion about as real as you could in a virtual environment. There was no GM to oversee the action. Just a bunch of PCs running around trying to make their way in the world. We were also just starting the Kingmaker adventure path at the time and thought it would be a neat way to experience the pen and paper concept of building and running a 'kingdom' in a virtual setting.

Fast forward to today. I am the only one of my group left playing the game. I still want the random player versus player action that should make this world feel alive. Along with that, I want a thriving economy so my gathers, refiners, and crafters can actually feel like they are contributing to a living world instead of just stockpiling stuff. I understand there are players who are PvP adverse. My answer to that is that in the 'real world', you need to hire protection. Need to mule a bunch of goods or gather in an unfriendly territory? Now there are jobs for mercenaries. You don't need PvP flags as long as there are solid rules in place (like hits to Reputation) for doing what many people would see as "evil" or at least on the wrong side of justice.

The main problem with the game right now is population and quality of game experience issues like documentation and tutorials. Until Paizo gets the game to a point where they feel they can spend the money to market the game and get players to stick, that will continue to be the main problem.

Quote

NightmareSr 07.17.2020 14:54
	I think my "dumb question" got taken a bit different than I intended. I'm not say eliminate PvP, as I did mention a mechanic to challenge people to a fight in someway similar to how we request trades or party invites. Plus there is still the feud mechanics that would be in place still. Also there is tons of interactions between players that doesn't consist of randomly attacking people. Heck you can still rob someone's mule by attacking the mule so it quits following the owner. If there were some enhancements to the hex security system also the PvP could be left intact even if the random attacking people was blocked in other ways. I was just trying to think of a way to find a middle ground or a way to interfere with the random ganking of new players but still allow PvP combat in the game. I certainly do not want just a PvE game, and that is the main reason I want to see new players in the game. While the population is so low there is less player to player interaction which leave mainly PvE activities in the game. - Wandering gatherer (NightmareSr#2669 on discord) – Cauchemar is a Greater Nightmare – cauchemar.pfo@gmail.com Quote

NightmareSr 07.17.2020 14:54

I think my "dumb question" got taken a bit different than I intended. I'm not say eliminate PvP, as I did mention a mechanic to challenge people to a fight in someway similar to how we request trades or party invites. Plus there is still the feud mechanics that would be in place still.
Also there is tons of interactions between players that doesn't consist of randomly attacking people. Heck you can still rob someone's mule by attacking the mule so it quits following the owner. If there were some enhancements to the hex security system also the PvP could be left intact even if the random attacking people was blocked in other ways.
I was just trying to think of a way to find a middle ground or a way to interfere with the random ganking of new players but still allow PvP combat in the game.
I certainly do not want just a PvE game, and that is the main reason I want to see new players in the game. While the population is so low there is less player to player interaction which leave mainly PvE activities in the game.

- Wandering gatherer (NightmareSr#2669 on discord)
– Cauchemar is a Greater Nightmare – cauchemar.pfo@gmail.com

Quote

Flari-Merchant 07.17.2020 15:17
	@NightmareSr Your question was not dumb and your ideas along with your preferences are just fine and legit. I hope that I didn't make you feel otherwise. That was not my intention! Quote

NightmareSr 07.17.2020 15:33
	@Flari, You did Not, I just keep trying to think of a way to hit a middle ground since I heard from a brand new player the other day that the open PvP everywhere was keeping his friends from trying the game, and I recently learned there are a lot of currently players who avoid and refuse to engage in any PvP. Sounds like we could possibly have more players in the game if we could find a solution to this aspect that they dislike. It seems the random gank style is what they are most opposed to. Perhaps there isn't a middle ground? - Wandering gatherer (NightmareSr#2669 on discord) – Cauchemar is a Greater Nightmare – cauchemar.pfo@gmail.com Quote

NightmareSr 07.17.2020 15:33

@Flari, You did Not, I just keep trying to think of a way to hit a middle ground since I heard from a brand new player the other day that the open PvP everywhere was keeping his friends from trying the game, and I recently learned there are a lot of currently players who avoid and refuse to engage in any PvP. Sounds like we could possibly have more players in the game if we could find a solution to this aspect that they dislike. It seems the random gank style is what they are most opposed to. Perhaps there isn't a middle ground?

- Wandering gatherer (NightmareSr#2669 on discord)
– Cauchemar is a Greater Nightmare – cauchemar.pfo@gmail.com

Quote

Flari-Merchant 07.17.2020 15:52
	NightmareSr @Flari, You did Not, I just keep trying to think of a way to hit a middle ground since I heard from a brand new player the other day that the open PvP everywhere was keeping his friends from trying the game, and I recently learned there are a lot of currently players who avoid and refuse to engage in any PvP. Sounds like we could possibly have more players in the game if we could find a solution to this aspect that they dislike. It seems the random gank style is what they are most opposed to. Perhaps there isn't a middle ground? I feel that if everyone really tries, there is always a middle ground. Flagging might be such a compromise. I do think that it lacks(or will eventually pall) a certain "excitement" when playing but that is just my opinion. Certainly I can accept the opinions of others and grasp that they feel differently. Quote

Flari-Merchant 07.17.2020 15:52

NightmareSr
@Flari, You did Not, I just keep trying to think of a way to hit a middle ground since I heard from a brand new player the other day that the open PvP everywhere was keeping his friends from trying the game, and I recently learned there are a lot of currently players who avoid and refuse to engage in any PvP. Sounds like we could possibly have more players in the game if we could find a solution to this aspect that they dislike. It seems the random gank style is what they are most opposed to. Perhaps there isn't a middle ground?

I feel that if everyone really tries, there is always a middle ground.

Flagging might be such a compromise. I do think that it lacks(or will eventually pall) a certain "excitement" when playing but that is just my opinion. Certainly I can accept the opinions of others and grasp that they feel differently.

Quote

NightmareSr 07.18.2020 05:48
	I would hope the lack of "excitement" would cause people to change their flag especially if there are other benefits or activities they can do. - Wandering gatherer (NightmareSr#2669 on discord) – Cauchemar is a Greater Nightmare – cauchemar.pfo@gmail.com Quote

Rynnik 07.18.2020 06:51
	People rarely play in their own self interest. Game designers have to consider that what players say they want and what they actually want are not always the same. Games have killed themselves by doing exactly what their player base asked for. Not a member, representative, or supporter of Brighthaven Alliance. Quote

Cookies Disclaimer

Pathfinder Online will be ending operations on November 28, 2021. For more details please visit our FAQ.